Search found 4 matches
Return to “CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife”
- Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:52 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1958
Re: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
With our lab the safety seems to involve stuffing food into the mouth.
- Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:31 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1958
Re: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
An OWB for sure ...Outside the Wag band! That tail is dangerous let me tell you!Tass wrote:Kevin,
Dude...what kind of holster for a yellow lab?
Tass
- Fri Nov 20, 2009 9:54 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1958
Re: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
OK....I have been reading several threads on this forum and I have reached the conclusion that dogs are the issue here.
Restrictions (or even total bans) should be placed on all dog owners (after they register of course). No amendments (that I know of) guarantee anyone the right to own dogs, and even if there was this obviously only meant dogs of circa 1776. These new assult dog have no place in a civilised society. Their only purpose is the kill or maim. Large breed dogs should be only allowed for law enforcement or military use (unless you are in government then you can own whatever you want). You should have to have a licence for all dogs and have a mandatory 3 day cooling off period when buying one.
EDIT: As my avatar I have a picture of my daily carry dog!
Restrictions (or even total bans) should be placed on all dog owners (after they register of course). No amendments (that I know of) guarantee anyone the right to own dogs, and even if there was this obviously only meant dogs of circa 1776. These new assult dog have no place in a civilised society. Their only purpose is the kill or maim. Large breed dogs should be only allowed for law enforcement or military use (unless you are in government then you can own whatever you want). You should have to have a licence for all dogs and have a mandatory 3 day cooling off period when buying one.
EDIT: As my avatar I have a picture of my daily carry dog!
- Fri Nov 20, 2009 7:46 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
- Replies: 18
- Views: 1958
Re: CA: Lame excuse for shooting wife
From the comments on the article:
I believe the smart money (and the jury apparently) is going with or intentionally killed his wife.
This bit cracks me up who either had it loaded when it didn't need to be (in the home and not in use) or intentionally killed his wife...anyone else keep their weapon loaded at home, or is that just me?Maybe you didn't read my post. In particular the part about the purpose of a gun being to put holes into living things and make them dead. I'm not bashing guns; as I said I'm a supporter of the 2nd Ammendment. But a gun should not be loaded unless it is about to be used, with the obvious exception of law enforcement because they might be called to use their weapons at any time.
Guns are not life-saving devices - they are life-ending devices. That is their purpose.
I don't blame the gun - I blame the idiot who either had it loaded when it didn't need to be (in the home and not in use) or intentionally killed his wife.
I believe the smart money (and the jury apparently) is going with or intentionally killed his wife.
Then he should know to keep the booger hook off the bang switch then right?Terrell (the defence attorney) said that Norris told him he was familiar with weapons because of his training in the military.