TexasCHLforum.com

bronco78 wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

Purplehood wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote:What ticked me off at least as much as the anti-2A and anti-firearms stuff was them labeling the guy as a "veteran"...though he did serve some time in the US Army, he was booted out with an "other than honorable" discharge. I'm sure there will be some who will get all technical on me and show just why he's a veteran by some letter of the laws...but as far as I am concerned, he's a dirtbag and a failure.

The implication resulting from when the casual reader fails to read on...is that he is one of the traumatized returning veterans from the Middle East who represent a potential threat to society.

While this guy may not be a combat veteran, the scary part is that there are thousands of veterans who have served several tours in the middle east and all have the potential of "losing it" on society. .

Really? so serving several tours makes me a scary person you should be concerned about?

Wow, I must be a time bomb ready to go off then..

Places you have never heard of... x 3
Panama x 2
Iraq x3
Afghanistan x 1
Heck even LA, CA

And not once have I "lost it on society" c

Though I have wanted to a few times......

(BTW, I get it, you meant or implied NO disrespect , and none taken)

Lord have mercy!! Kalifornia??!! I hope you are under some kind of medication!

philip964 wrote:

bronco78 wrote:

puma guy wrote:
This was described as an "act of domestic terrorism". Interesting that shootings at Christian/Jewish places of worship are never described in that manner AFAIK.

Or the shooting of American military and civilian staff by a devout Muslim who was in contact and mentored by a know terrorist..

I kinda noticed that right off.

Yep... Make that three of us.

I wanted to make separate post so I would not be perceived as disrespecting the two veterans that responded above.

Here is a link to just one of many sights on the interweb that has statistics on average time spent by our soldiers in Iraq/afganistan. If my posting this information is somehow seen as a threat to conservatism, my apologies. They don't get much more conservative than I. It far exceeds the AVERAGE TIME spent in Vietnam. While there are always exceptions to the rule, MOST, not to be read as all, soldiers spent one tour in nam and were done. Most of the soldiers in nam were drafted. There was a much larger pool of soldiers to rotate threw vietnam than there are for our volunteer military in Iraq/Afghanistan.


http://www.iraqometer.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is a link to one account of the average tour in vietnam and what the rotation standards were. It mentioned that most soldiers did not take the option to extend their tour and those that did were typically not combat soldiers, but usually administrative personal or soldiers who spent their entire tour on huge and heavily defended basis.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_long_was_ ... in_Vietnam" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


It really is no comparison to the situation that has been going on during the Iraq/Afghanistan war. Google it up yourselves. You fellers will quickly realize that the situation is entirely different and maybe understand were I was coming from with my comments earlier.

No problem jumping frog... I probably over reacted a bit.

To you other fellers... Thanks for your service.

Jumping Frog wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:While this guy may not be a combat veteran, the scary part is that there are thousands of veterans who have served several tours in the middle east and all have the potential of "losing it" on society. I am convinced that serving several tours under combat stress has the potential to create some emotional/mental problems. As these folks attempt to assimilate back into civilian life over the coming years, we will likely see more of these episodes.

I have more confidence on the young men and women who serve.

After all, the liberal theme in print and movies for decades was the psycho baby-killer, PTSD Vietnam veteran who came home and could never fit into society or have piece of mind.

However, as numerous veterans groups have shown, the reality for Vietnam veterans is quite different. When measured as an entire group, they have more stable marriages, better careers, less mental and emotional problems, less alcoholism/substance abuse, and a lower incidence of homelessness that the representatives of the same generation who stayed home and protested.

Obviously there are the exception cases on both ends of the bell curve, but on the whole the veteran is the person to place your bets on.

The one VERY BIG difference. Vietnam veterans, as a rule, served one term and came home. These young men and women are serving MANY tours and rotating back and forth at rates we have NEVER had in the past war situations. My comments were not made as a lack of confidence in anyone. Which would be very disrespectful.

Your beginning line reads as if you are working under the misconception that your confidence for our men and women of the military exceeds mine. Please don't fool yourself. My father was killed in Vietnam when I was 9 years old and my brother just retired from the Army with 27 years of active duty. I lost three uncles in various wars and have nothing but the greatest confidence in our brave men and women.

Purplehood wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote:What ticked me off at least as much as the anti-2A and anti-firearms stuff was them labeling the guy as a "veteran"...though he did serve some time in the US Army, he was booted out with an "other than honorable" discharge. I'm sure there will be some who will get all technical on me and show just why he's a veteran by some letter of the laws...but as far as I am concerned, he's a dirtbag and a failure.

The implication resulting from when the casual reader fails to read on...is that he is one of the traumatized returning veterans from the Middle East who represent a potential threat to society.

While this guy may not be a combat veteran, the scary part is that there are thousands of veterans who have served several tours in the middle east and all have the potential of "losing it" on society. I am convinced that serving several tours under combat stress has the potential to create some emotional/mental problems. As these folks attempt to assimilate back into civilian life over the coming years, we will likely see more of these episodes.

Sorry wildbill and sqlgeek. I don't buy it for one minute. being from Kalifornia is not something one can simply wash off with soap and water. I am not sure gasoline can remove those stains.

AEA wrote:

philip964 wrote:Are 88 guns per 100 people too many?

I'd like to know how they come up with that number when they can't even keep up with the number of guns THEY let walk into Mexico!

Does that 88 per 100 include all the illegal guns?
Does that 88 per 100 include all LEO guns?

OK, let's take the 100.....who exactly are they?
Who, exactly is the 88 guns in that group?

Just where does that number come from?

I'll tell you from where...........from the imagination of some Left Wing Loonie that wants to sensationalize his rhetoric. Nothing they say is the truth!

And we know that to be a "Good Dem" you cannot know how to count!
Anything a Dem says that has a number in it is nothing but a lie!

That 88 is a low number anyway and they should be happy with it. I own 10 guns. If only 49 others here in Texas owned the same number as I, the numbers would be 500 per 100 (for that particular 100). Just proves how stupid this 88 per 100 is. At what point do you stop and average all samples to come up with 88 per 100? Would that be the correct picture? Of course not.

I am at the point now that I don't even listen to their lies anymore.

It is getting beyond ridiculous! The problem I see is that there are a whole load of sheep who believe anything they hear on TV. My continued hope for our 2nd amendment rights was reinforced by the record number of guns sold just after the slaughter in that theater. I can promise one thing for certain, if cows and chickens had guns, we would all be vegetarians.

The media tools will act like a 10 round magazine is high capacity if it fits into their agenda. Some clown on Fox last night said the shooter used a "automatic or semi automatic" handgun. They just love throwing the buzz words around. Just a few... "assualt weapon", "automatic", "military style", "high capacity CLIPS", "plastic pistol" ... I want to choke them out!