On FOX News Sunday, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said concealed and carry laws in Denver would have meant “a firefight and killed many more people.” She forgot that there already was a massacre where 12 unarmed Americans were slaughtered in cold blood – including two military personnel.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

1 2 3 4

`
  1. #2 July 22, 2012 at 9:47 am

    RealMc commented:

    DiFi………..and Nancy Pelosi……..separated at birth.

  2. #3 July 22, 2012 at 9:53 am

    Bill Mitchell commented:

    So wait. She is saying that one guy spraying the crowd with lead with no one shooting back at him is less deadly that one guy ducking for cover and under return fire or maybe one dead guy with a bullet in his face?

    Lord democrats are stupid.

  3. #4 July 22, 2012 at 9:54 am

    mg4us commented:

    What the heck does not-so-Fine-stein know. .

    If James Holmes knew people would be packing, perhaps he would not have done what he did for fear of his own life. . .

    and how do we know he feared dying?

    He wore protective ammor.

    Also for the idiot Libtard Senator from California, let’s look at reality?

    When the “Wild West” was growing, and cowboys all wore guns, how many random gunfights occurred in bars and entertainment facilities. . especially where children were present?

    None. . but why let facts get in the way of Libtard politics.

    As Obama pal says, “Never let a crisis go to waste” – - The new DemocRAT way!

  4. #5 July 22, 2012 at 9:54 am

    Sasja commented:

    Typical lib.

  5. #6 July 22, 2012 at 9:54 am

    dba...vagabond trader commented:

    There really should be an intelligence/common sense test for all elected officials.

  7. #8 July 22, 2012 at 10:06 am

    xkaydet65 commented:

    In this one case Feinstein has a point. if someone had responded, say the way that guy in the internet cafe did, it would have had little effect. Holmes was almost as well protected as those LA bank robbers several years ago.. Someone firing a .32 beretta would have no impact on Holmes. In the case of a Colin Ferguson and the LIRR, a carry law could have had great impact on that murder spree.

  8. #9 July 22, 2012 at 10:11 am

    Male Silverback commented:

    We can be the Eloi or the Morlocks, if we listen to a group of pansies who cringe at the thought of a gun we would all be food for the criminals.

  9. #10 July 22, 2012 at 10:12 am

    dwillmore commented:

    Moments count when trying to let a crowd flee to safety. Even if the gunman was not hit it would have slowed him. If he was hit or had a close whiz by the ear it would have stopped him for a bit….unless I guess he was using pcp.

    Dems view people as cattle to be raised, framed, used or slaughtered.

  10. #11 July 22, 2012 at 10:13 am

    Male Silverback commented:

    #8, I would rather stand my ground with a .22 than cower and be a victim.

  11. #12 July 22, 2012 at 10:16 am

    Bill Mitchell commented:

    @#8 – Or you could just shoot him in the face – just sayin.

  13. #14 July 22, 2012 at 10:21 am

    onbe commented:

    @#8 – Or you could just shoot him in the face – just sayin.

    Good point

  14. #15 July 22, 2012 at 10:24 am

    Indiana commented:

    Right now “copycats” are saying….oh, cool…Holmes…famous. If there had been some conceal and carries in that crowd…..”copycats” would be saying….oh, $hit…not a good idea. No matter the death count, albiet tragic…..criminals should start taking into consideration that they’re going to be stopped by ordinary americans…..real soon.

  15. #16 July 22, 2012 at 10:25 am

    EBL commented:

    Chicago’s murder rate is double that of Aurora this month. Just saying. Don’t they have gun control in Chicago? http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/07/while-president-pops-in-aurora-colorado.html

  16. #17 July 22, 2012 at 10:25 am

    RealMc commented:

    @ #8, don’t worry, I carry.

    .45 HP’s, head shot. problem solved.

  17. #18 July 22, 2012 at 10:29 am

    Flintstone F. commented:

    #12

    I thought I posted and didn’t, but that’s exactly what I said. Severe injury to the eyes? He would fall down at the very least and be in pain.

    Also he would not have had the motivation to do what he did had his planning process included the real possibility that he could get shot before he does anything.

    The gun free zone was prime to his “courage.”

    #4 mg4us got it right.

  18. #20 July 22, 2012 at 10:32 am

    Highlander commented:

    Any intelligent person can see that the shooter would have done less damage if he was taking return fire. And, no innocent people would have been shot, because no able bodied individuals would have been standing anywhere close to him when he started shooting. These leftists and gun haters are so ignorant, and so biased, you just can’t reason with them.



1 2 3 4


`

© Copyright 2013, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Web Development By Arlington Kirk