I picked up a German newspaper at a news stand in Heathrow yesterday and it was amusing read this:
The statement: "If there was no guy with a rifle to chase the gunman there would have been more people dead than 26 in that church. Folks, the country needs more people with guns" The Newspaper: "the President of the United States just told us that his country is a lawless shooting gallery with people running around with guns and killing people in every damn place from children in an elementary school to families praying in a church. He said he wants more people with guns. What kind of a jackass would say that"? Frankfurter Allgemeine ZeitungIn the time it would take you to write five fake reviews or read your daily dose of Fake news you could listen to the actual words of a great speech in Seoul by MAGA President Trump, the Greatest President of my lifetime.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQkUgq7SwTc
The German newspaper you were reading online had no problem lying in their propaganda translation of MAGA President Trump, when he answered NBC's Miss Dingbat's questions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBCCyE53p8g
I picked up a German newspaper at a news stand in Heathrow yesterday and it was amusing read this:
The statement:
"If there was no guy with a rifle to chase the gunman there would have been more people dead than 26 in that church. Folks, the country needs more people with guns"
The Newspaper:
"the President of the United States just told us that his country is a lawless shooting gallery with people running around with guns and killing people in every damn place from children in an elementary school to families praying in a church. He said he wants more people with guns. What kind of a jackass would say that"?
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBCCyE53p8g
Trump said it would have prevented the civilian who shot the shooter from getting his rifle and, therefore, there would have been "hundreds more dead."
.
If the shooter had been better vetted (not just looking in a database with missing Air Force info) he probably would not have been allowed to legally obtain those guns. The shooter would have had to try to get guns illegally and maybe been deterred by the difficulty or cost or ended up with fewer or inferior weapons. As far as we know, the civilian with the rifle is not crazy and would have been vetted and approved to buy his rifle. He might have had to wait a few days, but he'd still legally obtain his rifle. I think there would have been no massacre and that the civilian would still be using his rifle for hunting and target practice.
.
The reporter also asked Trump about considering any gun control policy going forward. Trump cited Chicago as having gun tough laws that don't work implying, somehow, that that means that there should be NO such laws? He did NOT say that he thinks that there should be BETTER gun control policies. He just cited the failures of Chicago.
.
Many could cite the failure of walls to stop illegal immigration. Trump argues for BETTER walls. So he understands the concept. Why would he acknowledge the failure of current gun control laws but then not suggest BETTER gun control measures? I think this was on the SAT:
(a) illegal immigration : BETTER walls :: crimes with guns : BETTER gun control policies
(b) illegal immigration : BETTER walls :: crimes with guns : NO gun control policies
...This fool has the audacity to support Americas pussy grabber in-chief & even gives us the video of him answering that now is not the time to talk about gun violence, that is the line he uses after every mass shooting. Why can't the gun supporters give any good reasons against federally mandated back-round checks & reasonable waiting periods for firearm sales, do they really want more loonies buying a gun when they are pissed off just so they can go settle a score.
What's the point of making more laws when existing laws are not enforced across the board?
If employers and cheap skate homeowners would refuse to hire illegal workers we wouldn't have a need to build more walls.
I believe entry standards were lowered under Obama to meet recruitment goals, substandard clerical workers in the Military soon followed.
Devin Kelly should not have been allowed to legally buy a weapon if new gun sale laws were followed.
http://www.euronews.com/2017/11/07/killer-should-not-have-been-able-to-legally-purchase-firearms
Thirty people killed everyday in America because of drunk drivers.
We are not allowed to shoot drunk drivers between their beady eyes, in self defense.
Why no federal background checks for alcohol purchases?
When someone not of legal age to buy alcohol hopes to become a drunken fool they will ask a person who is legally allowed to buy their killing potion.
The same thing often happens when a criminal is not legally able to buy a weapon.
Would the death penalty for anyone buying alcohol for a minor or someone supplying weapons to a person they know is not legally allowed to purchase firearms, be a law you would support, to help quell murders.
MY GF is a fine outstanding peaceful citizen, she recently bought a new self defense weapon at our local gun store. She had to do another back ground check.
Now she carries two pistols outside our home.
I feel safe anytime we are together unless we are on the roads.
You never know when a loony drunk driver will hit you head on and snuff out your life. 
All drivers carry liability insurance for damage they cause to other drivers and vehicles! Even if they are not insured insurance policies cover uninsured motorist caused damages. If you are scared of driving, walk or take public transport.
Same thing cannot be said for people who buy guns, rifles and military style assault weapons. They don't have to carry any liability insurance to pay for people they kill in mass shootings.
It is nice to have a picture of an auto accident. The scenes at the Newtown Elementary School where 20 children were massacred, the pictures are protected and will not be released. It was declared too gory for normal people to see. Many first responders had to go for therapy to overcome what they saw.
What kind of people defend mass shootings and point finger at auto accidents?
...Another moronic post from quad ! I hate to repeat myself but quad keeps coming up with senseless posts hoping to turn attention away from ideas to try to prevent the sales of firearms to people who can't pass a back-round check. Twenty six members of a Texas church congregation just mite be alive today if that murdering loonie was unable to buy a gun. And while I do agree with the importance of getting drunken drivers off the road that post is best served in a different thread.
Which way would you prefer to lose a loved one. Killed by a drunk driver, or "lone killer" with a gun? How do you imagine s/he would answer? I imagine s/he would say: Why do I have to choose between the two?
Columbine School Shooting - Assault weapon ban passed, GOP President did not renew it.
Shooting at VA Tech - No action
Shooting at Tuscon, AZ - No action
Shooting at temple at Oak Creet, WI - No action (People praying)
Shooting at movie theater at Aurora, CO - No action
Shooting at Washington Navy Yard - No Action
Shooting at Newtown Elementary - No Action (20 Children killed sitting in their classes)
Shooting at Pulse club in Orlando - No action
Shooting at San Bernardino - No action
Shooting at Oregon college - No action
Shooting at Chareleston church - No action (people praying)
Shooting at Las Vegas concert - No action
Shooting at Texas church - No action (people praying)
The German newspaper is on the spot, 100% accurate and correct.
No Action = Lawless.
Shooting Gallery - Look at the list
If you want to continue to defend this lawless shooting, you are part of the problem. Don't blame the German newspaper for being honest.