Dereck Simonsmeier loves his gun a lot and feels the need to carry it with him everywhere he goes. Of course, that means that he is attacked for his freedom loving at places like Pick N Save. Never mind the fact that it's private property and the owners of said firm can bounce his ass whenever they want. He needed to stand his ground! Why?
The cold had numbed my arms and severely restricted the movement of my hands and fingers. If I had needed to draw my weapon in the Pick ’N Save parking lot, I would have been unsuccessful.
That's right, kids! Villains lurk around every corner waiting to pounce and attack!!! Look out!!! There's Barack Obama and his commie pinkos comin' to gin us!! Perhaps Simonsmeier was the victim of just such a dastardly plot when he was arrested for threatening a man with a gun. What a shining example of a responsible gun owner.
And people wonder why I don't want armed civilians in our schools.
4 comments:
You already got armed 'civilians' in the schools.
Your only choice is if you want to ban the law abiding ones from being there leaving only the law breaking ones....
And this DEA agent must be an example of why armed cops shouldn't be allowed in schools, either. Hint this actually took place in a school.
And with people like Jerome Hauer sweeping the audience with his (at the time) illegal Glock (which I'm sure had more than the now legal 7 rounds (one of the more idiotic things New York state has done lately). But no problem, Cuomo got him an ex post facto permit right away. Now that he's legal and had government pixie dust sprinkled on him, I just bet you'd love to have him come give a presentation at your school, right? I sure wouldn't.
BTW, are you against armed police coming to schools? I ask because police are civilians, too, except for military police, which is a just a specific MOS within the services.
Now this idiot Wisconsonite should (at a minimum) have his carry permit revoked if he's found guilty. That is unacceptable behaviour. It's also a pity that some cops do the same thing and mostly get away with it, because they're "special" and who's the jury going to believe? In too many places, it's almost a given that other cops and the union will rally to the defense of a bad cop.
Not to mention that this story is just the sort of anecdatum (thrown out in support of or against a policy) that you decried just yesterday. Practice consistency in thought much?
But you have no problem with armed police, do you?
Like this?
Or this?
Post a Comment