Too close to home

[Billy_Kinetta]

All the more reason to be trained, armed, and to carry every day. It hasn't happened in my back yard but if it does, I will be ready to counter whatever threat with an immediate response.

Sure ya will, Rambo. Lol.

Why wouldn't he? That's the point of carrying to protect yourself, your children and property

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

You're ignorance of the training involved in obtaining a concealed carry permit, and the mindset of those individuals who do carry on a daily basis, is evident.

Okay Rambo. I'm sure you're just Superman with that gun on your hip. Haha!

And you're Miss Muffet.

 

[John Shaw]

Sure ya will, Rambo. Lol.

Why wouldn't he? That's the point of carrying to protect yourself, your children and property

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

You're ignorance of the training involved in obtaining a concealed carry permit, and the mindset of those individuals who do carry on a daily basis, is evident.

Okay Rambo. I'm sure you're just Superman with that gun on your hip. Haha!

And you're Miss Muffet.

Uh, okay? ...

I guess that's the best you can do.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Why wouldn't he? That's the point of carrying to protect yourself, your children and property

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

You're ignorance of the training involved in obtaining a concealed carry permit, and the mindset of those individuals who do carry on a daily basis, is evident.

Okay Rambo. I'm sure you're just Superman with that gun on your hip. Haha!

And you're Miss Muffet.

Uh, okay? ...

I guess that's the best you can do.

It's the best I can muster for you. Really.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

It's doubtful. But the beauty is we'll never find out because there are 300 million guns in the hands of it's citizens.

And of course none of that matters because the bottom line is that's how the Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

Yeah, that's why the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents have rolled over and played dead because of our military's overwhelming firepower.

 

[whitehall]

"Guns for all gets shitcanned"? What does that mean? Is it possible that the angry crazy left doesn't understand the freaking law? How many gun laws did the kid violate and how does the uninformed crazy left presume to create new laws that guarantee that "guns for all gets shitcanned"? Who posts this stuff?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned? These parents should sue the government for not protecting kids that are required by law to attend school.

Yep, you are spot on !
They should indeed sue the government school that refused to hire adequate security.

Define "adequate".

There is your problem.

 

[MisterBeale]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

 

[KeiserC]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

'Sheite'... I want to agree with your libertarian stance but NO! ... way too simplistic... I was home schooled myself for a few years. The thing is, there are so many 'F'd' up parents... utterly irresponsible and self absorbed.... how can we as a society watch while an innocent among us is abused.... The only way you could 'justifiably do so' is to view the child as "chattle"..., property of the 'happenstanced x 2 who copulated and got... 'unlucky'... A very "slippery slope here" ... the rights of the "parents" VS. rights of the "populous" / State...

Who among us, at the age of ten, (on a gorgeous afternoon in August) wanted to be "compelled" to finish learning the proper grammatical use of adjectives and adverbs and the proper placement of punctuation.... Enough said, on the "compulsion aspect of education for adolescents".... I hardly think that the 'poster of the thread' really thinks that letting a child run 'carte blanche' free... is the best way to ensure their 'balanced' maturation, and eventual progression into being a balanced adult... BUT then again it certainly sounds that way from reading the post...

 

[KeiserC]

So it's the gun's fault.

Nope, it's the fucktard that has the gun.

And the fucktards that allowed the fucktard access to a gun.

The Congress Members Receiving the Most N.R.A. Funding

I'm usually fairly polite... but not on this... Fuck You!

Notify us when one of these 75,000 "most voulnerable" ... perpetrate anything but compassion, wisdom & grace upon this Nation...

"Issued near the end of Obama's presidency, the rule banned gun ownership by people who are on Social Security disability because they have mental health problems that prevent them from working and who must have someone manage their financial affairs. The Social Security Administration would have been required to send the names of these beneficiaries to the federal system that does background checks on people applying for gun licenses."

"According to press reports, about 75,000 people would have been affected by the regulation had it been implemented. The Social Security Administration approved the rule on December 19, 2016, but under the Congressional Review Act, Congress has 60 legislative days to disapprove of any new regulation by majority vote."

"In the first half of February, the House and Senate passed the legislation to overturn the Obama administration rule, mainly along party lines. The bill's passage revived the controversy that had attended the regulation when it was issued. The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Rifle Association — organizations not usually aligned in their legislative positions — joined with advocacy groups for the disabled to assail the rule and to support the bill to eliminate it."

 

[OKTexas]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned? These parents should sue the government for not protecting kids that are required by law to attend school.

You want to stop attacks on soft targets, harden them, simple.


.

 

[MisterBeale]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

'Sheite'... I want to agree with your libertarian stance but NO! ... way too simplistic... I was home schooled myself for a few years. The thing is, there are so many 'F'd' up parents... utterly irresponsible and self absorbed.... how can we as a society watch while an innocent among us is abused.... The only way you could 'justifiably do so' is to view the child as "chattle"..., property of the 'happenstanced x 2 who copulated and got... 'unlucky'... A very "slippery slope here" ... the rights of the "parents" VS. rights of the "populous" / State...

Who among us, at the age of ten, (on a gorgeous afternoon in August) wanted to be "compelled" to finish learning the proper grammatical use of adjectives and adverbs and the proper placement of punctuation.... Enough said, on the "compulsion aspect of education for adolescents".... I hardly think that the 'poster of the thread' really thinks that letting a child run 'carte blanche' free... is the best way to ensure their 'balanced' maturation, and eventual progression into being a balanced adult... BUT then again it certainly sounds that way from reading the post...

Who the hell goes to school in August anyhow?

That is precisely what I am suggesting.

But that is neither here nor there. The state and society have NO rights to parents' children, none. If no abuse is going on, what ever the parents deem best for that child to need to know, then that is best for them to know. If it means they remain illiterate, then that is best. It is nobody else's business, because it is not their child.

And if, when the kid turns eighteen and leaves home, he feels he is unemployable because of what his folks have done to him? Then he or she can rectify the problem easily enough on his or her own.

The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher

It is not my business how some others parents kids mature and get educated, or if they don't.

Nor are the problems of other nations my business either.

When do all of these things become my responsibility? When do they all, collectively become our responsibility?

OTH, do I think we, as a society should offer some alternatives, if we voluntarily collaborate to do so? Of course we should, after all, are we not civilized?

But from everything I have garnered from this situation, IT WAS, compulsory education, and the fact that this Nikolas Cruz had autism and did NOT fit into the pre-programmed sausage making plan that is our schools, that caused him to develop in a way which harmed not only his mind, but his self-esteem. His parents were forced to believe that a square peg should fit in a round hole. When they were gone, so was any chance for him or this community.

This is the object of our discussion, not what is best for HIM, but what would have been best for the community. And in this regard, for the community, it would have been best if Nikolas Cruz had never been forced to attend a public school to begin with.

 

[Dale Smith]

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

'Sheite'... I want to agree with your libertarian stance but NO! ... way too simplistic... I was home schooled myself for a few years. The thing is, there are so many 'F'd' up parents... utterly irresponsible and self absorbed.... how can we as a society watch while an innocent among us is abused.... The only way you could 'justifiably do so' is to view the child as "chattle"..., property of the 'happenstanced x 2 who copulated and got... 'unlucky'... A very "slippery slope here" ... the rights of the "parents" VS. rights of the "populous" / State...

Who among us, at the age of ten, (on a gorgeous afternoon in August) wanted to be "compelled" to finish learning the proper grammatical use of adjectives and adverbs and the proper placement of punctuation.... Enough said, on the "compulsion aspect of education for adolescents".... I hardly think that the 'poster of the thread' really thinks that letting a child run 'carte blanche' free... is the best way to ensure their 'balanced' maturation, and eventual progression into being a balanced adult... BUT then again it certainly sounds that way from reading the post...

Who the hell goes to school in August anyhow?

That is precisely what I am suggesting.

But that is neither here nor there. The state and society have NO rights to parents' children, none. If no abuse is going on, what ever the parents deem best for that child to need to know, then that is best for them to know. If it means they remain illiterate, then that is best. It is nobody else's business, because it is not their child.

And if, when the kid turns eighteen and leaves home, he feels he is unemployable because of what his folks have done to him? Then he or she can rectify the problem easily enough on his or her own.

The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher

It is not my business how some others parents kids mature and get educated, or if they don't.

Nor are the problems of other nations my business either.

When do all of these things become my responsibility? When do they all, collectively become our responsibility?

OTH, do I think we, as a society should offer some alternatives, if we voluntarily collaborate to do so? Of course we should, after all, are we not civilized?

But from everything I have garnered from this situation, IT WAS, compulsory education, and the fact that this Nikolas Cruz had autism and did NOT fit into the pre-programmed sausage making plan that is our schools, that caused him to develop in a way which harmed not only his mind, but his self-esteem. His parents were forced to believe that a square peg should fit in a round hole. When they were gone, so was any chance for him or this community.

This is the object of our discussion, not what is best for HIM, but what would have been best for the community. And in this regard, for the community, it would have been best if Nikolas Cruz had never been forced to attend a public school to begin with.

14 years of "public education" is necessary in order to indoctrinate children and make them respond to the bells and condition them. "Head Start", Kindergarten" then grades 1 through 12. People need to look at the findings of the Reece Committee and Norman Dodd. Charlotte Iserbyte is another great resource in order to see what has been done to our youth and why so many adults today can't break through the programming....thankfully for humanity? You did, MisterBeale.....and all of us that have crossed your path is better for it.

 

[KeiserC]

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

'Sheite'... I want to agree with your libertarian stance but NO! ... way too simplistic... I was home schooled myself for a few years. The thing is, there are so many 'F'd' up parents... utterly irresponsible and self absorbed.... how can we as a society watch while an innocent among us is abused.... The only way you could 'justifiably do so' is to view the child as "chattle"..., property of the 'happenstanced x 2 who copulated and got... 'unlucky'... A very "slippery slope here" ... the rights of the "parents" VS. rights of the "populous" / State...

Who among us, at the age of ten, (on a gorgeous afternoon in August) wanted to be "compelled" to finish learning the proper grammatical use of adjectives and adverbs and the proper placement of punctuation.... Enough said, on the "compulsion aspect of education for adolescents".... I hardly think that the 'poster of the thread' really thinks that letting a child run 'carte blanche' free... is the best way to ensure their 'balanced' maturation, and eventual progression into being a balanced adult... BUT then again it certainly sounds that way from reading the post...

Who the hell goes to school in August anyhow?

That is precisely what I am suggesting.

But that is neither here nor there. The state and society have NO rights to parents' children, none. If no abuse is going on, what ever the parents deem best for that child to need to know, then that is best for them to know. If it means they remain illiterate, then that is best. It is nobody else's business, because it is not their child.

And if, when the kid turns eighteen and leaves home, he feels he is unemployable because of what his folks have done to him? Then he or she can rectify the problem easily enough on his or her own.

The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher

It is not my business how some others parents kids mature and get educated, or if they don't.

Nor are the problems of other nations my business either.

When do all of these things become my responsibility? When do they all, collectively become our responsibility?

OTH, do I think we, as a society should offer some alternatives, if we voluntarily collaborate to do so? Of course we should, after all, are we not civilized?

But from everything I have garnered from this situation, IT WAS, compulsory education, and the fact that this Nikolas Cruz had autism and did NOT fit into the pre-programmed sausage making plan that is our schools, that caused him to develop in a way which harmed not only his mind, but his self-esteem. His parents were forced to believe that a square peg should fit in a round hole. When they were gone, so was any chance for him or this community.

This is the object of our discussion, not what is best for HIM, but what would have been best for the community. And in this regard, for the community, it would have been best if Nikolas Cruz had never been forced to attend a public school to begin with.

I'm comfortable asserting that a 'quorum', hopefully informal and "of the ones linked to the family & / involved" had some 'sway'.... If the situation was 'obviously' deplorable & 'beyond the pale'.... liberate the kid... by all means 'U' take on the responsibility...

 

[Frankeneinstein]

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned?

the communists will need to be elected

 

[Tehon]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

Seriously?

It's our fault for wanting our kids to get a basic education? And in doing so we are committing an act of violence against them?

Seriously?

 

[MisterBeale]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

So you don't mind guns in the hood?

Nope. My kids don't hang in the hood. They are required to attend school. Are only creeps killing each other important to you?

Seems to me, the better solution would be to make public education something that is voluntary rather than compulsory.

When you make something like institutionalization compulsory, it feeds into the same societal sickness that causes these incidents of violence in the first place.

Let's remember, the shooter himself was a product of compulsory government indoctrination.



When you compel someone, it means, you force them to do something; that IS violence. IOW, this shooter is a product of violence, so how can we be surprised by this violence? We live in a violent system. There is no choice for kids or their parents. From a very early age, the State dictates to them what they will be taught, and what will be the measures of truth.

We must accept, that some friction and blood loss will be the result of a violent system. It has always been this way since the start of the institution of compulsory schooling.

Seriously?

It's our fault for wanting our kids to get a basic education? And in doing so we are committing an act of violence against them?

Seriously?

No.

That is not what I am saying.

Learn the difference between schooling and education.

Education had nothing to do with this.
the deliberate dumbing down of america
Full text of "John Taylor Gatto The Underground History Of American Education Book"

 

[Rustic]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned? These parents should sue the government for not protecting kids that are required by law to attend school.

How could they "sue" the Gov?

Easy. Sue them for lax gun laws.

Only a fool would think more frivolous gun laws would stop these shootings, urban areas are reaping what they sow... Karma is a bitch

 

[Rustic]

Conservatives: masters of the red herring fallacy.

Too cowardly to address the issue of school shootings, lacking any constructive solutions to address the problem, rightists engage in failed attempts to deflect from the issue.

More frivolous gun laws... is that all you have? Lol
You’re a. Fucking pussy

 

[Rustic]

Why wouldn't he? That's the point of carrying to protect yourself, your children and property

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

I carry and can promise you if anyone threatened myself or our children I would not hesitate to ventilate them. No pause, no thought, nothing. Airhole them.

Yeah, sure you would. Lol. Sure ya would.

I would. Now run along novice...you are wasting bandwidth.

This whole site is a waste of bandwidth.

No one cares what a bunch of internet tough guys think they would do in an active shooter situation. There's a reason police don't want people to play hero; because, even though many of them may be trained, the real thing ... AIN'T TRAINING! Who'd have thought?

Only a fucking pussy. Thinks more frivolous gun laws will help anybody

 

[Rustic]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned?

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Lol
The military, police and fire is overwhelmingly pro second amendment... dolt