What's new

Walking definition of FAFO.....

I know some of your wives probably run a muck and the opinions on here show that.
Just the shit we have to deal with in life these days makes anti heroes like this seem like superman.
Fact is the guy murdered three people because they annoyed him. That's not a hero,that's a mentally unstable man than hasn't been properly treated.
It's not fucking cool that he murdered people.
What if someone murdered your parents and sibling because they annoyed him?
A normal person removes themselves from the situation and a mentally unfit person sticks around until he snaps.
From some of the posts in here it sounds like a handful of you need a divorce and a few others need a girlfriend:flipoff2:
Understanding and condoning are not the same.
 
I've never understood why using a gun is supposed to be a "worse" crime. Dead is dead. Would someone be more or less dead with another method? Like you, I think quick and painless is a more humanly way of carrying out your intention unlike maybe using a baseball bat.
Method is irrelevant; people should be room-temperatured for murder 1, forcible rape, pedo shit, and clogging the fast lane:flipoff2:.

Like others have said, I'd prefer to go out instantly from a clean lights-out shot than to be slowly stabbed or beaten to death.
 
I've never understood why using a gun is supposed to be a "worse" crime. Dead is dead. Would someone be more or less dead with another method? Like you, I think quick and painless is a more humanly way of carrying out your intention unlike maybe using a baseball bat.
To me strangling someone or something like that is way worse. A quick pull of the trigger or 15 minutes of effort.
 
Crimes committed with guns should be death penalty.

I've never understood why using a gun is supposed to be a "worse" crime. Dead is dead. Would someone be more or less dead with another method? Like you, I think quick and painless is a more humanly way of carrying out your intention unlike maybe using a baseball bat.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Gun involved crime enhancements are anti-gun establishment add-on's. A firearm is a tool, and/or a source of recreation. Same as a baseball bat. You can swing at a ball, or a head. The bat doesn't care what it hits.
 
Method is irrelevant; people should be room-temperatured for murder 1, forcible rape, pedo shit, and clogging the fast lane:flipoff2:.

Like others have said, I'd prefer to go out instantly from a clean lights-out shot than to be slowly stabbed or beaten to death.
You forgot talking out loud at the theater :flipoff2:
 
bunch of gd psycos in here :laughing:


Guilty as charged...

mr-rogers-guilty-smile-fvn1m8eyyr4bdaqk.gif
 
I've never understood why using a gun is supposed to be a "worse" crime. Dead is dead. Would someone be more or less dead with another method? Like you, I think quick and painless is a more humanly way of carrying out your intention unlike maybe using a baseball bat.

I'm more afraid of someone who grabs an bladed object and starts hacking opposed to a gun. Timeframe does make a difference. Those people where disoriented and stunned from the initial social disturbance from the first shot ringing out in the trailer.

Even though this guy goes with the grain of Killdozer. Murder is Murder. You murder someone in cold blood, you deserve to be un alived instead of spending the rest of your natural days in prison.

I know some of your wives probably run a muck and the opinions on here show that.
Just the shit we have to deal with in life these days makes anti heroes like this seem like superman.
Fact is the guy murdered three people because they annoyed him. That's not a hero,that's a mentally unstable man than hasn't been properly treated.
It's not fucking cool that he murdered people.
What if someone murdered your parents and sibling because they annoyed him?
A normal person removes themselves from the situation and a mentally unfit person sticks around until he snaps.
From some of the posts in here it sounds like a handful of you need a divorce and a few others need a girlfriend:flipoff2:
Yes.
 
I mean, I'm not condoning anything that was done. He committed murder. What i give him respect on was he owned it. He stated multiple times that he did it, knew it was wrong, and that he didn't need a lawyer. He knew the consequences of his actions and made the decision (certainly not the one I would make or condone). Probably the easiest investigation, indictment, and sentencing in the history of the US court system.
 
I mean, I'm not condoning anything that was done. He committed murder. What i give him respect on was he owned it. He stated multiple times that he did it, knew it was wrong, and that he didn't need a lawyer. He knew the consequences of his actions and made the decision (certainly not the one I would make or condone). Probably the easiest investigation, indictment, and sentencing in the history of the US court system.
Well considering that R Kansas has the death penalty for capital crime, this may be a case of suicide by court.
 
Why is that exactly? Is it because it is more gruesome than an ax or a knife with its 9mm lung blowers.:homer: That is not great logic. Id much rather be on the recieving end of a head shot than an ax atleast it was quick. People are gonna kill people. Id kind of rather they didn't resort to more painful methods to do it.

I wanted to like this post until that, what difference does the method make ?

Think big picture:flipoff2:

Because guns are protected by the 2A and the 2A isn't there for random murdering. That's why I said what I did. The 2A is sacred. Using a gun in this instance should be considered worse than a hammer, bat, or hands, because it's not being used within the "wording, framework, spirit" of the 2A. It's actually taking advantage of the 2A to commit a crime. That's exactly the reason why we have the .gov chipping away at the 2A.

Make the penalty for using a gun in a crime death and get rid of all other laws on guns.

Would this guy still have done what he did if the penalty was death? I think he would have. Sounds like he was ready to pay any price for them to be dead, so my point is really moot. But he did give ammo to the gun grabbers.

For the record, if I gotta go, and it's not in my sleep...........I'll take a bullet to the back of my head any day.:flipoff2::usa:




He probably grew up adjacent to some sort of thugs (more likely cops than street gang knowing this crowd but it's all one in the same in this context) and therefore doesn't like force equalizers.

Go get a juice box, the adults are talking.:flipoff2:
 
Last edited:
From the interview it sounds like they pulled it once on him when he first got married 6 years ago or so. It sounded like the rest of the time they all avoided each other. What's gnarly is he figured he'd just shoot his wife too, since she didn't' ask them to leave.

Well, you know how that goes, knock down the first two plates and you just want to finish the rack.
 
Think big picture:flipoff2:

Because guns are protected by the 2A and the 2A isn't there for random murdering. That's why I said what I did. The 2A is sacred. Using a gun in this instance should be considered worse than a hammer, bat, or hands, because it's not being used within the "wording, framework, spirit" of the 2A. It's actually taking advantage of the 2A to commit a crime. That's exactly the reason why we have the .gov chipping away at the 2A.

Make the penalty for using a gun in a crime death and get rid of all other laws on guns.

Would this guy still have done what he did if the penalty was death? I think he would have. Sounds like he was ready to pay any price for them to be dead, so my point is really moot. But he did give ammo to the gun grabbers.

For the record, if I gotta go, and it's not in my sleep...........I'll take a bullet to the back of my head any day.:flipoff2::usa:






Go get a juice box, the adults are talking.:flipoff2:
Wasn't sure if I was on board with your post until this:

"Make the penalty for using a gun in a crime death and get rid of all other laws on guns."

However, I would slightly edit:

"Make the penalty for using a weapon in a crime death and get rid of all other laws regarding."
 
Truth. I was sick of female bullshit drama and pretty much dating people in general by the time I met my wife. Right out of the gate I laid out some ground rules and told her if she stepped over those then she could take a hike. She heard me out and said she was cool with it. On Sept. 6th we will have been married 15 years and I wouldn't trade her for the world.

The ground rules? Pretty simple:

  • If you have a problem, tell me and we can talk about it. I don't read minds and I don't take hints.
  • If I have a problem, I will tell you. I don't drop hints and I don't expect you to read minds.
  • If I'm telling you about a problem, I don't care about the past, I just don't want to repeat it in the future.
  • I don't date jealous girls. If I don't want to be with you, I'll leave. Don't make a big deal if another chick talks to me in public.
  • I will always hang out with my friends. Take it or leave it.
  • We're equals, so everything I expect from you I also expect from me, including following these rules
 
Think big picture:flipoff2:

Because guns are protected by the 2A and the 2A isn't there for random murdering. That's why I said what I did. The 2A is sacred. Using a gun in this instance should be considered worse than a hammer, bat, or hands, because it's not being used within the "wording, framework, spirit" of the 2A. It's actually taking advantage of the 2A to commit a crime. That's exactly the reason why we have the .gov chipping away at the 2A.

Make the penalty for using a gun in a crime death and get rid of all other laws on guns.

Would this guy still have done what he did if the penalty was death? I think he would have. Sounds like he was ready to pay any price for them to be dead, so my point is really moot. But he did give ammo to the gun grabbers.

For the record, if I gotta go, and it's not in my sleep...........I'll take a bullet to the back of my head any day.:flipoff2::usa:






Go get a juice box, the adults are talking.:flipoff2:
That is still dumb. Murder is already illegal. In a place that has capitol punishment it is already an offense that can get you the death sentence. The 2A is there for you to have the gun. Period. After that it has 0 bearing on whatever crime you commit or the punishment you should recieve for it. It is a dumb argument when liberals use it and it is for our side too. The gun grabbers do not look at shit like this as ammo. We (unfortunately) in this country have plenty of other horrific mass murders to choose from and they don't care about the gun being used in the crime anyway in the grand scheme of things. They have proven if you took the crime out of the gun rights issue they would find another reason to push for them to be gone.


A very small minority of crimes involve guns and yet look at how it is already. You think painting them as a special and more capable murder tool is gonna help gun rights? And all of that pales to the fact i just think it is dumb to think someone deserves the death penalty for slighting what you think the 2nd is for more than someone like the asshole here a few years ago who slowly tortured a captured family to death in their basement with a hammer. Prosecute the person and the intent. Not the tool. Also just as an aside most prosecutors cannot drop gun charges from whatever list of shit they charge people with fast enough anyhow because it opens them up to being challenged on gun law where they could lose. Murder is really no different and even less likely because the fact that billy joe had an unregistered handgun kind of pales in comparison to triple homicide. Not even worth prosecuting for.
 
Last edited:
Top Back Refresh