FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Who cares if it has been a historical necessity? It is not a necessity now. It's a game.
Who cares if it has been a historical necessity? It is not a necessity now. It's a game.
In the USA it is not, although I can see a struggling farmer needing to hunt in 2009. Would you outlaw hunting in the 3rd world?
Who cares if it has been a historical necessity? It is not a necessity now. It's a game.
It certainly is a necessity. How else would you propose that we contain the populations of whitetail deer, feral swine, coyote, and other game animals who have no natural predators left?
It is a large part of the conservation efforts nationwide.
It certainly is a necessity. How else would you propose that we contain the populations of whitetail deer, feral swine, coyote, and other game animals who have no natural predators left?
It is a large part of the conservation efforts nationwide.
Thanks, I'm more knowledgeable about conservation as it pertains to land and non-animal life. I'm assuming Water is on the same page as me there.
It may be a cheap tool that conservationists use, but is it necessary? Alternatives would be expensive, but they do exist.
I was just rejecting Threedee's argument that historical necessity for human survival really mattered today. In hindsight, it really wasn't even worth commenting on.
I didn't analyze things in full. I was mostly thinking of hunting to eat and hunting for pure game, which is no longer a necessity.
Back to the main topic:
It is an sourced of unceasing idiocy how the mindless liberals want to blame the guns in tragedies like this.
Let me ask you totalitarian fucks one simple question:
WHY was a subhuman slimeball FUCK like that, with and extensive violent criminal record STILL ON THE FUCKING STREETS?
And the answer is:
All liberals, go look in a fucking mirror, you brain dead simpleton fucks. YOU are the mindless droves who support a political philosophy that put men like that out on the street to commit additional crime until finally they get in a situation that kills them. The sad thing is YOU fucks allowed him to kill three more, and wound another, before they could do what SHOULD have been done a LONG DAMNED TIME AGO!
Dear whiney little pissant: try to get your facts straight. The criminal had an extensive criminal record. The article says so more than once. He was ON PAROLE for assault with a deadly weapon (strike one you liberal retarded pissant) When a criminal has a long history of criminal activity which INCLUDES assault with a deadly weapon, then FUCK YES the son of bitch should be kept in fucking JAIL, you stupid little shit.YOU ARE THE REASON FOR IT! SERIOUSLY, KILL YOUR FUCKING SELF GOOD LUCK!
Dear whiney little pissant: try to get your facts straight. The criminal had an extensive criminal record. The article says so more than once. He was ON PAROLE for assault with a deadly weapon (strike one you liberal retarded pissant) When a criminal has a long history of criminal activity which INCLUDES assault with a deadly weapon, then FUCK YES the son of bitch should be kept in fucking JAIL, you stupid little shit.
Second NOWHERE does it say the assault charge was the ONLY violent crime on his record, just the CURRENT one.
Clue for you whiney liberal retarded totalitarian FUCKS out there, all bleeding heart
When a criminal is out on parole for AWDW, AND has an extensive criminal record, you can BET the AWDW is NOT the only violent crime on said record.
Third: the fact that he opened fire upon being pulled over in "what appeared to be a routine traffic stop" tells you full and well this slimy piece of subhuman excrement (who, by the way, had a warrant out for his arrest AGAIN anyway) should never have hit the streets under liberal "let them go, they're just poor misunderstood individuals whose mommies did not hug them enough" policies.
Just another black criminal, who was in and out of prison thanks to the liberal policies of California.
[/I]
LOLCalifornia has the toughest three strikes law in the nation. He couldn't have committed more than two without being locked up for 80 years afterward. That is common sense. Only you do not know that. You see, YOUR policies, the "Get tough" policies, have already been implemented. They have already failed. Thankyou, now go kill yourself.
Nowhere does it say it wasn't his only one. It only said he had an "extensive criminal history" - which could, and likely was, some minor crimes and then the assault. The fact is, by the mere presence of the three strikes law, it could not have been more than twol, or else he would be in prison for the rest of his life.
Better to have a bleeding heart than no heart at all.
Really good luck? I have your BET? Well, thanks for that, you've proven it to me now.
The fact is if he was in prison for AWDW and he was 27 he had spent most of his adult life in prison for the offense. If he had committed another similar crime, like robbery, he would've spent all his adult life in prison. You can't add your scheme up very well without putting tens of thousands of people in prison for crimes they NEVER WOULD HAVE COMMITTED, which is in itself a horrific crime.
It's not very difficult to understand. They stopped him for a traffic violation, which would have sent him back to prison. He raged and murdered them because he didn't want to go back to prison, and would rather die. So it's your fault, for having the ridiculous prison and parole system which makes it impossible for prisoners to reintegrate into society.