Stephen Crowder, Top 5 AR-15 myths...banning them is a Trojan Horse...

[hadit]

Now you're just projecting. You have no way of knowing what that guard knew was in the building or what he didn't want to face.

Exactly
The guards had no idea how many shooters were there and where they were.......but were expected to charge in armed only with a sidearm

And now our President expects a teacher to do it

And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs.

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

 

[2aguy]

Exactly
The guards had no idea how many shooters were there and where they were.......but were expected to charge in armed only with a sidearm

And now our President expects a teacher to do it

And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs.

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Are you kidding....dead kids are gold to the anti gun movement...if we end gun free zones by putting armed guards and arming staff and teachers into schools...where will they get dead kids to push for gun control?

 

[hadit]

And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs.

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Are you kidding....dead kids are gold to the anti gun movement...if we end gun free zones by putting armed guards and arming staff and teachers into schools...where will they get dead kids to push for gun control?

It's sick that they insist we focus on guns instead of school safety. If banning the AR-15 doesn't result in safer kids, what have we accomplished? Nothing more than letting a few feel warm and fuzzy because they got one over on the "gun nuts".

 

[jon_berzerk]

That's one of the goofiest things I ever heard. We wear seat belts, but people still die in car wrecks. Does that mean seat belts aren't a good idea?

people still die in car wrecks yet no call to ban them

A car is not designed and built for only one purpose. To kill.

Not all guns are designed to kill, either. Shooting competition guns are designed solely to be as accurate as possible, not to kill.

Tiny niche market.

Still accurate.

it is hardly a niche

this is 09 and it has only grown from there

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity

 

[jon_berzerk]

"New High for Overall Participation—34.4 Million Shooters"

hardly a niche

 

[BULLDOG]

Exactly
The guards had no idea how many shooters were there and where they were.......but were expected to charge in armed only with a sidearm

And now our President expects a teacher to do it

And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs.

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

 

[BULLDOG]

people still die in car wrecks yet no call to ban them

A car is not designed and built for only one purpose. To kill.

Not all guns are designed to kill, either. Shooting competition guns are designed solely to be as accurate as possible, not to kill.

Tiny niche market.

Still accurate.

it is hardly a niche

this is 09 and it has only grown from there

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity

So now you're trying to say the AR was designed for target shooting. You know that's goofy, right?

 

[hadit]

And why were they expected to only have a sidearm? Because anything else is scary in certain quarters. Regardless, they didn't do their jobs.

As for the teachers, no, you don't require them to be armed, but the ones that have CC permits and want to have a fighting chance if they are the last line of defense for the kids SHOULD be allowed to carry.

If you're going to rant, at least do it honestly.

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

 

[BULLDOG]

Right, and a short CC course qualifies them to engage in a combat situation. You bet.

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Crowder nails it....

He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
.
The anti gunners want them too....

Charles Whitman didn't have an AR-15. He used an M-1 carbine. People give the AR-15 too much credit.

So why did the US military pick the fully auto version of the AR to be their goto combat weapon? The AR and the M16 are identical other than the full auto capability. ARs weren't even built until the M16 patent ran out.

If they don't have the full auto, and I don't even think the M4 has that anymore, then they aren't identical......you are such a doofus.

AR-15s are civilian rifles also used by police, they are the most common rifle in the country and so are the most obvious rifle protected by our 2nd Amendment....

You guys want all the rifles and all the pistols......we know this, and we are going to fight you all the way...

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. The AR couldn't have even been built until the M16 patents ran out.

Wrong Colt bought the patient for the AR-15 from Armilight and the first commercially available AR-15 hit the market in 1964 the same year that the M16 was adopted by the US Military.

 

[hadit]

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

And you seem to think that a teacher guarding the door to his/her classroom is the equivalent of a squad of Marines working through Falujah. Stop working the extremes. You have to admit that an armed teacher at least has a fighting chance when a shooter attempts to enter his classroom, whereas an unarmed one has none. I want the kids to have that last line of defense if the teacher is willing to provide it. Don't you?

 

[Dale Smith]

cars accidentally kill more people than rifles or all guns.......they kill more children than guns do every single day......

Incorrect barrel stroker

Gun Deaths Have Now Surpassed Motor Vehicle Deaths In 21 States (And Counting)

Just wanted to remind you per our agreement that if General Kelly is still on the job in three days that you are to take a one month sabbatical from this forum. Have you any plans for the month of March?

 

[2aguy]

Like I said, at least be honest. Why not have more extensive training for teachers already possessing a CC permit that want to provide a last line of defense for the kids? You're leaping to extreme conclusions, getting nowhere.

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

And yet.....several states are already doing this.......for years.....

 

[jon_berzerk]

A car is not designed and built for only one purpose. To kill.

Not all guns are designed to kill, either. Shooting competition guns are designed solely to be as accurate as possible, not to kill.

Tiny niche market.

Still accurate.

it is hardly a niche

this is 09 and it has only grown from there

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity

So now you're trying to say the AR was designed for target shooting. You know that's goofy, right?

you are goofy

there is a big market for match grade ar-15s

either you are trying to look ignorant

or are you seriously lack that basic knowledge

Rainier Arms AR-15 Precision Match Grade BCG - Nitride

The Rainier Arms Precision Match Grade Phosphate BCG - 5.56 Nitride is machined and finished to a higher standard to meet and exceed all Mil Spec. ... We are so confident in our Rainier Arms BCG we offer them with a limited lifetime warranty. So if at anytime your Rainier Arms BCG

 

[BULLDOG]

Crowder nails it....

He demonstrates the rate of fire with a .357 lever action rifle.....he shows a semi auto shotgun....
.
The anti gunners want them too....

Charles Whitman didn't have an AR-15. He used an M-1 carbine. People give the AR-15 too much credit.

So why did the US military pick the fully auto version of the AR to be their goto combat weapon? The AR and the M16 are identical other than the full auto capability. ARs weren't even built until the M16 patent ran out.

If they don't have the full auto, and I don't even think the M4 has that anymore, then they aren't identical......you are such a doofus.

AR-15s are civilian rifles also used by police, they are the most common rifle in the country and so are the most obvious rifle protected by our 2nd Amendment....

You guys want all the rifles and all the pistols......we know this, and we are going to fight you all the way...

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. The AR couldn't have even been built until the M16 patents ran out.

Wrong Colt bought the patient for the AR-15 from Armilight and the first commercially available AR-15 hit the market in 1964 the same year that the M16 was adopted by the US Military.

Actually, the Air Force bought them in 63
AR 15 Rifle - A Brief History & Historical Time Line

 

[BULLDOG]

If you care to go back and check,YOU are the one who said teachers with a CC, with no mention of additional training. .

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

And you seem to think that a teacher guarding the door to his/her classroom is the equivalent of a squad of Marines working through Falujah. Stop working the extremes. You have to admit that an armed teacher at least has a fighting chance when a shooter attempts to enter his classroom, whereas an unarmed one has none. I want the kids to have that last line of defense if the teacher is willing to provide it. Don't you?

Working the extremes? In case you haven't figured it out yet, a combat situation such as all those school shootings is extreme.

 

[BULLDOG]

Not all guns are designed to kill, either. Shooting competition guns are designed solely to be as accurate as possible, not to kill.

Tiny niche market.

Still accurate.

it is hardly a niche

this is 09 and it has only grown from there

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity

So now you're trying to say the AR was designed for target shooting. You know that's goofy, right?

you are goofy

there is a big market for match grade ar-15s

either you are trying to look ignorant

or are you seriously lack that basic knowledge

Rainier Arms AR-15 Precision Match Grade BCG - Nitride

The Rainier Arms Precision Match Grade Phosphate BCG - 5.56 Nitride is machined and finished to a higher standard to meet and exceed all Mil Spec. ... We are so confident in our Rainier Arms BCG we offer them with a limited lifetime warranty. So if at anytime your Rainier Arms BCG

Are you trying to say that gun was specifically designed and sold to the military as a target competition gun, or are you just trying to muddle the discussion?

 

[Dale Smith]

Of course, because CC permit holders are among the safest out there. You seem to be terrified of the concept, so I said why not let them have additional training if the school wants it? You see, I'm ready to let them be the last line of defense against a shooter. Are you?

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

And you seem to think that a teacher guarding the door to his/her classroom is the equivalent of a squad of Marines working through Falujah. Stop working the extremes. You have to admit that an armed teacher at least has a fighting chance when a shooter attempts to enter his classroom, whereas an unarmed one has none. I want the kids to have that last line of defense if the teacher is willing to provide it. Don't you?

Working the extremes? In case you haven't figured it out yet, a combat situation such as all those school shootings is extreme.

False flags and psy-ops, Bulldawg.....

 

[Dale Smith]

Tiny niche market.

Still accurate.

it is hardly a niche

this is 09 and it has only grown from there

The first comprehensive survey to look at ownership and use of modern sporting rifles reveals that 8.9 million Americans went target shooting with AR-style rifles in 2009 and that participants using this type of rifle were the most active among all types of sport shooters.

Target shooting grows in popularity

So now you're trying to say the AR was designed for target shooting. You know that's goofy, right?

you are goofy

there is a big market for match grade ar-15s

either you are trying to look ignorant

or are you seriously lack that basic knowledge

Rainier Arms AR-15 Precision Match Grade BCG - Nitride

The Rainier Arms Precision Match Grade Phosphate BCG - 5.56 Nitride is machined and finished to a higher standard to meet and exceed all Mil Spec. ... We are so confident in our Rainier Arms BCG we offer them with a limited lifetime warranty. So if at anytime your Rainier Arms BCG

Are you trying to say that gun was specifically designed and sold to the military as a target competition gun, or are you just trying to muddle the discussion?

Bulldawg, if the mandate ever comes down that AR-15s are now illegal and everyone must turn them in and that a "door to door" search will be performed in order to insure compliance? Put your fat ass out in front of those searches and
"impress" me. I bet you will hide just like the sheriff sissies of Broward coward county.......

 

[BULLDOG]

Still have a problem with armed teachers. They have enough duties without the continuous training required to be effectively prepared for combat.

That's why you don't require all of them to do it. You only allow those who are already CC permit holders and who are willing to put in some extra training in how to effectively guard the one door into the classroom. IOW, I'm talking about the teacher who gets an alert that an active shooter is in the school, puts the kids behind whatever barrier(s) he can find, pulls his weapon and watches the door. You're talking about urban combat training wherein Dirty Harry stalks the hallways, snapping off hip shots and snarling, "Do you feel lucky, PUNK?".

This isn't rocket science. There's usually ONE fairly narrow door through which a shooter has to enter a classroom. An alert, armed teacher has a pretty good chance of stopping him at that point. An unarmed one has none.

And, how many armed teachers does it take for a sign to go up outside to the effect that there are armed teachers on premise? Also, which school is more likely to be attacked in the first place, one with such a sign or the ones with signs that proudly proclaim there are no oppositional weapons on campus?

I can tell you which, because the anti-gunners even understand the simple truth. Not a single one of them would post a sign outside their house proclaiming that their house is weapon free.

You seem to think a day of training takes you almost to the point of being ready for combat. It's not. At best, it slightly reduces the chance of you shooting yourself.

And you seem to think that a teacher guarding the door to his/her classroom is the equivalent of a squad of Marines working through Falujah. Stop working the extremes. You have to admit that an armed teacher at least has a fighting chance when a shooter attempts to enter his classroom, whereas an unarmed one has none. I want the kids to have that last line of defense if the teacher is willing to provide it. Don't you?

Working the extremes? In case you haven't figured it out yet, a combat situation such as all those school shootings is extreme.

False flags and psy-ops, Bulldawg.....

Right Dale. All those dead kids and grieving parents are just actors being paid to act a part. I'm guessing you got that info from that brain implant the space men put in you at the behest of the big foot.,