74 school shootings in 77 weeks...Worth it's own thread.

[Iceweasel]

The bottom line, I'm more concerned with my ability to protect my home than I am with your feelings.

But the stats show clearly that you are actually putting you and your family at higher risk when you have a gun in the home. You're not protecting anyone. Why do you hate your own family?

Why do you clearly hate thinking? You're an emotional basket case.

 

[RDD_1210]

No you're not. A locked door can be breached in under a minute. A window can be broken in a split second. A gun will stop your dogs in their tracks. BTW, everyone believes their dog will protect them if attacked. Studies have proven that sentimental belief wrong. View the 2 videos below if you don't believe me. Now.......30 seconds after the break in with someone standing in your child's room and your dogs dead, what is your next course of action? Words? Good luck.

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

bullshit 366,000,000 guns in american homes. homes with guns have no higher incidence than homes without guns . good god you guys are the biggest spin doctors going.

Yet the actual facts don't agree with you. Do you know more than these studies do?

 

[Meister]

So lets adopt Switzerlands gun laws. Deal?

No.

Of course not. You're just another that is ok with children being shot in the face at school so that you can have your precious toys.

It'll be a great day when your generation dies off.

Hurry up.

You have not ever answered my question, dumbfuck. What law would have stopped the incident in Troutdale?

You ignore the fact that we do have laws in place and they are ignored and not enforced.
So I'll die and you can roll down the sidewalk with your head up your ass.

 

[RDD_1210]

The bottom line, I'm more concerned with my ability to protect my home than I am with your feelings.

But the stats show clearly that you are actually putting you and your family at higher risk when you have a gun in the home. You're not protecting anyone. Why do you hate your own family?

Why do you clearly hate thinking? You're an emotional basket case.

I'm using facts and figures. You're using selfishness and greed.

 

[RDD_1210]

No.

Of course not. You're just another that is ok with children being shot in the face at school so that you can have your precious toys.

It'll be a great day when your generation dies off.

Hurry up.

You have not ever answered my question, dumbfuck. What law would have stopped the incident in Troutdale?

You ignore the fact that we do have laws in place and they are ignored and not enforced.
So I'll die and you can roll down the sidewalk with your head up your ass.

A combination of the laws I suggested would help reduce all gun related murders

 

[martybegan]

There was another shooting yesterday, I hear. This is becoming commonplace. If I lived in the US, I think I would keep my kids home from school. Too much risk of them becoming the victim of a gun wielding maniac.

No. No it isn't. There are 140,000 schools in the US. There are over 50,000,000 students in the US. The average number of days of instruction is 180 to 185 per year. Do the math and the odds of any given student being shot on any given day of the school year is miniscule. The answer of how to prevent this isn't to disarm the populace in violation of the US Constitution, it's to better protect the schools.

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

 

[RDD_1210]

No. No it isn't. There are 140,000 schools in the US. There are over 50,000,000 students in the US. The average number of days of instruction is 180 to 185 per year. Do the math and the odds of any given student being shot on any given day of the school year is miniscule. The answer of how to prevent this isn't to disarm the populace in violation of the US Constitution, it's to better protect the schools.

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

How many ******* times do you need to be told no one is suggesting a gun ban.

And don't bother pointing to an isolated example as some sort of proof. I can easily point to a right wing nut job and say "look, all gun owners want to go on murdering sprees".

 

[depotoo]

Interesting true story-

An April 30, 1866 editorial in the New York Times argued against students carrying pistols, citing "...pistols being dropped on the floor at balls or being exploded in very inconvenient ways. A boy of 12 has his pantaloons made with a pistol pocket; and this at a boarding-school filled with boys, who, we suppose, do or wish to do the same thing. We would advise parents to look into it, and learn whether shooting is to be a part of the scholastic course which may be practiced on their boys; or else we advise them to see that their own boys are properly armed with the most approved and deadly-pistol, and that there may be an equal chance at least of their shooting as of being shot."

 

[kwc57]

Actually, I don't have a need to protect anyone in my home. We lock our doors at night and have three dogs. We are perfectly safe from gun wielding nutters.

No you're not. A locked door can be breached in under a minute. A window can be broken in a split second. A gun will stop your dogs in their tracks. BTW, everyone believes their dog will protect them if attacked. Studies have proven that sentimental belief wrong. View the 2 videos below if you don't believe me. Now.......30 seconds after the break in with someone standing in your child's room and your dogs dead, what is your next course of action? Words? Good luck.

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

Hey fucktard, there is a methodology to amending the Constitution. Use it or shut the **** up. You don't like those big bad boom sticks. They skeer you. We get it. I'm fine with the fact that you want to "use your words" when something bad comes your way. I applaud your willingness to cleanse the gene pool for the rest of us. BTW, did you know that statistically, if you eat food, there is an increased risk you could get fat?

 

[Meister]

Of course not. You're just another that is ok with children being shot in the face at school so that you can have your precious toys.

It'll be a great day when your generation dies off.

Hurry up.

You have not ever answered my question, dumbfuck. What law would have stopped the incident in Troutdale?

You ignore the fact that we do have laws in place and they are ignored and not enforced.
So I'll die and you can roll down the sidewalk with your head up your ass.

A combination of the laws I suggested would help reduce all gun related murders

AGAIN, I ASK

What law would have stopped the incident in Troutdale?

Be specific in your answer

 

[rightwinger]

No. No it isn't. There are 140,000 schools in the US. There are over 50,000,000 students in the US. The average number of days of instruction is 180 to 185 per year. Do the math and the odds of any given student being shot on any given day of the school year is miniscule. The answer of how to prevent this isn't to disarm the populace in violation of the US Constitution, it's to better protect the schools.

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

Only 20 six year olds were massacred at Newtown

Small number considering the number of six year olds in the US. Maybe when over half the six year olds are murdered we can start doing something about gun violence

 

[kwc57]

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

Golly, next thing you know there will be a statistic on how owning a car makes it more likely you'll get into an automobile accident.

The bottom line, I'm more concerned with my ability to protect my home than I am with your feelings.

But the stats show clearly that you are actually putting you and your family at higher risk when you have a gun in the home. You're not protecting anyone. Why do you hate your own family?

What a pantie pisser.

 

[martybegan]

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

Only 20 six year olds were massacred at Newtown

Small number considering the number of six year olds in the US. Maybe when over half the six year olds are murdered we can start doing something about gun violence

The problem is what you are proposing would not stop something like this. That gives us pause to consider your motives, which are of course, to ban gun ownership by non governmental actors.

 

[Meister]

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

Golly, next thing you know there will be a statistic on how owning a car makes it more likely you'll get into an automobile accident.

The bottom line, I'm more concerned with my ability to protect my home than I am with your feelings.

But the stats show clearly that you are actually putting you and your family at higher risk when you have a gun in the home. You're not protecting anyone. Why do you hate your own family?

Having knives in your home adds to the risk factor.

 

[martybegan]

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

How many ******* times do you need to be told no one is suggesting a gun ban.

And don't bother pointing to an isolated example as some sort of proof. I can easily point to a right wing nut job and say "look, all gun owners want to go on murdering sprees".

But it would be the only gun control thing to prevent the tragedies you guys keep referencing. Everything you propose just makes it harder for law abiding citizens to get firearms, and does nothing to prevent a determined mass murderer from getting theirs.

 

[kwc57]

There was another shooting yesterday, I hear. This is becoming commonplace. If I lived in the US, I think I would keep my kids home from school. Too much risk of them becoming the victim of a gun wielding maniac.

No. No it isn't. There are 140,000 schools in the US. There are over 50,000,000 students in the US. The average number of days of instruction is 180 to 185 per year. Do the math and the odds of any given student being shot on any given day of the school year is miniscule. The answer of how to prevent this isn't to disarm the populace in violation of the US Constitution, it's to better protect the schools.

One of the most ridiculous responses I have ever heard regarding school massacres

Liberal sentiment and emotion doesn't do well in the face of logic and fact. As pointed out earlier, your child has a much higher likelihood of drowning in your bathtub than they do being shot at school. Are you going to quit giving them baths or protect them while taking a bath. The statistical likelihood of your child being shot at school is very, very small. There are ways to easily increase the safety factor against it without violating someone's constitutional rights. You know this, your politics and feelings just won't allow you to admit it. Grow a set for God's sake.

Since Newtown, there have been 15 incidents.....not the bullshit 74 lie that Bloomberg's group put out. Compared to 140,000 schools and 50 million students going to school 185 days per year, children are much safer at school than many other places you take them.....including home. Numbers don't lie....as long as you use the real numbers.

A closer look: How many school shootings since Newtown? - CNN.com

 

[rightwinger]

Its called risk assessment. The risk of a child being shot at a school is orders of magnitude less then the chance that same child is killed in a car accident, and both are small risks.

If you managed to ban guns the risk of creating a civil war would outweigh the decrease in risk you would eventually achieve.

Only 20 six year olds were massacred at Newtown

Small number considering the number of six year olds in the US. Maybe when over half the six year olds are murdered we can start doing something about gun violence

The problem is what you are proposing would not stop something like this. That gives us pause to consider your motives, which are of course, to ban gun ownership by non governmental actors.

Its not that we refuse to ban gun ownership, but we refuse to do a ******* thing about massacred six year olds

After all, we can't stop all murders so we should not try to stop any

 

[depotoo]

Another interesting tidbit-

*** May 18, 1927 Bath, Michigan School treasurer Andrew Kehoe, after killing his wife and destroying his house and farm, blew up the Bath Consolidated School by detonating dynamite in the basement of the school, killing 38 people, mostly children. He then pulled up to the school in his Ford car, then blew the car up, killing himself and four others. Only one shot was fired in order to detonate dynamite in the car. This was deadliest act of mass murder at a school in the United States.

 

[Spoonman]

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

bullshit 366,000,000 guns in american homes. homes with guns have no higher incidence than homes without guns . good god you guys are the biggest spin doctors going.

Yet the actual facts don't agree with you. Do you know more than these studies do?

yea, i know the studies don't agree with what you claim

 

[hunarcy]

Actually, I don't have a need to protect anyone in my home. We lock our doors at night and have three dogs. We are perfectly safe from gun wielding nutters.

No you're not. A locked door can be breached in under a minute. A window can be broken in a split second. A gun will stop your dogs in their tracks. BTW, everyone believes their dog will protect them if attacked. Studies have proven that sentimental belief wrong. View the 2 videos below if you don't believe me. Now.......30 seconds after the break in with someone standing in your child's room and your dogs dead, what is your next course of action? Words? Good luck.

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

News9.com Videos - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

And having a gun in the home has been proven to be more dangerous than not having a firearm in the home. The stats and reality just never agree with you selfish gun babies.

"Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. "

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study

Ridiculous...just because two sets of numbers appear to be correlated does not mean they are linked in any way. For example, I could tell you that the murder rate in Washington D.C and the average peanut butter consumption per resident are correlated, but that doesn’t mean that eating peanut butter causes murders. Here, I have a news flash for you. I have found that alligator-related death rates tend to be higher in states that have more alligators. Automotive fatalities are higher among people who own cars. Drowning tends to happen more to those people who swim. And 100% of Americans who’ve eaten mashed potatoes will die.

Your study fails to convince.