NRA School Shield: Why should the NRA be the voice of how schools are protected?

Geez......could we please just establish a few states for the limpristed left to go live.........create their own gun free area's and live in bliss for the rest of their lives. Conservatives could look forward to getting postcards from their liberal friends about how peaceful their society is.........no guns, no killings. It'd be all good.
 
I disagree that the constitution allows for us to own any type of gun. But of course that is the sticking point in the discussion.

You don't need an AR-15 for self defense, unless of course lax gun laws have put AR-15s into the hands of criminals. Anyone with good training can thwart off a home invader with one well placed bullet.

At lease we agree on something, and that is a start.
There is no 'self defense' requirement listed in the Constitution. None at all. There isn't even one in the 2nd Amendment. It simply says that the people have the right to be armed, and that government cannot infringe upon that.

This self defense, hunting, or other arguments are all red herrings. People who chase these arguments are fools.

I have the right to own arms. I do not have to explain to anyone why I have that right any more than people have to explain why they have the right to breath.
The second amendment says we have a right to bear arms to have militias to secure the state. SCOTUS recently interpreted that to mean a right to self-defense. I disagree with them but it is what it is.

I suggest you go find an English teacher and ask them to show you how to parse a sentence. After you do that you can come back and explain how you can justify reversing the main and subordinate clauses in that simple sentence.
 
There is no 'self defense' requirement listed in the Constitution. None at all. There isn't even one in the 2nd Amendment. It simply says that the people have the right to be armed, and that government cannot infringe upon that.

This self defense, hunting, or other arguments are all red herrings. People who chase these arguments are fools.

I have the right to own arms. I do not have to explain to anyone why I have that right any more than people have to explain why they have the right to breath.
The second amendment says we have a right to bear arms to have militias to secure the state. SCOTUS recently interpreted that to mean a right to self-defense. I disagree with them but it is what it is.

I suggest you go find an English teacher and ask them to show you how to parse a sentence. After you do that you can come back and explain how you can justify reversing the main and subordinate clauses in that simple sentence.
The next time your contribution isn't a deflection will be the first time.
 
NRA calls for armed police officer in every school | US National Headlines | Comcast

Guns and police officers in all American schools are what's needed to stop the next killer "waiting in the wings," the National Rifle Association declared Friday, taking a no-retreat stance in the face of growing calls for gun control after the Connecticut shootings that claimed the lives of 26 children and school staff.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, the group's chief executive officer.

"An armed society is a polite society"


Arming the schools is following the typical band-aid mentally this country loves to adhere to with just about every social ill.

Arming schools doesn't solve the intrinsic problem of gun violence, it just tries to cover it up a little.
 
And when they attack a church? Arm the Churches
Movie Theater? Arm the Theaters
Little League game? Arm the umpires

NRA Nirvana

Well those "gun free zone" signs aren't working now are they?:D

Seriously though, why not provide security for the most helpless among us?

Airport security, mall security, bank security; the list is endless. Security is everywhere.

Why not protect our children?

If we really want to drive this point home, why don't we insist that the President disband the Secret Service? Or at least take their guns away.

Why not insist the legislators disband the Capitol Hill police? Or take away their guns?

If we don't get to have the right to bare arms to protect ourselves, then let's make everything even steven.


Folks need to understand that "gun-free" zones don't necessarily eliminate guns in those areas, they are simply zones which carry double or triple penalties if you are caught with one.
 
images

What's your point? You want Israel's gun laws here?
 
It's more like 1/43 of that. How many is not "too many?"

Thanks for looking it up.

Of course, for gun grabbers, one accidental shooting is one too many, but a beaten wife who could have had a gun, killed by her hulking husband, or a robber shooting an unarmed teller that "gave em the eye"..... well they dont matter.

Typically in a home with an abusive partner and a gun, the abused partner ain't the one pointing it.

Just sayin'

Typically when the wife leaves the husband continues to harass her. The only effective way to enforce a restraining order is with a pistol.
 
What he has said is that every single US citizen should be carrying a gun.

He's insane.

Certifiable.

Not everyone needs to be carrying a gun, but if there were more good, responsible gun owners, that would be good for deterring crime.
 

Figures a Progressive wouldn't save children's lives because she's not PAID to do it!

So you believe a gun battle with semiautomatic assault rifles in schools is a good idea? If the principal has a bit of collateral damage, and offs a bunch of six year olds, should she be charged?

If she killed the nutbag before he got the second half of his victims you'd find a reason to bitch, right?

I mean, the nutbag is killing them UNOPPOSED, you think opposition would be WRONG?

You're a fucking IDIOT, Dick!!
 
The NRA has announced their 'solution' to gun violence in school. Armed guards.

I'm sure that the idea will have both multiple supporters and detractors as is usually the case when one side of the political aisle suggests a solution to a problem.

However, aside from the costs associated with placing armed guards in thousands (if not tens of thousands) of schools nationwide at a time of statewide budget cuts and even more proposed federal cuts, and the fact that there are usually multiple entrances to most schools and the fact that guards would likely be the first targets of any gunmen...what about school buses? How many school buses leave a school with 50 plus students at the end of the day, every day, all across the country? Should they ALL have armed guards on them like federal Marshalls on planes?

How about community centers? Swimming pools? After school sports games in gymnasiums? Bus stops? Cross walks? Any and every public place? How about day care centers? Restaurants? How about EVERY single movie theatre? Lobbies alone? Or the actual screening theaters? How about libraries?

Is the answer to gun violence mean that America has to embrace armed guard everywhere that children and adults congregate?

columbine had armed guards.
 
Anybody that thinks assault weapons are in the hands of the public is confused. True story.

You are referring to semi automatic weapons.

LOL.... a middle school student could fire off 100 rounds in 30-50 seconds with a well adjusted, well maintained AR-15. The triggers on those things can be easily adjusted to return to the fire position in two or three tenths of a second. When I was tank commander on an M-48 medium patton tank my weapon, mounted on the turret was a 50 caliber Browning Machine Gun, 500 rounds a minute. Anybody who can come up with a reason or purpose for the AR-15 other than killing people really con't know what the fuck they're talking about.
 
Last edited:
Anybody that thinks assault weapons are in the hands of the public is confused. True story.

You are referring to semi automatic weapons.

LOL.... a middle school student could fire off 100 rounds in 30-50 seconds with a well adjusted, well maintained AR-15. The triggers on those things can be easily adjusted to return to the fire position in two or three tenths of a second. When I was tank commander on an M-48 medium patton tank my weapon, mounted on the turret was a 50 caliber Browning Machine Gun, 500 rounds a minute. Anybody who can come up with a reason or purpose for the AR-15 other than killing people really con't know what the fuck they're talking about.

I talked to a gun owner (in person) I know the other day who told me (with a straight face) that AR-15s are used for hunting. As a former soldier, I found that hard but not impossible to believe, so I said that I suppose I could see someone using it for hunting vermin or very small game animals but that other more traditional firearms (like a 22 Remington) were likely better suited for doing so.

At any rate, we kept going around for a while, and he again mentioned hunting. And I said that I never heard of anyone using an AR-15 for hunting bigger game like deer. He disagreed with me and said that it's not uncommon for people to use AR-15s to hunt for deer. Now, I'm NOT a hunter. Never have been. But I've NEVER heard of someone using such a small caliber weapon for hunting deer.

What say you?
 
The AR-15 .223 is not legal for deer hunting in several states. Personally, I don't know why it's legal in any states for deer hunting - because it's too light. I consider the .223 more of a varmint cartridge.
 
The second amendment says we have a right to bear arms to have militias to secure the state. SCOTUS recently interpreted that to mean a right to self-defense. I disagree with them but it is what it is.

I suggest you go find an English teacher and ask them to show you how to parse a sentence. After you do that you can come back and explain how you can justify reversing the main and subordinate clauses in that simple sentence.
The next time your contribution isn't a deflection will be the first time.

Let me guess, you failed English grammar.

Dependent clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Forum List

Back
Top