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.
Mass shootings in a school or a church boil down to just a math problem and we can dismiss it because it's a fraction of a percent. We can dismiss 9/11 or the Oklahoma City bombing because it was only a fraction of a percent. Society breaks down when masses of innocent people are killed in rather mundane every day activities, but you don't want to do anything because retaining that AR15 is more important than innocent lives.
Dismiss it? is that the only options you are giving? Go tear up the 2nd amendment, confiscate millions of guns and put lots of people in jail or dismiss it. Both are bad ideas. Republicans are not pushing to defund the police or makes their jobs harder to prevent or investigate.
We did overreact after 9/11. We invaded the wrong country that resulted in the deaths of over 1.2 million people over 2 trillion dollars spending. Yeah, that is a good trade, 1.2 million deaths with a tag of 2 trillion dollars over 3,000 deaths.
Everybody in Oklahoma were caught and punished and last time I read it involved bombs. We didn't dismissed it but We didn't shredded the constitution or made matters worse by creating a Civil War with law abiding citizens.
Conservatives have proposals but your side doesn't like them. Big difference.
After Sandy Hook and Parkland we paid lip service to the idea of school security. There was no massive push to make our kids safer because, as usual, the real push was for disarmament rather than security. We had this exact same conversation on these forums after both incidents, and the argument was exactly the same. Those of us with common sense and knowledge of history wanted schools more secure, the anti gun crowd wanted to ban guns. In Washington, the argument continued until it fizzled out because the anti gun crowd only wanted to talk about banning guns and refused to pass anything which didn’t involve violating the Constitution. This time around they’ll probably manage to get some sort of firearm restriction passed and, assuming the SCOTUS doesn’t slap them down for it, they’ll crow loudly about how they did something. Right up until the next school shooting, when they’ll want to ban more guns and the cycle will continue. Because the anti gun crowd doesn’t care about children being safe nearly as much as they care about disarming the populace with unconstitutional laws. If they did, they would have been pushing for something that would actually worked.
How do you get underfunded schools more secure? The federal government needs to pay for it because the federal government is the entity which compels us to send our children there and forbids the citizens from making it more secure. It’s their obligation. It isn’t “too expensive” to secure schools. That’s a cop out. How many $BILLIONS$ have we spent on arming and defending other countries? What fraction of that money would it cost to make every government school secure from an 18-year-old with no training? For that matter, we give the NIH $40 Billion a year to create transgender monkeys and put mittens on marmosets to simulate menopause. Take some of their wasted money and use it for a better cause.
If you can come up with an idea that removes guns from the crazy people without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens, I’m all for it. I haven’t heard a suggestion from the anti gun crowd yet which does that though. Every suggestion they come up with involves restricting law abiding citizens with an unconstitutional law in the vain hope that criminals and crazies will also be affected.
Why did the Democrats block mental health being included in background checks if the goal is to prevent crazy people from getting guns? They’ve done it at least twice since Sandy Hook (both renditions of Grassley-Cruz, 2013 and 2021). That’s their stated goal, yet they block an idea that would do it. Why? Why have they spent 10 years pushing gun bans instead?
,
Were you ever in NY after 9/11? I am not talking about just Manhattan and NYC. It was a total "police state". Private citizens with guns???lol I am not just talking about police, but National Guard fully armed in all their gear. Everywhere. Far away from NYC. Try 75 miles, that I saw. They were all over the Port Authority, on the LIRR cars, all the way out to rural East End.
The Elementary School where I worked on LI then had squad cars going round and round all day.They stationed their cars right in front of the school at the start and end of school day. Active Shooter Drills? We had Terrorist Drills, including for chemical attacks,Hello although we didn't say that to the kids. They knew.
I moved to a City (smaller than Jacksonville) in Florida in 2007, before Parkland and Sandy Hook. Every school in this district had active duty, armed, uniformed Sheriff's Deputies:elementary 1 full time and 1 part time, 2 full time in middle schools, 3 full time in high schools. They parked their Squad Cars in front. sNot Resource Officers. I suppose not every school district in Florida is the same? Depends on how much taxes the citizens want to pay for this.
One elementary where I worked at was a very strange. Looked like Motel 6. No big building (to break into) with hallways and rooms. Rows of rooms with numbers on them from the outside air. To get from one classroom to another you had to go back outside. The Deputies had their own "room". It was not marked "Security". Just another number but with a red circle around it. Clever. A Shooter could not tell if it was just another classroom. Hello, Mr. Officer! All the outside doors were heavy metal and the windows had hurricane shutters. For weather.
I don't get the left. They complained for years that the police went over the line and were rough on the minorities and racial profile was unconstitutional but here they are pushing the same thing on steroids with breaking in people's homes and confrontation and confiscation to the point of jail and death by the government but on White people and red states.
They are ok to have madness by open borders and the drug war and wants the police to stand down and go easy but are the opposite for White people and red states.
The United States of America spends more than the next 8 Countries or so combined & has been doing so for decades; the “cop out” is blaming the current POTUS.
Think more than twice, think of it as a national IQ test.
Biden, as a Senator, wrote the Gun Free Schools Act of 1990. Yes, I can blame Biden for designating areas which children are compelled to attend as safe hunting places for school shooters. Because he’s the one that wrote the law, not because he is the current POTUS. I blame the Democrats in general for continuing to push the idea that “gun free” means “safe,” when it obviously does not.
Yes, our government spends money like they are drunken sailors on shore leave. Yet, with all that money they spend we still have schools where automatic locks don’t work and psychopaths are able to kill children. Wanting the federal government to fix the security issues in the buildings that they compel us to send our children to seems to touch a nerve with some people, and I’m not sure why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
After the school shootings security was put in place, the Uvalde school district had it's own 6 member police department and that didn't work so what's the next plan, add more police, stronger fences. Texas for starters doesn't even have a red flag law, if you really want to remove guns from mentally ill that should be an easy one. Texas was bragging they invested 100 million security over the last several years since the Sante Fe School shooting a few years ago but have done nothing to restrict guns.
I can't recall democrats blocking any bill regarding background checks, republicans talk a good line about mental health issues then do nothing on either mental health or background checks.
I gave you the name of the bill and the years in which I knew of it being introduced and blocked because I assumed that you wouldn’t know about it and perhaps would like to research it since it is germane to the topic of school shootings. Half of my assumption seems to have been incorrect, considering that you admit to not knowing it yet you didn’t bother to research it.
Quote:
They are just going to use the usual platitudes on these shootings then wait for the next mass shooting and repeat the same nonsens.
Yet I don’t see the Democrats doing much to stop school shootings. The only idea they seem to support is gun bans, which won’t stop evil people from doing evil things. No law has ever stopped evil people from doing evil things. What’s the plan B for when restrictions don’t work? Because frankly restrictions should be the last option, not the go to option. So, we have the GOP who tried to include mental health in NICS checks and we have the DNC who apparently doesn’t care if crazy people get guns. You’re arguing in favor of the side which is okay with crazy people having guns unless they can restrict the non crazy people too.
Best Compromise. Raise the age to 21, like handguns. Are all you gun owners on here UNDER 21? Show of hands.
I’m still not sure why 21 is the magical age, and I wouldn’t support such a restriction unless we change the definition of adult to 21 across the board. If someone can vote at 18, there is no reasonable justification for denying them other rights.
I’m still not sure why 21 is the magical age, and I wouldn’t support such a restriction unless we change the definition of adult to 21 across the board. If someone can vote at 18, there is no reasonable justification for denying them other rights.
Does that include not being able to drive until you're 21?
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,486,476 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
After the school shootings security was put in place, the Uvalde school district had it's own 6 member police department and that didn't work so what's the next plan, add more police, stronger fences. Texas for starters doesn't even have a red flag law, if you really want to remove guns from mentally ill that should be an easy one. Texas was bragging they invested 100 million security over the last several years since the Sante Fe School shooting a few years ago but have done nothing to restrict guns.
I can't recall democrats blocking any bill regarding background checks, republicans talk a good line about mental health issues then do nothing on either mental health or background checks.
They are just going to use the usual platitudes on these shootings then wait for the next mass shooting and repeat the same nonsens.
So many small things went wrong at Uvalde. First, suspect was able to jump over a chain link fence. Then an auto locking door failed to lock. In the classroom where all died the teacher was at her desk and got an email about the active shooter, immediately turned off a movie and was walking to close and lock the door when seconds earlier the shooter already got in. I found a photo of the room with teachers and students taken a month before the shooting and the teachers desk were on the far side from the door. Perhaps you could require all teachers desks be located next to the door? Who knows if it would help in another rare event like this... but in this case that was the difference between 0 dead and 21 dead.
Does that include not being able to drive until you're 21?
No. Driving a vehicle on public roads is neither a protected right nor a necessity. It’s a privilege that is granted by the government which you can lose if you break the law. Any of the rights protected by the Bill of Rights, though, should be protected equally at whatever age we as a society decide adulthood begins. Yes, that means if we lower voting age to 16 as some have suggested then we should allow firearms purchase at the age of 16.
ETA: I live in Florida, where it is now illegal to buy a firearm until 21. I disagree with that law for the exact reason I stated. A protected right is a protected right, and all protected rights should be treated equally.
Best Compromise. Raise the age to 21, like handguns. Are all you gun owners on here UNDER 21? Show of hands.
Then raise Armed Services to 21 and treat them as minors until 21 under all laws including contracts and responsibility. You treat them as minors in all criminal and civil laws until 21.
You can't have it both ways. You can say their brains at 18 are not fully developed to exercise their 2nd amendment rights but their brains are good enough to go overseas to fight, defend other's borders and die.
That's a lot of young bodies from 18 to 21 years old that the Pentagon are going to miss, males and females. When I went to Boot Camp in 1990 in the Navy, my company was about 82 recruits and most of us were 18-21 (I was 19) and 5 that were 17.
That means NO military recruitment in high schools and hands off from college students from 18 to 21.
See how the 21 year old push dies quick.
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.
