A more WF-approved[tm] source? Not surprisingly, the fact that this woman killed the intruder with a shotgun will now be buried under the of discussing the fine points of your respective arsenals...
Oh nothing to argue about. They are not M16s. M16s have full auto or 3 shot burst capability. Those to not appear to have that capability. The short barreled one is 16". The military M4 carbine has a 14.5" barrel. The other rifles appear to be AR15s in various configurations. All 4 rifles can only shoot one round for each pull of the trigger. They look "scary" but are no different from any other semi automatic rifle on the market in mechanical function, like this one: You're effort at thread derailment. I admit you nearly got me, but I already decided to stop with this after this post anyway.
It's the same logic that lets them judge everything after the fact as good or bad, right or wrong. This was a young woman, protecting herself and her baby. Obviously OK. If it were posted as a generic question of a homeowner's right to defend themselves with deadly force, I'm sure the support would've been much more equivocal.
Not at all. I'm not suggesting anything. Without qualification, or equivocation on the particular weapon used, I'm saying she was exercising her guaranteed rights. The question was reflecting the little passive aggressive, DD&B dance you do whenever firearms are being discussed. So...not able to answer that question?
Yes, your cut-and-paste skills are adequate. Your expectation that I will answer your passive-aggressive questions just because you feel like posting for a change is, however, disproportionate. Now the question becomes, do you have the ability to ask a non-passive-aggressive question? If so, please do, and it will be answered. If not, go back to doing what you do best.
Okay, then, you answer Jamey Dear. Because now that he's proven he's incapable of asking a non-passive-aggressive question, I consider him dismissed. Watch what he does now.
You want my own answer? People who attribute human motives to inanimate objects are fucking idiots. Neither is more evil than the other. That wasn't as much fun, now was it?
Since neither Post #54 nor Post #55 have any more bearing on my posts in this thread than Whistleboy's nonsense, they're entertaining as grace notes to the previously-established characters you two play on the Internets, but not overly.
Cliff Notes: Your characters have to sound like themselves. The reader should be able to say "That's Lanzman" and "That's garamet" even without the he said/she said. Paladin's very good at capturing the "voices" of other posters here. And a lot of people are getting very good at parodying skinofevil because, well, fuck you, that's why!
I'd like to think my "voice" here is pretty bland and not idiosyncratic enough to easily imitate. But we should discuss this elsewhere . . .