He doesn't get the point man that is all.Originally Posted by shagwAg3n
He doesn't get the point man that is all.
I get the point. You don't get the point. There are two sides to everything, and I'm brilliant enough to see both. There's no reason to defend one side when everyone is already saying the same damn thing. I was just showing you the other viewpoint.
There are two sides of everything no matter what... the question it do you get the main point and that is a NO. But imagine this your at a state park with your GF...(your life and her life are in danger) a guy is approaching you with a knife and saying give me your car keys what do you do now? If you have a CCW permit you can pull that gun out and say back of and he will back of knowing you are armed. But in reality that is what HB 89 is doing, it's letting you carry in more places were ur more open to attacks.
how convenient. if you're so brilliant you wouldn't be arguing for the WRONG side, whether you can SEE it or not. many who have posted here can SEE the other side, but all it does is make us laugh at how ridiculous it is.
Quoted for troof. Reps for you buddy
Those of you that are sooooo afraid of inanimate objects need to look at logic and FACTS.
This legislation has been in place in many many places already and some of your totally unrealistic logic has been proven wrong. Take Miami as an example.
From what I've read, this was in place there. Guess what happened? The crime rate drastically dropped. Why? Because the criminals suddenly were afraid and weren't sure just who was packing. But guess what else happened, that in my mind cements even more my thought process on this subject.......the crime rate in some other areas actually went UP. Yep, UP. Follow this now.....stick with me.
The criminals steered clear of those areas where they no longer KNEW that people would be easy prey due to the new legislation, SOOOO they figured out WHERE there were areas where they KNEW people would be unarmed. Guess where that is? AIRPORT. Yes, the Miami-Dade Int'l Airport. The criminals KNOW that when you come OFF an airplane you are definetly NOT carrying any weapons. Hell, we all KNOW that. So they would loiter around the airport, find their mark....usually someone renting a car (i.e. out of towners).....and follow them out of the airport. They would do the good ole "swoop and dive" car accident scheme where they just "accidentally" bump you to get you to stop and get out of the car....at which point since they KNOW you are NOT protected they turn the tables and rob you AT GUN POINT. See how that works?
So again, if any of you following the gun control herd mentality that says "GUNS kill people", should use some logic and seek FACTS. Giving people MORE power to protect themselves against criminals is NEVER a bad idea.
The ironic thing is that in today's AJC editorial, probably because the deadline is today for Perdue to veto this bill, they echo exactly what some of the gun control nuts in here are saying. Funny thing is that it would probably take all of 5 mins to find a million pages worth of FACTS on those cities where this has already been in place for a while, long enough to come to some concrete conclusions which overwhelmingly show crime rates do indeed DROP when gun laws are laxed. But if you read the editorial, it falls over backward saying there is "zero proof" that crime rates are affected by gun laws. Hmmmm, then why have ANY gun laws at all IF they do "nothing" according to you????
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
