Shooting at Navy Yard in Washington DC
#61
(09-17-2013, 05:42 PM)PonderThis Wrote: You are lying. It wasn't a dishonorable discharge and it wasn't a general discharge, it was an honorable discharge given early.

Yeah, i see some news people are changing their stories. I am not lying just going off what is being reported. Did I ever say dishonorable, no. Still look at the piece you posted:
"Military officials acknowledged, however, that Alexis had disciplinary problems including absence without permission, insubordination and disorderly conduct.
The officials said that often in cases like this the individual is offered early voluntary discharge instead of dishonorable discharge or a general discharge, which is one step below honorable. The officials could not say that that was the case with Alexis."
Maybe he cried racism and they were just tired of dealing with his BS.
Reply
#62
You said not honorable. And, it was an honorable discharge.

Maybe you are a racist pig on the forum. And, maybe disgruntled vets are dangers to society.
Reply
#63
(09-17-2013, 05:52 PM)PonderThis Wrote: You said not honorable. And, it was an honorable discharge.

Maybe you are a racist pig on the forum. And, maybe disgruntled vets are dangers to society.

Well there is honorable and then comes general under honorable conditions. A general uh is not an "honorable discharge" and has a different re code. He did deserve a dishonorable though.
"By the time the Navy began to seek a "general discharge" for Alexis, he had eight instances of misconduct on his record, including insubordination, disorderly conduct, unauthorized absences from work, and at least one instance of drunkenness. But in the end, he left the service with an honorable discharge because he had never been convicted and there was a lack of evidence to merit a general discharge, a U.S. defense official said."

I am sure he is, i mean was, a swell guyLaughing
Reply
#64
(09-17-2013, 06:02 PM)Scar Wrote:
(09-17-2013, 05:52 PM)PonderThis Wrote: You said not honorable. And, it was an honorable discharge.

Maybe you are a racist pig on the forum. And, maybe disgruntled vets are dangers to society.

Well there is honorable and then comes general under honorable conditions. A general uh is not an "honorable discharge" and has a different re code. He did deserve a dishonorable though.
"By the time the Navy began to seek a "general discharge" for Alexis, he had eight instances of misconduct on his record, including insubordination, disorderly conduct, unauthorized absences from work, and at least one instance of drunkenness. But in the end, he left the service with an honorable discharge because he had never been convicted and there was a lack of evidence to merit a general discharge, a U.S. defense official said."

I am sure he is, i mean was, a swell guyLaughing

What part of the enlarged area in this text can you not understand?
Reply
#65
(09-17-2013, 06:04 PM)PonderThis Wrote:
(09-17-2013, 06:02 PM)Scar Wrote:
(09-17-2013, 05:52 PM)PonderThis Wrote: You said not honorable. And, it was an honorable discharge.

Maybe you are a racist pig on the forum. And, maybe disgruntled vets are dangers to society.

Well there is honorable and then comes general under honorable conditions. A general uh is not an "honorable discharge" and has a different re code. He did deserve a dishonorable though.
"By the time the Navy began to seek a "general discharge" for Alexis, he had eight instances of misconduct on his record, including insubordination, disorderly conduct, unauthorized absences from work, and at least one instance of drunkenness. But in the end, he left the service with an honorable discharge because he had never been convicted and there was a lack of evidence to merit a general discharge, a U.S. defense official said."

I am sure he is, i mean was, a swell guyLaughing

What part of the enlarged area in this text can you not understand?

Yeah, i get that the news sources have changed thier stories and already said so. Not going to go back and fourth on this as it will probably change again. Next we will probably hear about the Medal of Honor he was deprived of by the Mason and how he was framed by Gil.Jittery
Reply
#66
Nice deflection, but the crazy stuff has all been on your side so far.
Reply
#67
Like the imaginary 15?Smiling
Reply
#68
I don't believe you heard me comment on the weapon used. It was still guns, and they still kill. And, we all pay the price for your 2nd Amendment rights. I understand all of that, but I made no point of the exact model firearm used. It makes little difference to me, frankly.
Reply
#69
(09-17-2013, 11:01 AM)PonderThis Wrote: "Shotguns and handguns. No more dangerous than an AR-15."

Yep, you sure did.
Reply
#70
(09-17-2013, 10:22 AM)PonderThis Wrote: AR-15's are too good.

(as opposed to are not) Smiling

Yep again.
Reply
#71
Do you see anything in there saying any of them were any worse or better than the others?
Reply
#72
(09-17-2013, 12:35 PM)PonderThis Wrote: How many have happened at gun shows? It's just as relevant. Laughing

(I'm pretty sure it was one of you gun nuts that brought up the type of weapon used, too, and none of us.)

Maybe in the fog of war you forgot the conversation here. Check post #12.
Reply
#73
OK, Rowan brought up shotguns. And your point is?

I'm still waiting to hear what good you accomplish with any of these guns, regardless of make or model.
Reply
#74
(09-17-2013, 07:53 PM)PonderThis Wrote: OK, Rowan brought up shotguns. And your point is?

I'm still waiting to hear what good you accomplish with any of these guns, regardless of make or model.

What was the point of your statement that I answered, with more than one example?
Reply
#75
Rowan's remark was a question, not a statement of fact, and neither he nor I were the first to bring up AR-15's either. You are wildly deflecting here, for purposes of I don't know what. Perhaps your wife never lets you be right either.
Reply
#76
(09-17-2013, 07:53 PM)PonderThis Wrote: OK, Rowan brought up shotguns. And your point is?

I'm still waiting to hear what good you accomplish with any of these guns, regardless of make or model.

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/co...kills-one/
Reply
#77
And, why does the model of gun(s) used make any difference anyway? Do you think it's somehow less tragic to be killed with one kind of gun versus another, or does that make it more right or wrong somehow?
Reply
#78
Why does this bother you leftists so much? Wasn't it Obama that said the Chicago way should be the way for the whole country?
Reply
#79
(09-17-2013, 08:00 PM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(09-17-2013, 07:53 PM)PonderThis Wrote: OK, Rowan brought up shotguns. And your point is?

I'm still waiting to hear what good you accomplish with any of these guns, regardless of make or model.

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/co...kills-one/

For your right to be an asshole with your guns, all the rest of us pay a heavy price. Mad
Reply
#80
(09-17-2013, 08:02 PM)PonderThis Wrote: And, why does the model of gun(s) used make any difference anyway? Do you think it's somehow less tragic to be killed with one kind of gun versus another, or does that make it more right or wrong somehow?

So guns saving lives is bad?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)