2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 111,975
- 52,247
- 2,290
This shows us why teenagers should not be listened to about gun control......they are irrational and emotional.....and don't know what they are talking about...
The theory from the 2 anti gun fascist teens of Parkland....since the guy disarmed the shooter in Tennessee with his hands,, you don't need to arm teachers.....
WALSH: Behold The Absolute Worst Anti-Gun Argument Ever Made
Some gun control advocates see it differently. The standard gun control talking points do not apply in this case because the shooter's guns had already been seizedby authorities prior to this massacre, so the gun grabbers took a different approach this time around. Many of them immediately pointed to Shaw as proof that you don't need a gun to defend yourself against an armed assailant. The Parkland activists, in particular, were quick to seize on this idea. As Emma Gonzalez put it:
"The local police say a man at the scene wrestled his gun away - looks like you don’t need to arm a teacher (or a resource officer) to stop a shooting. There goes the sales pitch for @SmithWessonCorp."
That tweet was "liked" 20,000 times. David Hogg's tweet making the same argument was "liked" more than 50,000 times.
Apparently the gun grabbers believe they've really stumbled onto some kind of brilliant point here.
They have not. On the contrary, they have stumbled onto something utterly nonsensical.
-----
The important takeaway from the case of James Shaw and the Waffle House shooter is that a good guy stood up and fought back. The law did not stop the shooting. The gun-free policy at the restaurant did not stop the shooting. The police could not get there in time to stop the shooting. It fell on the shoulders of an average person who decided not to be a victim. Fortunately, he was brave and strong enough to fight even at such a disadvantage. I fail to see how anyone was safer because of that disadvantage. Shaw prevailed in spite of it, not because of it.
The theory from the 2 anti gun fascist teens of Parkland....since the guy disarmed the shooter in Tennessee with his hands,, you don't need to arm teachers.....
WALSH: Behold The Absolute Worst Anti-Gun Argument Ever Made
Some gun control advocates see it differently. The standard gun control talking points do not apply in this case because the shooter's guns had already been seizedby authorities prior to this massacre, so the gun grabbers took a different approach this time around. Many of them immediately pointed to Shaw as proof that you don't need a gun to defend yourself against an armed assailant. The Parkland activists, in particular, were quick to seize on this idea. As Emma Gonzalez put it:
"The local police say a man at the scene wrestled his gun away - looks like you don’t need to arm a teacher (or a resource officer) to stop a shooting. There goes the sales pitch for @SmithWessonCorp."
That tweet was "liked" 20,000 times. David Hogg's tweet making the same argument was "liked" more than 50,000 times.
Apparently the gun grabbers believe they've really stumbled onto some kind of brilliant point here.
They have not. On the contrary, they have stumbled onto something utterly nonsensical.
-----
The important takeaway from the case of James Shaw and the Waffle House shooter is that a good guy stood up and fought back. The law did not stop the shooting. The gun-free policy at the restaurant did not stop the shooting. The police could not get there in time to stop the shooting. It fell on the shoulders of an average person who decided not to be a victim. Fortunately, he was brave and strong enough to fight even at such a disadvantage. I fail to see how anyone was safer because of that disadvantage. Shaw prevailed in spite of it, not because of it.
