More mass shootings

[Erroll 80]

SkyDekker

Texas politicians are now suggesting that doors are the problem in school shootings. You can't make this shit up.

This is how you solve problem:-

"Unfriend them"

***"I know some have strong feelings about gun rights, but I want you to know I've hit rock bottom and I am not interested in your views as it pertains to this issue," he said, adding he would "de-friend" anyone who posted anything about "guns aren't the problem" and "there's little we can do."

[Bob_Church 7]

yoink

*** And it's not that big a deal.

It IS that big a deal.

Kids are kids. They're not adults. They deserve to have an environment that is safe to be kids in without the need for specialized security to account for adults wanting to play with guns.

Here's the thing - where I went to school there was NO security. None. And that's true in just about every country that doesn't have multiple shootings in schools every week. So sure, you could lock the schools down, treat them like a prison and frisk everyone coming and going and there would probably be less events like this - But no parent in the world would want that.

By adding security that you want you're treating a symptom, not the root cause.


Let me ask you something - would you trade your child's life for your right to own firearms?
A straight yes or no answer please.

Speaking of giving things up, that's one thing when it's assumed that getting rid of all guns, whether possible or not, is the solution but what if there's a bigger problem?
What's changed? Remember all those sci-fi stories where everyone develops telepathy and soon after everyone has killed each other? We've done a pretty good job of at least emulating ESP. Think back to being a high school student and imagine all that snark and bullying and belittling but with no filters and 24/7. And remember, it only takes one outsider snapping from it to give us another mass death.
So, what if the question becomes "would you give up social media to save the children' lives? What if we find out that it's the hatred they wade through from others their age that triggers this, and that when we've rounded up all the guns and melted them down they just go online and learn how to build bombs and sarin?
Are we willing to give up the internet if it will save those children?

[GeorgiaDon 362]

yoink

*** And it's not that big a deal.

It IS that big a deal.

Kids are kids. They're not adults. They deserve to have an environment that is safe to be kids in without the need for specialized security to account for adults wanting to play with guns.

Here's the thing - where I went to school there was NO security. None. And that's true in just about every country that doesn't have multiple shootings in schools every week. So sure, you could lock the schools down, treat them like a prison and frisk everyone coming and going and there would probably be less events like this - But no parent in the world would want that.

By adding security that you want you're treating a symptom, not the root cause.


Let me ask you something - would you trade your child's life for your right to own firearms?
A straight yes or no answer please.This school did have armed security. One of the "resource officers" engaged the gunman and was shot and critically wounded. Perhaps he distracted the gunman and reduced the casualty toll, but it's impossible for police to be everywhere all the time and intervene before a shot is even fired. It would be even worse if the "open carry everywhere" crowd had their way, as the time between "I'm perfectly legal, and I'll sue if you even question me" and the time to mass slaughter would be only the time it takes you to unholster a weapon.

The gunman in this case was a student at the school. How are we supposed to be able to prevent someone who belongs in the building, is in fact required to be there, from doing harm? The only way would be to require more-than-TSA level security at every entrance, bar students from carrying backpacks (so no bringing your books to class!), and have an armed guard in every classroom and hallway so every student is watched every second they are in the building. Kids could start lining up at 5 AM to get through security in time for their 8:00 class. I suggest there would be a big cost to be paid down the road if we make every student feel that they are a suspected mass murderer every time they are in school. Plus a huge cost to be paid immediately to implement such security. I wonder how much people will appreciate a doubling of their taxes to pay for this?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[kallend 2,027]

GeorgiaDon

****** And it's not that big a deal.

It IS that big a deal.

Kids are kids. They're not adults. They deserve to have an environment that is safe to be kids in without the need for specialized security to account for adults wanting to play with guns.

Here's the thing - where I went to school there was NO security. None. And that's true in just about every country that doesn't have multiple shootings in schools every week. So sure, you could lock the schools down, treat them like a prison and frisk everyone coming and going and there would probably be less events like this - But no parent in the world would want that.

By adding security that you want you're treating a symptom, not the root cause.


Let me ask you something - would you trade your child's life for your right to own firearms?
A straight yes or no answer please.This school did have armed security. One of the "resource officers" engaged the gunman and was shot and critically wounded. Perhaps he distracted the gunman and reduced the casualty toll, but it's impossible for police to be everywhere all the time and intervene before a shot is even fired. It would be even worse if the "open carry everywhere" crowd had their way, as the time between "I'm perfectly legal, and I'll sue if you even question me" and the time to mass slaughter would be only the time it takes you to unholster a weapon.

The gunman in this case was a student at the school. How are we supposed to be able to prevent someone who belongs in the building, is in fact required to be there, from doing harm? The only way would be to require more-than-TSA level security at every entrance, bar students from carrying backpacks (so no bringing your books to class!), and have an armed guard in every classroom and hallway so every student is watched every second they are in the building. Kids could start lining up at 5 AM to get through security in time for their 8:00 class. I suggest there would be a big cost to be paid down the road if we make every student feel that they are a suspected mass murderer every time they are in school. Plus a huge cost to be paid immediately to implement such security. I wonder how much people will appreciate a doubling of their taxes to pay for this?

Don

Not a problem in TrumpWorld:
"I love the poorly educated".

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

yoink

*** And it's not that big a deal.

It IS that big a deal.

Kids are kids. They're not adults. They deserve to have an environment that is safe to be kids in without the need for specialized security to account for adults wanting to play with guns.

Here's the thing - where I went to school there was NO security. None. And that's true in just about every country that doesn't have multiple shootings in schools every week. So sure, you could lock the schools down, treat them like a prison and frisk everyone coming and going and there would probably be less events like this - But no parent in the world would want that.

By adding security that you want you're treating a symptom, not the root cause.


Let me ask you something - would you trade your child's life for your right to own firearms?
A straight yes or no answer please.

It is hard to have any discussion when you jump to extremes.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>Texas politicians are now suggesting that doors are the problem in school shootings.

"Guns don't kill people, doors kill people!"

This state of things will only last, of course, until Russia starts contributing heavily to the NDA. Then not even faulty aircraft doors that blow out and kill people will be blamed for anything. "Hey, it's not the door's fault. Someone had to choose to use that door. No one could have known. Don't politicize. Thoughts and prayers. No design changes! That's the same as fascism. Did you know Hitler tried to regulate doors?"

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>Texas politicians are now suggesting that doors are the problem in school shootings.

"Guns don't kill people, doors kill people!"

This state of things will only last, of course, until Russia starts contributing heavily to the NDA. Then not even faulty aircraft doors that blow out and kill people will be blamed for anything. "Hey, it's not the door's fault. Someone had to choose to use that door. No one could have known. Don't politicize. Thoughts and prayers. No design changes! That's the same as fascism. Did you know Hitler tried to regulate doors?"

Hitler also confiscated guns!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>Hitler also confiscated guns!

The funny thing is that you probably think you just made a point that countered my post.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>Hitler also confiscated guns!

The funny thing is that you probably think you just made a point that countered my post.

Not really. Cuz you really didn't have any kind of point!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yoink 321]

rushmc

****** And it's not that big a deal.

It IS that big a deal.

Kids are kids. They're not adults. They deserve to have an environment that is safe to be kids in without the need for specialized security to account for adults wanting to play with guns.

Here's the thing - where I went to school there was NO security. None. And that's true in just about every country that doesn't have multiple shootings in schools every week. So sure, you could lock the schools down, treat them like a prison and frisk everyone coming and going and there would probably be less events like this - But no parent in the world would want that.

By adding security that you want you're treating a symptom, not the root cause.


Let me ask you something - would you trade your child's life for your right to own firearms?
A straight yes or no answer please.

It is hard to have any discussion when you jump to extremes.

Yet another non-answer. It’s hard to have a discussion because you simply don’t understand what the word means.

I asked you a simple question that wasn’t an extreme in any way because 10 kids are dead at this latest one... I’m simply putting it in your frame of reference. (It’s how conversation works)

Let’s try it a different way:
If your child was killed in a school shooting do you think that is a reasonable cost for your 2nd amendment rights?

[rushmc 23]

You layed down an extreme premise that is not worth dealing with.

Now you've done it twice!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yoink 321]

rushmc

You layed down an extreme premise that is not worth dealing with.

Now you've done it twice!

Another cowardly non answer from the troll.

You’re bright enough to realize that it’s a question that puts you in an impossible situation. Either you answer yes and get called a callous fanatic, or you answer no in which case I retort with ‘but other people’s kids are worth it?’ and you’re fucked again.

You don’t like the choices you’re given so you follow the Trump playbook and attack on a tangent. The problem is you’re not as good at it as he is and come off looking foolish every time.


It’s a tough question, isn’t it? What is your 2nd amendment worth. So far this year it’s 30 innocent children. What’s the total you’d accept? And if it was YOUR child is the answer 0?

[rushmc 23]

yoink

***You layed down an extreme premise that is not worth dealing with.

Now you've done it twice!

Another cowardly non answer from the troll.

You’re bright enough to realize that it’s a question that puts you in an impossible situation. Either you answer yes and get called a callous fanatic, or you answer no in which case I retort with ‘but other people’s kids are worth it?’ and you’re fucked again.

You don’t like the choices you’re given so you follow the Trump playbook and attack on a tangent. The problem is you’re not as good at it as he is and come off looking foolish every time.


It’s a tough question, isn’t it? What is your 2nd amendment worth. So far this year it’s 30 innocent children. What’s the total you’d accept? And if it was YOUR child is the answer 0?


It's not a tough question. It's an irrelevant question. It's the only thing you got. It's misleading it's disingenuous and it's untruthful. So if I'm cowardly in your eyes so fucking be it I don't care. You got nothing you've never had anything you never will.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yoink 321]

rushmc

******You layed down an extreme premise that is not worth dealing with.

Now you've done it twice!

Another cowardly non answer from the troll.

You’re bright enough to realize that it’s a question that puts you in an impossible situation. Either you answer yes and get called a callous fanatic, or you answer no in which case I retort with ‘but other people’s kids are worth it?’ and you’re fucked again.

You don’t like the choices you’re given so you follow the Trump playbook and attack on a tangent. The problem is you’re not as good at it as he is and come off looking foolish every time.


It’s a tough question, isn’t it? What is your 2nd amendment worth. So far this year it’s 30 innocent children. What’s the total you’d accept? And if it was YOUR child is the answer 0?


It's not a tough question. It's an irrelevant question. It's the only thing you got. It's misleading it's disingenuous and it's untruthful. So if I'm cowardly in your eyes so fucking be it I don't care. You got nothing you've never had anything you never will.

Go for it.

Please explain how equating the worth of your kids' life to the continual loss of children's lives in school shootings is irrelevant. I can wait for you to make yourself look like an idiot again...

Empathy's a bitch, huh?

As for disingenuous and untruthful I'm just going assume that you don't understand what those words mean because they don't fit here. You're throwing words that are trying to let you dodge the question (hence the coward comment) and I'm not going to let you.

How many children being shot in schools is your 2nd amendment right worth? Give me a number. Throw something out to start a discussion... Does that number change if it was your child?


By the way, I love that you're getting angry in your responses because you know you don't have a leg to stand on. It gives me the tingles.

[Bob_Church 7]

I know I posted this earlier but it just seemed to slip by and I'd really like to discuss it. I don't think this is some bizarre over the top theory, I think it has merit and I wonder what, if anything people would be willing to do about it.

====once more, into the breech======

Speaking of giving things up, that's one thing when it's assumed that getting rid of all guns, whether possible or not, is the solution but what if there's a bigger problem?
What's changed? Well, remember all those sci-fi stories where everyone develops telepathy and soon after everyone has killed each other? We've done a pretty good job of at least emulating ESP. Think back to being a high school student and imagine all that snark and bullying and belittling but with no filters and 24/7. And remember, it only takes one outsider snapping from it to give us another mass death.
So, what if the question becomes "would you give up social media to save the children's lives? What if we find out that it's the hatred they wade through from others their age that triggers this, and that when we've rounded up all the guns and melted them down they just go online and learn how to build bombs and sarin?
Are we willing to give up the internet if it will save those children?

[yoink 321]

Bob_Church

I know I posted this earlier but it just seemed to slip by and I'd really like to discuss it. I don't think this is some bizarre over the top theory, I think it has merit and I wonder what, if anything people would be willing to do about it.

====once more, into the breech======

Speaking of giving things up, that's one thing when it's assumed that getting rid of all guns, whether possible or not, is the solution but what if there's a bigger problem?
What's changed? Well, remember all those sci-fi stories where everyone develops telepathy and soon after everyone has killed each other? We've done a pretty good job of at least emulating ESP. Think back to being a high school student and imagine all that snark and bullying and belittling but with no filters and 24/7. And remember, it only takes one outsider snapping from it to give us another mass death.
So, what if the question becomes "would you give up social media to save the children's lives? What if we find out that it's the hatred they wade through from others their age that triggers this, and that when we've rounded up all the guns and melted them down they just go online and learn how to build bombs and sarin?
Are we willing to give up the internet if it will save those children?

Really interesting question, and the 24hr cyber bullying you're referring to is a HUGE problem at the moment.

Give up the internet? No - it's not worth that. I genuinely believe the ability to share information freely is one of the paths to making us great as a species.

Give up social media though? Absolutely. In a heartbeat.

And there's the rub - does this type of usage censorship come from the parents, or from a central authority? Is it a combination of both?


Like any incredibly powerful tool, the internet can be abused and it will take training and education to teach people how to use it properly. Our generation has had to learn on the fly about alternate personas, identity theft, cyber bullying and a myriad of other things that are either a result of or enabled by this incredible invention, but our kids shouldn't have to.
I'm already thinking about how I'll teach my son to use the internet but he'll make mistakes learning - that's only to be expected. He'll post something he shouldn't and he'll get teased for it, or look at something that disturbs him.
That's my job as a parent - to ameliorate those events.

The big difference between the internet and gun education is that at least the internet is only words. It's unlikely that my boy will be able to kill a bunch of his classmates if he's angry by typing a nasty message on facebook in a one off situation.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

Bob_Church

I know I posted this earlier but it just seemed to slip by and I'd really like to discuss it. I don't think this is some bizarre over the top theory, I think it has merit and I wonder what, if anything people would be willing to do about it.

====once more, into the breech======

Speaking of giving things up, that's one thing when it's assumed that getting rid of all guns, whether possible or not, is the solution but what if there's a bigger problem?
What's changed? Well, remember all those sci-fi stories where everyone develops telepathy and soon after everyone has killed each other? We've done a pretty good job of at least emulating ESP. Think back to being a high school student and imagine all that snark and bullying and belittling but with no filters and 24/7. And remember, it only takes one outsider snapping from it to give us another mass death.
So, what if the question becomes "would you give up social media to save the children's lives? What if we find out that it's the hatred they wade through from others their age that triggers this, and that when we've rounded up all the guns and melted them down they just go online and learn how to build bombs and sarin?
Are we willing to give up the internet if it will save those children?

Would I give up my car if my kid was killed by one? I believe my car is integral to my freedom in the same way some feel about their guns. Of course I don't think the things are equal but that isn't how gun people see it. Until sanity returns we are stuck with the second amendment interpretation we have. So we need to look at things as they are today.

Our country has 11 Nuclear Powered Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups. The next so equipped country, France, has one. F-22's cost a quarter billion each. Stupid ass border walls are, what, $25 Billion these days? I'm confident we can afford to secure our schools at the Federal Level, most likely without anyone noticing, spread the costs evenly, and do so without changing a single gun law. Not that we shouldn't, however. We definitely should.

As previously reported, I'm a bit of a gun person so far in that I shoot gophers with my old duck gun and defend my home with a tactical shotgun. So, in a way, I get the never give an inch attitude of hardcore Amendment 2 folks. But I do not at all get how they fail to see that armed speech in the public square unfairly trumps Free Speech in the public square and that Amendment 1 is an important amendment, too. To wit, after the rebellion, it's free speech that confers armed speech.

Away from the background noise and checks it seems to me that any serious attempt to protect school kids from being blown apart and murdered mercilessly as they huddle in terror crying and begging for their lives (It isn't just another school shooting so be honest and just say the real words) would necessarily be a Federal action given that all kids, at least as we used to think, are created equal under our Constitution.

Sort of, I'm starting to wonder if the real battleground, when the last magazine drops and our idiot legislators come to agreement that school kids have inherent value, wont be in Mrs. McArnolds Art classroom. I'm thinking it'll be inside the twisted minds, not of the maniac murderers, but of the local school board members who will, and have shown it already, do anything to keep their particular and local conservative Christian, anti-science and sense agenda in the classroom. And they will, with vigor and godspeed, kick any Federal camel's nose they see because they fear (not unreasonably) that after keeping armed maniacs out of the classroom, Federal Government school improvement step number two might be removing locally distilled history and biology from the classroom.

It's a safe bet that the movers who tell the lemmings which cliff is next are already thinking it.........

P.S. I'm still looking for a firing pin and spring for my BRNO RV85 Launcher if anyone can help.

[Bob_Church 7]

yoink

***I know I posted this earlier but it just seemed to slip by and I'd really like to discuss it. I don't think this is some bizarre over the top theory, I think it has merit and I wonder what, if anything people would be willing to do about it.

====once more, into the breech======

Speaking of giving things up, that's one thing when it's assumed that getting rid of all guns, whether possible or not, is the solution but what if there's a bigger problem?
What's changed? Well, remember all those sci-fi stories where everyone develops telepathy and soon after everyone has killed each other? We've done a pretty good job of at least emulating ESP. Think back to being a high school student and imagine all that snark and bullying and belittling but with no filters and 24/7. And remember, it only takes one outsider snapping from it to give us another mass death.
So, what if the question becomes "would you give up social media to save the children's lives? What if we find out that it's the hatred they wade through from others their age that triggers this, and that when we've rounded up all the guns and melted them down they just go online and learn how to build bombs and sarin?
Are we willing to give up the internet if it will save those children?

Really interesting question, and the 24hr cyber bullying you're referring to is a HUGE problem at the moment.

Give up the internet? No - it's not worth that. I genuinely believe the ability to share information freely is one of the paths to making us great as a species.

Give up social media though? Absolutely. In a heartbeat.

And there's the rub - does this type of usage censorship come from the parents, or from a central authority? Is it a combination of both?


Like any incredibly powerful tool, the internet can be abused and it will take training and education to teach people how to use it properly. Our generation has had to learn on the fly about alternate personas, identity theft, cyber bullying and a myriad of other things that are either a result of or enabled by this incredible invention, but our kids shouldn't have to.
I'm already thinking about how I'll teach my son to use the internet but he'll make mistakes learning - that's only to be expected. He'll post something he shouldn't and he'll get teased for it, or look at something that disturbs him.
That's my job as a parent - to ameliorate those events.

The big difference between the internet and gun education is that at least the internet is only words. It's unlikely that my boy will be able to kill a bunch of his classmates if he's angry by typing a nasty message on facebook in a one off situation.

No, but what if he's one of the growing number who kills himself because of the abuse? Or cuts or huffs or starves or any of the other ways a kid deals with more than he can handle.This isn't something new, it's just been blown way up and extended in ways we never dreamed. The worry isn't that he kill people with a nasty note but that it alls gets to be too much and, well, we keep seeing what happens then. Think of the nasty situations back in school. Now imagine these same interactions day and night and without even the filter of a teacher or the filter of having to look the person you're slagging off in the eye which might finally make you start thinking that they're a person with feelings. I honestly don't know how more of them haven't snapped. But then, it's not over yet.
Is there any way to help them?

[rushmc 23]

Angry? LOL

Your questions aren't related. The second amendment has nothing to do with the shootings. The NRA has nothing to do with the shootings. You're trying to put together some false narrative that makes you feel better and looks like you got something that's irrefutable. Not the case. I know that. So enjoy your emotions. It's not bothering me

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Oh, and also, I'll bet you got the same Tingles up your leg when Obama got elected didn't you? LOL

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yoink 321]

***The second amendment has nothing to do with the shooting

WRONG!!

[yoink 321]

SkyDekker

Texas politicians are now suggesting that doors are the problem in school shootings. You can't make this shit up.

Guns don't kill people, entrances and exits do!

[nolhtairt 0]

RMK

Yes, I noted the same when I Googled.

I see CNN briefly interrupted their royal wedding coverage to note the shooting, but were back to royal wedding coverage quite quickly.

You know why? A shotgun and handgun was used, not an AR-15. It doesn't fit their agenda.

[yoink 321]

nolhtairt

***Yes, I noted the same when I Googled.

I see CNN briefly interrupted their royal wedding coverage to note the shooting, but were back to royal wedding coverage quite quickly.

You know why? A shotgun and handgun was used, not an AR-15. It doesn't fit their agenda.

The proposed AR-15 ban is all sorts of stupid.

[nolhtairt 0]

yoink

******Yes, I noted the same when I Googled.

I see CNN briefly interrupted their royal wedding coverage to note the shooting, but were back to royal wedding coverage quite quickly.

You know why? A shotgun and handgun was used, not an AR-15. It doesn't fit their agenda.

The proposed AR-15 ban is all sorts of stupid.

The libtard media's infatuation with the AR-15 is retarded.

It has never been a gun issue. It's a mental health issue. There are already laws on the book. They just need to be better enforced. Even then, that won't stop every shooting. Changing the school configuration to a single point entry with working metal detectors will help. But it's not what the libtards want.