Students at West Texas school district feel safe with staff who carry concealed weapons

[bripat9643]

249 people shot in Chicago so far in 2018...how are your gun laws working, Timmy? The elephant in the room is right next to you. 249 in less than two months

A big part of the reason Chicago's gun laws don't work is that it's so easy to get weapons in neighboring states and bring them into Illinois and Chicago. Indiana, to name one. If the whole country had stricter gun laws, it might actually help.

Millions of guns out there already but thanks for conceding criminals will find a way.

Why make it so easy for them?

Let me ask you . Illegals “find a way”, should we not bother with immigration control?

Yet you oppose the wall and undoubtedly support DACA. Idiot

A wall is a waste of money, that’s why I am against it . I am not for open borders , unlike u are for open gun availability .

We all know the "waste of money" argument is bullshit.

 

[John Shaw]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

 

[JGalt]

You just made a fool of yourself. Learn to read. I never said shootings. I said mass shootings.

There is no way around it. Democrats want gun control because they want only thugs and gang bangers armed. Why? Because thugs and gang bangers are most likely to be black or hispanic killing white people and that is the goal.

And yet, these mass shooters are usually white men.
Hmmm.

Predominantly liberals. Sure there's evidence this this shithead shooter wasn't a liberal but for the most part, those who come unhinged and commit mass shooting are liberals. Also those who have committed political assassinations in this country: For the most part, they have been leftists.

Bullshit ! This kid had a “make America great again “. Hat .

By there very definition, liberals are not gun nuts .

And? He also posed for pictures wearing black masks like Antifa.

Antifa owns the patent to black masks ?

Not entirely. They're sharing the patent with ISIS and al Qaeda.

 

[Timmy]

A big part of the reason Chicago's gun laws don't work is that it's so easy to get weapons in neighboring states and bring them into Illinois and Chicago. Indiana, to name one. If the whole country had stricter gun laws, it might actually help.

Millions of guns out there already but thanks for conceding criminals will find a way.

Why make it so easy for them?

Let me ask you . Illegals “find a way”, should we not bother with immigration control?

Yet you oppose the wall and undoubtedly support DACA. Idiot

A wall is a waste of money, that’s why I am against it . I am not for open borders , unlike u are for open gun availability .

We all know the "waste of money" argument is bullshit.

You want to build a 1200 mile wall, most of it across empty wasteland . How is that not a waste ?

 

[John Shaw]

A big part of the reason Chicago's gun laws don't work is that it's so easy to get weapons in neighboring states and bring them into Illinois and Chicago. Indiana, to name one. If the whole country had stricter gun laws, it might actually help.

Millions of guns out there already but thanks for conceding criminals will find a way.

Why make it so easy for them?

Let me ask you . Illegals “find a way”, should we not bother with immigration control?

Yet you oppose the wall and undoubtedly support DACA. Idiot

President Trump supports DACA as well.

You're just an annoyance. Stop annoying me please

Except he does. So ... guess even the orange messiah disagrees with you on that one, champ.

 

[JGalt]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

Our children's school has armed personal and signs informing people of it. In fact it says deadly force will be used to protect the students.

That's the truth. You don't protect schools with Twitter campaigns and walking around protest meetings holding a stupid little sign. You counter force with equal and opposite force.

 

[John Shaw]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

Our children's school has armed personal and signs informing people of it. In fact it says deadly force will be used to protect the students.

That's the truth. You don't protect schools with Twitter campaigns and walking around protest meetings holding a stupid little sign. You counter force with equal and opposite force.

Or you could actually examine why the kids are committing these crimes at an ever-increasing rate. But I guess that would be too difficult for Americans. We are too stupid to look for cures, so we just treat symptoms and call it a day.

 

[JGalt]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

Our children's school has armed personal and signs informing people of it. In fact it says deadly force will be used to protect the students.

That's the truth. You don't protect schools with Twitter campaigns and walking around protest meetings holding a stupid little sign. You counter force with equal and opposite force.

When the school approached the parents and explained what it would entail and cost to implement it the vote was overwhelming in favor of it. Tuition went up some but we're very pleased

 

[John Shaw]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Cool. It's not going to stop school shootings, though. As we saw in FL.

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Who cares what landa thought...if there had been armed resistance he wouldnt have had so many opportunities to shoot.

 

[bripat9643]

Millions of guns out there already but thanks for conceding criminals will find a way.

Why make it so easy for them?

Let me ask you . Illegals “find a way”, should we not bother with immigration control?

Yet you oppose the wall and undoubtedly support DACA. Idiot

A wall is a waste of money, that’s why I am against it . I am not for open borders , unlike u are for open gun availability .

We all know the "waste of money" argument is bullshit.

You want to build a 1200 mile wall, most of it across empty wasteland . How is that not a waste ?

Wherever they build the wall, illegals will stop trying to cross there and go to where the wall doesn't exist. Empty wasteland is where a lot of them currently cross.

 

[JGalt]

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

Our children's school has armed personal and signs informing people of it. In fact it says deadly force will be used to protect the students.

That's the truth. You don't protect schools with Twitter campaigns and walking around protest meetings holding a stupid little sign. You counter force with equal and opposite force.

Or you could actually examine why the kids are committing these crimes at an ever-increasing rate. But I guess that would be too difficult for Americans. We are too stupid to look for cures, so we just treat symptoms and call it a day.

Unfortunately, your idea of a "cure" is to go after legitimate, legal, law-abiding gun owners. Meanwhile,what happens when the next mass murderer at a school uses a vehicle, a knife, or a bomb?

Have restrictions on firearms stopped terrorist attacks in France, Spain, Australia, the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Russia?

 

[John Shaw]

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

Our children's school has armed personal and signs informing people of it. In fact it says deadly force will be used to protect the students.

That's the truth. You don't protect schools with Twitter campaigns and walking around protest meetings holding a stupid little sign. You counter force with equal and opposite force.

Or you could actually examine why the kids are committing these crimes at an ever-increasing rate. But I guess that would be too difficult for Americans. We are too stupid to look for cures, so we just treat symptoms and call it a day.

Unfortunately, your idea of a "cure" is to go after legitimate, legal, law-abiding gun owners. Meanwhile,what happens when the next mass murderer at a school uses a vehicle, a knife, or a bomb?

Have restrictions on firearms stopped terrorist attacks in France, Spain, Australia, the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Russia?

When did I say to go after gun owners? I said make guns more difficult to acquire. That's not taking anyone's gun. That's only making it more difficult for someone who shouldn't have a gun to ... have a gun. Maybe they'll get it some other way, but at least don't make it super easy for them.

And that's only the lesser part of my proposed START to finding solutions. Which, if anyone read any of my comments other than the inflammatory, trolling ones, you would already know of.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It will send the shooters to schools that dont have protection.
Yay for gun free zones ya numbskull.......

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

 

[John Shaw]

No, it won't. The shooters always (or at least in the cases I can recall) have a personal vendetta at the school that they attack. So they probably aren't going to go shoot up ANOTHER high school. That would defeat the whole purpose.

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Sorry,the shooters have come right out and said they shoot up schools because they know there will be no resistance.

Think about it...would you rob a house with a sign out front that said we dont call the police and dont expect a warning shot due to the high cost of ammo. Or a house with a hillary clinton for president sign?

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

Well first of all this statement....

"But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.[/QUOTE]"

What exactly does that mean?

 

[JGalt]

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

Well first of all this statement....

"But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

"

What exactly does that mean?[/QUOTE]


he meant "That's a nasty-looking freckle on your hand there. I'm afraid we're going to have to cut off that arm."

 

[John Shaw]

The shooter would just stay home. They wouldn't be like, "Oh, I'm a miserable little SOB who hates everyone at XYZ high school, but I know some of the teachers have guns so ... I'd better go shoot kids randomly at ZYX high school down the street instead!!"

I don't think it works that way. Except for some, like Lanza, but who knows why the hell he did anything ... he was suicidal anyway, and I doubt he would have cared about armed guards.

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

Well first of all this statement....

"But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

"

What exactly does that mean?[/QUOTE]

It means that just putting guards in schools isn't going to really solve the gun violence problem. Or even the school shooting problem.

I'm convinced it all stems from a mixture of a few different things: 1) males, especially the young, kind of floundering in modern society, uncertain of what they're supposed to aspire to be, unable to dedicate themselves to excellence, too often disillusioned with overwhelmed mothers and absent fathers, 2) the instant gratification culture of social media, sensationalism, and internet infamy, 3) a country that is very, very bad at regulating weapons.

Your solution does not even come close to touching the root causes. After all, AR-15's and other semi-auto and fully-auto weapons have been around for ages. Since the 40's and beyond. Yet the first publicized school shootings were in the sixties, I believe, and we only continued to climb from there to reach the rate of mass shootings we see today, school or otherwise. These guys are using the same weapons that have been around for ages, so it's not like that's changed. It's young men who have changed. Or, rather, the lack of responsibility, expectations of achievement, and supervision in their lives

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Lanza capped himself in the head with a Glock, after he was cornered. Most shooters do that once they realize someone is standing up to them.

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

Well first of all this statement....

"But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

"

What exactly does that mean?

he meant "That's a nasty-looking freckle on your hand there. I'm afraid we're going to have to cut off that arm."[/QUOTE]

NSIS.

 

[John Shaw]

I'm not saying we should NOT do anything to protect ourselves, or the schools. But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

Your statement is kinda silly when you consider the focus right now.
There wont be any meaningful gun bans because they dont work and Americans wont stand for them.

If liberals dont stand for armed teachers or armed guards they're on the shitty end of the stick.

Wait, what is silly about it?

Well first of all this statement....

"But we sure as hell better not stop there, because that's like trying to slap a band aid on a severed artery.

"

What exactly does that mean?

he meant "That's a nasty-looking freckle on your hand there. I'm afraid we're going to have to cut off that arm."

NSIS.[/QUOTE]

Except that's not remotely what I meant, and JGalt is trolling.