Just because you have a lack of intelligence doesn't mean there wasn't a point in my posts. It usually means that the point went over your dull head.R-Jack wrote:....and and and another thing..........when you are you are tarding up threads with your shit posts, here's an idea...............have a point. It makes it so much more interesting for the reader.Diego in Seattle wrote:So what?mvscal wrote: It also would have prevented him from legally purchasing firearms.
-republicans
I'll try explaining the point to you. Let me know if you need help understanding any of the words.
Republicans like to chant in gun control debates that gun control laws only effect law-abiding citizens. mvstard made a statement that a restraining order would have prevented Cho from legally obtaining a gun.
Here comes the really tough part, R-junk. Try to stick with us.
Why would republicans care about what a gun control law (such as keeping guns out of the hands of people w/ restraining orders) would have done if they don't think they're effective in the first place?
Take all the time you need to think this through. We wouldn't want you to overload your last remaining brain cells.