"armed and dangerous" ???


PDA

David
March 20, 2003, 09:50 PM
It's funny -- if you go the the FBI's website and look up the most wanted criminals and the most wanted terrorists -- you will usually see the term "use caution -- may be armed and dangerous".

However, in all the government homeland security info I have seen to date, they never even mention the word FIREARMS in reference to one's self-defense.

If all these "dirt bag" criminals and evil terrorists are likely "armed and dangerous," does it not may sense that us, the "good guys and gals," should be "armed and safe"?

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Just my 2 cents...

If you enjoyed reading about ""armed and dangerous" ???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hardtarget
March 20, 2003, 10:01 PM
Maybe to their way of thinking, anyone that is armed is dangerous. "They" want to be the only ones armed...so we wre put into the position of fearing "them"
Mark.

Standing Wolf
March 20, 2003, 10:51 PM
I believe the F., the B., and the I. are doing as much as possible to further leftist extremist hoplophobia.

cool45auto
March 20, 2003, 11:17 PM
My bad. I thought this was a review of that old John Candy movie!:D

Pendragon
March 21, 2003, 04:30 AM
Dangerous is almost meaningless as a word these days.

I am unarmed and still dangerous. I am a LOT bigger than about 99.9% of the people I come across.

Is something dangerous because it has the capacity to harm, or the intent to harm? Perhaps a combination?

blades67
March 21, 2003, 10:51 PM
They have to justify their budget somehow.:rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about ""armed and dangerous" ???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!