Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting

[BlindBoo]

Blaming this monstrous act on the Gun Free School Zone acts of the 90's or even to say that those Bills were some kind of Leftist subversion of common sense is as ludicrous as saying either side is to blame. The one to blame is the guy who did the deed. Hanging's too good for him.

Well, it's nice to see a leftist who actually wants to blame the criminal. That, however, does nothing to resolve the very real fact that we need more effective ways to prevent people like him from killing sprees in schools, malls, whatever. And I can and do blame "gun free zones" for being utterly ineffectual in that regard.

Furthermore, YOU started out by trying to blame Florida's gun laws for this shooting, and NOW you say we can't hold anyone or anything responsible EXCEPT the shooter. Could you possibly flail your way around to some consistency?

Well yeah I did start out with a partisan and flippant remark about the OP. Since I haven't been here all year I didn't want to jump into any long established discussions. Didn't the OP blame the Left exclusively for the gun free zone laws for this atrocity, which were in reality a bipartisan venture? Also, if we're going to blame the laws for failing to stop the behavior they were intended to restrict, do we blame all the murders committed on the laws against it? No of course not. Do you blame the rapist or the laws against rape for failing to stop the crime? Ridiculous!

See, again, you're conflating a discussion of "left and right" with "Democrat and Republican". A policy may be "bipartisan" in the sense of getting people from both political parties to vote for it (which is kinda the definition of "bipartisan"), but that doesn't apply to the philosophical divide of leftist and conservative. Gun-free zones are 100% leftist; there is no permutation in which they are remotely conservative. Therefore, the blame for any harm caused by them belongs to the left, not the right. The fact that Republican sometimes vote for leftist policies just demonstrates what I said before: left-think is more contagious than a flaming case of herpes.

Furthermore, we are not blaming laws for failing to stop behavior; we are blaming them for actively exacerbating that behavior. Gun-free zones not only do NOT prevent spree shooters from bringing guns into them to kill people, they ENCOURAGE them to go to those places for their slaughterfests, because they know all their targets will be defenseless. THAT is our objection.

Laws against murder in general act as a deterrent for most of society, including some criminals (who, for example, commit burglaries when no one is home, rather than when the family is present), but their primary purpose isn't to prevent murders so much as it is to offer a framework for which to arrest and punish people who commit them. More importantly in this context, they do not actively encourage people to do what they prohibit.

As for stopping rape, in a lot of cases, I blame the same gun laws I'm blaming for school shootings, because they prevent the victims from being able to defend themselves.

I disagree that most of the mass murderers choose the location of their slaughter because they are gun restricted areas. Fact is most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone. Sadly, I think more schools now do need to have more armed security and more individuals authorized/allowed to carry weapons. They certainly need to implement better security policies to prevent access to the so called gun free zones.

Whoa up there, Trigger.

"Most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone". Okay, and now you're going to explain how you got THAT statement.

But I appreciate that you're starting to come around to our argument on the subject of armed security.

"Of the 24 deadliest mass murders over the last 50 years only six of them happened at schools or “gun free zones” as described by “Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990”. The rest happened at homes, restaurants, places of employment, the street, a mall, and two at Military bases. "

Conservative Legislation Provides Support for Gun Control | HuffPost

Of course that was a year and a half ago so things changed a bit but not that much.

Mass shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

 

[Cecilie1200]

[

Perhaps this is because the notion that people should not bring guns to school, unless they are law enforcement, is neither a "liberal" nor "conservative" issue. Just mebbe. LOL

What's your plan to get shooters to not bring guns to school? If you want to live in the 1970s, that's fine. But don't pretend it is the 1970s.

And how many times have you told conservatives that? Hey guy, don't live in the past.

The reality is that starting with Columbine in 1999, not coincidentally not long after schools were made gun free zones, there have been repeated shootings and repeatedly no one is shooting back.

It's time to man up and address reality. Not live in the past as you'd gladly say to Republicans.

And when you think about it, the plan to keep 300 million guns away from people who want to kill people while maintaining our having no southern border was a stupid plan to begin with.

Leftists can be forgiven to a degree for a stupid plan. You cannot be forgiven when the results of your plan has been a long line of dead children's bodies and you refuse to think wow, maybe your plan was a stupid idea

Oh no, I have no interest in rehabilitating your snark thread, sparky. Esp after accusing me of snarking on your snark.

I have considered starting a serious thread on the issue of what's achievable and what might possibly lessen a person's ability to pull off a mass shooting. But there are too many threads on Parkland, and I think people like you would hijack the thread over your partisanship

Partisanship? You don't know what that means, do you? You know they have things things called dictionaries. Try one

I used to advocate a program called "Dictionaries for Democrats", so they could finally figure out the meanings of all those complicated words, like "infringe" . . . and "is".

Infringe is not your strongpoint, and neither are 18th century English usage or constitutional history.

Coming from you, that means . . . absolutely nothing. Call me when you sack up and enter the fray, instead of criticizing from the sidelines, spectator.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, it's nice to see a leftist who actually wants to blame the criminal. That, however, does nothing to resolve the very real fact that we need more effective ways to prevent people like him from killing sprees in schools, malls, whatever. And I can and do blame "gun free zones" for being utterly ineffectual in that regard.

Furthermore, YOU started out by trying to blame Florida's gun laws for this shooting, and NOW you say we can't hold anyone or anything responsible EXCEPT the shooter. Could you possibly flail your way around to some consistency?

Well yeah I did start out with a partisan and flippant remark about the OP. Since I haven't been here all year I didn't want to jump into any long established discussions. Didn't the OP blame the Left exclusively for the gun free zone laws for this atrocity, which were in reality a bipartisan venture? Also, if we're going to blame the laws for failing to stop the behavior they were intended to restrict, do we blame all the murders committed on the laws against it? No of course not. Do you blame the rapist or the laws against rape for failing to stop the crime? Ridiculous!

See, again, you're conflating a discussion of "left and right" with "Democrat and Republican". A policy may be "bipartisan" in the sense of getting people from both political parties to vote for it (which is kinda the definition of "bipartisan"), but that doesn't apply to the philosophical divide of leftist and conservative. Gun-free zones are 100% leftist; there is no permutation in which they are remotely conservative. Therefore, the blame for any harm caused by them belongs to the left, not the right. The fact that Republican sometimes vote for leftist policies just demonstrates what I said before: left-think is more contagious than a flaming case of herpes.

Furthermore, we are not blaming laws for failing to stop behavior; we are blaming them for actively exacerbating that behavior. Gun-free zones not only do NOT prevent spree shooters from bringing guns into them to kill people, they ENCOURAGE them to go to those places for their slaughterfests, because they know all their targets will be defenseless. THAT is our objection.

Laws against murder in general act as a deterrent for most of society, including some criminals (who, for example, commit burglaries when no one is home, rather than when the family is present), but their primary purpose isn't to prevent murders so much as it is to offer a framework for which to arrest and punish people who commit them. More importantly in this context, they do not actively encourage people to do what they prohibit.

As for stopping rape, in a lot of cases, I blame the same gun laws I'm blaming for school shootings, because they prevent the victims from being able to defend themselves.

I disagree that most of the mass murderers choose the location of their slaughter because they are gun restricted areas. Fact is most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone. Sadly, I think more schools now do need to have more armed security and more individuals authorized/allowed to carry weapons. They certainly need to implement better security policies to prevent access to the so called gun free zones.

Whoa up there, Trigger.

"Most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone". Okay, and now you're going to explain how you got THAT statement.

But I appreciate that you're starting to come around to our argument on the subject of armed security.

"Of the 24 deadliest mass murders over the last 50 years only six of them happened at schools or “gun free zones” as described by “Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990”. The rest happened at homes, restaurants, places of employment, the street, a mall, and two at Military bases. "

Conservative Legislation Provides Support for Gun Control | HuffPost

Of course that was a year and a half ago so things changed a bit but not that much.

Mass shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

I am going to have to respond to this when I get home this evening, since it requires a more in-depth response than I can provide on the fly at work.

 

[kaz]

No, it's irrelevant because the OP and the entire thread are about LEFTISTS, not Democrats. Dumbfuck.

LOL

Apparently, in your hollow cranial cavity, Democrats don’t represent the left.

Regardless of your insignificant dismissal, gun-free zones were sponsored by a Democrat. Voted for by a margin of 313-1, which means both left and right supported it, and signed into law by a Republican Party. That was nearly 3 decades ago and while both parties have been in control at various times over that period, neither party has attempted to revoke gun free zones. The whiney, sniveling right look like the fools they are for blaming the problem on gun-free zones when they are equally responsible for them.

There's a lot of overlap, no denying that, but leftists don't have to be Democrats, and Democrats don't have to be leftists. My objection is to the philosophy, not the political party.

The rest of your post proves my point. One does not have to be a Democrat to engage in egregious left-think.

Then your point is DOA because if that’s how you want to look at it, neither the “left” nor the “right” write laws. Democrats and Republicans do. And Democrat and Republican law makers in Congress represent the entire country, left, right, middle, i.e, everyone. And Democrats and Republicans together passed gun-free zones. 313-1.

Neither side can blame the other on this issue. I don’t actually know that either side wants to blame the other or even thinks it’s the problem; just a relative few people who don’t know where to turn or are seeking to blame someone else.

So your position is that if someone joins a political party, that negates their ability to hold a political philosophy? It's not at all possible in your worldview for someone to do both?

No, that not my position.

And I clearly stated my position.

Well, it's nice to see a leftist who actually wants to blame the criminal. That, however, does nothing to resolve the very real fact that we need more effective ways to prevent people like him from killing sprees in schools, malls, whatever. And I can and do blame "gun free zones" for being utterly ineffectual in that regard.

Furthermore, YOU started out by trying to blame Florida's gun laws for this shooting, and NOW you say we can't hold anyone or anything responsible EXCEPT the shooter. Could you possibly flail your way around to some consistency?

Well yeah I did start out with a partisan and flippant remark about the OP. Since I haven't been here all year I didn't want to jump into any long established discussions. Didn't the OP blame the Left exclusively for the gun free zone laws for this atrocity, which were in reality a bipartisan venture? Also, if we're going to blame the laws for failing to stop the behavior they were intended to restrict, do we blame all the murders committed on the laws against it? No of course not. Do you blame the rapist or the laws against rape for failing to stop the crime? Ridiculous!

See, again, you're conflating a discussion of "left and right" with "Democrat and Republican". A policy may be "bipartisan" in the sense of getting people from both political parties to vote for it (which is kinda the definition of "bipartisan"), but that doesn't apply to the philosophical divide of leftist and conservative. Gun-free zones are 100% leftist; there is no permutation in which they are remotely conservative. Therefore, the blame for any harm caused by them belongs to the left, not the right. The fact that Republican sometimes vote for leftist policies just demonstrates what I said before: left-think is more contagious than a flaming case of herpes.

Furthermore, we are not blaming laws for failing to stop behavior; we are blaming them for actively exacerbating that behavior. Gun-free zones not only do NOT prevent spree shooters from bringing guns into them to kill people, they ENCOURAGE them to go to those places for their slaughterfests, because they know all their targets will be defenseless. THAT is our objection.

Laws against murder in general act as a deterrent for most of society, including some criminals (who, for example, commit burglaries when no one is home, rather than when the family is present), but their primary purpose isn't to prevent murders so much as it is to offer a framework for which to arrest and punish people who commit them. More importantly in this context, they do not actively encourage people to do what they prohibit.

As for stopping rape, in a lot of cases, I blame the same gun laws I'm blaming for school shootings, because they prevent the victims from being able to defend themselves.

I disagree that most of the mass murderers choose the location of their slaughter because they are gun restricted areas. Fact is most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone. Sadly, I think more schools now do need to have more armed security and more individuals authorized/allowed to carry weapons. They certainly need to implement better security policies to prevent access to the so called gun free zones.

Whoa up there, Trigger.

"Most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone". Okay, and now you're going to explain how you got THAT statement.

But I appreciate that you're starting to come around to our argument on the subject of armed security.

"Of the 24 deadliest mass murders over the last 50 years only six of them happened at schools or “gun free zones” as described by “Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990”. The rest happened at homes, restaurants, places of employment, the street, a mall, and two at Military bases. "

Conservative Legislation Provides Support for Gun Control | HuffPost

Of course that was a year and a half ago so things changed a bit but not that much.

Mass shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

It's pathetic when they include the shooter(s) who are human garbage.

Now replace "school" with "gun free zone" and you have most of them.

BTW, "Gun free School Zones Act of 1990 zone act" and "schools" are synonymous.

Those six shootings were also as of the last 18 years. I find it interesting though that you're arguing now that school shootings are not really significant. Funny how you're not saying to the leftists screaming for more laws

 

[NoNukes]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

People in other countries do not need guns to fight back at schools. It is an American epidemic, and guns are not the solution.

Single cause fallacy.

And we didn't have shooters 30 years ago and we had the guns. What you have here is a lot of nothing.

Have you mentioned to your drug dealer your theory that if we make something illegal, that means we can't get it?

But you have the constant massacres today, and probably less guns 39 years ago.

 

[NoNukes]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

People in other countries do not need guns to fight back at schools. It is an American epidemic, and guns are not the solution.

Single cause fallacy.

And we didn't have shooters 30 years ago and we had the guns. What you have here is a lot of nothing.

Have you mentioned to your drug dealer your theory that if we make something illegal, that means we can't get it?

We had shooters 30 years ago and we kept adding guns per the orders of the NRA. Now we have more shooters.


If we ban drugs only criminals will have drugs....so let’s give everyone drugs.

There weren't the mass shootings 30 years ago at a high rate, particularly at gun free zone schools. That's a lie.

It's racism, isn't it, dumb ass?

What we have here is a single cause fallacy. You're just guilty over the blood of 17 students on your hands.

Let's pretend that gun laws keep guns out of the hands of shooters and remove the ability of anyone to defend themselves now as if it does. Then when it doesn't work, we blame the NRA and demand more laws.

If one digs into your plan, it's as stupid as the first reading of our plan

Why do you not need similar defence in other countries?

 

[toobfreak]

"Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting"

No, they don't.

We followed your plan, it was a gun free zone. 17 are dead. Damned straight you owe us an explanation for your failure

The Left will never have any explanation for this because it is exactly what they want. Without DEAD CHILDREN littering the streets, they'd have no argument for trying to ban guns and attacking the NRA. If Lefties have proven ONE THING, it is that they place their godless power politics over all else, including human lives.

 

[Faun]

LOL

Apparently, in your hollow cranial cavity, Democrats don’t represent the left.

Regardless of your insignificant dismissal, gun-free zones were sponsored by a Democrat. Voted for by a margin of 313-1, which means both left and right supported it, and signed into law by a Republican Party. That was nearly 3 decades ago and while both parties have been in control at various times over that period, neither party has attempted to revoke gun free zones. The whiney, sniveling right look like the fools they are for blaming the problem on gun-free zones when they are equally responsible for them.

There's a lot of overlap, no denying that, but leftists don't have to be Democrats, and Democrats don't have to be leftists. My objection is to the philosophy, not the political party.

The rest of your post proves my point. One does not have to be a Democrat to engage in egregious left-think.

Then your point is DOA because if that’s how you want to look at it, neither the “left” nor the “right” write laws. Democrats and Republicans do. And Democrat and Republican law makers in Congress represent the entire country, left, right, middle, i.e, everyone. And Democrats and Republicans together passed gun-free zones. 313-1.

Neither side can blame the other on this issue. I don’t actually know that either side wants to blame the other or even thinks it’s the problem; just a relative few people who don’t know where to turn or are seeking to blame someone else.

So your position is that if someone joins a political party, that negates their ability to hold a political philosophy? It's not at all possible in your worldview for someone to do both?

No, that not my position.

And I clearly stated my position.

Well yeah I did start out with a partisan and flippant remark about the OP. Since I haven't been here all year I didn't want to jump into any long established discussions. Didn't the OP blame the Left exclusively for the gun free zone laws for this atrocity, which were in reality a bipartisan venture? Also, if we're going to blame the laws for failing to stop the behavior they were intended to restrict, do we blame all the murders committed on the laws against it? No of course not. Do you blame the rapist or the laws against rape for failing to stop the crime? Ridiculous!

See, again, you're conflating a discussion of "left and right" with "Democrat and Republican". A policy may be "bipartisan" in the sense of getting people from both political parties to vote for it (which is kinda the definition of "bipartisan"), but that doesn't apply to the philosophical divide of leftist and conservative. Gun-free zones are 100% leftist; there is no permutation in which they are remotely conservative. Therefore, the blame for any harm caused by them belongs to the left, not the right. The fact that Republican sometimes vote for leftist policies just demonstrates what I said before: left-think is more contagious than a flaming case of herpes.

Furthermore, we are not blaming laws for failing to stop behavior; we are blaming them for actively exacerbating that behavior. Gun-free zones not only do NOT prevent spree shooters from bringing guns into them to kill people, they ENCOURAGE them to go to those places for their slaughterfests, because they know all their targets will be defenseless. THAT is our objection.

Laws against murder in general act as a deterrent for most of society, including some criminals (who, for example, commit burglaries when no one is home, rather than when the family is present), but their primary purpose isn't to prevent murders so much as it is to offer a framework for which to arrest and punish people who commit them. More importantly in this context, they do not actively encourage people to do what they prohibit.

As for stopping rape, in a lot of cases, I blame the same gun laws I'm blaming for school shootings, because they prevent the victims from being able to defend themselves.

I disagree that most of the mass murderers choose the location of their slaughter because they are gun restricted areas. Fact is most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone. Sadly, I think more schools now do need to have more armed security and more individuals authorized/allowed to carry weapons. They certainly need to implement better security policies to prevent access to the so called gun free zones.

Whoa up there, Trigger.

"Most of the deadliest ones did not happen in a gun free zone". Okay, and now you're going to explain how you got THAT statement.

But I appreciate that you're starting to come around to our argument on the subject of armed security.

"Of the 24 deadliest mass murders over the last 50 years only six of them happened at schools or “gun free zones” as described by “Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990”. The rest happened at homes, restaurants, places of employment, the street, a mall, and two at Military bases. "

Conservative Legislation Provides Support for Gun Control | HuffPost

Of course that was a year and a half ago so things changed a bit but not that much.

Mass shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

It's pathetic when they include the shooter(s) who are human garbage.

Now replace "school" with "gun free zone" and you have most of them.

BTW, "Gun free School Zones Act of 1990 zone act" and "schools" are synonymous.

Those six shootings were also as of the last 18 years. I find it interesting though that you're arguing now that school shootings are not really significant. Funny how you're not saying to the leftists screaming for more laws

LOL

I like how you include links to my posts (which means you clicked reply to it) while you pretend to have me on ignore.

 

[evenflow1969]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

The left did not do this, the right did not do this. The fuck that pulled the trigger did this! The left and the right have not operated in a vacuum they are equaly responsible for the climate that we live in. We as a culture are equally reasponsible. We have not figured out a solution to this problem yet. I do not hink there is any one solution to this. It will take changes on multiple fronts to fix this. I think that this split in ideology is heavily to blame for this issue. We are so quick to villify the other side of an ideological issue it creates an us vs. them mentality which is what allows these loons to loose empathy and commit atrocities like these. In this sick fucks head he was likely doing right and dispacthing his enemies. You can not reasonalby call some one evil because they do not have a solution for a problem that seems to be so unsolvable. According to the bible the first murderer was around in a very short period of time after our firstr being around. No one has fixed it yet! If I thought removing every gun would fix the problem I would be for it. The problem is it impossible to accomplish. Even if you could some how find them all, they can be bulit with materials that are impossible to track. It is not feasable! If you want a gun you can get or make one. Arming every one is not a solution either, not every one is suted to carry a fire arm. Our kids are so sheltered today, I belive most of them are more likely to be shot with thier own weapon than defending themself. Not to mention they spend so much time on their phones I am not sure they know how to function with each other in person. When most of our p[opulation was rural fire arms was a way of life and it was a respected tool. Now most people live in the city where I see adults who do not know how to change a tire. I am not jumping up and down about arming them. There is no one good solution. Going and getting rid of two hundred years of tradition and the logic of I would like to defend myself is worse though.

 

[boedicca]

Hey Lefties! 'Splain this timeline and how taking away guns from law-abiding NRA members would have prevented the shooting. Extra points if you can identify what could have been done early in the timeline to prevent the shooting.


▪ Feb. 5, 2016: A Broward Sheriff’s Office deputy is told by an anonymous caller that Nikolas Cruz, then 17, had threatened on Instagram to shoot up his school and posted a photo of himself with guns. The information is forwarded to BSO Deputy Scot Peterson, a school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

▪ Sept. 23, 2016: A “peer counselor” reports to Peterson that Cruz had possibly ingested gasoline in a suicide attempt, was cutting himself and wanted to buy a gun. A mental health counselor advises against involuntary committing Cruz. The high school says it will conduct a threat assessment.

▪ Sept. 28, 2016: An investigator for the Florida Department of Children and Families rules Cruz is stable, despite “fresh cuts” on his arms. His mother, Lynda Cruz, says in the past he wrote “hate signs” on his book bag and had recently talked of buying firearms.

▪ Sept. 24, 2017: A YouTube user named “nikolas cruz” posts a comment stating he wants to become a “professional school shooter.” The comment is reported to the FBI in Mississippi, which fails to make the connection to Cruz in South Florida.

▪ Nov. 1, 2017: Katherine Blaine, Lynda Cruz’s cousin, calls BSO to report that Nikolas Cruz had weapons and asks that police recover them. A “close family friend” agrees to take the firearms, according to BSO.

▪ Nov. 29, 2017: The Palm Beach County family that took in Cruz after the death of his mother calls the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office to report a fight between him and their son, 22. A member of the family says Cruz had threatened to “get his gun and come back” and that he has “put the gun to others’ heads in the past.” The family does not want him arrested once he calms down.

▪ Nov. 30, 2017: A caller from Massachusetts calls BSO to report that Cruz is collecting guns and knives and could be a “school shooter in the making.” A BSO deputy advises the caller to contact the Palm Beach sheriff.

▪ Jan. 5, 2018: A caller to the FBI’s tip line reports that Cruz has “a desire to kill people” and could potentially conduct a school shooting. The information is never passed on to the FBI’s office in Miami.

▪ Feb. 14, 2018: Nikolas Cruz attacks Stoneman Douglas High. Peterson, the school’s resource officer, draws his gun outside the building where Cruz is shooting students and staff. He does not enter.

‘School shooter in the making’: All the times authorities were warned about Nikolas Cruz

 

[P@triot]

Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting.
easy ... the dems MADE RW's join the NRA and fight tooth and nail for assault rifle freedom.es

So in your peanunt brain if their was no NRA their would be no second amendment?

More than that...his comment illustrates that he wants there to be no 2nd Amendment.

 

[P@triot]

"Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting"

No, they don't.

Spoken like a true radical who doesn’t care about children brutally slaughter. CCJ only cares about control. If children have to die for it - so be it.

I’ve got news for you CCJ....yes you do. It was your idiotic policies that lead to the slaughter. You owe the American people an explanation for why your policies are failing.

 

[P@triot]

You mean, why he didn’t follow the law?

Which is what we’ve been trying to tell you nitwits for decades now. Criminals don’t follow the law. Therefore, outlawing guns will ensure that only outlaws have guns.

I never cease to marvel at the astounding stupidity of the left.

 

[depotoo]

I’m not a nitwit.

You mean, why he didn’t follow the law?

Which is what we’ve been trying to tell you nitwits for decades now. Criminals don’t follow the law. Therefore, outlawing guns will ensure that only outlaws have guns.

I never cease to marvel at the astounding stupidity of the left.

 

[P@triot]

The shooter was a Trump supporter, he has pictures showing him target practicing in his backyard wearing a Make America Great Again hat.

Pitiful redirect there, snowflake. I don’t care what he wore. It was failed left-wing policy that allowed him to kill.

 

[depotoo]

Hey Lefties! 'Splain this timeline and how taking away guns from law-abiding NRA members would have prevented the shooting. Extra points if you can identify what could have been done early in the timeline to prevent the shooting.


▪ Feb. 5, 2016: A Broward Sheriff’s Office deputy is told by an anonymous caller that Nikolas Cruz, then 17, had threatened on Instagram to shoot up his school and posted a photo of himself with guns. The information is forwarded to BSO Deputy Scot Peterson, a school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

▪ Sept. 23, 2016: A “peer counselor” reports to Peterson that Cruz had possibly ingested gasoline in a suicide attempt, was cutting himself and wanted to buy a gun. A mental health counselor advises against involuntary committing Cruz. The high school says it will conduct a threat assessment.

▪ Sept. 28, 2016: An investigator for the Florida Department of Children and Families rules Cruz is stable, despite “fresh cuts” on his arms. His mother, Lynda Cruz, says in the past he wrote “hate signs” on his book bag and had recently talked of buying firearms.

▪ Sept. 24, 2017: A YouTube user named “nikolas cruz” posts a comment stating he wants to become a “professional school shooter.” The comment is reported to the FBI in Mississippi, which fails to make the connection to Cruz in South Florida.

▪ Nov. 1, 2017: Katherine Blaine, Lynda Cruz’s cousin, calls BSO to report that Nikolas Cruz had weapons and asks that police recover them. A “close family friend” agrees to take the firearms, according to BSO.

▪ Nov. 29, 2017: The Palm Beach County family that took in Cruz after the death of his mother calls the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office to report a fight between him and their son, 22. A member of the family says Cruz had threatened to “get his gun and come back” and that he has “put the gun to others’ heads in the past.” The family does not want him arrested once he calms down.

▪ Nov. 30, 2017: A caller from Massachusetts calls BSO to report that Cruz is collecting guns and knives and could be a “school shooter in the making.” A BSO deputy advises the caller to contact the Palm Beach sheriff.

▪ Jan. 5, 2018: A caller to the FBI’s tip line reports that Cruz has “a desire to kill people” and could potentially conduct a school shooting. The information is never passed on to the FBI’s office in Miami.

▪ Feb. 14, 2018: Nikolas Cruz attacks Stoneman Douglas High. Peterson, the school’s resource officer, draws his gun outside the building where Cruz is shooting students and staff. He does not enter.

‘School shooter in the making’: All the times authorities were warned about Nikolas Cruz

And some 30 calls to his home while his mother was alive, for police.

 

[Faun]

The shooter was a Trump supporter, he has pictures showing him target practicing in his backyard wearing a Make America Great Again hat.

Pitiful redirect there, snowflake. I don’t care what he wore. It was failed left-wing policy that allowed him to kill.

The Trump supporting shooter is responsible.

 

[Moonglow]

The shooter was a Trump supporter, he has pictures showing him target practicing in his backyard wearing a Make America Great Again hat.

Pitiful redirect there, snowflake. I don’t care what he wore. It was failed left-wing policy that allowed him to kill.

The Trump supporting shooter is responsible.

Patirot is a mental retard.....(no offense retards)...

 

[P@triot]

Why does the left always support what fails to be effective or successful?

Over the course of the January call, which lasted more than 13 minutes, the tipster warned the F.B.I. that Mr. Cruz had been adrift since his mother’s death in November. She said that Mr. Cruz had “the mental capacity of a 12 to a 14 year old.” The tipster provided four Instagram accounts for Mr. Cruz, which she said showed photos of sliced up animals and the firearms he had amassed.

So to recap - the left wants to give more power and control to the government that failed to act to protect the children and take away citizens right to defend themselves.

 

[Faun]

I’m not a nitwit.

You mean, why he didn’t follow the law?

Which is what we’ve been trying to tell you nitwits for decades now. Criminals don’t follow the law. Therefore, outlawing guns will ensure that only outlaws have guns.

I never cease to marvel at the astounding stupidity of the left.

Maybe not, but you are a piece of steaming shit who spreads personal information of people receiving death threats.

Why would you do such a despicable thing? Are you hoping someone will
act on the personal information you posted?