by Simon 616 Replies latest members politics
It would really suck to have to protect my home from an invasion by multiple intruders who are armed with semi-auto weapons if I am only armed with a musket.
Low-Key ...
If the multiple intruders only had muskets it would be a fair fight. But then, with the gun laws the way they are here, they could stop at Walmart on the way to your house and buy all the fire-power they need.
Go figure.
Rub a Dub
Not really. There's still only one of me. Not really the point, however.
How do we make it so that criminals are limited to only having muskets available to aid them in their criminal activity? I can't wait to hear this one.
Whatever expert's passive security plans a school might have relied upon to protect it's students, it has been shown to be flawed. Without an internal armed guard, no school can feel safe anymore. Stricter gun laws will be no substitue for that armed guard.
Internal armed guards becoming necessary in schools?
The land of the free surely must rethink this gun question. It's incomprehensible to the rest of the world.
GUNS!!! GUNS!!! GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM!!!!
How about a flawed, violent, frightened society? Lack of mental health care? Sensationalism and anti-hero making of these mass murderers?
Nope. Let's blame the object. The tool. Much easier to put a band-aid over it than to actually treat the infection.
Guns aren't going anywhere. Making them harder to obtain legally only serves to make it tougher for the law-abider to get them, therefore giving the criminals an unfair and dangerous advantage. Look at the laughably failed "War on Drugs". How did that one work out? Nobody's on drugs in America, right?
Simon: Your Term of Use are against name calling. Perhaps you should practice what you preach? "clowns"? really?
I think that is mild given the idiocy that some people are coming out with.
Really, just step back from your constitution / NRA indoctrination and T-H-I-N-K ...
2 classrooms of 5-10 year olds are massacred and instead of even considering what can be done to prevent it happening again or be willing to accept the possibility of some compromise to ensure it doesn't happen again some people are just trying to dismiss the problem even exists. Typical selfish, arrogant black-and-white thinking from extremists IMO.
I think 'clowns' is a mildest of names to call these people.
"Sorry, your child is dead ... but hey, some dickless wonder gets to hold a gun because someone 200+ years ago didn't like a king". Yeah. Grade A clowns.
I would hope no school board member would vote against an armed guard at each school in my district- just to save money.
And I am not a clown, this is serious. Gun laws don't work to stop criminals from obtaining guns (even in Britain) and passive security, like video cameras, won't stop a determined and armed thug.
I don't think restrictions would help to be honest, other than restricting the sale of hand guns.
Take this incident yesterday, all the guns used in that massacre were obtained legally by a mentally sound woman,
the kid never applied for a gun or bought one.
If you think about all of these massacres in recent years, just about all were done by hand guns or semi-automatics.
You are just as extreme in your thinking as the other side, Simon. Your arguments are just as black & white, just as ridiculous, and you are every bit the clown as the people you decry as clowns.
It's truly a sad thing that there are so many guns in this country, but no amount of whining or wishing is going to make them all magically disappear.
If people with bad intentions have guns, I should have the right to protect myself, my loved ones, my belongings, and my way of life with the same guns. How can you argue that? How does stating that make me a clown?
It's sad as hell that those kids were gunned down, but restricting legal gun ownership for law-abiding citizens only serves to give the upper hand to the bad guys. It's not going to protect further innocents from being slaughtered. If some deranged asshole is bent on killing a bunch of kids before he offs himself, he's going to find a way to get a gun. The last bad guys did, and so will the next. Maybe next time, there will be an armed citizen with some balls that will put the bad guy down? I much prefer that scenario to the alternative, but hey, I'm just a clown, so what do I know?
