arma virumque cano (et alia)
I think the original video that this person used parts of is much better.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo
Thanks for the link to the original. I saw that back when an Brinks, then Broadview, were running commercials like this one:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wkr0-nVwmQY&list=PLD75B3BDC2F564D06That's one of the worst offenders with the violent ex, jealous the woman is on a date, kicking in the door, thinking about it, and then running away from the alarm.That link takes you to the video within a playlist someone made. The others I looked at or remember are as bad or worse. Invariably, these criminals who know someone is home, wait for the opportune moment such as a man their size to leave, and then break in, all run away as soon as the alarm sounds. One even has a party crasher break in after everyone leaves, even after the woman see him coming to the door. If he was casing the joint, he'd have seen the damn panel.Always irritated the piss out of me. Yes, it might happen, but someone brazen enough to break in when the KNOW they're being seen doing it--especially when they're a violent ex and they know that the other person can identify them--is not likely to be deterred by the alarm alone, hence the need for a different kind of noisemaker for those who ignored the warning to flee for their lives.That's why that Glock ad was such a breath of fresh air to me at that time.
Too bad guns do more harm than good. Which means by pushing that fear-driven and paranoid video sales pitch for buying Glock you actually harm more women than help them. But you biased gun rights fanatics don't care about that. You only care about pushing your agenda and you don't give a fuck if more women end up like Meleanie Hain as long as you justify your own gun ownership.
Fuck you you fucking hypocrite. Talking about Melanie Hain as if you care about her soooooo much more than us.This after you and your cohorts posted a picture of her with a smartass caption on it making fun of her for being murdered after advocating gun rights--and then defending the picture as appropriate humor because it made a good point.
As for your smart remark: "Too bad guns do more harm than good." You have not proven that remark, and your attempts to prove it discount whole classes of good done by firearms.As for the ad, it was no more fear driven than the security system ads--in fact, I would say it was less so since the scenario was less frighteningly presented.As for the comment about gun ownership harming women more than helping them, you sound like the Colorado legislator who told the rape victim that it was good that she'd learned to defend herself hand to hand, but that she should be glad that she wasn't allowed to carry her gun in the place she was raped because she'd have likely been disarmed and shot with it--i.e. Tone Deaf to the point of Insensitive.
"You only care about pushing your agenda and you don't give a fuck if more women end up like Meleanie Hain as long as you justify your own gun ownership." So Mike, Ms. Hain, decided to carry a firearm for self defense. Met and overcame social and legal barriers to her legally carrying. Then when her husband enters her house and shoots here and then commits suicide with guns he brought himself. Him being a member of the law enforcement community, and you seem to believe that somehow the gun she possessed somehow had some part in her death. And then of course Laci pipes in: “I only rejoice that someone who was a fool has been removed from this earth…”“It's not a tragedy, it's ironic. And I just happen to find irony funny! I mean it's really fuckin' ironic, guys!” I truly appreciate you bringing this young lady's story up, though I cant agree with your premise.
T., the fact that guns do more harm than good has been readily proven on these pages. The only way you can win that argument is by insisting there are a million-plus DGUs, and, like Greg says, each and every one saved a life. ss, you're right about Meleanie's gun not having been a factor in her demise, but it sure didn't help her any.
You have proven no such thing. You have made numeric arguments based on your estimates of millions of crimes per year (contrary to the statistics) and your estimates of defensive uses which you refuse to set a number for, but insist must be far lower than any of the estimates out there.As for the estimates of DGU's, there is a wide range of estimates. Even the lower estimates make a strong case, but you declare all of the estimates illegitimate because of problems in the methodology of those who gathered the Large estimates.You also change the rules regarding what counts as a gun crime and a DGU--a brandished gun counts as a gun crime, but a brandishing that scares off a criminal doesn't.Of course, why should we expect anything other than such dishonest arguments from someone who lies about what we say and who tries to pretend to care about a dead gun rights supporter whose death he has satirized before.
I'll also point out that you expressed this hypocrisy regarding Ms. Hain only days after you made jokes about a murdered family being NRA members and how they should have home carried.
The lower estimates do not make a strong case. There are half-a-million crimes committed with guns each year PLUS there are half-a-million guns stolen from homes. And that's the tip of the iceberg. Remember, those DGU estimates include brandishings for which there are no records. To make a fair comparison, we'd have to include all the criminal brandishings and threats that happen for which there are no records. Conservative estimates would put the bad gun uses WAAAAY above the good gun uses.
And so you use baseless speculation to deflate one side's numbers and inflate the other's. And you are also still leaving out other benefits from guns.Sorry, we're not buying it.
Mikeb, I firmly believe that a gun would do you more harm than good. But how about you let those of us with more skill and brains make our own choices?
"Fuck you you fucking hypocrite."Now there's congenial conversation, AS USUAL, from hillbillies.
Yeah, T. really lost it there for a minute. But, in all fairness, that's a rare slip for him so I ignored it.
I did not lose anything there. You and your cohorts have danced on Ms. Hain's grave and that of others--some before their bodies had even cooled. But now, when it suits you, you pretend to feel sorry for Ms. Hain and care for what happened to her.It demonstrates the height of hypocrisy. My words were rough, but they were within the bounds you have established as acceptable by using such language directed at some of us--I figured I'd stick within those bounds since my comments get deleted when I use a thesaurus to express how loathsome some of your behavior is.
Jim, calling someone out for congeniality doesn't sell well after the name calling you've engaged in.
I guessed you missed the point (with the other hillbilly) responding in kind is fair when I am called a liar and worse for no reason and without provocation.If he's going to be a jack ass, I will treat him like a jack ass. Sorry I don't react well to the superiority and arrogance from people whop are just name calling ass holes, who lie about facts, who could care less about following the law, or the needless death of children. Anything else you want to know?
Sarge, you nailed it. This troll believes in two sets of standards--he gets to carry, but we're not worthy; he gets to be haughty, but we have to be worshipful. It reminds me of a certain senator from California.
Treating people as they treat me is not a double standard. People who expect good treatment after treating people badly, is just an ass hole hillbilly standard.Bye ass hole hillbilly.