Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Emotionalism and ideology trump logic and reason. You will see changes that have zero impact on shootings.
That's all we've seen for thirty-plus years. Hence the subject of this thread.
For years now, every time there is a horrific shooting, the same people instantly react, calling for gun bans, increased background checks, waiting periods, and other programs. Invariably some of them get enacted, and the rate of shootings, murders, etc. keep right on going, with no reduction (and sometimes they increase.
And just as inevitably, soon there is another horrific mass shooting or three. And the same people start in with the same demands: More schemes that have ailed in the past... along with blaming government for failing to do enough.
Well, in one way they are right. In giving in to these terrified hysterics and enacting their programs, the govt is wasting its time, passing useless programs instead of things that actually work, and our children keep dying.
When will they finally stop listening to the hysterics whose programs let the killers keep right on killing? When will they finally get around to trying things that have actually worked in the past?
Posting armed guards at every school, in cooperation with local police departments who know the area and know how may guards would be needed to really make a difference, has worked. It's expensive, but are our children's lives not worth the extra expense?
Or we could allow for guards of a different, and far more numerous, nature: Obey the 2nd amendment for a change, and let any law-abiding adult who wants to, carry. A teacher if they want, a deliveryman at the school, a janitor, somebody walking their dog past the campus, plus many other such.
Some demented thug who wants to shoot up the school and get tons of headlines after he's dead, would know that there's probably someone nearby with a gun who knows how to use it. So he probably won't be able to rack up the huge body count he's hoping for. And maybe some of them will decide not to do it in the first place. Presto, a reduction in shootings, without a shot being fired.
Why do the horrified spectators always call for "solutions" that have failed already? And why does the govt listen to them, and let the killings go on without restraint? Isn't it time they listened to those whose solutions are already proven to work instead?
Many people are sick of the empty promises by politicians who are owned by the NRA. No one has proposed taking your guns away. Why the hysteria from gun owners? These students have faced a slaughter of their classmates and the Righties are trying to criticize their right to protest by calling these kids actors. They have a right to Disagree with the gun laws on the books now. The politicians are getting nervous because this isn’t going away until something is done. Why does the NRA give these politicians millions? Something is wrong with that alone.
Then please tell us want would've stopped the shooting?
Posting armed guards at every school, in cooperation with local police departments who know the area and know how may guards would be needed to really make a difference, has worked. It's expensive, but are our children's lives not worth the extra expense?
Or we could allow for guards of a different, and far more numerous, nature: Obey the 2nd amendment for a change, and let any law-abiding adult who wants to, carry. A teacher if they want, a deliveryman at the school, a janitor, somebody walking their dog past the campus, someone who lives across the street, plus many other such. Even if all were allowed to carry, most still probably wouldn't... but a few would.
Some demented thug who wants to shoot up the school and get tons of headlines after he's dead, would know that there's probably someone nearby with a gun who knows how to use it. So he probably won't be able to rack up the huge body count he's hoping for. And maybe some of them will decide not to do it in the first place. Presto, a reduction in shootings, without a shot being fired.
Why do the horrified spectators always call for "solutions" that have failed already? And why does the govt listen to them, and let the killings go on without restraint? Isn't it time they listened to those whose solutions are already proven to work instead?
For years now, every time there is a horrific shooting, the same people instantly react, calling for gun bans, increased background checks, waiting periods, and other programs. Invariably some of them get enacted, and the rate of shootings, murders, etc. keep right on going, with no reduction (and sometimes they increase.
And just as inevitably, soon there is another horrific mass shooting or three. And the same people start in with the same demands: More schemes that have ailed in the past... along with blaming government for failing to do enough.
Well, in one way they are right. In giving in to these terrified hysterics and enacting their programs, the govt is wasting its time, passing useless programs instead of things that actually work, and our children keep dying.
When will they finally stop listening to the hysterics whose programs let the killers keep right on killing? When will they finally get around to trying things that have actually worked in the past?
Posting armed guards at every school, in cooperation with local police departments who know the area and know how may guards would be needed to really make a difference, has worked. It's expensive, but are our children's lives not worth the extra expense?
Or we could allow for guards of a different, and far more numerous, nature: Obey the 2nd amendment for a change, and let any law-abiding adult who wants to, carry. A teacher if they want, a deliveryman at the school, a janitor, somebody walking their dog past the campus, plus many other such.
Some demented thug who wants to shoot up the school and get tons of headlines after he's dead, would know that there's probably someone nearby with a gun who knows how to use it. So he probably won't be able to rack up the huge body count he's hoping for. And maybe some of them will decide not to do it in the first place. Presto, a reduction in shootings, without a shot being fired.
Why do the horrified spectators always call for "solutions" that have failed already? And why does the govt listen to them, and let the killings go on without restraint? Isn't it time they listened to those whose solutions are already proven to work instead?
"Common sense" in this context means the same thing that "comprehensive" means when it comes to other issues. It means whatever people pushing the agenda need it to mean. It's completely subjective and open ended.
It's sad that school shootings are an American phenomenon. Is having the ability to own an AR in the current system worth these types of consequences?
I like my AR, i'm not a hunter, and wanted a semi auto rifle weak enough to shoot at my local indoor ranges. It is also cheap. Would have went with a Ruger 10/22 but at the time .22 ammo was impossible to find.
Plus , with the AR, i was able to assemble it myself.
Some of you folks are playing with fire, what's going to happen when the next mass shooting happens? If it's another school shooting then the 2nd amendment won't protect you from parents.
"Mass shootings" are a very, very small component of murder in this country. It is statistically insignificant. If you want to address the issue, make schools more secure. Don't take rights away from the law abiding. Also an AR-15 is no different from any other semi automatic sporting rifle. It is also the MOST POPULAR, and MOST COMMON rifle in the U.S.
How many more of our children have to die before the gun-controllers finally start advocating programs that work for a change?
Indeed. While I likely would never own a gun, I recognize it's a right many people might embrace. That said, trying to balance gun regulation and not violating one's 2nd Amendment right is hard. The 2nd Amendment doesn't specify which type of arms are/are not allowed. As such, I'd argue that gives some justification for making it harder for regular citizens to own assault rifles. To get a better understanding of what could be effective gun control, we would have to meet with both political sides and look at past gun control methods (local, national, and foreign) as a guide.
Some of you folks are playing with fire, what's going to happen when the next mass shooting happens? If it's another school shooting then the 2nd amendment won't protect you from parents.
lol What kind of mindless threat is this? If there is another school shooting are you saying parents(which parents, all parents?) are going to kill or maim anyone who they found did not support an anti second amendment agenda now? Please, do elaborate. And what will happen if they go to kill or maim these people in their fit of unstoppable rage and find that the people they are attacking have armed themselves with guns? Or will these parents have guns too? If they do how will they reconcile arming themselves with their demands that we repeal the second amendment?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
