What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Tx AG Paxton & Parkland Dad Say This Would Have Better Protected School Children - And They're Right

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
145,781
Reaction score
20,728
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Right, Chicago is the city that has more killed every month this one large mass shooting. Yeah, those aren't "white suburban" folks.

Well, while I know you wank off nightly to the thought of dead minorities, the fact is, we have too many gun deaths of ALL races in this country... 43,000 a year.

The only time we pay even a little attention is when it's a mass shooting.

Or knife proof or car proof or bomb proof, etc. Short of waving a magic wand to remove all guns in the US, there is no way to prevent a person from getting a gun and doing something crazy with it. Realizing that there is no magic wand is the first step to resolving the problem. The overwhelming majority of gun owners, myself included, have no desire to kill anyone, however, I believe that most gun owners would have shot this guy and others like him in a heart beat. You see from the inaction of the police in Uvalde what happens when the bad guy has a gun and nobody challenges him.

which is why you don't let the bad guys have guns to start with. Any background check would have found this kid had issues.

The problem is, a "law abiding gun owner" didn't stop this kid. A cop did.

Again, there is no magic wand. You are impractical and ideological.

No magic involved. Okay, let's freely admit that we aren't going to do what the UK, Australia, and Japan did, which is totally ban private gun ownership, and as a result, they have minimal gun homicides. In Japan, you can count the gun homicides every year on one hand.... (just not this hand.)


But okay, we aren't going to go that far.

We could follow Germany's policies. They allow private gun ownership, but it's strictly licensed and regulated. There are 20 million privately owned guns in Germany in a population of 80 million... but they have only about 600 gun homicides a year (compared to our 20,000).
 

DBA

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2015
Messages
8,195
Reaction score
7,634
Points
1,940
Well, while I know you wank off nightly to the thought of dead minorities, the fact is, we have too many gun deaths of ALL races in this country... 43,000 a year.

Again, YOU bring race into the conversation. Obsessed much? White guilt is strangling you.

which is why you don't let the bad guys have guns to start with. Any background check would have found this kid had issues.

We do have checks. ATF is contacted when you guy a gun to make sure you qualify. The problem with extensive checks is that it allows wackos like your self and other Democrats to decide who they think qualifies to buy a gun. Forgive us for being skeptical when the AG of the US targets parent's at school board meetings for speaking out. Democrats are immoral scum and would use this power to remove the rights of law abiding citizens from purchasing fire arms. You live in an area that has conditioned you to give up this right. It still hasn't sunk in that criminals still have guns in your area because you are brainwashed.

We could follow Germany's policies. They allow private gun ownership, but it's strictly licensed and regulated. There are 20 million privately owned guns in Germany in a population of 80 million... but they have only about 600 gun homicides a year (compared to our 20,000).

Yeah, we can always draw extensive knowledge from just about everything from countries in the EU. It seems to be a liberal Nirvana over there, nevermind that it is the good ole' USA that ultimately protects them from aggressors so they can have their social spending sprees.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
145,781
Reaction score
20,728
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Again, YOU bring race into the conversation. Obsessed much? White guilt is strangling you.

Racism is America's original sin. We need to address it, as it permeates every facet of our nation.

We do have checks. ATF is contacted when you guy a gun to make sure you qualify. The problem with extensive checks is that it allows wackos like your self and other Democrats to decide who they think qualifies to buy a gun. Forgive us for being skeptical when the AG of the US targets parent's at school board meetings for speaking out. Democrats are immoral scum and would use this power to remove the rights of law abiding citizens from purchasing fire arms. You live in an area that has conditioned you to give up this right. It still hasn't sunk in that criminals still have guns in your area because you are brainwashed.

Criminals have guns in my area because they can drive 20 miles to Indiana and buy guns from the one store where 850 guns recovered by police were purchased by straw buyers or because of inadequate background checks.

Okay, let's look at what constitutes an extensive check.

When I applied for my last job (before I went independent) they did a thorough background check on me. They reviewed my financials, they talked to my ex-bosses, they talked to my former co-workers. They checked with my university from 1985 to confirm my education.

When I applied for my current home loan, they pretty much gave me a financial colonoscopy, even though I had no credit card debt, substantial assets and a nearly pristine credit score. I STILL had to fill out a pile of paperwork and they found things that I hadn't even done yet. (For instance, I got a line of credit with a furniture store to buy new furniture for my new place.)

So, um, yeah, if Angry Dad at a school board who threatened to kill the school board members because his slut daughter was having hookups with the trans-kid in the girls bathroom wanted a gun, that probably SHOULD get a bit of scrutiny.

Yeah, we can always draw extensive knowledge from just about everything from countries in the EU. It seems to be a liberal Nirvana over there, nevermind that it is the good ole' USA that ultimately protects them from aggressors so they can have their social spending sprees.

Actually, they were probably never under threat. Our bloated defense spending and we got rolled by two third world countries, that's nothing to be proud of.

Most of our EU allies thought one of those was a terrible idea.
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
79,429
Reaction score
45,107
Points
2,645
Um, okay. Let's say it takes 10 seconds to clear a child through a security station. Let's say for sake of argument that you have two security guards at that checkpoint and you have 2400 students. So it's going to take you four hours to clear all those students.



Except Chicago Schools aren't the ones having the mass shootings. That would be white suburban schools. The kids at the Urban schools know how to duck when the shooting starts. That's the kind of world you Ammosexuals have given us.



All of which sounds like points of entry for a mass shooter that can easily be beaten. The problem with all your measures is that the human factor comes into play. People leave emergency doors and windows open on hot days or if they are going out to have a smoke.



Not sure what plan makes teachers and kids bullet proof.



Um, okay... most schools have this. Really doesn't help.



This is the dumbest suggestion yet. You know, teachers already get very thorough background checks to make sure they aren't pedophiles or some other sort of criminal, right?

More to the point, you clowns on the right don't trust teachers to answer kids questions about gays or teach them about the parts of American History that offend your White Fragility, but you trust them to pack a gun and engage what might be a disturbed student?



The problem is, Salvador Ramos was a "law abiding citizen" up until the day he shot 21 people.



Begs the question, though. We are we having to protect kids in the first place? Because you gun fetishists don't even want to wait more than a few minutes before getting the gratification of new guns.
WHY did Ramos do this?
WHY are kids killing j
kids?

No one wants to ask/answer this question. WHY NOT?

Disarming every Law-abiding citizen is not the solution.

Thugs and criminals with illegal guns are causing record-setting gun crimes and murder rates. How about trying to take THOSE weapons away 1st.
 

task0778

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
10,555
Reaction score
9,454
Points
2,265
Location
Texas hill country
Two words, buddy.

Maginot Line.

For those not familiar with history, the Maginot line was a set of elaborate defenses that France built along their border with Germany. It included underground barracks, obstacles and reinforced gunnery positions that would have made it a difficult proposition for any invading army to assault.

The Germans simply went around it. France fell in about six weeks in 1940.

The idea that you can turn our schools into fortresses and problem solved is naive at best. No matter how good you think your defenses are, there is going to be someone who will figure a way around them.

In a sense, yes. There's no way we can ever 100% protect our kids in school or out of it. We can make it harder though, and less likely for the shooter to succeed. The problem for the Left though is their thinking that a gun ban or UBC or red flag laws will 100% protect the kids and anybody else either. How can anyone believe that a ban on assault weapons would stop somebody from buying a couple of non-assault weapons and killing a bunch of kids anyway? The results of the last assault weapon ban in 1994-2004 are mixed, some say it worked and others say it didn't. According to the Department of Justice, that ban had no measurable effect on gun violence, and gun violence was already declining before the ban became effective. And there are millions of assault weapons out there already, so even if you ban the sale of new weapons there is such a thing as the black market where a terrorist or a crazy person can get one anyway, or steal one from somebody and again whose to say that the shooter won't acquire a non-assault weapon and do his thing?

The other thing is, that period 1994-2004 was among the better economic periods except for a downturn in 2000-2001. Thanks to the pandemic lockdowns and inflation concerns among other things, the mood of the country is IMHO decidedly more negative now than then and I think that a gun ban wouldn't make a difference to anybody. Nobody is saying the school shootings problem will be solved by improving school security and having people with guns protecting the kids. But it could be at least improved and that is worth doing. Especially since a gun ban is not very likely in this country, so what are you gonna do? The Left can howl at the moon all they want, but do they really want to solve the problem?

And BTW the Maginot Line was a terrible analogy. The Germans went around it in 1940 but a shooter can't go around a school and get in if the security is good enough and that is the point. Plus, if he knows there are people that will shoot his ass if he does get in is something of a deterrent. These guys want to create maximum casualties and that ain't going to happen if someone else with a gun shoots you before you can kill anybody. Why do you think 98% of all mass shootings are done in Gun Free Zones?
 
Last edited:

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
145,781
Reaction score
20,728
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
WHY did Ramos do this?
WHY are kids killing j
kids?

No one wants to ask/answer this question. WHY NOT?

Disarming every Law-abiding citizen is not the solution.

Thugs and criminals with illegal guns are causing record-setting gun crimes and murder rates. How about trying to take THOSE weapons away 1st.


While finding out why Ramos did this might shed some light.

Preventing the next Ramos from getting a gun to start with would be far better.

Ramos didn't have an illegal gun. He had a perfectly legal one he was able to buy with no questions asked. That's the problem here.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
145,781
Reaction score
20,728
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
In a sense, yes. There's no way we can ever 100% protect our kids in school or out of it. We can make it harder though, and less likely for the shooter to succeed. The problem for the Left though is their thinking that a gun ban or UBC or red flag laws will 100% protect the kids and anybody else either. How can anyone believe that a ban on assault weapons would stop somebody from buying a couple of non-assault weapons and killing a bunch of kids anyway? The results of the last assault weapon ban in 1994-2004 are mixed, some say it worked and others say it didn't. According to the Department of Justice, that ban had no measurable effect on gun violence, and gun violence was already declining before the ban became effective. And there are millions of assault weapons out there already, so even if you ban the sale of new weapons there is such a thing as the black market where a terrorist or a crazy person can get one anyway, or steal one from somebody and again whose to say that the shooter won't acquire a non-assault weapon and do his thing?

A thorough background check would have stopped Ramos. It would have found out about the 2018 incident where he was thrown out of school for making threats.

To say we should make it easy for mass shooters to get guns because they are going to get guns anyway is kind of silly.

The other thing is, that period 1994-2004 was among the better economic periods except for a downturn in 2000-2001. Thanks to the pandemic lockdowns and inflation concerns among other things, the mood of the country is IMHO decidedly more negative now than then and I think that a gun ban wouldn't make a difference to anybody. Nobody is saying the school shootings problem will be solved by improving school security and having people with guns protecting the kids. But it could be at least improved and that is worth doing. Especially since a gun ban is not very likely in this country, so what are you gonna do? The Left can howl at the moon all they want, but do they really want to solve the problem?

Sure. Solving the problem means making it hard for mass shooters to get guns. If it means the other ammosexuals also can't get guns, I'm good with that, too.
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
79,429
Reaction score
45,107
Points
2,645
While finding out why Ramos did this might shed some light.

Preventing the next Ramos from getting a gun to start with would be far better.

As soon as Democrats get all the ILLEGAL guns off the streets, those used in perpetrating what a.mounts to a mass shooting every week in Chicago, then start talking about disarming law-abiding citizens.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
145,781
Reaction score
20,728
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
As soon as Democrats get all the ILLEGAL guns off the streets, those used in perpetrating what a.mounts to a mass shooting every week in Chicago, then start talking about disarming law-abiding citizens.

How about we stop more guns from getting on the streets to stop with.

You don't drain something unless you turn off the flow first.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$225.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top