Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
THis is the man Vox says should have stayed to be murdered
An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
The tread is about the shooting: The target would seem to be topical.
Anyone who believes they would have stayed rather than run is a fucking hypocrite until they've been there.
An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
The tread is about the shooting: The target would seem to be topical.
Anyone who believes they would have stayed rather than run is a fucking hypocrite until they've been there.
This thread is not about his actions. He did what he did as you said it's understandable. But would a mother or father leave their child? I can't see myself leaving my child much less anyone's child at the mercy of a shooter, but that's just me. People who aren't trained for that type of emergency situation do not know what they will do until it happens.
I would whether focus on the action of the shooter if it's at all possible?
My bet is that a lot of parents are very grateful to him for drawing fire away from their children. Its just unconscionable that some want to see more children and teachers gunned down.
An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
The tread is about the shooting: The target would seem to be topical.
Anyone who believes they would have stayed rather than run is a fucking hypocrite until they've been there.
This thread is not about his actions. He did what he did as you said it's understandable. But would a mother or father leave their child? I can't see myself leaving my child much less anyone's child at the mercy of a shooter, but that's just me. People who aren't trained for that type of emergency situation do not know what they will do until it happens.
I would whether focus on the action of the shooter if it's at all possible?
The tread is about the shooting: The target would seem to be topical.
Anyone who believes they would have stayed rather than run is a fucking hypocrite until they've been there.
This thread is not about his actions. He did what he did as you said it's understandable. But would a mother or father leave their child? I can't see myself leaving my child much less anyone's child at the mercy of a shooter, but that's just me. People who aren't trained for that type of emergency situation do not know what they will do until it happens.
I would whether focus on the action of the shooter if it's at all possible?
A teacher is not the child's parent so that has nothing to do with it.
BUT, if a parent were the target, then yes, they would want their child as far away from the gunfire as possible.
Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
What kind of idiot parent would do that?
Did the teacher know that he was the intended target and after he was gone no other person would be harmed?Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
THis is the man Vox says should have stayed to be murdered
Tracy Murphy, the school's librarian and debate coach, was the target of Karl Piersons rampage, students said. He left campus, trying to lure the shooter away.
Read more: Colorado teenage gunman had 'very strong beliefs about gun laws' and Republicans* - NY Daily News
An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
Nothing wrong with an anti gun liberal that hate republican shooting them-self.another leftist freaks out
Interesting you said this
On his Facebook page, he seemed to make fun of Republicans, writing "you republicans are so cute" and posting an image that read: "The Republican Party: Health Care: Let 'em Die, Climate Change: Let 'em Die, Gun Violence: Let 'em Die, Women's Rights: Let 'em Die, More War: Let 'em Die. Is this really the side you want to be on?"
Read more: Colorado teenage gunman had 'very strong beliefs about gun laws' and Republicans* - NY Daily News
"He had very strong beliefs about gun laws and stuff," said junior Abbey Skoda, who shared a class with Pierson during her freshmen year, The Denver Post reported. "I also heard he was bullied a lot."
Yep disarm more people so he can create more victims.
This is the second known gun control supporter who actually used guns to kill with.
I thought he only killed himself with a gun.
So what's the problem?
Liar, I have never said teachers should be unarmed. Maybe you have.THis is the man Vox says should have stayed to be murdered
An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
Why am I not surprised that you would want that teacher, unarmed, face the armed gunman.
what is the most impressive in this story - it is the coward teacher, who ran away upon learning that the student he/she abused came for her - and ran away, like a true sissy.
This thread is not about his actions. He did what he did as you said it's understandable. But would a mother or father leave their child? I can't see myself leaving my child much less anyone's child at the mercy of a shooter, but that's just me. People who aren't trained for that type of emergency situation do not know what they will do until it happens.
I would whether focus on the action of the shooter if it's at all possible?
A teacher is not the child's parent so that has nothing to do with it.
BUT, if a parent were the target, then yes, they would want their child as far away from the gunfire as possible.
Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
What kind of idiot parent would do that?
A teacher might not be their parents BUT IT is irrelevant. They are in charge when the children are own school grounds.
Did the teacher know that he was the intended target and after he was gone no other person would be harmed?Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
I think that knowledge came after the fact, not during the shooting. You have a screwed up way of asking a question. Holding the children close to me? Why would I use the child as a shield? Are you saying the teachers did wrong at sandy hook by not running away?
A teacher is not the child's parent so that has nothing to do with it.
BUT, if a parent were the target, then yes, they would want their child as far away from the gunfire as possible.
Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
What kind of idiot parent would do that?
A teacher might not be their parents BUT IT is irrelevant. They are in charge when the children are own school grounds.
Did the teacher know that he was the intended target and after he was gone no other person would be harmed?Are you really saying you would do different? Are you saying that if YOU were the target, you would keep your child close to you?
I think that knowledge came after the fact, not during the shooting. You have a screwed up way of asking a question. Holding the children close to me? Why would I use the child as a shield? Are you saying the teachers did wrong at sandy hook by not running away?
According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
"using a child as a shield"? YOU suggested that. I said that drawing fire away from the children protected them.
Now you are saying all or some or one of the Sandy Hook teachers were the known intended target? I didn't know that.
Neither do you.
What an insane position to take - that the known target of a nutcase shooter should stay close to children when the shooting starts.
"using a child as a shield"? YOU suggested that. I said that drawing fire away from the children protected them.
According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
A teacher might not be their parents BUT IT is irrelevant. They are in charge when the children are own school grounds.
Did the teacher know that he was the intended target and after he was gone no other person would be harmed?
I think that knowledge came after the fact, not during the shooting. You have a screwed up way of asking a question. Holding the children close to me? Why would I use the child as a shield? Are you saying the teachers did wrong at sandy hook by not running away?
According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
"using a child as a shield"? YOU suggested that. I said that drawing fire away from the children protected them.
Now you are saying all or some or one of the Sandy Hook teachers were the known intended target? I didn't know that.
Neither do you.
What an insane position to take - that the known target of a nutcase shooter should stay close to children when the shooting starts.
"using a child as a shield"? YOU suggested that. I said that drawing fire away from the children protected them.
OK that's one lie.You said it. Now have the balls to own it.
According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
Well then now that is interesting if he knew he was going to be the target, why was he even at school that day, week, month? why wasn't the shooter picked up by the protecting cops? No I think you're mistaken or the news report is misleading.
Once again this thread is not about the action of the teacher. But the action of the shooter and the mentality that brought him to do this
First it was I suggested it, now it's I said it?According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
"using a child as a shield"? YOU suggested that. I said that drawing fire away from the children protected them.
Now you are saying all or some or one of the Sandy Hook teachers were the known intended target? I didn't know that.
Neither do you.
What an insane position to take - that the known target of a nutcase shooter should stay close to children when the shooting starts.
OK that's one lie.You said it. Now have the balls to own it.
According to news reports, yes, he knew he was the intended target.
Well then now that is interesting if he knew he was going to be the target, why was he even at school that day, week, month? why wasn't the shooter picked up by the protecting cops? No I think you're mistaken or the news report is misleading.
So now you're saying that not only should he draw gunfire to children, he (as well as "the protecting cops"!) should have been able to read the kid's mind and know he was going to bring a gun to school and go after the teacher.
Once again this thread is not about the action of the teacher. But the action of the shooter and the mentality that brought him to do this
Once again, one of your fellow rightwing nitwits makes an inane and ignorant statement that demands a response.
Just as inane and as ignorant as arming school teachers.
Liar, I have never said teachers should be unarmed. Maybe you have.An adult who has been given charge over children should run and leave the children at the will of a gunman? OK this thread is not about his action.
Why am I not surprised that you would want that teacher, unarmed, face the armed gunman.
Do you support trained teachers carrying guns in schools?
