Latest Comments by tntrn

Latest Comments by tntrn

tntrn 15,854 Views

I am happily retired after 35 years of Labor and Delivery nursing. My passions now are two wonderful grandchildren, quilting on my HQ 16, sewing, and going where life takes me with my husband of 28 years. I am primarily conservative with moderate views on a couple social issues.

Sorted By Last Comment (Past 5 Years)
  • 0

    I don't see it as a sad thing at all. If the Brits voted that way, the Brits will have to, in time, decide to correct it or live with it.

  • 2
    herring_RN and Tweety like this.

    Quote from Tweety
    "law abiding citizens just shouldn't have to carry a're not getting me in that direction". I agree with him, we shouldn't be promoting citizens to go out and arm themselves. . He's not saying "I want to take away people's rights to defend themselves".

    But I see your point.

    I can be a little snarly at time, you know this. LOL

    Yes, I do know that about you.....and about myself as well. ACtually one of the things I like most about you is that you will admit it.

    Hope your day is a good one.

  • 0

    First search that popped up. I have an appointment to get ready for, so no more time....but this will offer you exactly the kind of hypocritical thoughts I mentioned before.

    Rangel: No Guns For Americans But I Need Police Protection [AUDIO] | The Daily Caller

  • 0

    Quote from herring_RN
    So the killer had to pull the trigger more than 100 times to shoot 102 people in a short time?
    It is sad to arguing details, but good to be discussing it. Just maybe sensible people can come up with reasonable regulations.

    The history of the AR-15 - The Washington Post
    Yes, one pull of the trigger, one and only one round fired. Of course, this fellow had several hours to do his evil. But the claims that dozens of rounds can be fired in 30 seconds is just not physically possible.

  • 0

    Quote from Tweety
    Now you're being condescending with your "let's be grown ups". Are you calling me childish?

    We've had many discussions over the years, if you feel you've been scolded, then so be it. I can't tell you how to feel.

    Yep, I do criticize you for exaggerating (making up facts like the 98% thing) and I myself do the same by saying these are weapons of war. Really, in my mind they are. They aren't weapons of self-defense is what I'm saying.

    Politicians and big Hollywood types aren't saying we can't defend ourselves. The "they're coming after our guns" is weak.

    Again, moot point. People are going to arm themselves, and going to kill each other. My thoughts and prayers are with the future victims and their families. Hopefully a good guy with a gun can stop these things.

    Gun sales up on the First Coast after Orlando mass shooting |
    No I am saying we are both, and maybe all of us, not quite adult at times.

    Charlie Rangel said that exact thing. He deserves to be protected but the common citizen doesn't. I'll find that video or audio for you.

    And many people feel they are perfect for self-defense.

  • 0

    Quote from Tweety
    Thanks for the correction. I'll ignore the dig about being "scolded again". Perhaps "weapon of war" was a bit dramatic on my part. I'll still maintain that a "good man with a gun" doesn't need this to protect himself. These weapons are not designed for that, but for a greater destructive need, and a great profit to the fat cats and even small business owners. But it sure looks good when someone open carries one.

    I'm certainly not naive enough to think that banning them will stop murders. The old argument "if you take away guns only criminals will have guns" is quite effective. It's too late, they are flying off shelves and there are too many millions out there, so we may as well not ban them and let people just buy more and more. A ban would be ineffective at this point.

    You've convinced me. I throw in the towel and give up and just offer "my thoughts and prayers for the victims and the families" next time.

    Let's be grownups okay? I will try if you will. You and others have scolded me. And here you go, now admitting your use of the phrase "weapons of war" was "a bit dramatic." For clarity, it that the same as exaggeration?

    I have no issue with someone arguing their point. However, the political types, who are very happy to have their safety enhanced with armed security guards, have openly declared that the rest of us don't deserve to enhance our own safety.....oh, and the Hollywood types, too. Big giant fences and armed hypocritical can they get?

    I personally have never seen anybody openly carrying a shoulder slung rifle. In AZ I have seen openly carried holstered pistols......with far more powerful ammo than the AR or the Sig-Sauer use.

    If I did, I would next be watching him, but I would not necessarily be afraid. When I purchased my nice, pretty concealed carry handbag, the woman was very good about teaching how to properly use it and what to watch for. Among those tips were, "most people, when walking around, are looking into people's faces......Be also looking at their hands......because if they are about to start shooting their hands are going to be the first clue."

    I have shot an M-4, at a range in Las Vegas. It is quite different (other than looks) from the AR-15 I own.

    As an aside, I would encourage anybody who hasn't actually shot a firearm of any kind, might go to a range, get an instructor to help you and just try it. This is not meant to change your mind in any way, but only suggested as a way to get more accurate information than the anti-gun advocates are feeding you. Also, while there, you could ask about the legalities of purchasing, because those guys KNOW. Their livelihood depends on them following the laws.....again information that is not accurately offered by the anti-gun types.

  • 0

    Quote from Tweety
    Weapons gunman used in Orlando shooting are high-capacity, common

    These are not weapons that a "good man with a gun" needs to defend himself, family or property. They are designed to rapidly kill and we can start with banning these weapons. They are weapons of war, law enforcement and mass murder. Apparently though they are flying off the shelves as they do after mass murders.

    They need to be banned. If that involves trampling on your 2nd Amendment rights, so be it.

    I know I will get scolded again, but at the very least we should have the correct information when making arguments. The AR-15 (which stands for Armalite Rifle not assault rifle) and the Sig-Sauer which the Orlando shooter used are not weapons of war or used by police. They might be high capacity, but they are do not use ammo as big and hefty as many handguns do.

    A soldier handed an AR-15 or the Sig would probably be like, "really? you want me to fight war with this?"

    The fact that mass murderers use them does not make them weapons of wars. And taking them away from law-abiding citizens will ensure that murderers will find a different weapon for their evil doings.

  • 0

    Quote from Elvish
    Being called - albeit directly - on factual inaccuracies is not nastiness. .
    I'll take a play from the left and all the snowflakes that are popping up all over: If I perceive something to be nasty, then it is. Whether you meant to be, or whether or not it really is, is of no consequence. That's what is happening everywhere around us....I think I'll use that approach once in a today.

  • 0

    Quote from Elvish
    Because this is the United States and we have freedom of religion here. Good call. You don't want Christians to be 'investigated' and 'profiled' on the simple basis of their religion in other countries, be consistent and extend those same protections to minority religions here.

    Profile behaviors, not religions.
    Exactly. But not being able to go into primarily Muslim areas when a crime is suspected is NOT targetting the religion....unless you are a liberal and want to twist it that way.

  • 0
  • 0

    Quote from Elvish
    This almost a verbatim parrot of what Trump says. Is it too much to ask to, you know, fact check?

    I used an internet search engine and in less than 30 seconds found an article that directly refutes this statement. Not from a liberal news rag, but the director of the FBI. And wasn't it a Muslim guy that reported the Times Square bomber?
    FBI: Muslim Americans report extremist threats often - Business Insider

    All immigrants must assimilate? I call BS. This notion that previous generations assimilated seamlessly into society and learned English and became God-bless-America patriots is total crap. Assimilation? Please explain neighborhoods like Little Havana and Little Italy and Hamtramck and any number of Chinatowns that are still in existence today. Your ancestors and mine were not any more noble than those who currently come here, and they are certainly not less prone to barbarism.

    The difference is that nonwhite people by default will not 'fit in' because of the color of their skin and will always have to somehow 'prove' their loyalty. Funny how no one cares about St. Paddy's day parades....
    I tire of the nastiness toward fellow posters here.

    I have heard interviews with LEO's who have affirmed this very thing. Now maybe it is not an official, in writing, kind of policy....but it is, at the very least, unwritten but followed, policy in some areas.
    I tire of the nastiness from some of the posters here.

  • 0

    Quote from herring_RN
    Thank you for answering!
    A citizen who came to the USA from Pakistan in 1979 reported the Orlando killer to the FBI. You can read what he wrote here:
    While a good thing, and taking into account that a gun shop owner also reported him, Muslims do not generally do this, maybe from fear I don't know. I think the authorities dropped the ball. But when authorities are banned from investigating Muslim neighborhoods or other gathering places UNLESS there is self-reporting, how can they truly do their job? And how is it fair to have enacted that policy anyway?

  • 0

    Quote from herring_RN
    Do you have an idea how we in the United States can prevent would-be terrorists from buying guns and shooting more than a hundred people in a short time?
    Yes I do but it won't be popular. I think Trump's idea to temporarily cease immigration of people from countries known to be terrorist hotbeds is a good one. Better vetting of refugees must be done to include what diseases they may be subjecting us to, needs to be done.

    Gun laws have not and will not keep evil people from doing evil. Keeping them out of the country will be a big step in the right direction.

    Citizen Muslims who truly are peaceful need to actually start reporting their own when something is amiss...instead of merely saying they are a peaceful religion.

    All imigrants need to assimilate.

    i await the outrage.

  • 0

    Quote from azhiker96
    It shows their level of maturity and reminds me of this commercial.
    Banned Commercial - Condoms - YouTube

    Next time, maybe they can lie on the floor and throw temper tantrums.

  • 2
    Spidey's mom and azhiker96 like this.

    The Orlando shooter was not on a watch list. He did not use an assault weapon. He passed background checks. So what would the laws the Democrats want have to be in order to prevent him doing what he did?