Politesub53
Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kirata quote:
ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Your snide remark about me being challenged (Bolded) is duly noted. I'm glad you noticed, because your question implied that I must be "challenged," as does your present continuation of that theme. quote:
ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Since several of those killed or injured in the theatre were hit by bullets coming through the walls, what makes you think they would have been safer if armed ? I didn't say that I thought having someone armed in another theater would have been of any benefit. When you're prepared to engage in an honest exchange and drop the supercilious attitude that has characterized your questions so far, I'll stop handing it back to you. In the meantime, quit whining about getting what you give. K. "Honest debate" "Supercilious attitiude"......... Thats a stunning use of irony right there. My original question assumes nothing. It asserts, correctly, that people the other side of walls were indeed killed. It also asserts, correctly, that if they had been armed, they would still have been shot. Its noticable that you still avoid my point. Others killed on that day were in the same complex, not "Another theatre"..... They were killed and injured by the same perp you are referring to. As with most gun threads those who dont like my replies resort to smoke, mirrors, slight of hand and passive aggresive posts.
|