Trump's Final 100 days

Quote: rsactuary

They're right!

Just pushing guns into the schools for concealed carriers doesn't actually answer the question the CDC studies had shown as in increase in homicides in homes with guns over non-gun households. In other words, more guns in society won't necessarily lead to fewer homicides overall. One problem solved doesn't necessarily guarantee a net positive effect with even more acceptance of gun culture.

Quote: ams288

Look at Donald's body language as he gets schooled by Gov. Inslee of Washington.

This is a man who clearly isn't used to listening to anyone else, especially if they disagree with him. When he crosses his arms, you know he's just pissed. Love it.

Gov. Inslee confronts Trump: Our teachers don’t want to be armed

I am not a huge fan of arming teachers, but I wonder if the range of responses Inslee got from teachers he listened to in WA would differ from the range of responses he would get from teachers heading back to school in Parkland, Sandy Hook or Columbine.

A better question might be whether schools should allow teachers or administrators to conceal carry on campus if that is their choice? If I was a teacher today, I am pretty sure I would be looking at alternative ways to protect myself & my students with more than a "locked door/duck & cover/stay in place" strategy.

I know for a fact that church's, particularly large "mega churches", already have active shooter response plans in place that include strategically placed conceal carriers throughout their church campuses on any given Sunday. With schools and churches being the soft targets of choice, some changes need to be considered on how to make them less inviting targets.

So what do we do about the fact that schools and churches the vast majority of the time are the targets of choice for these perpetrators? I know there is a vocal contingent regarding what to do about the current "weapon of choice"...but when the weapon of choice changes, because it will, what do you propose we do about the target of choice?

Quote: Paradigm

[
I know for a fact that church's, particularly large "mega churches", already have active shooter response plans in place that include strategically placed conceal carriers throughout their church campuses on any given Sunday.

Heh. God must be staying outside along with the Broward County cops

Quote: Paradigm

So what do we do about the fact that schools and churches the vast majority of the time are the targets of choice for these perpetrators? I know there is a vocal contingent regarding what to do about the current "weapon of choice"...but when the weapon of choice changes, because it will, what do you propose we do about the target of choice?

A couple things come to mind that would make schools more resistant to a psychopathic killer.

When class is in session, keep the class room door locked, unless a student or faculty member needs to enter or exit, then unlock it and lock it up again asap.

Strengthen the classroom doors to be fusillade resistant, and have any glass in a door bullet proof.

Have a trained, armed individual at the entrance and exit when school begins and lets out.

No, this won't prevent an attack from someone sneaking in with a weapon and shooting while kids are in the hall at the beginning of the day: to prevent that you'd need metal detectors, which would be a real nightmare.

*note to self: see who mfrs metal detectors, check their stock price*

Quote: Paradigm

Quote: ams288

Look at Donald's body language as he gets schooled by Gov. Inslee of Washington.

This is a man who clearly isn't used to listening to anyone else, especially if they disagree with him. When he crosses his arms, you know he's just pissed. Love it.

Gov. Inslee confronts Trump: Our teachers don’t want to be armed

I am not a huge fan of arming teachers, but I wonder if the range of responses Inslee got from teachers he listened to in WA would differ from the range of responses he would get from teachers heading back to school in Parkland, Sandy Hook or Columbine.

A better question might be whether schools should allow teachers or administrators to conceal carry on campus if that is their choice? If I was a teacher today, I am pretty sure I would be looking at alternative ways to protect myself & my students with more than a "locked door/duck & cover/stay in place" strategy.

I know for a fact that church's, particularly large "mega churches", already have active shooter response plans in place that include strategically placed conceal carriers throughout their church campuses on any given Sunday. With schools and churches being the soft targets of choice, some changes need to be considered on how to make them less inviting targets.

So what do we do about the fact that schools and churches the vast majority of the time are the targets of choice for these perpetrators? I know there is a vocal contingent regarding what to do about the current "weapon of choice"...but when the weapon of choice changes, because it will, what do you propose we do about the target of choice?

I think that teachers should not have guns, because the odds of things going wrong and a student getting the hands on a gun or a teacher not using a gun properly. It is far better to hire one armed guard if you are going to arm the schools. As for churches, our church of 250 or so became very skittish after Texas, and we considered changing our security situation, closing the doors during the service and having someone standing outside looking for a security threat.

"Some changes need to be considered on how to make them less inviting targets." So the solution is to engage in an arms race? How about removing guns, especially the ones that are capable of causing mass carnage.

Once again, it will be about changing the culture and reducing gun ownership overall and having very tough punishment for illegal gun ownership.

Quote: MrV

A couple things come to mind that would make schools more resistant to a psychopathic killer.

When class is in session, keep the class room door locked, unless a student or faculty member needs to enter or exit, then unlock it and lock it up again asap.

Strengthen the classroom doors to be fusillade resistant, and have any glass in a door bullet proof.

Have a trained, armed individual at the entrance and exit when school begins and lets out.

No, this won't prevent an attack from someone sneaking in with a weapon and shooting while kids are in the hall at the beginning of the day: to prevent that you'd need metal detectors, which would be a real nightmare.

*note to self: see who mfrs metal detectors, check their stock price*

Yea locked doors while kids are in class so they cant get out in a fire

Lock them from the inside.

Duh.

Of course, the Parkland shooter got things rolling by setting off a fire alarm, causing all the students to suddenly exit their classes; get rid of the fire alarms that anyone can pull that triggers mass alert; maybe have it only alert the office so they can run and check it out to see if it is a valid alarm or not.

MrV you have some truly awful ideas. Like they’re not just “bad” but they’d make things worse.

Quote: MrV

A couple things come to mind that would make schools more resistant to a psychopathic killer.

When class is in session, keep the class room door locked, unless a student or faculty member needs to enter or exit, then unlock it and lock it up again asap.

Strengthen the classroom doors to be fusillade resistant, and have any glass in a door bullet proof.

Have a trained, armed individual at the entrance and exit when school begins and lets out.

Why not just have all new build-outs be copied from medium-security prisons? Sounds like what you are proposing here.

Quote: Paradigm

So what do we do about the fact that schools and churches the vast majority of the time are the targets of choice for these perpetrators? I know there is a vocal contingent regarding what to do about the current "weapon of choice"...but when the weapon of choice changes, because it will, what do you propose we do about the target of choice?

There is not a ton you can do. The USA has always been target-rich for this kind of thing. I doubt more than most societies, but it is what it is. Crowded shopping malls (ones that are left!) around the holidays, the ballgame or concert letting out, the Strip and all the pedestrians on it.

A gun is not needed. Crash a car into it, drive by and throw some moltov cocktails into the crowd, crash a plane into Yankee Stadium. Supposed to be regs against planes near ballparks, but how hard would that really be?

All you can do is keep up good police work and choose not to live in fear.

Quote: MrV

Lock them from the inside.

Duh.

Of course, the Parkland shooter got things rolling by setting off a fire alarm, causing all the students to suddenly exit their classes; get rid of the fire alarms that anyone can pull that triggers mass alert; maybe have it only alert the office so they can run and check it out to see if it is a valid alarm or not.

Horrible ideas

Doubt fire departments will allow removal of alarms from hallways

Time wasted while office worker checks if fire alarm is valid is time wasted from evacuation procedures = lives at stake

You also assume teachers are always present in a classroom. In high school teachers often leave students to work on qn assignment. Gonna lock them in?

Quote: AZDuffman

There is not a ton you can do.

While I do agree with this statement it would be foolish and unpatriotic not to TRY to do something with some kind of legislation. Even if it doesn't stop 90% of the crimes... that 10% are peoples children, parents, friends and family. Those 10% are worth saving and a STEP in the right direction doesn't solve the issue, but hell it's a step in the right direction. We need to pass some damn laws that make sense... and to re-iterate what I think EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS SAID: no one wants to ban all guns. It's the silly propaganda the NRA pushes on its gun nuts to make them think that's what any kind of common sense gun legislature is after, when really no one gives a s%*t. I own 2 guns myself, and I'm sure I'll get another... but I'd still rather see more and more comment sense gun laws.

Quote: AZDuffman

A gun is not needed. Crash a car into it, drive by and throw some moltov cocktails into the crowd, crash a plane into Yankee Stadium. Supposed to be regs against planes near ballparks, but how hard would that really be? ...

They have barricades to block vehicles at most events. Moltov's would be fairly easy to spot as you have to light and throw them, but then they more than likely wouldn't kill nearly as many as someone with a riffle in the same crowd. You're right, someone could crash a plane and kill more, if they could get their damn hands ON A COMMERCIAL PLANE TO CRASH. The difference here is you're pointing out things that will either harm less people than a gun, or things that aren't as easy to implement as a gun. Apples and oranges.

I'll go back to a previous argument... why not legalize nukes? Why can't I own a nuke?

Quote: AZDuffman

There is not a ton you can do. The USA has always been target-rich for this kind of thing. I doubt more than most societies, but it is what it is. Crowded shopping malls (ones that are left!) around the holidays, the ballgame or concert letting out, the Strip and all the pedestrians on it.

A gun is not needed. Crash a car into it, drive by and throw some moltov cocktails into the crowd, crash a plane into Yankee Stadium. Supposed to be regs against planes near ballparks, but how hard would that really be?

All you can do is keep up good police work and choose not to live in fear.

I am waiting for the first molotav cocktail armed 300 dollar drone to drop incendiary on a crowd and start a stampede.

Quote: Romes

and to re-iterate what I think EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS SAID: no one wants to ban all guns. It's the silly propaganda the NRA pushes on its gun nuts to make them think that's what any kind of common sense gun legislature is after, when really no one gives a s%*t.

This isn’t true. There are plenty of people that want to ban all guns. Some are very vocal about it (not here on WOV, AFAICT) and for some it’s part of their “hidden agenda”. I’m not accusing you of this. Accusing you would be wrong....and I’m never wrong. :)

While putting more regulations on guns and all that is a step in the “right” direction concerning ridding school shooters, but it’s also a step in the “ban all guns” direction, too. Just pointing that out.

Quote: RS

This isn’t true. There are plenty of people that want to ban all guns. Some are very vocal about it (not here on WOV, AFAICT) and for some it’s part of their “hidden agenda”. I’m not accusing you of this. Accusing you would be wrong....and I’m never wrong. :)

While putting more regulations on guns and all that is a step in the “right” direction concerning ridding school shooters, but it’s also a step in the “ban all guns” direction, too. Just pointing that out.

You're using statistics to lie, essentially. The number of people that want ALL guns banned RELATIVE to the number of people you'd consider 'liberal' that just want some kind of sensible laws passed is minute, at best... something like 1% of the 100% "liberal" agenda people. Yet you, the NRA, and gun nuts use this 1% at a lightening rod to pretend they represent the rest of the herd, when in reality they don't represent crap.

That's like me saying "EVERYONE ON WOV BELIEVES IN BETTING SYSTEMS" because we have 1% of the population come on here and tout them. It's just silly and completely inaccurate. I want sensible and logical gun laws, and again I even own multiple guns and you probably consider me "liberal."

Quote: darkoz

Horrible ideas

Doubt fire departments will allow removal of alarms from hallways

Time wasted while office worker checks if fire alarm is valid is time wasted from evacuation procedures = lives at stake

You also assume teachers are always present in a classroom. In high school teachers often leave students to work on qn assignment. Gonna lock them in?

I've no pride of authorship in these ideas, all are obviously open to discussion / criticism: the issue is "What can be done?"

IIRC, the teachers kept the door closed when they were in the room, so why not have them lock it?

Reinforce the interior of the doors to strengthen them; have them look the same as always, not like prison bars.

As far as fire alarms, what would YOU suggest be done to prevent a psycho from triggering one like Cruz did?

Maybe have them in the classrooms and not in the hallway?

C'mon people, don't just throw stones; use them to build something constructive.

Quote: Romes

You're using statistics to lie, essentially. The number of people that want ALL guns banned RELATIVE to the number of people you'd consider 'liberal' that just want some kind of sensible laws passed is minute, at best... something like 1% of the 100% "liberal" agenda people. Yet you, the NRA, and gun nuts use this 1% at a lightening rod to pretend they represent the rest of the herd, when in reality they don't represent crap.

That's like me saying "EVERYONE ON WOV BELIEVES IN BETTING SYSTEMS" because we have 1% of the population come on here and tout them. It's just silly and completely inaccurate. I want sensible and logical gun laws, and again I even own multiple guns and you probably consider me "liberal."

I don’t know how many people fit into each category, but I highly doubt it’s anywhere near only 1%. All I know is these people do in fact exist. There are plenty on another forum I mostly just read and don’t participate on really (cuz it’s like 100x as liberal as here, so a gigantic fustercluck). I think a few here may have even made some off-hand comment about wanting to ban all guns or be fine if they were all banned. I don’t think they make up near the majority of the liberal base, but I think there are far more than you think.

Quote: MrV

I've no pride of authorship in these ideas, all are obviously open to discussion / criticism: the issue is "What can be done?"

IIRC, the teachers kept the door closed when they were in the room, so why not have them lock it?

Reinforce the interior of the doors to strengthen them; have them look the same as always, not like prison bars.

As far as fire alarms, what would YOU suggest be done to prevent a psycho from triggering one like Cruz did?

Maybe have them in the classrooms and not in the hallway?

C'mon people, don't just throw stones; use them to build something constructive.

One reason you can't keep the door closed in all classrooms is simple: ventilation, and lack of funding to fix it.
Schools don't have the best in ventilation. A room that is unbearably hot needs a room opened; a cold room that needs the warm air from a hallway; a smelly room where students just came from gym class or kids are letting off SBDs; a stuffy room on a high humidity day; a chemistry classroom who are working with sulphur dioxide; and so on and so on. It's the same reason why the door to my office is open.

Hell, any idea that diverts funding away from education and into protection measures is stupid, and this includes hiring guards, putting barriers around schools, and arming teachers and giving them "bonuses". Schools are strapped with funding issues because legislators are unable to grasp the idea of long term investment into human capital because the benefits are immeasurable on a current legislator's balance sheet. This is the same reason why jails are crowded -- because it is simpler to just lock people up then to use alternative sentencing that would get people mental help and reduce recidivism.

Quote: MrV

I've no pride of authorship in these ideas, all are obviously open to discussion / criticism: the issue is "What can be done?"

IIRC, the teachers kept the door closed when they were in the room, so why not have them lock it?

Reinforce the interior of the doors to strengthen them; have them look the same as always, not like prison bars.

As far as fire alarms, what would YOU suggest be done to prevent a psycho from triggering one like Cruz did?

Maybe have them in the classrooms and not in the hallway?

C'mon people, don't just throw stones; use them to build something constructive.

Add cameras over the alarms with intercoms to immediately assess the situation from the main office. Probably have a direct feed to the local police and fire dept

Quote: darkoz

Add cameras over the alarms with intercoms to immediately assess the situation from the main office. Probably have a direct feed to the local police and fire dept

I agree, more CCTV. Nefarious characters don't necessarily want to be photographed, although some of these tragedy's do seem to be a cry for attention.

They should add the pressurized color packs to fire alarms, and whoever pulls them gets a big blue hand so that they can easily be seen in a crowd.

Maybe have robots monitor the hall instead of student hall monitors. The photo eye never sleeps. https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/13/security-robots-are-being-used-to-ward-off-san-franciscos-homeless-population/

Quote: darkoz

Add cameras over the alarms with intercoms to immediately assess the situation from the main office. Probably have a direct feed to the local police and fire dept

I sure hope that the fire alarm has a feed to the fire dept.

Quote: petroglyph

I sure hope that the fire alarm has a feed to the fire dept.

I was referring to the camera as a direct feed. The shooter could be immediately identified that way

Quote: darkoz

I was referring to the camera as a direct feed. The shooter could be immediately identified that way

: ) : )

Quote: RS

I don’t know how many people fit into each category, but I highly doubt it’s anywhere near only 1%. All I know is these people do in fact exist. There are plenty on another forum I mostly just read and don’t participate on really (cuz it’s like 100x as liberal as here, so a gigantic fustercluck). I think a few here may have even made some off-hand comment about wanting to ban all guns or be fine if they were all banned. I don’t think they make up near the majority of the liberal base, but I think there are far more than you think.

And I believe it's far less thank you think. Considering me "liberal" (though I'm no democrat) I've heard NO ONE that I can recall say they want all guns banned. No one. Let that sink in. If these people had "more than I thought" numbers wise how on earth could I not know ONE person that wants all guns banned?

To boot, let's give you the benefit of the doubt... you're saying a subsection of liberals, so what, like 20%? So 0% of conservatives and 80% of liberals DON'T WANT all guns banned? Yeah, that's the vaaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority yet you and gun nuts/etc cry "omg they want to take all our guns away" when we just want to talk about SENSIBLE COMMON LOGIC gun laws. Hell, just go back 10 pages and read duffman's posts. Paranoid much?

Quote: darkoz

I was referring to the camera as a direct feed. The shooter could be immediately identified that way

Explain who would be doing the identifying, and why you think it's a priority.

Quote: boymimbo

"Some changes need to be considered on how to make them less inviting targets." So the solution is to engage in an arms race? How about removing guns, especially the ones that are capable of causing mass carnage.

Once again, it will be about changing the culture and reducing gun ownership overall and having very tough punishment for illegal gun ownership.

Your solutions are to "remove guns", "change the culture" and "reduce gun ownership overall"? I wish you good luck in passing the legislation that achieves any of those goals.

If an administrator or teacher wants to be armed while on campus, set up parameters for what training and security protocols are required to maximize safety. Perhaps firearms are in a classroom wall safe with a biometric lock. I think it would be tough to conceal carry while you are around kids all day long. But a firearm available in the classroom behind the safety of a gun safe should a "code red" be signaled or you hear shots fired...what is wrong with that?

I don't expect any civilian to be going into the hallways to confront an active shooter. Although I bet you would be amazed at the attitude and skills of everyday civilians that previously decided to get firearms training, put time in at the range, sign up for LE run active shooter courses, etc.

More likely a teacher that WANTED to be armed would follow the same protocols of locking the door and getting kids down and under as much cover as possible. Removing the firearm from the safe and positioning themselves between the kids and the doorway/windows and look for an opportunity to return fire/take down the shooter. The element of surprise is a big advantage.

If you haven't been the victim of a home/office invasion robbery, you'll have no idea how helpless a feeling it is to be unarmed, trapped and hiding in the next room while an intruder is rifling through items hoping the Police arrive before the intruder decides yours is the next office to invade. Multiply that feeling by 10X if you realize from previous shots fired that the invader is armed and coming down the hallway getting ever so closer to your loation. Go through that experience and then tell me you are against a teacher that WANTS to be trained and follow safety protocols in order to be allowed to have a firearm inside a wall mounted safe located in their classroom.

Here's a question, Romes, you're a gun owner and I know from my experience with you that you are serious about activities in your life in which you chose to engage. If you're doing something, I got $50 that says you're doing it way more intelligently than the average individual. Let's say you decide to become a high school math teacher, would you want to be able to put your firearm in a classroom wall mounted gun safe that you could access in the event of an active shooter incident on campus?

Quote: billryan

Explain who would be doing the identifying, and why you think it's a priority.

Well if the fire department gets am immediate alert and looks at a live feed and sees a gunman shooting people as well as office staff at the high school that should help a bit dont ypu think

Quote: Paradigm

Multiply that feeling by 10X if you realize from previous shots fired that the invader is armed and coming down the hallway getting ever so closer to your loation. Go through that experience and then tell me you are against a teacher that WANTS to be trained and follow safety protocols in order to be allowed to have a firearm inside a wall mounted safe located in their classroom.

Not sure about the actual numbers, but most teachers who have been through it seem to still be against it.

Most of the students at parkland who lived through it should be gun advocates. Percentage seems to be low so far.

headline: "Trump says he would have run into Florida school without a weapon."

His "bone spurs" must have gone away.

The Coward in Chief.

Bah.

Quote: Romes

And I believe it's far less thank you think. Considering me "liberal" (though I'm no democrat) I've heard NO ONE that I can recall say they want all guns banned. No one. Let that sink in. If these people had "more than I thought" numbers wise how on earth could I not know ONE person that wants all guns banned?

To boot, let's give you the benefit of the doubt... you're saying a subsection of liberals, so what, like 20%? So 0% of conservatives and 80% of liberals DON'T WANT all guns banned? Yeah, that's the vaaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority yet you and gun nuts/etc cry "omg they want to take all our guns away" when we just want to talk about SENSIBLE COMMON LOGIC gun laws. Hell, just go back 10 pages and read duffman's posts. Paranoid much?

Bruh I think you’re over thinking it. I dont remember saying the vast majority of anyone wants all guns banned.

I was thinking a stab-in-the-dark guess would be 10-20% of liberals want all guns banned. Probably more like 10% though. And I’m talking openly want all guns banned, not the ones who want regulations now as a stepping stone to banning all guns or super heavy regulations down the road.

Then again, I don’t have statistics on this, you probably don’t either, and I haven’t seen a survey or stats on the subject (not that specific-question surveys are particularly accurate).

Quote: Paradigm

Your solutions are to "remove guns", "change the culture" and "reduce gun ownership overall"? I wish you good luck in passing the legislation that achieves any of those goals.

If an administrator or teacher wants to be armed while on campus, set up parameters for what training and security protocols are required to maximize safety. Perhaps firearms are in a classroom wall safe with a biometric lock. I think it would be tough to conceal carry while you are around kids all day long. But a firearm available in the classroom behind the safety of a gun safe should a "code red" be signaled or you hear shots fired...what is wrong with that?

Who is going to pay for said safes in every classroom??? Given the public's reticence to properly fund education, your ask is a lark. Teachers move around classrooms. Teachers switch schedules, and they switch schools as well.

Quote: P

]More likely a teacher that WANTED to be armed would follow the same protocols of locking the door and getting kids down and under as much cover as possible. Removing the firearm from the safe and positioning themselves between the kids and the doorway/windows and look for an opportunity to return fire/take down the shooter. The element of surprise is a big advantage.

And we trust that the teacher has the right judgment skills, like a George Zimmerman, for example?

Quote: P

If you haven't been the victim of a home/office invasion robbery, you'll have no idea how helpless a feeling it is to be unarmed, trapped and hiding in the next room while an intruder is rifling through items hoping the Police arrive before the intruder decides yours is the next office to invade. Multiply that feeling by 10X if you realize from previous shots fired that the invader is armed and coming down the hallway getting ever so closer to your location. Go through that experience and then tell me you are against a teacher that WANTS to be trained and follow safety protocols in order to be allowed to have a firearm inside a wall mounted safe located in their classroom.

Let's say one teacher in each of America's 100,000 schools is armed. There are 1.5 mass school shootings a year. In a teacher's 40 year career of teaching, that means that an armed teacher has a 1,666:1 odd of having to pull said gun in their career.

Compare that, now against the odds of (a) a student taking the teacher's gun and using it (b) the teacher's gun being stolen and used to commit a crime (c) the teacher turning the weapon against their class and (d) the odds that the teacher would have the opportunity to act if such a mass shooting situation took place. I would say that the odds of something like this happening is much higher than having to use the gun successfully in a real emergency.

A home invasion robbery is about goods. Frankly, if a gunman wants to come into my house and steal everything and leaves me alive, have at it. Motivation is different for mass murder over home invasion. And I fully support having defensive capabilities via a gun in the home anyway for that purpose. For me, the total value of the steal able property in my house (1 personal laptop, 2 tablets, 2 phones and two televisions) represents about two weeks pay, and my insurance deductible takes care of it anyway.

But hey, since you mentioned it, if you are thinking teachers need access to bio metric safes as a layer of protection, how about doing the same for all gun owners? Enact laws that force them to keep their arms locked up in a safe? It would lower gun theft and ensure that household members (children) do not get access to firearms. Liberty, for examples, sells bio metric gun safes that are accessible in less than 2 seconds with your fingerprint and are available with A/C adapters with battery backup for less than $250.

Quote: MrV

headline: "Trump says he would have run into Florida school without a weapon."

He absolutely would not have run into that school without a weapon.

He might have leisurely rode a golf cart in though...

Just quickly @Romes...

I know it's frustrating. So many people speak in absolutes or dramatize, it gets old on both sides. I'm sure I do my fair share as well. But while the claim that "All Libs want to ban guns" is an absurd overreach, there have been example aplenty where ridiculous, grabber-esque policies have come to fruition.

I'd wish for everyone to read the link provided by my long time opposition and favorite anti, rxwine. The one about "Why the NRA hates smart guns". In it, you'll find pretty much my exact argument, and why I personally stray a bit into extremism when it comes to my guns.

The fact of the matter is that our legislators are being tasked with creating restriction, limitations and outright bans on things that they do not have one clue about. I have seen legislators mock those who carry, and to a challenge of wanting the opportunity to protect themselves, this same legislator state that the citizen "Would probably be dead anyway", a statement spoken directly to the citizen's face in a town hall like meeting. I've watched legislators argue their cases and state such things as "If you ban them (30rd mags), no more will be made and the ones out there will get (and I quote) 'used up'", as if a magazine was a consumable item. I've watched my own state's leg pass a ridiculous law in an EO, which was done at 0200hrs with just 15min of review of the law, a law which I've written about in this forum too many times to repeat. A law so poorly worded it made felons of police officers doing their job, and a law which my as well as some 50 other county sheriffs stood at a podium in front of news cameras and said "I will not enforce this". That's not "progress" in my eyes. That's chaos. That's worse than before we started.

Read rxwine's link. I want to be with the Left on this. Nothing can fly with just a left or right wing. But in no way, shape, or form will I ever relinquish anything to someone operating on pure, unfiltered ignorance, as too many legislators are.

Quote: ams288

He absolutely would not have run into that school without a weapon.

He might have leisurely rode a golf cart in though...

There was a story in the early 90's about him stopping a mugger with a bat beating someone. He does conceal carry and he didn't flinch when that SJW stormed the stage when campaigning.

Quote: MaxPen

He does conceal carry and he didn't flinch when that SJW stormed the stage when campaigning.

Didn't flinch, eh?



Ah Max, I love when your BS is easily disproven with a simple gif.

He assessed the threat and did not run or cower. He followed the threat and stayed on point.

Try again.

Why didn't he serve his country in Vietnam?

"Bone spurs?"

Really?

Baloney.

His daddy must have paid a sawbones off.

Quote: Romes

While I do agree with this statement it would be foolish and unpatriotic not to TRY to do something with some kind of legislation.

Why?

We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law We need a law ................

Why does every little thing (and statistically it is still little) require new laws?

This guy fell thru several laws. He could have been arrested for making a terroristic threat. I would suggest that the FBI just review their procedures on tips. Local law enforcement do the same. See what comes of it. But enough of the stupid suggestions running from locking the kids in the rooms behind bulletproof doors to police stations at every school to keeping a gun safe in every classroom.

Thing is, making a law is easy. Solving a problem is not. What has happened to schools the last 2 generations? Some are fine, some are the level of prison. Probably time to make some changes. Make it easier to expel students (didn't help here of course.) Lower the dropout age to 16. Make it easier to "test out" of glasses so they may get the heck out early if they like.

Quote:

and to re-iterate what I think EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS SAID: no one wants to ban all guns. It's the silly propaganda the NRA

Sorry, but you need to listen closer. Plenty of liberals wish this. Listen to Rosie or Michael Moore. Yes, they are not pols, but they are saying what pols can't. I have met more than one liberal who would love guns to be banned. I made the point earlier, I do not take any pol at their word, I look at actions and intent.

Quote:

if they could get their damn hands ON A COMMERCIAL PLANE TO CRASH.

When did I say "commercial" plane? Hit the airport and you can rent or just steal a small plane. This is my point, you cannot plug every hole. For that reason, I do not go around concerned for the thing that has almost no chance of happening. I am quite honestly more concerned about clueless pols who think high capacity mags must be thrown away making gun laws.

Quote:

I'll go back to a previous argument... why not legalize nukes? Why can't I own a nuke?

Fine by me. I'd be a happy camper if I could buy some Plutonium at my corner store.

Quote: AZDuffman

Fine by me. I'd be a happy camper if I could buy some Plutonium at my corner store.

I think that will kill your bees. And probably all your neighbors.

Boymimbo,

1) Who funds the wall safe...the teacher does. If they want to be armed, they pay for it, all of it...the gun, the wall safe, the training, the range time, the ammunition, the cost of LE training on Active Shooter protocol. This isn't part of a job they are paid for, this is on them if they want it...no one is forcing them to do this, its an option that they apply for and may be granted to those that the school administration thinks are up to the task. No different than being a concealed carry permit holder...they are just allowed to carry on campus if they store their gun in their wall safe.

2) Really, George Zimmerman strikes you as the teacher type...besides, he had anger management counseling and restraining order filings well before the incident. These would come up on a background check by school administrators of local police records. And no doubt a teacher would subject themselves to extensive background checks if they requested to have a firearm in their classroom.

2) If you are going to pull out the long odds of being a onsite during a mass school shooting, why are we considering any legislation at all (you can thank me later AZ). Aren't there like five million AR-15 type weapons in the country and 10 of them have been used in mass shootings in the last decade. Why are we considering restrictions on a weapon that has a 1 in 500,000 chance of being used in a mass shooting? Of course based on my previous list, I think you can tell I believe some legislation/new restrictions should happen, but the "chances of this happening" argument doesn't work very well unless you are arguing for nothing to be done.

3) We trust teachers & administrators with the safety of our children everyday...if they wanted to do our children physical harm, it would be happening now. The gun isn't coming out of the safe with kids in the room unless there is a code red. The teacher is trained to not allow a gun to be taken off of them, just try and take a gun away from a properly trained concealed carrier or LE Officer. On second thought don't, you'll end up shot.

4) A home invasion can start as being "about the goods"....never mind, it is irrelevant.

5) I believe guns should be in safes if not on your person. Look, common ground :-P...but you'll never get that legislated.

Quote: rxwine

I think that will kill your bees. And probably all your neighbors.

Half my neighbors make too much noise anyhow.

Quote: MaxPen

He assessed the threat and did not run or cower. He followed the threat and stayed on point.

Didn't run or cower? Looks like he actually attempted to hide under his podium for a brief millisecond. Probably quickly realizing his fat ass would never fit underneath.

Why destroy your credibility by lying about something so easily disprovable? Is your reflex to defend the Orange Ass really that strong?

Quote: Paradigm

Boymimbo,

1) Who funds the wall safe...the teacher does. ...and may be granted to those that the school administration thinks are up to the task. No different than being a concealed carry permit holder...they are just allowed to carry on campus if they store their gun in their wall safe.

It's a stupid idea that makes school campuses more dangerous.

Quote: P

2) Really, George Zimmerman strikes you as the teacher type...besides, he had anger management counseling and restraining order filings well before the incident. These would come up on a background check by school administrators of local police records. And no doubt a teacher would subject themselves to extensive background checks if they requested to have a firearm in their classroom.

Says who? No law is on the books stating how teachers can carry in the classroom, and we cannot rely on lawmakers and school boards to make it difficult. Quite the contrary.

Quote: P

3) If you are going to pull out the long odds of being a onsite during a mass school shooting, why are we considering any legislation at all (you can thank me later AZ). Aren't there like five million AR-15 type weapons in the country and 10 of them have been used in mass shootings in the last decade. Why are we considering restrictions on a weapon that has a 1 in 500,000 chance of being used in a mass shooting? Of course based on my previous list, I think you can tell I believe some legislation/new restrictions should happen, but the "chances of this happening" argument doesn't work very well unless you are arguing for nothing to be done.

Many more than 10. And much greater than 1:500,000. Of the top 10 casualty list, 7 have been committed by the AR-15, all in the last 10 years. In fact, the last large casualty mass shooting not done by the AR-15 was in 2007 (Virginia Tech), but to that point, the shooter in 2007 used a Glock with 10 and 15 round magazines.

Quote: P

3) We trust teachers & administrators with the safety of our children everyday...if they wanted to do our children physical harm, it would be happening now. The gun isn't coming out of the safe with kids in the room unless there is a code red. The teacher is trained to not allow a gun to be taken off of them, just try and take a gun away from a properly trained concealed carrier or LE Officer.

Source
There are 966,000 violent incidents at public schools each year (assault and worse). About 5.4% (2013) of all teachers (or about 170,000) are physically attacked each year by students. I do not trust that a teacher to use discretion to stop a non-deadly incident, invoking some kind of stand-your-ground defense.

Quote: P

5) I believe guns should be in safes if not on your person. Look, common ground :-P...but you'll never get that legislated.

Agreed.

Frankly, I understand the odds. The US had three huge shootings in the last 5 months all committed by this particular rifle. The sanity of people being able to own weapons of mass destruction is now into question (and I know that there are actually better weapons out there capable of doing far worse than the AR-15 and that the AR-15 is just being used to copycat). I understand the AR-15 is being picked on. It's kind of like Trump picking on the Mexicans or banning Muslims coming from countries that have never committed a terrorist act. Wrong target, right intention.

I have to pass a test to drive a car. I have to take more extensive training and have a different test to drive an 18-wheeler. Both are vehicles. I have to do a whole pile of work and training to be able to fly a plane. I don't see why the same types of graduated licensing shouldn't be required with guns:

- You want a have a pistol, fine. Take a minimal weapons training course and submit the typical background checks and you can own up to say, THREE and be restricted to buying six round magazines. Your 2nd amendment right is fulfilled.
- You want to buy anything more than that and be able to buy high-cap magazines, then you have to take more training and licensing, submit to mental health checks, and keep those weapons locked up at all times when not in use. Your extended 2nd amendment rights are earned.

If you want to change the law, you start categorizing guns into two or three categories and require a level of training for each and licensing for the upper categories. Give current gun owners two years to comply (take the training courses, buy a safe) and apply for licenses (pass the extended background check and mental health test). Offer a generous buyback program or even a trade-in program.

And for those who violate the new laws, including illegal gun ownership or carrying without a permit, jail time or very harsh fines.

Quote: ams288

Didn't run or cower? Looks like he actually attempted to hide under his podium for a brief millisecond. Probably quickly realizing his fat ass would never fit underneath.

Why destroy your credibility by lying about something so easily disprovable? Is your reflex to defend the Orange Ass really that strong?

Two references to the president's ass in the same post is a little weird and obsessive. Is you mad cause he spurned your advances in an elevator? ;)

#HesJustNotThatIntoYou

Quote: boymimbo

You want a have a pistol, fine. Take a minimal weapons training course and submit the typical background checks and you can own up to say, THREE and be restricted to buying six round magazines. Your 2nd amendment right is fulfilled.
- You want to buy anything more than that and be able to buy high-cap magazines, then you have to take more training and licensing, submit to mental health checks, and keep those weapons locked up at all times when not in use. Your extended 2nd amendment rights are earned.

Unfortunately, I think we will just have to leave it there. When the view of common sense gun legislation includes labeling anything more than a 6 round magazine as "high capacity", we aren't going to find too much more common ground.

Besides that, it's time for this thread to get back to more constructive conversations anyway...like Trump's fat ass, AMS's fascination with Trump's fat ass and discussions about how Trump wouldn't go into the building like he said he would...you know the really meaty stuff that makes membership on WoV such a joy. Probably time to sign out for a while.

A generation ago, a weapon capable of firing more than a half dozen rounds would have been high capacity. NYPD switched from its long standing .38 revolver, which generally had five bullets loaded in it because more an more bad guys were carrying 14 shot semi automatics. Guns like the AR-15 were not very popular and "hunters" didn't go around with banana clips.

Quote: Paradigm

Unfortunately, I think we will just have to leave it there. When the view of common sense gun legislation includes labeling anything more than a 6 round magazine as "high capacity", we aren't going to find too much more common ground.

Besides that, it's time for this thread to get back to more constructive conversations anyway...like Trump's fat ass, AMS's fascination with Trump's fat ass and discussions about how Trump wouldn't go into the building like he said he would...you know the really meaty stuff that makes membership on WoV such a joy. Probably time to sign out for a while.

Yeah that's fine. The point is that you can put in licensing restrictions around more powerful weapons. Whatever the line is, it still presents a barrier to get the high powered (whatever that is) weaponry.

Quote: billryan

Guns like the AR-15 were not very popular and "hunters" didn't go around with banana clips.

Animals started packing heat, and the arms race started.

So, I guess we can probably blame deer.

Quote: rxwine

Animals started packing heat, and the arms race started.

So, I guess we can probably blame deer.

I blame the sheep.

Quote: waxie22

So all that want the guns ban lets say we get them all banned and all the ammo banned too. Whoever said they should give out 10 rounds per gun and you have to bring back the empty shells to get ten more lol... that was crazy funny! But what do you do once all the guns are banned? Can you start banning knives and spears? Are you gonna ban the bow and arrow? The crossbow gets banned next? Harpoons?? You ever seen what those Harpoons can do that spear sharks or fish? Are you gonna start banning rocks and sticks as well? Baseball Bats? Where does it end? How much government control do you want? Might as well just turn socialist and work for the man and forget all this free reign freedom!!

This has already been discussed. Get off your other wack ass forum and actually attempt to read this thread before you comment. Thanks 😇