Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Says call boxes and "safe zones" are enough. Says he wants to prevent women from capping a potentially misidentified threat. Apparently, he has no clue that gun safety courses tend to cover target identification, and has a low view of a woman's ability to do so. Like every woman with a gun will shoot non-threats. Sure, there are some dummies out there, but whitewashing all women like that is REALLY dumb.

You "don't know" you're going to be raped, so you shouldn't have a weapon. What kind of logic is THAT?!?

Idiot....

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/36966-c ... -be-raped/

SuperHornet wrote:Says call boxes and "safe zones" are enough. Says he wants to prevent women from capping a potentially misidentified threat. Apparently, he has no clue that gun safety courses tend to cover target identification, and has a low view of a woman's ability to do so. Like every woman with a gun will shoot non-threats. Sure, there are some dummies out there, but whitewashing all women like that is REALLY dumb.

You "don't know" you're going to be raped, so you shouldn't have a weapon. What kind of logic is THAT?!?

Idiot....

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/36966-c ... -be-raped/

What about the right of the non-threat victim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

Donks and their war on wimmin.

houndawg wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:Says call boxes and "safe zones" are enough. Says he wants to prevent women from capping a potentially misidentified threat. Apparently, he has no clue that gun safety courses tend to cover target identification, and has a low view of a woman's ability to do so. Like every woman with a gun will shoot non-threats. Sure, there are some dummies out there, but whitewashing all women like that is REALLY dumb.

You "don't know" you're going to be raped, so you shouldn't have a weapon. What kind of logic is THAT?!?

Idiot....

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/36966-c ... -be-raped/

What about the right of the non-threat victim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

"Rapists just want to be loved, give them what they want and we'll handle it later." - Donks

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

DSUrocks07 wrote:

houndawg wrote:
What about the right of the non-threat victim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

"Rapists just want to be loved, give them what they want and we'll handle it later." - Donks

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

That is actually pretty close to what many Republican politicians have stated. But don't let facts get in the way of your gun-lovin hysteria

-

Fox News Liberal Bob Beckel On Why Female Students Don’t Need A Gun: “When Was The Last Time You Heard About A Rape On Campus?”…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUKHM435buk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ignoramus? Calling the kettle black, aren't we pot?

houndawg wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:Says call boxes and "safe zones" are enough. Says he wants to prevent women from capping a potentially misidentified threat. Apparently, he has no clue that gun safety courses tend to cover target identification, and has a low view of a woman's ability to do so. Like every woman with a gun will shoot non-threats. Sure, there are some dummies out there, but whitewashing all women like that is REALLY dumb.

You "don't know" you're going to be raped, so you shouldn't have a weapon. What kind of logic is THAT?!?

Idiot....

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/36966-c ... -be-raped/

What about the right of the non-threat victim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

That's not the point. The point is the inherent bogus assumption that EVERY female is incompetent with weapons.

UCCS website advises that women who are being raped to urinate, vomit, and/or tell their attacker they are menstruating.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... p-rapists/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perfect! Well, that settles it. The debate about whether or not a campus ban on weapons will stop mass shooters or rapists from using guns on campus is moot! Rape can be stopped with non-violent bodily functions.

SuperHornet wrote:

houndawg wrote:
What about the right of the non-threat victim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

That's not the point. The point is the inherent bogus assumption that EVERY female is incompetent with weapons.

Do you have some studies showing that this assumption is bogus?

Pwns wrote:UCCS website advises that women who are being raped to urinate, vomit, and/or tell their attacker they are menstruating.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... p-rapists/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perfect! Well, that settles it. The debate about whether or not a campus ban on weapons will stop mass shooters or rapists from using guns on campus is moot! Rape can be stopped with non-violent bodily functions.

But only if it's legitimate.

Makes me all warm and fuzzy to see all this social consciousness welling up from the NRA crowd....mental health...women's safety.......so touching..