It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Sounds great on paper, but it would only postpone his determination to ultimately achieve what he wants.
(sorry op I think this might turn in to a gun debate despite your request )edit on 18-12-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SpearMint
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Sounds great on paper, but it would only postpone his determination to ultimately achieve what he wants.
(sorry op I think this might turn in to a gun debate despite your request )edit on 18-12-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)
These things are very rarely planned, they're an impulse thing with the weapons at hand.
Originally posted by SpearMint
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Sounds great on paper, but it would only postpone his determination to ultimately achieve what he wants.
(sorry op I think this might turn in to a gun debate despite your request )edit on 18-12-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)
These things are very rarely planned, they're an impulse thing with the weapons at hand.
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Originally posted by SpearMint
Originally posted by Lonewulph
Originally posted by SpearMint
Would make a lot more sense to remove the guns he used, which were LEGALLY owned by his mother.
Sounds great on paper, but it would only postpone his determination to ultimately achieve what he wants.
(sorry op I think this might turn in to a gun debate despite your request )edit on 18-12-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)
These things are very rarely planned, they're an impulse thing with the weapons at hand.
Pardon? It takes much planning for all of these shooters. Getting the equipment together, loading up on multiple weapons and ammo, killing mom and dad before you head out... their mind is gone and with diligent planing, they will act on that plan. Remember the planning the went into Columbine?
Sorry op, back on topic,... beam me in!edit on 18-12-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by tjack
You don't even have to answer it with a post, just think about it and answer yourself.
If you could snap your fingers, and magically transport a gun through time and into the hands of the principal and/or teachers of Sandy Hook as the tragedy was starting to unfold, "Would you do it?"
Be honest with yourself. Would you?
Thanks in advance for your courtesy.
Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by SpearMint
You keep claiming facts where there are none.
Stealing a legally owned gun is still a crime, who owned the gun doesn't matter.
At least with gun on gun you have a chance to stop them, if they try something else like a bomb you are mostly screwed.
Again I say remember Tim McVeigh and those big planes on 9/11.