Mass Killings: The Blame

[Picaro]

Inspirational. A speech no child should have to make. Lets hope Fox show it so that orange shit can see it.

Good thing that Emma Gonzalez is in Florida, if she would have been in her Ancestral Home Mexico she probably already would have been shot dead by one of Mexico's Drug Cartels already. She should be happy she is in the American nation, unlike Mexico it not being in the control of Drug Cartels, so she gets to live and be a skinhead Bull Dyke screeching into a microphone demanding that the ENTIRE American population is disarmed, perhaps she should turn her attention to Mexico and screech and demand that the Mexican Government disarmed all the Drug Cartels and put a stop to them using Mexican girls who look like Emma Gonzalez as Drug Mules etc before they shoot them.

lol indeed. They're ALL ridiculous frauds and liars, every last one of them, from top to bottom. I'm still laughing my ass off at where all these tards were going to run to if Trump won and they were all going to leave the country n stuff'. Almost 100% to white countries with long Christian traditions in law and rights, and one idiot, who is still here, but claims to 'hate the sight of white people', who claimed he was moving to South Africa, a country far better off than most of its neighbors, and of course that's because of its past of 'white colonialism', of which it is quickly going downhill now, thanks to Tutu and the Mandela Legacy terrorists. I guess he decided to stay after all, and just scowl at us a lot or something. lol lol lol

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Crap like that is why people should not vote Democrat.

Did you see the part where more than half already do have police in the school?

I do believe the school where the shooting was had one. (School; Officer)

which only proves the point that such measures are useless. Campus police didn't stop this, they didn't stop VA Tech, they didn't stop Columbine. By the time the School Cop even knows there is a shooting going on, the mayhem has already been done.

What is needed is to keep nuts from getting guns to start with.

I didn't read anything about the guard, but from what I understand, he wasn't armed, he was just a security officer.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Um, yeah, if you can only shoot six rounds at a time, you just aren't going to kill as many people.

Duh. I thought you knew lot about guns.

I know enough where most magazines hold a hell of a lot more than six rounds. I also know that replacing a magazine only takes a few seconds. So tell me, if the next mass murder takes place using a semi-automatic pistol, will you be happy the killer only killed 57 people instead of 60?

You wake up from going to sleep, to start with.

Oh, so when I made the comparison of death to sleeping, you though I meant that people thought they would rise from the dead?

Most Americans favor stricter gun laws. Also, if people knew how weak the guns laws are, they'd probably be shocked.

They are not weak, it's just they are not enforced. Many people in your city are let out for carrying a concealed weapon because there is no room in your jails. So they don't even fear getting caught with an illegal gun.

I've never made that claim. so argue with what I'm arguing, not what other people are arguing.

"Rights" are what people decide they are. When the majority gets sick and tired of the gun nuts and their shit, you'll be AMAZED how fast the Second Amendment will be about Militias again.

Don't you even understand how this all works?

The people don't decide the constitutionally of firearms--the Supreme Court does. And the Supreme Court will never rule that arms only applies to militias unless we are unfortunate enough to get a very liberal biased court. If that would ever happen, it would create a society of armed criminals and a disarmed public. What do you suppose would happen then?

And this is the problem with the gun industry. They know that their market isn't the 78% who don't own a gun or even the 19% who bought a gun 10 years ago and stuck it in their closet. They know their market is the three percent compensating for tiny peckers. Just like the alcohol industry markets towards alcoholics, the gun industry markets to gun nuts.

No, I don't expect to ever win over the guys who think they need guns to compensate for their "Shortcomings". They are a fringe to be marginalized.

I would point out to the other 97% that they don't want their kids going to school with Adam Lanza or Nikolas Cruz being able to get a military grade weapon.

And what is a military grade weapon? Care to give us a link to the official definition?

An AK is a semi-automatic rifle. It works just like a semi-automtic pistol. It just looks meaner is all.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Licensing, registration, vigorous vetting, etc., WILL greatly reduce the number of weapons that mentally unstable folk and criminals are able to obtain openly.

This guy was not judged as mentally unstable, therefore your idea wouldn't' have worked. The Vegas shooter the same. He was not diagnosed as mentally anything and bought his weapons legally through the background check system.

The Bigger-Fish-to-Fry is the 29,900... and taking a whack at substantively reducing THAT number.

And that's all it would be too---just taking a whack at it. We don't need to turn the entire country upside down to "take a whack" at anything. We either have something that will stop all mass shootings or we don't. I don't want our representatives to keep making regulation after regulation, law after law, and all along making it more miserable for law abiding citizens to buy or own guns. You know it won't work, I know it won't work, and it's just a foot in the door for liberals to keep piling on more regulations. Because you'll demand X, and when we have another shooting, you'll demand another X, and another X.

I say no. Democrats cannot be trusted.

Yep... taking a whack at it... 'cause the old way just ain't workin' any more...

And neither would a new way. That's why we're against it.

"Folks, liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."
Rush Limbaugh

We have hit an agree-to-disagree point in this exchange.

Serious gun control works in other developed countries.

It will work here too.

National databases and standards for licensing, weapon registration, vigorous screening, mandatory reporting of convictions and diagnoses, and vigorous enforcement.

Given the increasing pace of mass shootings within our country, we are quickly reaching a tipping point as it relates to popular support for better gun control.

The People of the United States are sovereign on this soil... if they want it enough, they'll get it, and, I believe, we're looking at a groundswell towards just such an outcome here.

The trick will be for Gun Rights advocates to perceive and acknowledge this shift in the National Psyche and to ensure they have a place at the table.

One obtains a place at the table by engaging in dialogue and the give-and-take of meaningful political accommodation, rather than obstructionism.

Every time we see another classroom full of slaughtered babes, it becomes that much more difficult for Gun Folk to hang onto the old arrangement.

To turn the tables briefly... you know that, I know that, and the public at-large knows that.

The longer you obstruct, the smaller your seat at that future table, when Judgment Day arrives in this context... and Judgment Day's a'comin'.

Best to get out in front of it now, while there's still some time.

The clock is ticking.

Yeah, well I'll take my chances.

It's a very sad day in America when people believe that the federal government has the solution to all their problems. It demonstrates the negative conditioning that's been going on.

But if they do try your ideas, and it works, then maybe we can do the same for recreational narcotics since that's been illegal as well for as long as I've been alive. Yet we have more of a drug problem today than we had 40 years ago.

To understand what's going on, you need to look at the history of the Democrat party. They won't stop with one or two gun laws. Even if they get them instituted (which they won't) another mass shooting will take place and they will demand even more gun laws. The next shooting after that, demand more gun laws. Their goal is to disarm society. Like terrorists, they are very patent people. Baby steps, baby steps.

Even though mass shootings have been on the increase, violent crime (and gun crime) as been on the decrease since the early 90s. People understand that it's because we have more guns and legal ability to use them for self-defense that's responsible. The reason you're safe in your home today from an invasion is because criminals have no idea if you're armed or not. Once they are assured you're not (because of new laws) robbing or killing you and your family will be like taking candy from a baby.

If that's what you want, then you have that right to live that way. As for myself, I don't worry about intruders because I have the advantage over them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Licensing, registration, vigorous vetting, etc., WILL greatly reduce the number of weapons that mentally unstable folk and criminals are able to obtain openly.

This guy was not judged as mentally unstable, therefore your idea wouldn't' have worked. The Vegas shooter the same. He was not diagnosed as mentally anything and bought his weapons legally through the background check system.

The Bigger-Fish-to-Fry is the 29,900... and taking a whack at substantively reducing THAT number.

And that's all it would be too---just taking a whack at it. We don't need to turn the entire country upside down to "take a whack" at anything. We either have something that will stop all mass shootings or we don't. I don't want our representatives to keep making regulation after regulation, law after law, and all along making it more miserable for law abiding citizens to buy or own guns. You know it won't work, I know it won't work, and it's just a foot in the door for liberals to keep piling on more regulations. Because you'll demand X, and when we have another shooting, you'll demand another X, and another X.

I say no. Democrats cannot be trusted.

Yep... taking a whack at it... 'cause the old way just ain't workin' any more...

And neither would a new way. That's why we're against it.

"Folks, liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."
Rush Limbaugh

We have hit an agree-to-disagree point in this exchange.

Serious gun control works in other developed countries.

It will work here too.

National databases and standards for licensing, weapon registration, vigorous screening, mandatory reporting of convictions and diagnoses, and vigorous enforcement.

Given the increasing pace of mass shootings within our country, we are quickly reaching a tipping point as it relates to popular support for better gun control.

The People of the United States are sovereign on this soil... if they want it enough, they'll get it, and, I believe, we're looking at a groundswell towards just such an outcome here.

The trick will be for Gun Rights advocates to perceive and acknowledge this shift in the National Psyche and to ensure they have a place at the table.

One obtains a place at the table by engaging in dialogue and the give-and-take of meaningful political accommodation, rather than obstructionism.

Every time we see another classroom full of slaughtered babes, it becomes that much more difficult for Gun Folk to hang onto the old arrangement.

To turn the tables briefly... you know that, I know that, and the public at-large knows that.

The longer you obstruct, the smaller your seat at that future table, when Judgment Day arrives in this context... and Judgment Day's a'comin'.

Best to get out in front of it now, while there's still some time.

The clock is ticking.

Yeah, well I'll take my chances.

It's a very sad day in America when people believe that the federal government has the solution to all their problems. It demonstrates the negative conditioning that's been going on.

But if they do try your ideas, and it works, then maybe we can do the same for recreational narcotics since that's been illegal as well for as long as I've been alive. Yet we have more of a drug problem today than we had 40 years ago.

To understand what's going on, you need to look at the history of the Democrat party. They won't stop with one or two gun laws. Even if they get them instituted (which they won't) another mass shooting will take place and they will demand even more gun laws. The next shooting after that, demand more gun laws. Their goal is to disarm society. Like terrorists, they are very patent people. Baby steps, baby steps.

Even though mass shootings have been on the increase, violent crime (and gun crime) as been on the decrease since the early 90s. People understand that it's because we have more guns and legal ability to use them for self-defense that's responsible. The reason you're safe in your home today from an invasion is because criminals have no idea if you're armed or not. Once they are assured you're not (because of new laws) robbing or killing you and your family will be like taking candy from a baby.

If that's what you want, then you have that right to live that way. As for myself, I don't worry about intruders because I have the advantage over them.

"It's a very sad day in America when people believe that the federal government has the solution to all their problems. It demonstrates the negative conditioning that's been going on."

Yet that is exactly what has happened.....they're called 'Liberals.'


Amazingly.....Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about it 200 years ago.


1. Alexis de Tocqueville, writing “Democracy in America” in the 1830’s, described “an immense, tutelary power, which takes sole charge of assuring their enjoyment and of watching over their fate.” As he predicted, this power is “absolute, attentive to detail, regular, provident, and gentle,” and it “works willingly for their happiness, but it wishes to be the only agent and the sole arbiter of that happiness. It provides for their security, foresees and supplies their needs, guides them in their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their testaments, divides their inheritances.” It is entirely proper to ask, as he asked, whether it can “relieve them entirely of the trouble of thinking and of the effort associated with living.”

 

[defcon4]

Facebook, Twitter and Youtube are purging crisis actor references by the thousands.

Facebook, YouTube Removing Any And All Posts About Witness David Hogg And Emma Gonzalez – Twitter Lockout

 

[Kondor3]

Licensing, registration, vigorous vetting, etc., WILL greatly reduce the number of weapons that mentally unstable folk and criminals are able to obtain openly.

This guy was not judged as mentally unstable, therefore your idea wouldn't' have worked. The Vegas shooter the same. He was not diagnosed as mentally anything and bought his weapons legally through the background check system.

The Bigger-Fish-to-Fry is the 29,900... and taking a whack at substantively reducing THAT number.

And that's all it would be too---just taking a whack at it. We don't need to turn the entire country upside down to "take a whack" at anything. We either have something that will stop all mass shootings or we don't. I don't want our representatives to keep making regulation after regulation, law after law, and all along making it more miserable for law abiding citizens to buy or own guns. You know it won't work, I know it won't work, and it's just a foot in the door for liberals to keep piling on more regulations. Because you'll demand X, and when we have another shooting, you'll demand another X, and another X.

I say no. Democrats cannot be trusted.

Yep... taking a whack at it... 'cause the old way just ain't workin' any more...

And neither would a new way. That's why we're against it.

"Folks, liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."
Rush Limbaugh

We have hit an agree-to-disagree point in this exchange.

Serious gun control works in other developed countries.

It will work here too.

National databases and standards for licensing, weapon registration, vigorous screening, mandatory reporting of convictions and diagnoses, and vigorous enforcement.

Given the increasing pace of mass shootings within our country, we are quickly reaching a tipping point as it relates to popular support for better gun control.

The People of the United States are sovereign on this soil... if they want it enough, they'll get it, and, I believe, we're looking at a groundswell towards just such an outcome here.

The trick will be for Gun Rights advocates to perceive and acknowledge this shift in the National Psyche and to ensure they have a place at the table.

One obtains a place at the table by engaging in dialogue and the give-and-take of meaningful political accommodation, rather than obstructionism.

Every time we see another classroom full of slaughtered babes, it becomes that much more difficult for Gun Folk to hang onto the old arrangement.

To turn the tables briefly... you know that, I know that, and the public at-large knows that.

The longer you obstruct, the smaller your seat at that future table, when Judgment Day arrives in this context... and Judgment Day's a'comin'.

Best to get out in front of it now, while there's still some time.

The clock is ticking.

Yeah, well I'll take my chances.

It's a very sad day in America when people believe that the federal government has the solution to all their problems. It demonstrates the negative conditioning that's been going on.

But if they do try your ideas, and it works, then maybe we can do the same for recreational narcotics since that's been illegal as well for as long as I've been alive. Yet we have more of a drug problem today than we had 40 years ago.

To understand what's going on, you need to look at the history of the Democrat party. They won't stop with one or two gun laws. Even if they get them instituted (which they won't) another mass shooting will take place and they will demand even more gun laws. The next shooting after that, demand more gun laws. Their goal is to disarm society. Like terrorists, they are very patent people. Baby steps, baby steps.

Even though mass shootings have been on the increase, violent crime (and gun crime) as been on the decrease since the early 90s. People understand that it's because we have more guns and legal ability to use them for self-defense that's responsible. The reason you're safe in your home today from an invasion is because criminals have no idea if you're armed or not. Once they are assured you're not (because of new laws) robbing or killing you and your family will be like taking candy from a baby.

If that's what you want, then you have that right to live that way. As for myself, I don't worry about intruders because I have the advantage over them.

I sense that you are not opposed in principle to more vigorous controls but that you do not trust your negotiating 'partners'.

Frankly, I can't say as I blame you, on that score... most Leftists are amoral opportunists who will say anything to get that foot in the door.

 

[Norman]

Um, yeah, if you can only shoot six rounds at a time, you just aren't going to kill as many people.

Duh. I thought you knew lot about guns.

I know enough where most magazines hold a hell of a lot more than six rounds. I also know that replacing a magazine only takes a few seconds. So tell me, if the next mass murder takes place using a semi-automatic pistol, will you be happy the killer only killed 57 people instead of 60?

You wake up from going to sleep, to start with.

Oh, so when I made the comparison of death to sleeping, you though I meant that people thought they would rise from the dead?

Most Americans favor stricter gun laws. Also, if people knew how weak the guns laws are, they'd probably be shocked.

They are not weak, it's just they are not enforced. Many people in your city are let out for carrying a concealed weapon because there is no room in your jails. So they don't even fear getting caught with an illegal gun.

I've never made that claim. so argue with what I'm arguing, not what other people are arguing.

"Rights" are what people decide they are. When the majority gets sick and tired of the gun nuts and their shit, you'll be AMAZED how fast the Second Amendment will be about Militias again.

Don't you even understand how this all works?

The people don't decide the constitutionally of firearms--the Supreme Court does. And the Supreme Court will never rule that arms only applies to militias unless we are unfortunate enough to get a very liberal biased court. If that would ever happen, it would create a society of armed criminals and a disarmed public. What do you suppose would happen then?

And this is the problem with the gun industry. They know that their market isn't the 78% who don't own a gun or even the 19% who bought a gun 10 years ago and stuck it in their closet. They know their market is the three percent compensating for tiny peckers. Just like the alcohol industry markets towards alcoholics, the gun industry markets to gun nuts.

View attachment 178176

No, I don't expect to ever win over the guys who think they need guns to compensate for their "Shortcomings". They are a fringe to be marginalized.

I would point out to the other 97% that they don't want their kids going to school with Adam Lanza or Nikolas Cruz being able to get a military grade weapon.

And what is a military grade weapon? Care to give us a link to the official definition?

An AK is a semi-automatic rifle. It works just like a semi-automtic pistol. It just looks meaner is all.

The weapons should be powerful enough to resist, say, a leftist bolshevik rising.

That's the whole point. Of course, most murders are done with handguns anyway so there is not much if any reason to ban the ARs.

 

[JoeB131]

If the government did their job correctly, that shooting would not have happened.

The government isn't allowed to do it's job properly, that's the problem.

This guy never, ever should have been able to guy a gun, but he was.

 

[JoeB131]

The people don't decide the constitutionally of firearms--the Supreme Court does. And the Supreme Court will never rule that arms only applies to militias unless we are unfortunate enough to get a very liberal biased court. If that would ever happen, it would create a society of armed criminals and a disarmed public. What do you suppose would happen then?

We might actually address racism and poverty?

Naw, that ain't gonna happen.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The people don't decide the constitutionally of firearms--the Supreme Court does. And the Supreme Court will never rule that arms only applies to militias unless we are unfortunate enough to get a very liberal biased court. If that would ever happen, it would create a society of armed criminals and a disarmed public. What do you suppose would happen then?

We might actually address racism and poverty?

Naw, that ain't gonna happen.

HTF did you bring race into this? You'll bring race into anything, won't you?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This guy was not judged as mentally unstable, therefore your idea wouldn't' have worked. The Vegas shooter the same. He was not diagnosed as mentally anything and bought his weapons legally through the background check system.

And that's all it would be too---just taking a whack at it. We don't need to turn the entire country upside down to "take a whack" at anything. We either have something that will stop all mass shootings or we don't. I don't want our representatives to keep making regulation after regulation, law after law, and all along making it more miserable for law abiding citizens to buy or own guns. You know it won't work, I know it won't work, and it's just a foot in the door for liberals to keep piling on more regulations. Because you'll demand X, and when we have another shooting, you'll demand another X, and another X.

I say no. Democrats cannot be trusted.

Yep... taking a whack at it... 'cause the old way just ain't workin' any more...

And neither would a new way. That's why we're against it.

"Folks, liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."
Rush Limbaugh

We have hit an agree-to-disagree point in this exchange.

Serious gun control works in other developed countries.

It will work here too.

National databases and standards for licensing, weapon registration, vigorous screening, mandatory reporting of convictions and diagnoses, and vigorous enforcement.

Given the increasing pace of mass shootings within our country, we are quickly reaching a tipping point as it relates to popular support for better gun control.

The People of the United States are sovereign on this soil... if they want it enough, they'll get it, and, I believe, we're looking at a groundswell towards just such an outcome here.

The trick will be for Gun Rights advocates to perceive and acknowledge this shift in the National Psyche and to ensure they have a place at the table.

One obtains a place at the table by engaging in dialogue and the give-and-take of meaningful political accommodation, rather than obstructionism.

Every time we see another classroom full of slaughtered babes, it becomes that much more difficult for Gun Folk to hang onto the old arrangement.

To turn the tables briefly... you know that, I know that, and the public at-large knows that.

The longer you obstruct, the smaller your seat at that future table, when Judgment Day arrives in this context... and Judgment Day's a'comin'.

Best to get out in front of it now, while there's still some time.

The clock is ticking.

Yeah, well I'll take my chances.

It's a very sad day in America when people believe that the federal government has the solution to all their problems. It demonstrates the negative conditioning that's been going on.

But if they do try your ideas, and it works, then maybe we can do the same for recreational narcotics since that's been illegal as well for as long as I've been alive. Yet we have more of a drug problem today than we had 40 years ago.

To understand what's going on, you need to look at the history of the Democrat party. They won't stop with one or two gun laws. Even if they get them instituted (which they won't) another mass shooting will take place and they will demand even more gun laws. The next shooting after that, demand more gun laws. Their goal is to disarm society. Like terrorists, they are very patent people. Baby steps, baby steps.

Even though mass shootings have been on the increase, violent crime (and gun crime) as been on the decrease since the early 90s. People understand that it's because we have more guns and legal ability to use them for self-defense that's responsible. The reason you're safe in your home today from an invasion is because criminals have no idea if you're armed or not. Once they are assured you're not (because of new laws) robbing or killing you and your family will be like taking candy from a baby.

If that's what you want, then you have that right to live that way. As for myself, I don't worry about intruders because I have the advantage over them.

I sense that you are not opposed in principle to more vigorous controls but that you do not trust your negotiating 'partners'.

Frankly, I can't say as I blame you, on that score... most Leftists are amoral opportunists who will say anything to get that foot in the door.

That's the problem. Democrats have proven themselves not to be trustworthy. Look what they did with the IRS and FBI! Look at how they used their activist judges to interfere in the work of a US President.

And to be honest, if I thought for one minute a Democrat had the solution to stop all mass murders, I would be more open minded. But knowing Democrats, it has nothing more to do with stopping school shootings than Commie Care did to make sure all Americans had the ability to get health insurance. It's a front to forward their ulterior motive.

 

[Picaro]

The Blame is twofold:

1. the shooter

2. the system that allows unstable individuals to obtain and possess firearms

Means, opportunity and motivation: The first two are easy to identify, the last not so simple.

This ^^^ is why gun controls need to be considered, and not efforts to scapegoat the mentally ill, most of whom are peaceful.

So now you're saying that the shooter wasn't mentally ill and that there'll be no insanity plea available during the trial.

*****SMILE*****

They should have taken the deal he offered re a life sentence. The school system is not gong to come off well in a trial, given they dope up kids and make them even crazier.

 

[JoeB131]

HTF did you bring race into this? You'll bring race into anything, won't you?

You don't think racism plays a role in our crime rate?

That's adorable.

That's the problem. Democrats have proven themselves not to be trustworthy. Look what they did with the IRS and FBI! Look at how they used their activist judges to interfere in the work of a US President.

Yeah, it's called "Checks and Balances". Look it up some time. We didn't elect a dictator when Trump "won" (even though most people voted against him.)

And to be honest, if I thought for one minute a Democrat had the solution to stop all mass murders, I would be more open minded. But knowing Democrats, it has nothing more to do with stopping school shootings than Commie Care did to make sure all Americans had the ability to get health insurance. It's a front to forward their ulterior motive.

Millions of Americans got insurance under the ACA. A few battered housewife Republicans who take whatever abuse their bosses dish out lost it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Blame is twofold:

1. the shooter

2. the system that allows unstable individuals to obtain and possess firearms

Means, opportunity and motivation: The first two are easy to identify, the last not so simple.

This ^^^ is why gun controls need to be considered, and not efforts to scapegoat the mentally ill, most of whom are peaceful.

So now you're saying that the shooter wasn't mentally ill and that there'll be no insanity plea available during the trial.

*****SMILE*****

They should have taken the deal he offered re a life sentence. The school system is not gong to come off well in a trial, given they dope up kids and make them even crazier.

I pushed the funny button against my better judgment. The fact is some posts are so stupid, so off topic and thus so idiotic they do not even make the grade of an idiot-gram.

 

[Rustic]

HTF did you bring race into this? You'll bring race into anything, won't you?

You don't think racism plays a role in our crime rate?

That's adorable.

That's the problem. Democrats have proven themselves not to be trustworthy. Look what they did with the IRS and FBI! Look at how they used their activist judges to interfere in the work of a US President.

Yeah, it's called "Checks and Balances". Look it up some time. We didn't elect a dictator when Trump "won" (even though most people voted against him.)

And to be honest, if I thought for one minute a Democrat had the solution to stop all mass murders, I would be more open minded. But knowing Democrats, it has nothing more to do with stopping school shootings than Commie Care did to make sure all Americans had the ability to get health insurance. It's a front to forward their ulterior motive.

Millions of Americans got insurance under the ACA. A few battered housewife Republicans who take whatever abuse their bosses dish out lost it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Blame is twofold:

1. the shooter

2. the system that allows unstable individuals to obtain and possess firearms

Means, opportunity and motivation: The first two are easy to identify, the last not so simple.

This ^^^ is why gun controls need to be considered, and not efforts to scapegoat the mentally ill, most of whom are peaceful.

So now you're saying that the shooter wasn't mentally ill and that there'll be no insanity plea available during the trial.

*****SMILE*****

They should have taken the deal he offered re a life sentence. The school system is not gong to come off well in a trial, given they dope up kids and make them even crazier.

I pushed the funny button against my better judgment. The fact is some posts are so stupid, so off topic and thus so idiotic they do not even make the grade of an idiot-gram.

So, you're sayin' you fit right in?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Blame is twofold:

1. the shooter

2. the system that allows unstable individuals to obtain and possess firearms

Means, opportunity and motivation: The first two are easy to identify, the last not so simple.

This ^^^ is why gun controls need to be considered, and not efforts to scapegoat the mentally ill, most of whom are peaceful.

So now you're saying that the shooter wasn't mentally ill and that there'll be no insanity plea available during the trial.

*****SMILE*****

They should have taken the deal he offered re a life sentence. The school system is not gong to come off well in a trial, given they dope up kids and make them even crazier.

I pushed the funny button against my better judgment. The fact is some posts are so stupid, so off topic and thus so idiotic they do not even make the grade of an idiot-gram.

So, you're sayin' you fit right in?

So claims the master ^^^ of the logical fallacy!

Most people deviate on occasion from their usual persiflage to foolish posts, as I do when responding to any comment posted by PoliticalChic, a known toxic narcissist incapable of civil discourse.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Means, opportunity and motivation: The first two are easy to identify, the last not so simple.

This ^^^ is why gun controls need to be considered, and not efforts to scapegoat the mentally ill, most of whom are peaceful.

So now you're saying that the shooter wasn't mentally ill and that there'll be no insanity plea available during the trial.

*****SMILE*****

They should have taken the deal he offered re a life sentence. The school system is not gong to come off well in a trial, given they dope up kids and make them even crazier.

I pushed the funny button against my better judgment. The fact is some posts are so stupid, so off topic and thus so idiotic they do not even make the grade of an idiot-gram.

So, you're sayin' you fit right in?

So claims the master ^^^ of the logical fallacy!

Most people deviate on occasion from their usual persiflage to foolish posts, as I do when responding to any comment posted by PoliticalChic, a known toxic narcissist incapable of civil discourse.

You misunderstand.....When you enter any discussion with moi.....it is on this basis:
Welcome to the karma cafe....there are no menus but you will get what you deserve

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You don't think racism plays a role in our crime rate?

That's adorable.

Race plays a role, but not racism. People of race commit the most crime, but that's the extent of it.

Yeah, it's called "Checks and Balances". Look it up some time. We didn't elect a dictator when Trump "won" (even though most people voted against him.)

When a judge stops a President from enforcing law passed by the United States Congress, that's judicial activism which is something our founders were against. If you knew what checks and balances meant, you'd understand that.

Millions of Americans got insurance under the ACA. A few battered housewife Republicans who take whatever abuse their bosses dish out lost it.

And millions more lost their insurance. The only people that benefited were lowlifes that sweep floors at Walmart. Most everybody else got screwed.