Nashville News Blog

You know the diner robbery in Pulp Fiction? Bad Mother Fucker Samuel L. Jackson totally diffused that situation without firing a shot. But Tim Roth is pretty hot so I wouldn't want to shoot him, either. Wait, what are we talking about?

Here's how we can tell this is fiction. You gotta aim for the widest part. Between the eyes may sound good, but you really should go for the chest. Easier to hit what you're aiming for and less chance of a stray shot taking out an innocent bystander.

But then, all us permit holders who were required by law to take a handgun safety class know that.

Wow, Gilbert and Scott! You guys are GOOD. You actually can spot fiction. Of course, can't spot irony or humor for shit. But whatever.

WOW! The REAL writer was Libtard Man (The name was changed to protect the Liberal agenda).
I wonder why he ued Chili's for “dangerous”, in his little fugue, instead of using maybe Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, TX? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_massacre) Or Wendy’s in Queens, NY? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy%27s_massacre)
Or maybe San Ysidro, CA McDonald’s? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Ysidro_McDonald%27s_massacre)
That would have made Libtard Man’s fantasy sounded so much more realistic!

I wonder why Libtard Man “forgot” to use a REAL Second Amendment Man AKA Thomas Glee Terry and Shoney’s Family Restaurant? (www.uexpress.com/printable/print.html?uc_full_date=19990730&uc_comic=ac)

History and facts seems to disagree with Libtard Man’s fantasy scenario of “armed resistance will only make it worse”:
Unarmed Columbine (with 5 SWAT Teams on scene and many other cops): 13 murdered/ 24 injured.
Protected by Second Amendment Man: Pearl High School (ARMED vice-principal held the killer until the police FINALLY arrived): 3 murdered/7 injured

Unarmed Virginia Tech (Most victims were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”): 32 murdered/23 injured
Protected by Second Amendment Man: VA Appalachian School of Law (2 ARMED students held the killer until the police FINALLY arrived): 3 murdered/ 3 injured.

Unarmed Luby’s Cafeteria: 23 murdered/20 injured.
Protected by Second Amendment Man: Shoney’s Family Restaurant (ARMED diner stopped the killers and waited until the police FINALLY arrived): even with multiple armed assailants and 21 hostages no innocent was harmed and assailants were stopped by Concealed carry ARMED CITIZEN Thomas Glenn Terry.
Final Tally:
Unarmed resistance -68 murdered/ 67 injured
Protected by Second Amendment Man: 6 murdered/ 10 injured

All of us can name 5 U.S. “Gun-Free Zone” massacres; can you name 5 “Gun-RICH Zone” (Gun shows, shooting ranges, police stations, etc.) massacres?

Annoy a Libtard: Use Facts and Logic, Work, succeed, be armed, protect your family, cherish your Freedoms, don’t rely on the god of Government.

Remember: Mexico is “Gun-Free”

That's some funny shit, Pete. Wish I'd wrote it myself. As a fellow libtard, I say, Libtards unite!

Those of you who insist on being at the bottom of the food chain, walking around unarmed in the 2d and 9th most dangerous cities in the country, may continue to pretend you and your families are safe.

I find street gangs and meth junkies to be a threat to my safety.

Some of you apparently do not.

When something bad happens to nice people (as is frequently the case in Memphis and Nashvile (and even in Knoxville)), you may continue to light candles, sing Kumbayah, conduct group hugs, wear ribbons and ask local law enforcement for a greater presence.

That does not interest me.

I prefer a more realistic approach to personal safety.

Brian Kelsey stood firm on the arbitrary 11:00 p.m. curfew on Second Amendment rights, but he had around 66 other Reps voting with him on this common sense gun law.

Thanks for the feebleminded view on this subject. Now, here's the reality: Chili's is no more dangerous than anyplace else (and no less dangerous, either). The Crips won't be busting into Chili's, they'll just be busting into your car, where you had to leave your gun because the stupid law said you had to. As a result, you have just armed a Crip, which would not have happened if the gun had stayed on your belt where it belonged. Go ahead, and pooh-pooh this, it happened to me, and it's directly the fault of thoughtless jerks like you.

Wildfire - you kicked the libtards asses and they don't even know it.

Why don't they know it?

Appears their attention span is too short to bother reading facts.

As I recall, the Luby's massacre and the Shoney's NON-massacre occurred within a few months of each other. The contrast was quite stark. In one case, 46 people killed or wounded. In the other, one killed and one wounded - both of them bad guys.

Given a choice, I'd MUCH rather my fellow diners be armed.

As for the libtards...

Hey GeoOrwell... you taking drugs for that severe ADD?

Oh wait... you didn't make it this far, did you?

What is with you simpletons? You attack gun owners using stereotypes and bigotry, then cry when we view you as sheep.

I am able to control my primitive urges, unlike you. I can go in to a resturant that serves alcohol without drinking. I can carry a gun without having to wave it around. I actually have talked to real gang bangers without a confrontation. I train with firearms, seek further levels of proficency and certification, study the legal and legislative aspects of firearms.

You spout drivil and hate.

Just because YOU cannot control yourself does not mean the laws should cater to your lack of impulse control.

You write this story as impossible fiction and make fun of circumstances that in fact, actually did happen. Ask Dr. Suzanne Huff in Texas how she feels about this story !! Chili's certainly could be a Luby's Cafeteria someday!!! Are you knowledgeable of the facts of history, before a story like this is written?? I tend to think you are not!

A few of inanimate objects sure is an interesting thing to observe. If anti-gun nuts are so afraid of guns, why do you want our cops armed with AR-15's and semiautomatic handguns? Are cops any more reliable than regular honest citizens? Not that I have seen. Besides, when New Orleans got hit by Katrina, most of the cops split the scene, leaving behind a lot of honest citizens with NO way to call for help. A gun on the hip is like car insurance. There JUST IN CASE you might need it, but normally left where it is.

Statistically, you are safer around CCW license holders than you are the police. The percentage of CCW license holders that commit crimes is quite a bit lower than it is for LEOs

It's ironic that people who think that firearms are too dangerous for good people to own and carry (regardless of the bad people that will do bodily harm) are the same people that think people that say there is no reason to carry, and actually make fun of people that accept responsilibity for their own physical security.
absolutely insane. why would anyone expect others {not of a like foolishness} to take them seriously. go figure.

Sorry guys. I don't live in fear so I feel no need to carry. That's the real difference between us.

This is probably something you all should seek therapy for. Phallic fixations and insecurity? Thinking people think so.

Mr. Kotz, you wrote, "*blither, blather, blather, blither*"

We presume this was an attempt at ironic comedy.

What it actually is reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Natural Law and unalienable rights, and in a most arrogant and ignorant manner.

Here's a hint, my clueless countryman: Regardless of your (or anyone's) awareness of the of armed law-abiding citizens who surround you, or of your 'feelings' of insecurity because of it, we have the pre-existent right to do it, and there's NOTHING you can do about it.

Except, evidently, show your ass in parodies like this one.

You do realize, of course, that the amendment that immediately precedes the 2nd is what guarantees your ability to do this, regardless of the fact that it is inane, sophistic and just a plain waste of bandwidth?

Of course, you do. You just refuse to admit that the 2nd is equal in importance to, if not preemptory in importance of, the one that protects the expression of a) the deficit of your political philosophy, and b) your wobbly-kneed feelings of inadequacy. And, you cloak those feelings of inadequacy in arrogance.

Therefore, you attack your fellows who are philosophically astute and have a set of big ones, both to your benefit, despite your personal lack of backbone, which benefits noone except those who would rule you.

*clap-clap-clap* WELL DONE!

In the annals of the clueless, you obviously have a PhD.

Well, it wasn't Chili's, but Suzanna Hupp was enjoying a meal with her parents in a small Texas diner one fine afternoon in 1991. A gun man drove his truck into the diner and opened fire on the patrons. Suzanna reached for her purse to retrieve her firearm, but then realized she had left it in her vehicle in order to comply with state law. She watched as the gunman shot and killed both of her parents, as well as killing 21 others and wounding 20 more.
Dr. Hupp went on to become a State Representative who advocated for Second Amendment rights. She believes no one should have to witness the brutal murders of their friends and loved ones when in public places. It has happened in restaurants before and it will happen again.

As for "Second Amendment Man", carriers of firearms behave no differently than a parent who mindfully watches their children. We could easily call them paranoid or people who are aggressively looking for trouble, but in reality they are just trying to protect their child from harm and danger. Since when is that not a virtue?

As a holder of a concealed carry permit, I would like to reassure all of you anti-gun hoplophobes that I will not be ready to spray bullets at anyone who threatens mass murder in your favorite restaurant. I usually sit in the back, near a window or fire exit. If anyone comes in to the restaurant and starts shooting, or announces a holdup and starts herding the unarmed sheep into a killing ground, I will be leaving as fast as possible through the back door or out the window. I see no reason to risk MY life, health, and financial well-being to defend people who are too cowardly to take steps to defend themselves. So go ahead and call 911 on your cell phone and wait for the authorities to save you - like the dead sheep at Va Tech or Luby's Cafeteria. The only time I will use my concealed handgun will be to defend myself or my family - my first move will be to leave the area, unless I have no choice but to shoot back. You happy little anti-gun sheep can all serve as unarmed victims. screaming and milling around in panic - you will provide good cover for my exit. So relax - you won't have to worry about me trying to be a hero and saving any of your worthless lives. I see the whole process as an example of Darwinian selection - anyone who does not believe in self-defense SHOULD be removed from the gene pool.

Hargrove:

Your fantasy about "gun nuts" is typical. The plain fact is that law-abiding people are law-abiding people. The exceptions of law-abiding people going over the edge are minute in scope. The odds of a permit holder saving your sorry ass are much greater than those of a permit holder capping you in a fit of pique.

Grow up.

You guys are WRONG, historically, statistically, and philosophically.

You better put some ice on that...

Wow. That was very creative. I guess when you can't argue logic or facts you......have to resort to comedy and snarky sarcasm?

Whatever works for you antis.

Me? I'm "packing heat". Yes. Why? Because I can. Because I want to. Do I need any other reason? No. My personal rights do not require that I have a reason. I do not need a reason to speak, practice Muslim faith, carry a firearm or own private property.

So to you "intellects" who are obviously much cooler than I am and much more funny and enlightened....don't carry. The people who get shot up in these "no gun zones" also previously thought having guns to protect themselves was silly and Rambo-ish. If only they were alive now to be able to reanalyze the situation. I bet they would have wished they were allowed to defend their lives.

But what do you care? What do you care about their lives? To you, this is funny. This is about Rambo. This is why you UN intellectual nutjobs are losing the battle. You can only rely on snarky sarcasm to get your half baked point across. And its not holding very much water.

Good luck antis!!!

I truly believe that there is a missing enzyme in the brains of liberals, that doesn't allow neurons to fire across the synapses that control logical thought. We can bombard them with facts, and they always come back with "gun nut, Rambo" rhetoric, I guess as a way to disguise their self-loathing, at their inability to assume responsibility for themselves and their families.
I on the other hand haven't gone unarmed in the last 9 years, and have interceded, once, in what would have been the gang initiation armed robbery of two of my friends at the pawn shop across the street from my business. Unfortunately you libs. will never know the feeling of security that the comforting heft of a gun on your side delivers. The knowing that whatever evil befalls you you stand a much better chance of survival, because you took the responsibility of your personal safety in your own hands. No, you can't make the world safer by trying to make the world as weak as you, you must make yourselves as strong as the rest of the world. Until then there are enough of us "Rambo, gun-nuts" out there to at least even the odds out a little. So go back to your "fairy-tale,princess, unicorn, butterfly" world and let those of us willing to take a stand alone. Just remember the meek shall inherit the earth, but then again, earth isn't the goal, is it?

Let's see how many of your points are valid..

"You will not notice me, the unassuming man presumably having a nice dinner with his wife in a booth." - True statement. (You probably walk by and shop with numerous CCW holders every day and you would never notice them or their weapons)

"You will be startled when they arrive." - True

"For you have chosen to forsake your Second Amendment rights. You're a moron. Thankfully for you, I am not." -Semi-truth (You have chosen not to defend yourself. I will, however, support your right to make that decision and I would probably attempt to help preserve your life if possible. I do not think you are a moron for doing so.)

"I will dispatch the intruders with a marksman's precision, a bullet between each of their eyes." - Semi-truth (While I am proficient, I don't think I would risk that shot. Nice thought though. Most shooters are trained to shoot center of mass. Less likely to miss and hit a bystander.

"by that time I will already be back in my mom's basement, cleaning my weapons and basking in the satisfaction of a job well done." - False (I will probably have my firearm taken for a short while for evidence. After I get home to my wife and children, there will probably be a group hug as I try not to remember that I was almost murdered and that I had to kill someone in order to defend myself. There was nobody else who would do it for me....)

Wow. When you actually look at how much truth was in your story, it's not really credible is it? But it was, after all, written as entertainment and not meant to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, you wrote it to make fun of a segment of society you really know nothing about. Why use facts and evidence when you can base your opinions on personal suppositions and undocumented assumptions. It's easy to ignore another person regardless of how reasonable their argument is when you can make them out to be somehow inferior or "un-enlightened". Why listen to facts contrary to your opinion when I am just a supposed "gun nut" right?