Another school shooting....time to arm the teachers?

[Uncensored2008]

Could she have made it any easier?

Regulars here know I cook a lot. I have a magnetic board in my kitchen with a dozen knives on it, including a Zwilling JA Henckel with a 12 inch blade. My children could EASILY kill me in my sleep with it. Of course, they could hit me with the crystal lamp on by nightstand as well. You Bolsheviks don't grasp the concept that it is the person, not the tool, which is the danger.

(Actually you do, but you have a goal of a totalitarian state, so you play retard.)

 

[rightwinger]

Could she have made it any easier?

Regulars here know I cook a lot. I have a magnetic board in my kitchen with a dozen knives on it, including a Zwilling JA Henckel with a 12 inch blade. My children could EASILY kill me in my sleep with it. Of course, they could hit me with the crystal lamp on by nightstand as well. You Bolsheviks don't grasp the concept that it is the person, not the tool, which is the danger.

(Actually you do, but you have a goal of a totalitarian state, so you play retard.)

Assault rifles and the mentally infirm do not mix

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your goal is to prove yourself a loon.

You have succeeded.

You can't define socialism and how it applies here, so I am not so sure you know what a Bolshevik is, either.

Could she have made it any easier?

Regulars here know I cook a lot. I have a magnetic board in my kitchen with a dozen knives on it, including a Zwilling JA Henckel with a 12 inch blade. My children could EASILY kill me in my sleep with it. Of course, they could hit me with the crystal lamp on by nightstand as well. You Bolsheviks don't grasp the concept that it is the person, not the tool, which is the danger.

(Actually you do, but you have a goal of a totalitarian state, so you play retard.)

 

[Uncensored2008]

Assault rifles and the mentally infirm do not mix

No one is suggesting that you have access to any kind of rifle, RW.

 

[idb]

Does it matter?

It does if you're using them as examples of the successful arming of schools.
In those cases they are protecting themselves from attack from non-citizens of the country - they're in a war zone.

Are there any countries that aren't at war with either insurgents or external forces, that require the arming and fortification of its schools to protect its children from its own citizens?

No, I'm sorry, but it makes no fucking difference at all WHO is trying to kill the children. "It's okay to arm teachers to protect children from the bullets of non-citizens, but citizens' bullets must be met by unarmed, helpless bodies."

Shut. The Fuck. Up.

So, you're happy that the US is the only advanced Western country that has to isolate its kids away in armed fortifications from its own citizens for their protection?

I know this is a very hard concept for you because it won't fit on a bumper sticker, but isn't this the very reason you should be talking about the wider issues...including, but not limited to, firearms regulation.
Nutcases like you are the ones that are endangering your own kids by refusing to discuss these things because it might 'infringe your civil rights'.

Do you get it now you selfish bitch?

 

[idb]

Does it matter?

It does if you're using them as examples of the successful arming of schools.
In those cases they are protecting themselves from attack from non-citizens of the country - they're in a war zone.

Are there any countries that aren't at war with either insurgents or external forces, that require the arming and fortification of its schools to protect its children from its own citizens?

Whom the shooter(s) my or may not be is irrelevant.

No, I suppose not.
Just like you should feel safe and secure knowing that there are more killings in Syria than the US...right?

 

[Dr Grump]

Wrong.

Which part?

You don't have gun control,...

Um. You don't.

 

[Dr Grump]

I'm not scared of guns.
Nor am I scared of where I live
I don't own a gun because I don't live in fear - of other people or my govt.. But don't worry, I'm a mere subject, while you are a citizen in the land of the 'free'....

Not that I believe anything you post, Forrest; but if you actually did live in Australia, you would be prohibited from owning a gun.

Untrue. I just have to prove that I need a gun...not too hard to do if I really wanted one....

 

[KissMy]

Believe It or Not Mass Killings Are Not on the Rise, They Are on the Decline

The assault with gun rate for the entire country dropped faster than cities with gun bans. Gun violence rose by comparison in cities with gun bans. There was an immediate changes in society around 1992 & it was not from government.

November 7, 1991, basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson stuns the world by announcing he tested positive for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Within 2 months the number of people getting tested for aids was up 50%. Illegitimate birth rates dropped within 9 months. Heroin & other injected drug use that had been soaring since 1960 slowed their accent.

The country sobered up a bit & quit sharing IV drug needles. People quit having as many orgies, as much sex with strangers & not without protection. Maybe even settled down & married. This must have reduce the financial stress of illegitimate births & drug use, thus lowered the crime rate. Two parent structure households create the best well adjusted children. Single parent & divorced households & unwanted children create criminals.

 

[Dr Grump]

It does if you're using them as examples of the successful arming of schools.
In those cases they are protecting themselves from attack from non-citizens of the country - they're in a war zone.

Are there any countries that aren't at war with either insurgents or external forces, that require the arming and fortification of its schools to protect its children from its own citizens?

No, I'm sorry, but it makes no fucking difference at all WHO is trying to kill the children. "It's okay to arm teachers to protect children from the bullets of non-citizens, but citizens' bullets must be met by unarmed, helpless bodies."

Shut. The Fuck. Up.

So, you're happy that the US is the only advanced Western country that has to isolate its kids away in armed fortifications from its own citizens for their protection?

I know this is a very hard concept for you because it won't fit on a bumper sticker, but isn't this the very reason you should be talking about the wider issues...including, but not limited to, firearms regulation.
Nutcases like you are the ones that are endangering your own kids by refusing to discuss these things because it might 'infringe your civil rights'.

Do you get it now you selfish bitch?

At the core of any neocon, right-wing loon is their own ego. It's all about "me, me, me" to them. You would never meet a more self-centred, self-righteous, egotistical, selfish group of people anywhere on the planet.

It is about survival of the fittest. IOW, they may live in the 21st century but their mind set is in the Stone Age...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Untrue. I just have to prove that I need a gun...not too hard to do if I really wanted one....

That MIGHT get you a single shot .22 - but level 3 (or C) is where the real guns start. Sheep Shaggers apparently can't be trusted with weapons.

 

[Crackerjack]

Untrue. I just have to prove that I need a gun...not too hard to do if I really wanted one....

That MIGHT get you a single shot .22 - but level 3 (or C) is where the real guns start. Sheep Shaggers apparently can't be trusted with weapons.

It's his debilitating hoplophobia that is the problem here. A real shame.

 

[idb]

Untrue. I just have to prove that I need a gun...not too hard to do if I really wanted one....

That MIGHT get you a single shot .22 - but level 3 (or C) is where the real guns start. Sheep Shaggers apparently can't be trusted with weapons.

Why would he want one?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why would he want one?

No idea, and don't much care.

 

[Foxfyre]

The mass shootings, including those in schools, are not a phenomenon unique to the United States. According to a recent CNN article, the U.K., Finland, and Australia, just to name a few, have endured the same kinds of unconscionable massacres. And this after continual and repeated tightening of gun laws in those respective countries.

But I get weary of those who look to countries with different cultures, much tinier in size and population, and designed on much different principles than is the U.S.A. for the answers. But if you insist on doing that, why not look to Israel and other places where faculties are armed, and therefore there are no massacres in their schools?

Why not look to our own people, study our own cultural complexities, and devise policy and systems that will be effective here? And if providing school faculties with the means of protecting the kids against those who would harm them would save a single child from the tragedy that happened at Sandy Hook Elementary, why would any rational person oppose that?

 

[idb]

The mass shootings, including those in schools, are not a phenomenon unique to the United States. According to a recent CNN article, the U.K., Finland, and Australia, just to name a few, have endured the same kinds of unconscionable massacres. And this after continual and repeated tightening of gun laws in those respective countries.

But I get weary of those who look to countries with different cultures, much tinier in size and population, and designed on much different principles than is the U.S.A. for the answers. But if you insist on doing that, why not look to Israel and other places where faculties are armed, and therefore there are no massacres in their schools?

Why not look to our own people, study our own cultural complexities, and devise policy and systems that will be effective here? And if providing school faculties with the means of protecting the kids against those who would harm them would save a single child from the tragedy that happened at Sandy Hook Elementary, why would any rational person oppose that?

Yes, you have the immediate problem of protecting the kids from nutters but there has to be a greater discussion on why the US is som much more violent than other similar countries.

I don't believe you can compare the measures taken in countries like Israel when they are actually protecting against outside aggressors...they're in the middle of a war zone.
You are looking to protect against other US citizens...shouldn't that be concerning and cause questions to be asked?

If the basic culture isn't addressed where will it end?
Will people start actually living in fortified enclaves to protect themselves while wild-eyed lunatics roam the land outside?

 

[koshergrl]

You start with protecting the children.

Then you address the causes.

But regardless of what the CAUSE is, you protect the children, right now. You don't wait to try various things out. We know how to protect them, it's insane that people propose that we just continue to let them be slaughtered by anyone who wants to target them.

 

[idb]

You start with protecting the children.

Then you address the causes.

But regardless of what the CAUSE is, you protect the children, right now. You don't wait to try various things out. We know how to protect them, it's insane that people propose that we just continue to let them be slaughtered by anyone who wants to target them.

That's what I said.
What are ya...a limp-wristed liberal?

 

[Foxfyre]

The mass shootings, including those in schools, are not a phenomenon unique to the United States. According to a recent CNN article, the U.K., Finland, and Australia, just to name a few, have endured the same kinds of unconscionable massacres. And this after continual and repeated tightening of gun laws in those respective countries.

But I get weary of those who look to countries with different cultures, much tinier in size and population, and designed on much different principles than is the U.S.A. for the answers. But if you insist on doing that, why not look to Israel and other places where faculties are armed, and therefore there are no massacres in their schools?

Why not look to our own people, study our own cultural complexities, and devise policy and systems that will be effective here? And if providing school faculties with the means of protecting the kids against those who would harm them would save a single child from the tragedy that happened at Sandy Hook Elementary, why would any rational person oppose that?

Yes, you have the immediate problem of protecting the kids from nutters but there has to be a greater discussion on why the US is som much more violent than other similar countries.

I don't believe you can compare the measures taken in countries like Israel when they are actually protecting against outside aggressors...they're in the middle of a war zone.
You are looking to protect against other US citizens...shouldn't that be concerning and cause questions to be asked?

If the basic culture isn't addressed where will it end?
Will people start actually living in fortified enclaves to protect themselves while wild-eyed lunatics roam the land outside?

The fact is, the USA is NOT more violent than most other countries in the world. The U.K. has a higher per capita violent crime rate than we do despite having much more rigid gun laws. Cuba, Russia, and Greenland, to name a few, have higher intentional homicide rates. Take inner city drug related, and gang violence out of the mix, and we are among the world's most peaceful nations. And, our most violent cities have some of the nation's strictest gun laws. Despite our immense size in area and population, and having one of the world's most diverse populations, the the vast majority of us have zero fear of being hit by a stray bullet when we leave our homes every day and really don't think that much about somebody doing violence to us.

But does it matter if it is an outside aggressor or a U.S. citizen intent on committing mayhem in a public school? When confronted by an aggressor in such a situation, are you really going to even think about what country issued his passport or whether he has one? And does it matter that a tiny number of schools will ever encounter such a threat?

But we know it does happen.

If having means to protect themselves and the kids is given to the school administration and faculty to defend themselves and the children to which they are entrusted, how does any rational person object to that?

There is another active thread devoted to the 'real reason' behind the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and it has provoked some interesting discussion including American cultural forces.

This thread I see as a discussion of how we best avert such a massacre in the future.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Administrators are hired to manage, teachers to teacher. Neither are hired to carry guns. Period.

Trained armed security personnel who do it for a living are the logical answer.

Yes, you far right wacks, it is going to cost, and it is going to come out of our pockets.

Get used to the idea, because it will happen in the next few months in all fifty states, either by executive or legislative action.