Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
That way us 2nd amendment types won't have to what we do... SAVE THE CHILDREN! When they are pistol whipping you, you can scream out "FUCK THE NRA"!
Howard University Running Back Fatally Shot in Robbery Attempt
Police believe that the 22-year-old running back was shot and killed while attempting to break into a Texas apartment.
BY: STEPHEN A. CROCKETT JR.
Posted: Dec. 26 2014 8:52 AM
A Howard University running back, who returned to his Texas home while on holiday break, was shot and killed along with an 18-year-old man after the two men and an accomplice reportedly attempted to rob an apartment.
According to the Denton Record-Chronicle, Howard running back Terrence Neal Tusan, 22; Jakobi Dmon Gipson, 18; and another man allegedly forced their way into a Denton, Texas, apartment Sunday. Although police did not say how the shooting began, it is believed that residents of the apartment opened fire on the young men, who were reportedly all wearing masks.
Gipson's body was found inside the apartment, according to the Denton Record-Chronicle, and Tusan's body was found outside near the apartment. A third suspect, who may have been injured in the shooting, remains at large.
Tusan's mother, Donna, told the newspaper that she and her son had watched the Dallas Cowboys beat the Indianapolis Colts on Sunday and that after the game, he left to be with friends.
"He was very happy with his grades," she told the Record-Chronicle. "We were going to do some more Christmas shopping."
Clarence Nevels, a former coach, family friend and mentor to the Howard Bison running back, told the Record-Chronicle that Tusan was a "good kid."
"He had good grades and was just down at AT&T Stadium for Thanksgiving Day Madness Youth Football speaking to students about believing in themselves," Nevels said. He told the newspaper that the young man he had known for some 15 years didn't have a criminal history and wasn't associated with drugs.
That way us 2nd amendment types won't have to what we do... SAVE THE CHILDREN! When they are pistol whipping you, you can scream out "FUCK THE NRA"!
Do us all a favor and go back and re-read the poll conducted by JD which gave people on ECCIE an opportunity to express their views on gun control -- want more, want less, content with the status quo. Exactly ONE person wanted total gun control. SIX wanted no gun control. The majority were in the middle.
To sum up, the overwhelming majority of the people who responded to the poll are NOT "gun grabbers". They support your right to own weapons to protect yourself. Why can't you respect the decisions of those who decide NOT to own guns, for whatever reason?
I'll tell you why, speedy. SLOBBRIN doesn't really care about what's going on here in ECCIE, just so he can blast Ozombies, per his self-styled mission statement.
He doesn't read what he posts.
He doesn't stick to topics, especially if he posts the thread in question.
He rarely, if ever, makes sense.
And he's always oozing with hatred for people of color.
Sounds like a confused, frustrated, very stupid little man. Self-sufficient? Doubtful. Subsidized by various state and federal assistance programs? Likely, hence the utter frustration and jealousy of being a white man without the privilege he so desperately feels entitled to.
I would point out that an large number of gun grabbers (my definition) are in government and that is worrisome. They will lie (and they have) and they want a either a total ban or a very draconian ban on firearm ownership and our constitutional right.
I would point out that an large number of gun grabbers (my definition) are in government and that is worrisome. They will lie (and they have) and they want a either a total ban or a very draconian ban on firearm ownership and our constitutional right.
These same politicians are hypocrites in that they surround theirselves in security staff who are armed.
How about Hollywood Hypocrites crying for further liberal gun controls while making millions brandishing weapons in their films. Example: The outspoken NRA bashing Kevin Costner ! Costner even owns guns. He stated that he hunts with his Grandfathers shotgun, and thats ok. He says he would be fine telling the NRA that while bashing them for their defense of the Second Amendment. A real piece of work there. Freedom for the elite and priviledged is some concept !
I would point out that an large number of gun grabbers (my definition) are in government and that is worrisome. They will lie (and they have) and they want a either a total ban or a very draconian ban on firearm ownership and our constitutional right.
Again, worry about it when it comes close to a vote at the state or federal level and will affect you. IMHO, at the very worst, a few more assault weapons will be banned. And I think that that is a long shot. No pun intended.
Again, worry about it when it comes close to a vote at the state or federal level and will affect you. IMHO, at the very worst, a few more assault weapons will be banned. And I think that that is a long shot. No pun intended.
Hah! Define an assault weapon for us. This is where the problem comes in.
Hah! Define an assault weapon for us. This is where the problem comes in.
You are right on that. Since I admittedly have little knowledge of firearms, I will leave that to the "experts". No matter what would be on a potential list, would you agree to any further bans?
You are right on that. Since I admittedly have little knowledge of firearms, I will leave that to the "experts". No matter what would be on a potential list, would you agree to any further bans?
As a blanket statement....NO, I do not agree to any further bans. Those experts, they are just politicians who don't like guns. After all, only people who don't want us to have guns are writing the laws. They lie and are incompetent about what they are writing. They get their information (if not the entire bill) from people like Handgun Control, Inc.
As a blanket statement....NO, I do not agree to any further bans. Those experts, they are just politicians who don't like guns. After all, only people who don't want us to have guns are writing the laws. They lie and are incompetent about what they are writing. They get their information (if not the entire bill) from people like Handgun Control, Inc.
So it really doesn't matter how "assault weapons" is defined or what might be on a list to be possibly banned. You are against it. That simplifies matters. Help me understand -- what about an uzi?
Certainly the number of homeowners who defend their homes with an uzi is few. It certainly isn't the weapon of choice for those carrying a concealed handgun. If the uzi was banned, what difference would it make to the average law-abiding citizen, other than it would take away from some people's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?
So it really doesn't matter how "assault weapons" is defined or what might be on a list to be possibly banned. You are against it. That simplifies matters. Help me understand -- what about an uzi?
Certainly the number of homeowners who defend their homes with an uzi is few. It certainly isn't the weapon of choice for those carrying a concealed handgun. If the uzi was banned, what difference would it make to the average law-abiding citizen, other than it would take away from some people's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?
\
The problem is when we as a citizens decide it is ok for someone, anyone to re-interpret the constitution. I don't need an anti-gunner to decide what is acceptable for a citizen to own. I don't want a pro-gunner to decide either. It was decided by those who drafted and passed the U.S. Constitution and does not need re-interpratation today. The second amendmant does not dictate which arms, bow, arrow, musket, sword, dagger, uzi, semi-auto, or AR. The intent was, no restrictions, period !
So it really doesn't matter how "assault weapons" is defined or what might be on a list to be possibly banned. You are against it. That simplifies matters. Help me understand -- what about an uzi?
Certainly the number of homeowners who defend their homes with an uzi is few. It certainly isn't the weapon of choice for those carrying a concealed handgun. If the uzi was banned, what difference would it make to the average law-abiding citizen, other than it would take away from some people's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?
Is that a semi-automatic or a fully-automatic uzi?
So it really doesn't matter how "assault weapons" is defined or what might be on a list to be possibly banned. You are against it. That simplifies matters. Help me understand -- what about an uzi?
Certainly the number of homeowners who defend their homes with an uzi is few. It certainly isn't the weapon of choice for those carrying a concealed handgun. If the uzi was banned, what difference would it make to the average law-abiding citizen, other than it would take away from some people's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment?
You're a fucking lying moron, speedy. It really does matter who makes the definitions:
Quote:
"Gunman Aaron Alexis unleashed a barrage of bullets using an AR-15, a rifle and a semi-automatic handgun. Authorities believed the AR-15 was used for most of the shooting, the official said. The news prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein, one of the strongest proponents of a ban on assault weapons like the AR-15, to issue a statement:
'This is one more event to add to the litany of massacres that occur when a deranged person or grievance killer is able to obtain multiple weapons—including a military-style assault rifle—and kill many people in a short amount of time.
Thing is, speedy, Aaron Alexis didn't use an AR-15. He used a shotgun just like Uncle Joe told him. So, speedy, when you have lib-retard assholes like you, the MSM and Feinstein running around calling a shotgun an 'assault weapon', there's an obvious problem.
Hah! Define an assault weapon for us. This is where the problem comes in.
If Politicians and the Media would stop defining things to suit their needs we would all realize there is no such thing as an "Assault Weapon" The proper term is Tactical Weapon, Assault is what you do with it.
Gun Grabbers please post your address
