He would not be a criminal..

teddyR This criminal obviously wasn't dissuaded by DC's strict gun control laws and ban on public carry.

As if it would've done him any good. You've been watching too many rambo movies. A 68 yr old man isn't as able as a 24 yo young creep like that to snap fire a gun. Are you sure the 68 yo *didn't* have a gun? in glove compartment? rifle in trunk? what good would it have done?
Flash, gun owners carrying concealed get shot & killed too, esp when somebody intent on it gets the drop on them.
Perhaps the DC handgun ban would've prevented this murder, you never know.

teddyr: A majority of these types of crimes are committed by people who either are convicted felons that should not have a gun or purchased their gun illegally.

Toss in felon recidivists who've had their alleged gun rights restored, or passive criminals who haven't been detected as such, still importuning the sacred 2ndA cow.

"A 68 yr old man isn't as able as a 24 yo young creep like that to snap fire a gun. Are you sure the 68 yo *didn't* have a gun? in glove compartment? rifle in trunk? what good would it have done? "

The comment was on the criminals disregard of the current law, not for the 68 Yr old to be armed.


This criminal obviously wasn't dissuaded by DC's strict gun control laws and ban on public carry.

Do I need to break it down Barney style for you?
It is obvious that you wanted to attack the idea of self defense so badly you created an argument against what was clearly a different statement altogether. There's a word for that jimm-jimm.

Have any of their Constitutional rights revoked, including the 2nd. If they are too dangerous to own a firearm shouldn't they still be incarcerated?

Why should a murderer, rapist or child molester get to own a firearm or vote for our leaders?

And entitled to equal protections and rights described by the Constitution?

...specific rights revocations. Anyone charged and pending trial, the same regarding violent crimes.