David Hogg weeps...interest in Concealed carry goes up 100% after Parkland shooting

[BULLDOG]

I'll get back with you as soon as I get that fake Chinese diploma, and we can speak on equal terms.

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

The 100% number is a fantasy, as you should know, but that aside you will find that most gun owners would like a background check system that works as well. The problem we have is you always connect a gun registry with the check. That we won't support. What would be awesome is there is a national background check phone number. ANYBODY who wishes to sell a gun calls the number, it's free to use, it accesses ALL the records on the individual you are going to sell the gun to. You get a response back within 20 minutes. Totally possible to do that BTW. If they pass, they buy the gun, if they don't pass there is a reason transmitted to the seller. If the person trying to buy is a prohibited person the police are notified and they come and ARREST the buyer. How about that? That reasonable enough for you?

Yes. 100% would be a fantasy because there will always be a very few gun nuts that oppose universal background checks. That's why I said ALMOST 100% (somewhere in the high 90s last I checked)
No. YOU and other gun nuts always try to connect a gun registry with the check, but that is not reality. There is no national gun registry now, yet there are some background checks.
I'm surprised someone with your vast educational background missed that.

We don't believe you.

We don't TRUST YOU...........

So........................NO

Yes. I know. Mistrust of everyone but the group brainwashing you is the first major step in brainwashing. The NRA put a check by your name in that column a long time ago

 

[westwall]

There are 20,000 gun laws on the books already. What do you consider "reasonable"?

I'll get back with you as soon as I get that fake Chinese diploma, and we can speak on equal terms.

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

The 100% number is a fantasy, as you should know, but that aside you will find that most gun owners would like a background check system that works as well. The problem we have is you always connect a gun registry with the check. That we won't support. What would be awesome is there is a national background check phone number. ANYBODY who wishes to sell a gun calls the number, it's free to use, it accesses ALL the records on the individual you are going to sell the gun to. You get a response back within 20 minutes. Totally possible to do that BTW. If they pass, they buy the gun, if they don't pass there is a reason transmitted to the seller. If the person trying to buy is a prohibited person the police are notified and they come and ARREST the buyer. How about that? That reasonable enough for you?

Yes. 100% would be a fantasy because there will always be a very few gun nuts that oppose universal background checks. That's why I said ALMOST 100% (somewhere in the high 90s last I checked)
No. YOU and other gun nuts always try to connect a gun registry with the check, but that is not reality. There is no national gun registry now, yet there are some background checks.
I'm surprised someone with your vast educational background missed that.

"Gun nuts" the progressive mantra that you spew at every opportunity. You don't own a gun, nor do have a CCW. That is plain to see. Pretty much every gun check program that the progressives trot out contains a registry. Feel free to provide a link to one that doesn't.

 

[westwall]

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

The 100% number is a fantasy, as you should know, but that aside you will find that most gun owners would like a background check system that works as well. The problem we have is you always connect a gun registry with the check. That we won't support. What would be awesome is there is a national background check phone number. ANYBODY who wishes to sell a gun calls the number, it's free to use, it accesses ALL the records on the individual you are going to sell the gun to. You get a response back within 20 minutes. Totally possible to do that BTW. If they pass, they buy the gun, if they don't pass there is a reason transmitted to the seller. If the person trying to buy is a prohibited person the police are notified and they come and ARREST the buyer. How about that? That reasonable enough for you?

Yes. 100% would be a fantasy because there will always be a very few gun nuts that oppose universal background checks. That's why I said ALMOST 100% (somewhere in the high 90s last I checked)
No. YOU and other gun nuts always try to connect a gun registry with the check, but that is not reality. There is no national gun registry now, yet there are some background checks.
I'm surprised someone with your vast educational background missed that.

We don't believe you.

We don't TRUST YOU...........

So........................NO

Yes. I know. Mistrust of everyone but the group brainwashing you is the first major step in brainwashing. The NRA put a check by your name in that column a long time ago

The propaganda is from bloomberg and his cronies. That is as obvious as the nose on your face.

 

[2aguy]

There are 20,000 gun laws on the books already. What do you consider "reasonable"?

I'll get back with you as soon as I get that fake Chinese diploma, and we can speak on equal terms.

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

The 100% number is a fantasy, as you should know, but that aside you will find that most gun owners would like a background check system that works as well. The problem we have is you always connect a gun registry with the check. That we won't support. What would be awesome is there is a national background check phone number. ANYBODY who wishes to sell a gun calls the number, it's free to use, it accesses ALL the records on the individual you are going to sell the gun to. You get a response back within 20 minutes. Totally possible to do that BTW. If they pass, they buy the gun, if they don't pass there is a reason transmitted to the seller. If the person trying to buy is a prohibited person the police are notified and they come and ARREST the buyer. How about that? That reasonable enough for you?

Yes. 100% would be a fantasy because there will always be a very few gun nuts that oppose universal background checks. That's why I said ALMOST 100% (somewhere in the high 90s last I checked)
No. YOU and other gun nuts always try to connect a gun registry with the check, but that is not reality. There is no national gun registry now, yet there are some background checks.
I'm surprised someone with your vast educational background missed that.

The only way to make sure a gun goes through a private sale is with a gun registry to know who owned the gun and who owns the gun now......otherwise they can simply say they always owned the gun and no sale occurred....you twit.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Americans who own and carry guns make the country safer.....mass shooters choose democrat party gun free zones as their targets......so when Americans can legally carry guns, they keep mass shooters from attacking...this news of an increase in interest in Concealed carry of guns shows that Americans understand, the cops can't protect you.....


US interest in concealed carry permit training jumps by over 100 per cent after Parkland: ‘We’ve never seen a spike this big before’

The number of Americans interested in obtaining concealed carry permits to secretly bear arms in public has jumped dramatically since the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February – with some states having seen as much as a 250 per cent increase in training requests for this type of permit.

In the 50 days since the Parkland, Florida shooting, companies and networks of firearm instructors that provide training for the permits in dozens of states have seen enquiries spike. One company said it had even received more requests for training than after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

I've got my CCP. I support universal background checks, psych evals, mandatory insurance and limits on types of firearms that can be owned.

I think the OP is worried that he'd fail some of those tests. So he's freaked out by normal people inquiring about his fitness to carry.

 

[flacaltenn]

Does interest in CC require NRA membership?

I have a CC, but I am disgusted with the NRA, and want reasonable gun regulation. Lots of people just like me, so I guess the answer is no. Now, answer the question.

There are 20,000 gun laws on the books already. What do you consider "reasonable"?

I'll get back with you as soon as I get that fake Chinese diploma, and we can speak on equal terms.

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

How about FIXING the system FIRST ? BEFORE you make it more more complicated than any govt bureaucrat can handle. THAT mismanagement is responsible for AT LEAST 4 of the last 7 "mass shootings"..

Why is it that when govt FAILS MISERABLY -- they all get PROMOTED and a ton more funding?? We're morons for falling for the ruse for all these years.

And every Dem wants to make their work MORE complicated rather than FIXING the flaws?

 

[Care4all]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

 

[westwall]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

I'm sorry Care, but 39 times that a SO responds to a call for a violent domestic abuse case, and the fact that we know back in 2016 that they had a legit reason to commit this little monster removes the "hind sight" possibility from this discussion. There were political reasons why this little prick wasn't removed from society and i want to know who made those decisions because they have the blood of 17 innocents on their hands.

 

[flacaltenn]

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

It's not just Parkland. THAT was abominable. The failures were completely massive. You have the Charleston shooter, the Navy Yard shooter and 4 or 5 other RECENT cases where info in the NICS system was deficient. And in the case of TWO OF THEM, we found out that that majority of reporting from MILITARY courts wasn't even being included.

That's government asleep at the wheel in both sides of "background checks" and cost DOZENS of lives in high profile shootings.

 

[flacaltenn]

What's the sense of EXPANDING a broken ass mismanaged system? Why don't we PRIVATIZE it? Moody's or an Insurance Company could do that job nearly error free and cheaper...

 

[westwall]

You will never be able to speak on equal terms with me as you don't have the intellect, nor the education. But, that aside, what do you think is a reasonable gun law. We are all curious. You claim to be a CCW holder, but based on your prior proclamations I find that claim to be highly dubious, but your penchant for lying aside, tell us what you think a "reasonable" gun law would be.

Universal background checks, which almost 100% of Americans want would be a good place to start.

The 100% number is a fantasy, as you should know, but that aside you will find that most gun owners would like a background check system that works as well. The problem we have is you always connect a gun registry with the check. That we won't support. What would be awesome is there is a national background check phone number. ANYBODY who wishes to sell a gun calls the number, it's free to use, it accesses ALL the records on the individual you are going to sell the gun to. You get a response back within 20 minutes. Totally possible to do that BTW. If they pass, they buy the gun, if they don't pass there is a reason transmitted to the seller. If the person trying to buy is a prohibited person the police are notified and they come and ARREST the buyer. How about that? That reasonable enough for you?

Yes. 100% would be a fantasy because there will always be a very few gun nuts that oppose universal background checks. That's why I said ALMOST 100% (somewhere in the high 90s last I checked)
No. YOU and other gun nuts always try to connect a gun registry with the check, but that is not reality. There is no national gun registry now, yet there are some background checks.
I'm surprised someone with your vast educational background missed that.

We don't believe you.

We don't TRUST YOU...........

So........................NO

Yes. I know. Mistrust of everyone but the group brainwashing you is the first major step in brainwashing. The NRA put a check by your name in that column a long time ago

With 39 instances of a failure to follow the law, and one absolutely certain case where they could have committed the little monster a healthy dose of mistrust of the sheriff, and the school admin of Parkland FL seems to be in order don't you think?

 

[Care4all]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

I'm sorry Care, but 39 times that a SO responds to a call for a violent domestic abuse case, and the fact that we know back in 2016 that they had a legit reason to commit this little monster removes the "hind sight" possibility from this discussion. There were political reasons why this little prick wasn't removed from society and i want to know who made those decisions because they have the blood of 17 innocents on their hands.

i think it was something like 39 different police interactions and yes that seems like pure negligence, or just thoughtless making the motions.... but I do not think it was simply ''political reasons''... no ones intent for the ''positive program'' primarily directed towards black youth, (not necessarily someone white as snow like cruz), would in any way support over 35 incidences with the police....the positive program was for teens that made a foolish mistake or two in their youth....not to be burdened with a record for the rest of their lives.... What the police did was PURE negligence imo....

 

[westwall]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

I'm sorry Care, but 39 times that a SO responds to a call for a violent domestic abuse case, and the fact that we know back in 2016 that they had a legit reason to commit this little monster removes the "hind sight" possibility from this discussion. There were political reasons why this little prick wasn't removed from society and i want to know who made those decisions because they have the blood of 17 innocents on their hands.

i think it was something like 39 different police interactions and yes that seems like pure negligence, or just thoughtless making the motions.... but I do not think it was simply ''political reasons''... no ones intent for the ''positive program'' primarily directed towards black youth, (not someone white as snow like cruz), would in any way support over 35 incidences with the police....the positive program was for teens that made a foolish mistake or two in their youth....not to be burdened with a record for the rest of their lives.... What the police did was PURE negligence imo....

Nope. He was one of the kids who benefited from the PROMISE program, one of obama's less well known projects. Sadly, the school admin decided that instead of having the kid arrested for hie violent outbursts in school (which would have hurt their statistics) they let the little monster carry on his merry way till he killed all of those innocents.

Negligence? Yep. A healthy dose of that, but there is a huge political component to this catastrophe as well.



"The PROMISE Program (Preventing Recidivism through Opportunities, Mentoring, Interventions, Supports & Education) represents the most comprehensive thinking available to address socially unacceptable or illegal behavior, targeting both short and long term academic success, aligning best practice models and Restorative Justice principles, and developing pro-social and resiliency skills. PROMISE, while addressing the behavior specific to the youth, is committed to addressing family and community circumstances that serve as both strengths and challenges for the youth’s resiliency. PROMISE is an intervention-based program designed to correct student behavior that violates Policy 5.8 and/or Policy 5006, Suspension and Expulsion. PROMISE utilizes a comprehensive set of supports and education. The intent of PROMISE is to safeguard the student from entering the judicial system."

PROMISE Program

 

[Care4all]

What's the sense of EXPANDING a broken ass mismanaged system? Why don't we PRIVATIZE it? Moody's or an Insurance Company could do that job nearly error free and cheaper...

And if the private company doesn't do the job, can they be sued for the mistake like our government is with their mistakes? I may not trust the govt, but I don't trust private companies either, especially involved in law enforcement....(like our prisons are simply prisons for profit)

And also, that would still require the military courts or someone giving the private company the info to enter and the problem with the gvt would still exist....they could fail to give the private company the info.... so there has to be another way, with checks of some sort.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Americans who own and carry guns make the country safer.....mass shooters choose democrat party gun free zones as their targets......so when Americans can legally carry guns, they keep mass shooters from attacking...this news of an increase in interest in Concealed carry of guns shows that Americans understand, the cops can't protect you.....


US interest in concealed carry permit training jumps by over 100 per cent after Parkland: ‘We’ve never seen a spike this big before’

The number of Americans interested in obtaining concealed carry permits to secretly bear arms in public has jumped dramatically since the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February – with some states having seen as much as a 250 per cent increase in training requests for this type of permit.

In the 50 days since the Parkland, Florida shooting, companies and networks of firearm instructors that provide training for the permits in dozens of states have seen enquiries spike. One company said it had even received more requests for training than after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

The country safer huh? The most dangerous First World country, the only one with massive easily availability of guns, the First World country with the least democratic government, the craziest fucked up head of state, the worst wealth gap, the fattest people, and you're talking about the guns making you safe??????

Delusion is not a river in Africa......

 

[Care4all]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

I'm sorry Care, but 39 times that a SO responds to a call for a violent domestic abuse case, and the fact that we know back in 2016 that they had a legit reason to commit this little monster removes the "hind sight" possibility from this discussion. There were political reasons why this little prick wasn't removed from society and i want to know who made those decisions because they have the blood of 17 innocents on their hands.

i think it was something like 39 different police interactions and yes that seems like pure negligence, or just thoughtless making the motions.... but I do not think it was simply ''political reasons''... no ones intent for the ''positive program'' primarily directed towards black youth, (not someone white as snow like cruz), would in any way support over 35 incidences with the police....the positive program was for teens that made a foolish mistake or two in their youth....not to be burdened with a record for the rest of their lives.... What the police did was PURE negligence imo....

Nope. He was one of the kids who benefited from the PROMISE program, one of obama's less well known projects. Sadly, the school admin decided that instead of having the kid arrested for hie violent outbursts in school (which would have hurt their statistics) they let the little monster carry on his merry way till he killed all of those innocents.

Negligence? Yep. A healthy dose of that, but there is a huge political component to this catastrophe as well.



"The PROMISE Program (Preventing Recidivism through Opportunities, Mentoring, Interventions, Supports & Education) represents the most comprehensive thinking available to address socially unacceptable or illegal behavior, targeting both short and long term academic success, aligning best practice models and Restorative Justice principles, and developing pro-social and resiliency skills. PROMISE, while addressing the behavior specific to the youth, is committed to addressing family and community circumstances that serve as both strengths and challenges for the youth’s resiliency. PROMISE is an intervention-based program designed to correct student behavior that violates Policy 5.8 and/or Policy 5006, Suspension and Expulsion. PROMISE utilizes a comprehensive set of supports and education. The intent of PROMISE is to safeguard the student from entering the judicial system."

PROMISE Program

You are taking a cliff note of what the program is without knowing the actual details Westwall and presuming an awful lot in between....

Before I could agree with you, I would want to see the full program and what the teachers and cops were taught, if there were any instructions on how to handle the kids that truly do have a real problem..... I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that 39 instances where the cops were called falls in to the category of still forgiving and forgetting....

And if it is, then that needs to be changed...like 3 strikes and you are out or 5 strikes...... but 39 fricking times? Please, that was just NEGLIGENCE, not the promise program.... that is a behavior pattern that is well beyond anyone with a brain on their head to see, that this kid was a walking time bomb....someone, an adult in the room, should have done something....program or not.

 

[flacaltenn]

What's the sense of EXPANDING a broken ass mismanaged system? Why don't we PRIVATIZE it? Moody's or an Insurance Company could do that job nearly error free and cheaper...

And if the private company doesn't do the job, can they be sued for the mistake like our government is with their mistakes? I may not trust the govt, but I don't trust private companies either, especially involved in law enforcement....(like our prisons are simply prisons for profit)

And also, that would still require the military courts or someone giving the private company the info to enter and the problem with the gvt would still exist....they could fail to give the private company the info.... so there has to be another way, with checks of some sort.

As a matter of fact you COULD make that way and not give legal immunity to the contractor like the government has when THEY fuck up.. But I'd rather take AWAY the government immunity and make it a "fair fight" and have them FOCUS on excellence and dilligience.

Would you rather get an elevator inspection from a Private company who CAN be sued? Or a government official that his normal grade raise that year he kills 3 people?

And prisons already subcontract about 1/3 of their budget for laundry, food, medical services, inmate services etc. Even the "government run:" ones... They can't compete because they are NOT GOOD at cooking, cleaning, accounting, and medical care. In fact, they can't handle much of anything because there is general lack of accountability..

NICS system is NOT rocket science. It's not even near as complex an operation as Twitter or SnapChat. There's just not a motivation to make it ACCURATE and complete with the parameters we have NOW. And too many of these mass shootings COULD have avoided if anyone was managing the system as intended.

That's WHY most folks OPPOSE adding Psych info to it. The potential for mistakes, abuse and lack of a process to protest is humongeous. Not to mention, there's no medical test numbers for "crazy" or dangerous.

 

[Care4all]

And Westwall, the Promise program for Broward country was Florida State Legislation....not federal....and the Florida legislature is a Republican Majority...... so THEY agreed to put in the program.

 

[protectionist]

Nope. He was one of the kids who benefited from the PROMISE program, one of obama's less well known projects. Sadly, the school admin decided that instead of having the kid arrested for hie violent outbursts in school (which would have hurt their statistics) they let the little monster carry on his merry way till he killed all of those innocents.

Negligence? Yep. A healthy dose of that, but there is a huge political component to this catastrophe as well.

"The PROMISE Program (Preventing Recidivism through Opportunities, Mentoring, Interventions, Supports & Education) represents the most comprehensive thinking available to address socially unacceptable or illegal behavior, targeting both short and long term academic success, aligning best practice models and Restorative Justice principles, and developing pro-social and resiliency skills. PROMISE, while addressing the behavior specific to the youth, is committed to addressing family and community circumstances that serve as both strengths and challenges for the youth’s resiliency. PROMISE is an intervention-based program designed to correct student behavior that violates Policy 5.8 and/or Policy 5006, Suspension and Expulsion. PROMISE utilizes a comprehensive set of supports and education. The intent of PROMISE is to safeguard the student from entering the judicial system."

PROMISE Program

Whatever the intent of the PROMISE Program is , there's no doubt it got 17 people killed - bears at least partial blame. If not for it, Cruz would have been arrested, would have gotten criminal record, would have flunked gun store background check, wouldn't have bought his guns there.

Maye he would have gotten guns in the street, but isn't is the libs who are soup in arms about background checks ? Here's a program that makes the background check disintegrate, and we don't hear a word from them about it. I've written 5 OPs on the PROMISE fiasco, links galore. Crickets.

 

[flacaltenn]

Everything does seems clearer in HINDSIGHT.... but that isn't always the case....

We are looking only at the ones that slip through the cracks, but not the thousands upon thousands that the FBI probably looks in to and even stopped before a tragedy happened.

I agree the one at Parkland seems like everything went wrong, that could go wrong....but again, in hindsight.... there are things that seem like the protocols could be changed and fixed....

like, why can't when callers from say Florida call the FBI call line it goes directly to Florida's FBI office, instead of going to some national call line for the FBI that would then have to decide to pass it on to Florida's FBI office?

OR a certain number of police incidents for a teen with no record, to be flagged or given a record that would flag him as being ineligible to purchase a gun or something that restricts him? with of course the opportunity to appeal the decision, due process...?

I'm sorry Care, but 39 times that a SO responds to a call for a violent domestic abuse case, and the fact that we know back in 2016 that they had a legit reason to commit this little monster removes the "hind sight" possibility from this discussion. There were political reasons why this little prick wasn't removed from society and i want to know who made those decisions because they have the blood of 17 innocents on their hands.

i think it was something like 39 different police interactions and yes that seems like pure negligence, or just thoughtless making the motions.... but I do not think it was simply ''political reasons''... no ones intent for the ''positive program'' primarily directed towards black youth, (not necessarily someone white as snow like cruz), would in any way support over 35 incidences with the police....the positive program was for teens that made a foolish mistake or two in their youth....not to be burdened with a record for the rest of their lives.... What the police did was PURE negligence imo....

The part of that that's more criminal than just negligence is the federal/state/local policies designed to "cook the books" for their records of "school crimes committed by minorities and disabled". In their zest to lower the IN SCHOOL crime rates, they banned police investigations and arrests. Making the SROs more of a LifeLock security guard (see the commercial) than a partner in total school discipline.

Oh we're not POLICE officers, we just bring the junior gang bangers to the Principal to deal with...

The STATS look fabulous. No longer arresting and expelling all those wonderful junior citizens. But the criminal potential will GROW under that stupidity in liberal logic.