Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting

[kaz]

If cons want students with guns, then they are simply proving themselves to be dumb

Another butt hurt liar. No one has advocated arming students. We advocated allowing teachers and administrators who have a CC to CC.

That you have to lie shows you know you're losing this debate ... badly.

Liar = loser. That's you

 

[kaz]

We banned guns from schools, just like you wanted. Even people with concealed carry permits trained to use their guns safely didn't have them. And your plan worked. No one had a gun and was able to defend themselves and shoot back. And 17 people died because of it.

You owe us an explanation. What is wrong with your plan? Why isn't it working?

Maybe you can ask your drug dealer why banning guns doesn't work the next time you buy a doobie ...

Actually the gun nuts (still) need to essplain how morphing schoolrooms into war zones and putting firearms in educators' pockets where they can and will (a) be grabbed by a would-be shooter who doesn't even have to worry about bringing his own into the building; (b) be the instrument of crossfire that hits some innocent bystander, and (c) ensure that in the event a shooter does come in with his own arms, the teacher will be the first target, leaving a room full of kids with no adult in charge at all.

(C) is the most troubling, since it means that once you put the word out that "teachers are armed here", even if a given teacher declines to participate in Rambo Education and stays arm-free ---- she becomes a shooter's first target, just because some dickheads on the outside insist on foisting arms into what's supposed to be an educational institution. All she wanted to do was teach -- her blood is on their hands.

Nothing about those questions is "left" or "right". They're more about "life" and "death".

If you want to live in the past, that's up to you. But in the modern day, shooters are targeting gun free zones because they know they are gun free.

And an administrator or educator who has a CC is already trained in gun safety. It's about living in the real world, not the fantasy in your head where a gun free zone sign will make shooters stay away. Actually, it draws them here.

It's funny how leftists like to mock conservatives for not following science. Then you turn around and think signs and laws will stop shooters from killing people. Here's a ball, look, it's bouncy ...

 

[rshermn]

Fact is the truth is much more complicated than a political slogan

What's "complicated" about that in shooting after shooting in "gun free zones," only the shooter is armed? Explain what confuses you about that

Trumpians salivate like Pavlov's Dogs over zingy political slogans

It's hilarious how you just told me the world isn't simplistic for something that is simple. Then you turn around with duh, dar, you're not a Democrat, so you're a Trump supporter. Irony is lost on shallow people like you.

Gotcha, Fido. There are Democrats and Trump supporters. Not Democrat = Trump supporter. That's the world, at least as far as you're capable of processing it.

You need to spend more time chasing sticks and barking at cars, thinking's not your forte

The original Gun Free School Zone law was passed overwhelmingly by both parties and signed by a Republican President. That bill tried to mandate punishment for students who were caught bringing guns to school. Furthermore it allow for authorized armed personnel. Last I heard of the most recent attack, there were at least four officers who did not advance toward the shooter even though they were armed. So if(and that's a big if) the gun free zones are the main problem in stopping these shootings, the blame for their existences does not lie totally on one side or the other.

It's leftists who are all over the board arguing that the solution to our existing gun laws not working is to pass more gun laws. You're the ones fighting against allowing CCs by teachers and administrators. You're the ones who's plan is to keep 300 million guns and other weapons away from people who want to murder and you're the ones fighting to maintain that we have no southern border.

You even gave the example where four armed police didn't enter while teachers and administrators who were trained and inside weren't allowed to defend themselves.

Leftists used to be at least honest enough to say that mass shooters wouldn't be stopped by gun laws. You just have no intellectual honesty left

That was because they looked around the world, and realized that no other nation had even 5% of the gun shootings and gun deaths as we do. Dipshit. Because you, as a con troll simply parrot what the NRA and politicians owned by the nra want you to say. Those who are not cons do not want to be told what to believe and what to say as cons do. And they have noticed no other country has the deaths that we do.
Then, they actually value the lives of kids and other humans more than their right to own and shoot a weapon that has no Earthly use except killing people. Hundreds of dead people is a MUCH higher cost, in their mind, than loosing a useless war weapon. To thinking people. But not to cons. Cause cons are stupid, and simply do what they are told.

 

[kaz]

Fact is the truth is much more complicated than a political slogan

What's "complicated" about that in shooting after shooting in "gun free zones," only the shooter is armed? Explain what confuses you about that

Trumpians salivate like Pavlov's Dogs over zingy political slogans

It's hilarious how you just told me the world isn't simplistic for something that is simple. Then you turn around with duh, dar, you're not a Democrat, so you're a Trump supporter. Irony is lost on shallow people like you.

Gotcha, Fido. There are Democrats and Trump supporters. Not Democrat = Trump supporter. That's the world, at least as far as you're capable of processing it.

You need to spend more time chasing sticks and barking at cars, thinking's not your forte

The original Gun Free School Zone law was passed overwhelmingly by both parties and signed by a Republican President. That bill tried to mandate punishment for students who were caught bringing guns to school. Furthermore it allow for authorized armed personnel. Last I heard of the most recent attack, there were at least four officers who did not advance toward the shooter even though they were armed. So if(and that's a big if) the gun free zones are the main problem in stopping these shootings, the blame for their existences does not lie totally on one side or the other.

It's leftists who are all over the board arguing that the solution to our existing gun laws not working is to pass more gun laws. You're the ones fighting against allowing CCs by teachers and administrators. You're the ones who's plan is to keep 300 million guns and other weapons away from people who want to murder and you're the ones fighting to maintain that we have no southern border.

You even gave the example where four armed police didn't enter while teachers and administrators who were trained and inside weren't allowed to defend themselves.

Leftists used to be at least honest enough to say that mass shooters wouldn't be stopped by gun laws. You just have no intellectual honesty left

That was because they looked around the world, and realized that no other nation had even 5% of the gun shootings and gun deaths as we do. Dipshit. Because you, as a con troll simply parrot what the NRA and politicians owned by the nra want you to say. Those who are not cons do not want to be told what to believe and what to say as cons do. And they have noticed no other country has the deaths that we do.
Then, they actually value the lives of kids and other humans more than their right to own and shoot a weapon that has no Earthly use except killing people. Hundreds of dead people is a MUCH higher cost, in their mind, than loosing a useless war weapon. To thinking people. But not to cons. Cause cons are stupid, and simply do what they are told.

You'll have to debate with a con what con's think. You're a vacuous idiot who thinks the proposal is to arm "everyone" and you're talking about anyone parroting anyone.

[media]

 

[Pogo]

If you want to live in the past, that's up to you. But in the modern day, shooters are targeting gun free zones because they know they are gun free.

Ass-suming causations not in evidence. I uh, don't think anybody looks at a "gun free zone" sign and thinks, "Hey, that's my cue to shoot guns". Such signs were put up *AFTER* rampant shootings made them necessary, not before.

So you're cherrypicking your own causation and running with it as if it were established causation. Case in point, 'splain this --- school shooters are always alienated males. If a "gun free zone" sign is what, no pun intended, triggers shootings, which still doesn't explain the shootings before they got put there, why don't we have an equal number of female shooters? Do not the signs read the same way to males and females?

And an administrator or educator who has a CC is already trained in gun safety. It's about living in the real world, not the fantasy in your head where a gun free zone sign will make shooters stay away. Actually, it draws them here.

Same specious ass-sumption. See above.

It's funny how leftists like to mock conservatives for not following science. Then you turn around and think signs and laws will stop shooters from killing people. Here's a ball, look, it's bouncy ...

STILL same specious ass-sumption. And an ironic twist since science (data) actually disproves the sign mythology anyway.


So all I see here is a specious causation theory that's easily, again no pun intended, shot full of holes, and no address of my points at all. No answer whatsoever as to why Rump, the NRA and assorted gun nuts with no involvement in schools want to paint a bullseye on teachers. Or create war zones in what's supposed to be a learning environment. Or why anybody would want to live in such a world. Or what's going to prevent some festering alienated male student from grabbing a teacher's gun since as we all know teachers never have occasion to turn their backs. Or why we want to address gunfire with even more gunfire. Nothing. Zero.

 

[kaz]

If you want to live in the past, that's up to you. But in the modern day, shooters are targeting gun free zones because they know they are gun free.

Ass-suming causations not in evidence. I uh, don't think anybody looks at a "gun free zone" sign and thinks, "Hey, that's my cue to shoot guns". Such signs were put up *AFTER* rampant shootings made them necessary, not before.

So you're cherrypicking your own causation and running with it as if it were established causation. Case in point, 'splain this --- school shooters are always alienated males. If a "gun free zone" sign is what, no pun intended, triggers shootings, which still doesn't explain the shootings before they got put there, why don't we have an equal number of female shooters? Do not the signs read the same way to males and females?

And an administrator or educator who has a CC is already trained in gun safety. It's about living in the real world, not the fantasy in your head where a gun free zone sign will make shooters stay away. Actually, it draws them here.

Same specious ass-sumption. See above.

It's funny how leftists like to mock conservatives for not following science. Then you turn around and think signs and laws will stop shooters from killing people. Here's a ball, look, it's bouncy ...

STILL same specious ass-sumption. And an ironic twist since science (data) actually disproves the sign mythology anyway.

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

Pogo: That's odd. Do you notice more people are eating tacos in Taco Bell than in McDonalds? I wonder what the causality of that is?

 

[rshermn]

If cons want students with guns, then they are simply proving themselves to be dumb

Another butt hurt liar. No one has advocated arming students. We advocated allowing teachers and administrators who have a CC to CC.

That you have to lie shows you know you're losing this debate ... badly.

Liar = loser. That's you

Perhaps you just are brain dead. The idea of a gun free zone is to keep guns out of the hands of students. An issue the NRA has opposed. Dipshit. Maybe if you remove your head from it/s normal resting place, you will be able to think more clearly.
By the way, do you know who Wayne LaPierre is, me boy? In 1999 he said, in the annual CPAC meeting, "We believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America’s schools. Period.". Then, he had to change his mind. Lying shit.

 

[Pogo]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

 

[mudwhistle]

Leftists owe the rest of us an explanation for the Florida shooting.



easy ... the dems MADE RW's join the NRA and fight tooth and nail for assault rifle freedom.

es

The problem with Lefties is their solutions always involve screwing some group over to benefit their victims.

The list of victims is long:

• Muslims
• Blacks
• Hispanics
• Women
• Homosexuals
• Transsexuals
• Illegal Immigrants
• The Poor
• The Handicapped
• Convicted Felons
• Children
• Fat People
• Drug Traffickers
• Foreign Governments
• Communist Dictators
• Religious Fanatics
• Terrorists
• Islamic Theocracies
• People that can't figure out what sex they are

 

[kaz]

If cons want students with guns, then they are simply proving themselves to be dumb

Another butt hurt liar. No one has advocated arming students. We advocated allowing teachers and administrators who have a CC to CC.

That you have to lie shows you know you're losing this debate ... badly.

Liar = loser. That's you

Perhaps you just are brain dead. The idea of a gun free zone is to keep guns out of the hands of students. An issue the NRA has opposed

Liar. The NRA opposes keeping guns out of the hands of administrators and teachers. That you have to lie shows you know you're getting your ass handed to you

[media]

 

[kaz]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

 

[Pogo]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

 

[kaz]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, there is one part of this discussion that NOBODY has hit on yet.

It's the fact that kids are pretty observant, and if they are told that there are armed teachers in school, one of the FIRST things they are going to do is to try to figure out who is and isn't armed. And, chances are, after about two to three months, they will have it figured out which teacher is carrying and which ones aren't.

After that? Then you will probably have some delinquents who will try to see if they can steal the teachers gun while they aren't looking.

That is a formula for disaster.

 

[BlindBoo]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

I don't think most of the students (or former student) mass murderers target their schools because of the gun free zone laws at all.

 

[kaz]

I didn't assume shit. Google the top 30 mass shootings and count how many of them were in gun free zones.

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?

That you think causation between gun free zones and shootings isn't established is just being ODD, there is no virtue in that.

It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

I don't think most of the students (or former student) mass murderers target their schools because of the gun free zone laws at all.

The shooter shot freely until the timer in his head went off that the cops could be arriving, he ditched his guns and went out with the other students.

But you don't see any connection with it being a gun free zone.

Of course you do, you're just intellectually dishonest like the rest of the leftists. The more stupid a leftist argument is, the more proud you are of believing it

 

[ABikerSailor]

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?



It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

I don't think most of the students (or former student) mass murderers target their schools because of the gun free zone laws at all.

The shooter shot freely until the timer in his head went off that the cops could be arriving, he ditched his guns and went out with the other students.

But you don't see any connection with it being a gun free zone.

Of course you do, you're just intellectually dishonest like the rest of the leftists. The more stupid a leftist argument is, the more proud you are of believing it

You know, that is another thing that disturbs me about this whole situation. If the cops stayed outside to check the exits, then why in the hell was the shooter able to get out with the other students and then go shopping?

Not only did the SRO and deputies fail by staying outside for 4 minutes while kids were getting shot, but they also allowed the shooter to sneak through the perimeter.

 

[BlindBoo]

Of course you did. Classic Association Fallacy. Two pieces of circumstance in the same place "must" mean one causes the other. Wellllllllllllll no, it does not.

Doesn't begin to essplain the shootings that led to the signs being put up in the first place, now does it?



It's being logical. You have a causation theory --- prove the causation exists.

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

I don't think most of the students (or former student) mass murderers target their schools because of the gun free zone laws at all.

The shooter shot freely until the timer in his head went off that the cops could be arriving, he ditched his guns and went out with the other students.

But you don't see any connection with it being a gun free zone.

Of course you do, you're just intellectually dishonest like the rest of the leftists. The more stupid a leftist argument is, the more proud you are of believing it

While it may have played a role his his strategy, I don't believe it was the deciding factors in his decision to shoot the place up.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, instead of having a whole bunch of armed teachers running around, why don't we look at one of the root causes?

Bullying.

Most kids who shoot up their schools do so because they have something against the school itself, or they have an axe to grind with some of the students in it.

A comprehensive bullying program ran by a small group of teachers would do more good than arming everyone IMHO.

 

[kaz]

Pogo: Why would a shooter go to a gun free zone? I don't get it

Sure you do, Pogo

Now you're just reiterating over and over that you CAN'T prove the causation. Nor can you answer the pre-sign shootings that spurred the signs --- without which causation no signs would have existed or ever been contemplated.

We seem to have doubled down on an Association Fallacy with the good ol' reliable Everybody Knows Fallacy on top of it.

Theory is thus dismissed.

Yes, shooters go to gun free zones where they don't run into other guns because the gun free zones are working for honest citizens.

Pogo: WTF causes that? It's a total mystery. Maybe it's ice cream stands?

I don't think most of the students (or former student) mass murderers target their schools because of the gun free zone laws at all.

The shooter shot freely until the timer in his head went off that the cops could be arriving, he ditched his guns and went out with the other students.

But you don't see any connection with it being a gun free zone.

Of course you do, you're just intellectually dishonest like the rest of the leftists. The more stupid a leftist argument is, the more proud you are of believing it

While it may have played a role his his strategy, I don't believe it was the deciding factors in his decision to shoot the place up.

He'd have just as soon gone to somewhere in Florida which wasn't a gun free zone? That wasn't a factor in his choice, just his strategy?

Florida?

Wow, he was lucky then that he picked the gun free zone since he didn't really care.

There were almost 1.4 million valid CC permits in Florida as of the last data two years ago. Double Texas. But he wasn't concerned about that. Sure he wasn't.

Let's go more your speed. Here's a stick, It's a stick! There you go, jump up and down, ok, I'm throwing it ... now! Good boy Boo, Good boy. That was great. OK, sure, I'll throw it again ...