skirvir

@mrperfkt

I can't disagree with that, unless he sold the weapons at such point where no profit is garnered, then your definitly right, but I do also think he means well, by empowering others with a simple means to protect themselves, I do think it makes the community or society at large, just a little safer.

For example, I don't know if you have, but if you goto a shooting range, even though there are many people you don't know all around you, firing very deadly weapons, you'll find that it is in fact one of the safest places to be, because if any one of those shooters for some reasons starts firing at others, he's going to get killed, very quickly. The same thing applies in the macro sense of a small community or society in general. I'd personaly feel safer if everyone around me had a weapon, I believe there are inherently more 'good' people than 'bad'.

The weapons and the manufacturers themselves should never be blamed, the people who use them in evil acts should be blamed and held accountable. The mentality that weapons are the problem leads to the outlawing of firearms and weapons to the point where it becomes very difficult if not impossible (weapons bans) for the standard 'good' law-abiding citizen to obtain one. While this might seem good on the surface (no weapons, no problems right?), it's not, because criminals, by their very nature will rarely go through legal channels to obtain said weapons in the first place, they will always manage to find one in a black market, hence the result is the criminals have the weapons regardles of the laws, but the good citizens are screwed, all because some kind of consensus of people agreed that guns are the problem, not the people themselves.

You are absolutely implying the fact that the weapons manufacturer will 'backfire' and actually cause a tragedy. I think perhaps it should have been reworded cause it definitly sounds like if a tragedy does occur (we all hope it doesn't).. it's this guys fault, because of this little marketing campaign, which would be absurd to prove anyway.

If everyone in this country owned a weapon and carried it, there's no doubt these mass killings wouldn't be able to get as out of hand as they do, the fool would be killed, saving us all tax dollars and more needless death.

This question is baseless and only focuses on the likelyhood of another mass shooting, implying blame on the part of the weapon itself, not the sick individual who'd actually do the killing. It's incredibly naive to say if/when such an event happens, its the fault of any weapons manufacturer.

Congratulations, because of questions and dialogue like this, racism will never die and by the way its 'evil white male' these days, not just 'white male'! =P

He should have been killed long ago, this country aborts babies by the millions but does everything in its power to stop the execution of completely sick pedophiles like this.

God bless that girl, only the innocent suffer in this world.

I don't understand the point of the question, it almost seems to be written intentionally to be misleading, why not just say will any movie released in the year make more than 800 million worldwide? Whats the significance of Germany in the question?

Of course it takes money to fix this 'problem', it's nothing more than a modern day tithe.

Look at all the 'green' stuff around you, it's all designed to get your green.

Nobody else is sick of ONLY hearing about this guy? I think if anyone deserves credit, its Fleury hands down, exceptional goal-tending.

Yeah, cause a ton of people live in Antarctica.

I would assume that this doesn't include what may be shown at the beginning if/when they kinda show old shows and storylines to catch you up right? Rather just the new material? I know assuming is bad too though :)

just stick with your bet its play money :)

its gone back and forth all day long, I hardly call tha consensus, if the question was when will he announce is resignation, I wouldn't have an issue, but it wasn't, it is when will he resign, and that's apparently the 17th, though even that could change, it's not a done deal.

He isn' resigned right now, he could just as well choose not to resign on the 17th afterall (and face impeachment regardless), the fact is, he only announced resigning, he hasn't physically resigned yet, he's still getting a paycheck till its official.

I'll repeat, the question asks when he will resign, NOT, when will he announce he is resigning, he's still working until he's officially resigned.

The question indicates when he would resign, not when he'd announce he'll resign.