I thought this was a thread about massacres by loonies. Or is this a thread about massacres by other then loonies ?
Where did you get the idea I didn't want you to post your opinions ? Or the idea that I don't care ?
No I don't think it's OK. But from most of your posts I get the feeling you think we're doing something wrong here so I thought there maybe someone doing things better so they wont happen at all.
Well if you read this you'll see that India should be looking in their country before ours.
http://herpreetgrewal.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/bring-1984-killers-of-sikhs-to-justice-says-human-rights-body/
Do you think Saddam Hussein could have lasted so long killing his own people if the had been well armed ? In one three year period (1986-1989) he killed over 180,000 people. Now they all may have died anyway but armed they would have had a chance.
I would still stand up for someones right to ban guns on their property. I don't see any extra liability, if you don't want to be without your gun then don't go there. Your choice is what freedom is.
And if the business owner bans guns could he be sued ? Will the insurers cover the owner ? Maybe the insurer should pay a person carrying that stopped someone that was killing people ?
Anymore information on why Thailand has a higher murder rate then the U.S. ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
http://chartsbin.com/view/1454
Every day in 2010 in this country there was over 40 people murdered and that was the lowest sense 1968.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
Well was the make up to blend in ? Would anyone been able to pick him out of a line up ?
The load music started at 12 am and he started shooting about 25 min. later and could have been intended to draw all the cops to his apartment so he could get away. Did he tell the cops about the bombs at...