Glasswolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

I cannot directly relate this to gun violence but just a observation here. Teachers and parents are scared to death to administrate discipline students of any age. Safe spaces, time out things like that. If my mother had given me a spanking and child social services showed up at her door there was a great chance that social worker was totting a ass whipping too.

Bring back corporal punishment in school. There is a difference between a spanking and a beating.

---

Now you're talking, Glass! See how much support you get, on this board, for that suggestion.

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Yes! Hire security guards. Or, do like my church does… have certain people carrying during church services!

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

You don't even have to hire more security guards. Just abolish the laws that make schools "gun free zones". Simply change the law to ALLOW teachers, principals, and other staff to be armed.

Then, potential criminals at least have to consider the possibility that if they try something like this, they are going to be facing down armed resistance. If they know there's even a 20% chance an armed teacher or staff will resist them, then that's a substantial deterrent.

Do you think somebody would try something like this at a gun show or a gun range? Or how about trying it at a police station? Of course not, because they'd be cut down quick. Of course, these are "extreme" examples. But see the principle? If the criminal knows there is armed resistance, they aren't going to even attempt it. So...apply this principle to society at large. The more armed good guys, crime will drop dramatically.

Texas state senator Roland Gutierrez says on CNN the death toll in Uvalde is now 20: 18 children and two adults. Gutierrez was briefed by Texas Rangers, who are part of the investigation.

Glasswolf said:

---

https://abc11.com/uvalde-texas-robb-elementary-school-active-shooter-district-lockdown/11889693/?ex_cid=TA_WTVD_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%20Trending%20Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Ag39WKEQTso6uJ1NbadtYSzE6Ia4gtB0NK4X41H_wejFx1aOy4NTeBhk

Another Government set up y'all? (That's my sarcasm font)

---

Regardless of whether you meant for that to be sarcasm that is about as low rent of a statement that I believe you could have made. Jeez.... and you claim to be a counselor or something of that sort? Have some class if you possibly can.

Funny how you and the rest of the anti-gun crusaders ignored the below incidents and have for years. Only when you think it will help promote your political agendas do you claim to "care" about shooting victims.

Again another "low rent" moment for the left when they choose to politicize shootings such as this. They don't care that the streets of Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, NYC hell even Durham are basically warzones. That doesn't move the needle at the ballot box.

Send me the link to where you posted about the below mass shootings.... I'll hang up and listen.

https://www.wisn.com/article/large-police-presence-at-water-and-juneau-milwaukee/39997812#

Did you post about this one?

https://abc7chicago.com/shooting-chicago-crime-weekend-violence-police-department/11884559/

Surely since you are so concerned you had to have a link to where you posted about this one right?

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/bloody-weekend-in-nyc-amid-spate-of-shootings-in-nearly-every-borough/

Wow... All 5 Boroughs in NYC had shootings... where is the link to that one?

https://abc7.com/los-angeles-crime-shootings-in-one-week-34-people-shot-la/11771140/

Here's one in Los Angeles... with 34 shot you must have really had a field day with this thread. Link?

Again... the left has one priority and that is power. All of you that have voiced your opinions blaming the guns are part of the problem We have laws. We have a judiciary. In places that have liberal MARXIST District Attorneys the criminals are released and they get a slap on the wrist.

The problem isn't legal law-abiding citizens with guns. It's the criminals and those that let the criminals walk free after committing crimes.

Glad to see everyone's true colors come out on this topic. Again, the lefty followers want nothing but to flex their power and lord over the Conservative rubes. And it was proven here this evening.

Looking forward to seeing all of those "concerned links" you posted over the last few weeks. Like I said, I'll hang up and listen.

There's middle ground that here that needs to be explored and enacted as law. It's not going to stop every single one of these incidents, but if it prevents one from happening I'm all for exploring what that middle ground is.

People have to decide whether safety comes from freedom or from law and how much are we willing to sacrifice because the status quo ain't working.

Glasswolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

I cannot directly relate this to gun violence but just a observation here. Teachers and parents are scared to death to administrate discipline students of any age. Safe spaces, time out things like that. If my mother had given me a spanking and child social services showed up at her door there was a great chance that social worker was totting a ass whipping too.

Bring back corporal punishment in school. There is a difference between a spanking and a beating.

---

Glass, you and I are on the same page with a lot of things here. Kids weren't dying these things when there was discipline in the home and in the school. Today, parents pass the discipline off on the school, and then when the kid acts up in school they blame the teacher.

From this you get 18 yr olds that don't have societal coping skills. Neither mom or dad taught them how to deal with **** that happens in life and let them believe that life is all rainbows and butterflies. Then somebody tells them NO and they don't no how to deal with it.

Participation trophies are given to everyone, and failing classes in school doesn't hold a kid back. So everyone is pushed through the system and never taught how to work for anything, how to compete in life. So we get young adults who want an easy job, and a promotion after 6 months of just being there.

I would be fine with stricter rules for owning and purchasing guns. I also think if an incident like today is committed by a minor, his the parents responsible. If the gunman wasn't the owner of the gun, hold the owner responsible. Start holding people accountable that aid in creating scenes like today. Start holding parents accountable for raising ******* kids.

hokiewolf said:

---

There's middle ground that here that needs to be explored and enacted as law. It's not going to stop every single one of these incidents, but if it prevents one from happening I'm all for exploring what that middle ground is.

People have to decide whether safety comes from freedom or from law and how much are we willing to sacrifice because the status quo ain't working.

---

And that's just it... the left won't stop. When they tell you who they are believe them. They are already clamoring to abolish the filibuster and enact gun control laws tomorrow.

You'd have to be a damn fool to believe anything a lefty politician tells you. You can't compromise with people who want single party MARXIST rule. And laugh if you want it's no conspiracy theory. It's the damn truth.

BBW12OG said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

https://abc11.com/uvalde-texas-robb-elementary-school-active-shooter-district-lockdown/11889693/?ex_cid=TA_WTVD_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%20Trending%20Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Ag39WKEQTso6uJ1NbadtYSzE6Ia4gtB0NK4X41H_wejFx1aOy4NTeBhk

Another Government set up y'all? (That's my sarcasm font)

---

Regardless of whether you meant for that to be sarcasm that is about as low rent of a statement that I believe you could have made. Jeez.... and you claim to be a counselor or something of that sort? Have some class if you possibly can.

Funny how you and the rest of the anti-gun crusaders ignored the below incidents and have for years. Only when you think it will help promote your political agendas do you claim to "care" about shooting victims.

Again another "low rent" moment for the left when they choose to politicize shootings such as this. They don't care that the streets of Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, NYC hell even Durham are basically warzones. That doesn't move the needle at the ballot box.

Send me the link to where you posted about the below mass shootings.... I'll hang up and listen.

https://www.wisn.com/article/large-police-presence-at-water-and-juneau-milwaukee/39997812#

Did you post about this one?

https://abc7chicago.com/shooting-chicago-crime-weekend-violence-police-department/11884559/

Surely since you are so concerned you had to have a link to where you posted about this one right?

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/bloody-weekend-in-nyc-amid-spate-of-shootings-in-nearly-every-borough/

Wow... All 5 Boroughs in NYC had shootings... where is the link to that one?

https://abc7.com/los-angeles-crime-shootings-in-one-week-34-people-shot-la/11771140/

Here's one in Los Angeles... with 34 shot you must have really had a field day with this thread. Link?

Again... the left has one priority and that is power. All of you that have voiced your opinions blaming the guns are part of the problem We have laws. We have a judiciary. In places that have liberal MARXIST District Attorneys the criminals are released and they get a slap on the wrist.

The problem isn't legal law-abiding citizens with guns. It's the criminals and those that let the criminals walk free after committing crimes.

Glad to see everyone's true colors come out on this topic. Again, the lefty followers want nothing but to flex their power and lord over the Conservative rubes. And it was proven here this evening.

Looking forward to seeing all of those "concerned links" you posted over the last few weeks. Like I said, I'll hang up and listen.

---

Feel free to start a thread about any and all mass shootings or killings you wish. This one is about 18 children and 2 adults being shot dead in school in TEXAS

hokiewolf said:

---

There's middle ground that here that needs to be explored and enacted as law. It's not going to stop every single one of these incidents, but if it prevents one from happening I'm all for exploring what that middle ground is.

People have to decide whether safety comes from freedom or from law and how much are we willing to sacrifice because the status quo ain't working.

---

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"



infringe
verb
act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on



There can be no "middle ground" on that. There is no compromise. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be limited, undermined, or encroached upon even a little bit.

BBW12OG said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

There's middle ground that here that needs to be explored and enacted as law. It's not going to stop every single one of these incidents, but if it prevents one from happening I'm all for exploring what that middle ground is.

People have to decide whether safety comes from freedom or from law and how much are we willing to sacrifice because the status quo ain't working.

---

And that's just it... the left won't stop. When they tell you who they are believe them. They are already clamoring to abolish the filibuster and enact gun control laws tomorrow.

You'd have to be a damn fool to believe anything a lefty politician tells you. You can't compromise with people who want single party MARXIST rule. And laugh if you want it's no conspiracy theory. It's the damn truth.

---

bud, if that's what you got out of my post then you're part of the problem too

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Well, Chem, I would love to hear your well thought out solution. Do you honestly think putting labels on boxes of shells warning against shooting kids will actually have an effect? Do you truly believe restricting access to guns will somehow end all shootings? Perhaps if you lose the preachy BS, kneejerk reaction attitude, we can have a discussion.

As I suggested, deterrence seems to me to be the best solution. Perhaps you think we have a prayer of eliminating guns even if we pass the most draconian laws. The usual response is to go look where they have done that and see if it was effective. Chicago has those laws and they are supposedly the most dangerous city in the country. Perhaps the fear of getting shot at would deter the criminal. I think it's interesting that idiots have selected elementary schools and churches for many of these violent acts.

For the record, I have never owned a firearm, but I understand the deterrence aspect of having one. If we continue to see copycat shootings, I may have to get around to making the purchase. I know that gun purchases were dramatically up last year during all the defund police nonsense. Folks living in tough neighborhoods realized that if the police couldn't be relied on they better prepare themselves.

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Look up the statistics. Semi-automatic rifles are literally used for less than 1% of all homicides using guns. It's over 90% using handguns.

If the Left are truly these "bleeding heart humanitarians", then why aren't they calling for handguns to be banned? Why are they so obsessed with banning a type of rifle that is used in less than 1% of all gun homicides?

Why? Because this is about population control, and subjecting the population to the (communist) government. They don't want the public able to fight back against a tyrannical government.

Do you realize that the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have a "civilian army" capable of defending the nation -- against all enemies, foreign or domestic? If you want, I can break that down in detail. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to hunt squirrels and deer. It's right there in plain English in the text of the Amendment. A civilian militia is necessary to defend the security of the nation...therefore, the right of the people to own and carry firearms shall not be infringed. That means that we have the right to military-grade weaponry. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to be able to equip an ARMY...a civilian army.

Glasswolf said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

https://abc11.com/uvalde-texas-robb-elementary-school-active-shooter-district-lockdown/11889693/?ex_cid=TA_WTVD_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%20Trending%20Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Ag39WKEQTso6uJ1NbadtYSzE6Ia4gtB0NK4X41H_wejFx1aOy4NTeBhk

Another Government set up y'all? (That's my sarcasm font)

---

Regardless of whether you meant for that to be sarcasm that is about as low rent of a statement that I believe you could have made. Jeez.... and you claim to be a counselor or something of that sort? Have some class if you possibly can.

Funny how you and the rest of the anti-gun crusaders ignored the below incidents and have for years. Only when you think it will help promote your political agendas do you claim to "care" about shooting victims.

Again another "low rent" moment for the left when they choose to politicize shootings such as this. They don't care that the streets of Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, NYC hell even Durham are basically warzones. That doesn't move the needle at the ballot box.

Send me the link to where you posted about the below mass shootings.... I'll hang up and listen.

https://www.wisn.com/article/large-police-presence-at-water-and-juneau-milwaukee/39997812#

Did you post about this one?

https://abc7chicago.com/shooting-chicago-crime-weekend-violence-police-department/11884559/

Surely since you are so concerned you had to have a link to where you posted about this one right?

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/bloody-weekend-in-nyc-amid-spate-of-shootings-in-nearly-every-borough/

Wow... All 5 Boroughs in NYC had shootings... where is the link to that one?

https://abc7.com/los-angeles-crime-shootings-in-one-week-34-people-shot-la/11771140/

Here's one in Los Angeles... with 34 shot you must have really had a field day with this thread. Link?

Again... the left has one priority and that is power. All of you that have voiced your opinions blaming the guns are part of the problem We have laws. We have a judiciary. In places that have liberal MARXIST District Attorneys the criminals are released and they get a slap on the wrist.

The problem isn't legal law-abiding citizens with guns. It's the criminals and those that let the criminals walk free after committing crimes.

Glad to see everyone's true colors come out on this topic. Again, the lefty followers want nothing but to flex their power and lord over the Conservative rubes. And it was proven here this evening.

Looking forward to seeing all of those "concerned links" you posted over the last few weeks. Like I said, I'll hang up and listen.

---

Feel free to start a thread about any and all mass shootings or killings you wish. This one is about 18 children and 2 adults being shot dead in school in TEXAS

---

I proved my point. You and your ilk ALWAYS use certain incidents to promote your political agendas.

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and most of us have known that.

If you cared one iota about the victims you wouldn't have started the thread with a sick joke. But you did.

Enjoy your feeling of superiority on your pedestal of holier than thou…. You seem to enjoy it.

If you and the rest of the liberal left cared about shootings you'd mention it more than once or twice a year. But you don't?

Is it because the shootings in inner cities are people of color? Serious question? I thought Black Lives Mattered?

You've never once posted a thread about inner city mass shootings. Why not?

I know and so do you. You don't because you don't want to bring attention to the liberal run cesspool cities with their left wing liberal extremist DAs that do nothing to prevent the shootings from happening.

Other words it doesn't fit your agenda. FACT.

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Define an AR-15 please.

And you know it's illegal to have a fully automatic machine gun right?

BBW12OG said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

https://abc11.com/uvalde-texas-robb-elementary-school-active-shooter-district-lockdown/11889693/?ex_cid=TA_WTVD_FB&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%20Trending%20Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1Ag39WKEQTso6uJ1NbadtYSzE6Ia4gtB0NK4X41H_wejFx1aOy4NTeBhk

Another Government set up y'all? (That's my sarcasm font)

---

Regardless of whether you meant for that to be sarcasm that is about as low rent of a statement that I believe you could have made. Jeez.... and you claim to be a counselor or something of that sort? Have some class if you possibly can.

Funny how you and the rest of the anti-gun crusaders ignored the below incidents and have for years. Only when you think it will help promote your political agendas do you claim to "care" about shooting victims.

Again another "low rent" moment for the left when they choose to politicize shootings such as this. They don't care that the streets of Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, NYC hell even Durham are basically warzones. That doesn't move the needle at the ballot box.

Send me the link to where you posted about the below mass shootings.... I'll hang up and listen.

https://www.wisn.com/article/large-police-presence-at-water-and-juneau-milwaukee/39997812#

Did you post about this one?

https://abc7chicago.com/shooting-chicago-crime-weekend-violence-police-department/11884559/

Surely since you are so concerned you had to have a link to where you posted about this one right?

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/bloody-weekend-in-nyc-amid-spate-of-shootings-in-nearly-every-borough/

Wow... All 5 Boroughs in NYC had shootings... where is the link to that one?

https://abc7.com/los-angeles-crime-shootings-in-one-week-34-people-shot-la/11771140/

Here's one in Los Angeles... with 34 shot you must have really had a field day with this thread. Link?

Again... the left has one priority and that is power. All of you that have voiced your opinions blaming the guns are part of the problem We have laws. We have a judiciary. In places that have liberal MARXIST District Attorneys the criminals are released and they get a slap on the wrist.

The problem isn't legal law-abiding citizens with guns. It's the criminals and those that let the criminals walk free after committing crimes.

Glad to see everyone's true colors come out on this topic. Again, the lefty followers want nothing but to flex their power and lord over the Conservative rubes. And it was proven here this evening.

Looking forward to seeing all of those "concerned links" you posted over the last few weeks. Like I said, I'll hang up and listen.

---

Feel free to start a thread about any and all mass shootings or killings you wish. This one is about 18 children and 2 adults being shot dead in school in TEXAS

---

I proved my point. You and your ilk ALWAYS use certain incidents to promote your political agendas.

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and most of us have known that.

If you cared one iota about the victims you wouldn't have started the thread with a sick joke. But you did.

Enjoy your feeling of superiority on your pedestal of holier than thou…. You seem to enjoy it.

If you and the rest of the liberal left cared about shootings you'd mention it more than once or twice a year. But you don't?

Is it because the shootings in inner cities are people of color? Serious question? I thought Black Lives Mattered?

You've never once posted a thread about inner city mass shootings. Why not?

I know and so do you. You don't because you don't want to bring attention to the liberal run cesspool cities with their left wing liberal extremist DAs that do nothing to prevent the shootings from happening.

Other words it doesn't fit your agenda. FACT.

---

no worries man, one day it'll be so ordinary that there's a mass shooting in an elementary school it won't make the news either, so no one will bother to start a thread about it. I'm sure we'll be at that point soon.

Police engaged the terrorist BEFORE he entered school, but apparently were unable to stop him due to his commercially available "hunting" gear.

So much for the idea the armed security guards at school would help. Wasn't there an armed guard at the grocery store in Buffalo?

Sgt. Erick Estrada of the Texas Dept of Public Safety tells @andersoncooper the shooter crashed his car near the school, got out with a gun and wearing body armor, was engaged by law enforcement, but made his way into the school anyway and went classroom to classroom shooting.

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) May 25, 2022

GuerrillaPack said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Look up the statistics. Semi-automatic rifles are literally used for less than 1% of all homicides using guns. It's over 90% using handguns.

If the Left are truly these "bleeding heart humanitarians", then why aren't they calling for handguns to be banned? Why are they so obsessed with banning a type of rifle that is used in less than 1% of all gun homicides?

Why? Because this is about population control, and subjecting the population to the (communist) government. They don't want the public able to fight back against a tyrannical government.

Do you realize that the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have a "civilian army" capable of defending the nation -- against all enemies, foreign or domestic? If you want, I can break that down in detail. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to hunt squirrels and deer. It's right there in plain English in the text of the Amendment. A civilian militia is necessary to defend the security of the nation...therefore, the right of the people to own and carry firearms shall not be infringed. That means that we have the right to military-grade weaponry. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to be able to equip an ARMY...a civilian army.

---

I find it extremely interesting that one of the guys who demonizes pharmaceutical companies over the drugs they manufacture and the profits they make and how that's proof of a mass conspiracy doesn't seem to have that same keen eye for the gun manufacturers and gun lobby

BBW12OG said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Define an AR-15 please.

And you know it's illegal to have a fully automatic machine gun right?

---

I do know that, that's why I said it was a "semi-automatic weapon" that COULD be modified ILLEGALLY and there are simple online tutorials on how to accomplish this.

Someone asked what was different from the 70s to now, and one major difference is that 18 year olds in the 70s didn't have access to AR-15s that they could learn to modify to automatic weapons at home. Several of the most high-profile mass shooting have been these type of weapons. I'm not saying ban guns, I just have a really hard time understanding the REASON anyone, let alone an 18 year old, would need a semi-automatic weapon with 30 rounds. My father and brother both own them, and they've ONLY used them at a gun range, so I see no legitimate reason for them to have them other than to say they do and because they can legally.

All the far Left commie Lamestream fake "news" propaganda channels (NBC, CBS, ABC) are running "special reports" on this right now, HARD CORE pushing gun control. Senile kid sniffer in Chief gave a speech, calling for "standing up to the gun lobby".

It's the same thing every time. The commie media breathlessly "reporting" on a mass shooting as if they actually "care about the children", when in fact they are blood-thirsty cheerleaders of the mass murder of unborn children. Piggy backing on tragedies, playing on peoples' emotions, pretending to care about the children, while all they really care about is pushing their communist totalitarian agenda.

It's sick, and it makes my blood boil. GO TO HELL you communist scum. You don't care about the children, and you never did. You're not going to destroy the 2nd Amendment and take our rights.

We use AR-15s for depredation hunting every summer.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Look up the statistics. Semi-automatic rifles are literally used for less than 1% of all homicides using guns. It's over 90% using handguns.

If the Left are truly these "bleeding heart humanitarians", then why aren't they calling for handguns to be banned? Why are they so obsessed with banning a type of rifle that is used in less than 1% of all gun homicides?

Why? Because this is about population control, and subjecting the population to the (communist) government. They don't want the public able to fight back against a tyrannical government.

Do you realize that the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have a "civilian army" capable of defending the nation -- against all enemies, foreign or domestic? If you want, I can break that down in detail. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to hunt squirrels and deer. It's right there in plain English in the text of the Amendment. A civilian militia is necessary to defend the security of the nation...therefore, the right of the people to own and carry firearms shall not be infringed. That means that we have the right to military-grade weaponry. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to be able to equip an ARMY...a civilian army.

---

Do anyone believe a few thousand people with AR-15s, that have gone through a couple of backyard taught tactical courses, bought some online body armor, and shot at targets is going to be be able to form an army that can actually do anything to our real armed forces? Seriously? I get the concept behind the 2nd Amendment, but when that was written, it was muskets and canons, not tanks and fighter jets, so the whole premise of saying it's to be able to fight back against our industrial military complex is laughable. And we spend enough in military not to expect to form a militia to defend the country.

Now to your "statistics". No argument, tons of killing with handguns, but how many mass shootings have happened with a hunting rifle or only a handgun? What is the pure volume of handguns in circulation in the US vs ARs?

In 2021 Newsweek had an article that said of the last 80 mass shootings, 26% of them involved an AR-15. The one a few weeks ago in Buffalo did as well, same as today.

Once again, all for the right to own guns, just don't think the AR-15 should be one that should either be owned or available without a LOT of hoops to jump through(psych eval, background, course on how to use it, higher age limit, longer waiting times, more expensive, etc).

smitt86 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Look up the statistics. Semi-automatic rifles are literally used for less than 1% of all homicides using guns. It's over 90% using handguns.

If the Left are truly these "bleeding heart humanitarians", then why aren't they calling for handguns to be banned? Why are they so obsessed with banning a type of rifle that is used in less than 1% of all gun homicides?

Why? Because this is about population control, and subjecting the population to the (communist) government. They don't want the public able to fight back against a tyrannical government.

Do you realize that the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have a "civilian army" capable of defending the nation -- against all enemies, foreign or domestic? If you want, I can break that down in detail. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to hunt squirrels and deer. It's right there in plain English in the text of the Amendment. A civilian militia is necessary to defend the security of the nation...therefore, the right of the people to own and carry firearms shall not be infringed. That means that we have the right to military-grade weaponry. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to be able to equip an ARMY...a civilian army.

---

Do anyone believe a few thousand people with AR-15s, that have gone through a couple of backyard taught tactical courses, bought some online body armor, and shot at targets is going to be be able to form an army that can actually do anything to our real armed forces? Seriously? I get the concept behind the 2nd Amendment, but when that was written, it was muskets and canons, not tanks and fighter jets, so the whole premise of saying it's to be able to fight back against our industrial military complex is laughable. And we spend enough in military not to expect to form a militia to defend the country.

Now to your "statistics". No argument, tons of killing with handguns, but how many mass shootings have happened with a hunting rifle or only a handgun? What is the pure volume of handguns in circulation in the US vs ARs?

In 2021 Newsweek had an article that said of the last 80 mass shootings, 26% of them involved an AR-15. The one a few weeks ago in Buffalo did as well, same as today.

Once again, all for the right to own guns, just don't think the AR-15 should be one that should either be owned or available without a LOT of hoops to jump through(psych eval, background, course on how to use it, higher age limit, longer waiting times, more expensive, etc).

---

What you personally think doesn't matter, when it comes to interpreting the 2nd Amendment. Just because you don't think we should have AR-15s doesn't mean we can violate the 2nd Amendment in order to make that happen. What matters is the intent of those who wrote it. And it's the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. So if you want to change an Amendment to the Constitution, then go through the process to abolish it. Good luck.

It's undeniable, after just reading the plain language of the amendment as well as researching the intent and history of it, that the Founders intended it to equip a civilian army to defend the nation. And it's still just as relevant today as it was back then. We the people, collectively and individually, have the right to arm ourselves in order to defend not only against foreign armies, but also a tyrannical domestic government.

And if you are saying that civilians with AR-15s is "not enough" to protect against a government, then you are only making the argument that the 2nd Amendment guarantees our right to even more powerful weapons -- including fully automatic high-caliber guns, canons, tanks, etc. And guess what? I agree. The 2nd Amendment does protect that right. Governments should not be more powerful and more armed than the people. The government is supposed to serve the people and be in subjection to the people. Not the other way around.

But having 150+ million Americans heavily armed with just rifles is, in fact, a heavy deterrent to a tyrannical government. Recent wars have proven that guerrilla forces armed mostly with small arms (eg, Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam) are able to hold their own against and even defeat armies with a full arsenal of modern tanks, airplanes, missiles, etc.

smitt86 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Look up the statistics. Semi-automatic rifles are literally used for less than 1% of all homicides using guns. It's over 90% using handguns.

If the Left are truly these "bleeding heart humanitarians", then why aren't they calling for handguns to be banned? Why are they so obsessed with banning a type of rifle that is used in less than 1% of all gun homicides?

Why? Because this is about population control, and subjecting the population to the (communist) government. They don't want the public able to fight back against a tyrannical government.

Do you realize that the entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to have a "civilian army" capable of defending the nation -- against all enemies, foreign or domestic? If you want, I can break that down in detail. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is not to hunt squirrels and deer. It's right there in plain English in the text of the Amendment. A civilian militia is necessary to defend the security of the nation...therefore, the right of the people to own and carry firearms shall not be infringed. That means that we have the right to military-grade weaponry. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to be able to equip an ARMY...a civilian army.

---

Do anyone believe a few thousand people with AR-15s, that have gone through a couple of backyard taught tactical courses, bought some online body armor, and shot at targets is going to be be able to form an army that can actually do anything to our real armed forces? Seriously? I get the concept behind the 2nd Amendment, but when that was written, it was muskets and canons, not tanks and fighter jets, so the whole premise of saying it's to be able to fight back against our industrial military complex is laughable. And we spend enough in military not to expect to form a militia to defend the country.

Now to your "statistics". No argument, tons of killing with handguns, but how many mass shootings have happened with a hunting rifle or only a handgun? What is the pure volume of handguns in circulation in the US vs ARs?

In 2021 Newsweek had an article that said of the last 80 mass shootings, 26% of them involved an AR-15. The one a few weeks ago in Buffalo did as well, same as today.

Once again, all for the right to own guns, just don't think the AR-15 should be one that should either be owned or available without a LOT of hoops to jump through(psych eval, background, course on how to use it, higher age limit, longer waiting times, more expensive, etc).

---

So by banning AR-15's that's going to solve the problem right?

When the next shooter, and there will be one uses a semi-automatic 30.06 like I use or a semi-automatic pistol we ban those next right?

Here's the problem with people who don't know jack **** about guns. The AR-15 isn't the only semi-auto on the market.

And here's a newsflash…. The lefties won't just stop at banning AR-15s… they want a complete ban on guns like Australia. They don't give a **** about the Constitution or The Bill of Rights.

Read the posts on this thread. They prove it.

Here's a great start at middle ground. And you are correct Big Beautiful Wolf, gun bans don't work.

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/pass-and-enforce-red-flag-laws-now

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Well, Chem, I would love to hear your well thought out solution. Do you honestly think putting labels on boxes of shells warning against shooting kids will actually have an effect? Do you truly believe restricting access to guns will somehow end all shootings? Perhaps if you lose the preachy BS, kneejerk reaction attitude, we can have a discussion.

As I suggested, deterrence seems to me to be the best solution. Perhaps you think we have a prayer of eliminating guns even if we pass the most draconian laws. The usual response is to go look where they have done that and see if it was effective. Chicago has those laws and they are supposedly the most dangerous city in the country. Perhaps the fear of getting shot at would deter the criminal. I think it's interesting that idiots have selected elementary schools and churches for many of these violent acts.

For the record, I have never owned a firearm, but I understand the deterrence aspect of having one. If we continue to see copycat shootings, I may have to get around to making the purchase. I know that gun purchases were dramatically up last year during all the defund police nonsense. Folks living in tough neighborhoods realized that if the police couldn't be relied on they better prepare themselves.

---

I don't know the answer. But letting the NRA dictate any meaningful action on them is NOT the answer. What is sad is, some people don't want to even consider changes to reduce the availability of ARs or some of the ammo that is available --- that was not available in the romantic periods you want to reference.

Look, we've all just moved on and accept the individual killings in Chicago, NY, Detroit, Miami, etc. No one really cares, clearly, and it'll likely never be stopped.
I mean, you really want Austin and Charlotte and Marshville and _____ to be like Guatemala City and San Pedro Sula and Managua where everywhere you go, you have teenaged guards with rifles parading around (And plenty of people still get killed).
Maybe the guns over life crowd can start some bumper stickers -- we want our schools to be like those in Guatemala instead of Tokyo!!!

I just don't get it....where else do we have to hear stories like today? Or two weekends ago? But we just accept it.

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Well, Chem, I would love to hear your well thought out solution. Do you honestly think putting labels on boxes of shells warning against shooting kids will actually have an effect? Do you truly believe restricting access to guns will somehow end all shootings? Perhaps if you lose the preachy BS, kneejerk reaction attitude, we can have a discussion.

As I suggested, deterrence seems to me to be the best solution. Perhaps you think we have a prayer of eliminating guns even if we pass the most draconian laws. The usual response is to go look where they have done that and see if it was effective. Chicago has those laws and they are supposedly the most dangerous city in the country. Perhaps the fear of getting shot at would deter the criminal. I think it's interesting that idiots have selected elementary schools and churches for many of these violent acts.

For the record, I have never owned a firearm, but I understand the deterrence aspect of having one. If we continue to see copycat shootings, I may have to get around to making the purchase. I know that gun purchases were dramatically up last year during all the defund police nonsense. Folks living in tough neighborhoods realized that if the police couldn't be relied on they better prepare themselves.

---

I don't know the answer. But letting the NRA dictate any meaningful action on them is NOT the answer. What is sad is, some people don't want to even consider changes to reduce the availability of ARs or some of the ammo that is available --- that was not available in the romantic periods you want to reference.

Look, we've all just moved on and accept the individual killings in Chicago, NY, Detroit, Miami, etc. No one really cares, clearly, and it'll likely never be stopped.
I mean, you really want Austin and Charlotte and Marshville and _____ to be like Guatemala City and San Pedro Sula and Managua where everywhere you go, you have teenaged guards with rifles parading around (And plenty of people still get killed).
Maybe the guns over life crowd can start some bumper stickers -- we want our schools to be like those in Guatemala instead of Tokyo!!!

I just don't get it....where else do we have to hear stories like today? Or two weekends ago? But we just accept it.

---

You know what makes places like Guatemala, Mexico, and South America so dangerous? The "type" of people who live there. And now we are importing tens of millions of those people here. THAT is the reason that so much of America is becoming crime-infested and dangerous. Because you are allowing the nation to be flooded with tens of millions of these type of people.

If you have good people making up the population (like America from it's founding until the mid 1900s), then you could have every person in the country having 2 or 3 firearms, and you would have virtually zero crime.

Banning weapons does not stop crime. Weapons are not the cause of crime. Wicked people are the cause of crime. Mexico and many central and south American nations have very strict gun control. And yet they have the highest crime in the world.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

I cannot directly relate this to gun violence but just a observation here. Teachers and parents are scared to death to administrate discipline students of any age. Safe spaces, time out things like that. If my mother had given me a spanking and child social services showed up at her door there was a great chance that social worker was totting a ass whipping too.

Bring back corporal punishment in school. There is a difference between a spanking and a beating.

---

Glass, you and I are on the same page with a lot of things here. Kids weren't dying these things when there was discipline in the home and in the school. Today, parents pass the discipline off on the school, and then when the kid acts up in school they blame the teacher.

From this you get 18 yr olds that don't have societal coping skills. Neither mom or dad taught them how to deal with **** that happens in life and let them believe that life is all rainbows and butterflies. Then somebody tells them NO and they don't no how to deal with it.

Participation trophies are given to everyone, and failing classes in school doesn't hold a kid back. So everyone is pushed through the system and never taught how to work for anything, how to compete in life. So we get young adults who want an easy job, and a promotion after 6 months of just being there.

I would be fine with stricter rules for owning and purchasing guns. I also think if an incident like today is committed by a minor, his the parents responsible. If the gunman wasn't the owner of the gun, hold the owner responsible. Start holding people accountable that aid in creating scenes like today. Start holding parents accountable for raising ******* kids.

---

So as we've discussed before, there has been a clear breakdown in the traditional family structure, no doubts, and clearly there are negative impacts of that.

One thing I'm sure will / should be looked at -- did a year plus of being away from people contribute? Heck, look around at ball games, school events, etc --- people acting the fool more than I ever recall. Maybe the last 2 years have exacerbated problems where people who don't cope well have been pushed even further into an abyss that results in behavioral issues for all.

Personally, i think a lot of coping issues, borderline mental health, etc have always existed -- kids today have access to soooooo much more though than any generation before them. They are wealthier and have more free time to find trouble. They live 7x24 on the internet, which is trouble. Whether power or complete unadulterated embarrassment in front of the world -- it happens today on the interent, when I didn't have those kinds of worries. They can find chats and such that prey on their youth and make issues worse (I'll guess the kid in Buffalo will show all these signs)

So its the worst combination of all -- less parenting, but more time and $$$ and access, and much more harmful tools to find trouble than any generation before them.

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Well, Chem, I would love to hear your well thought out solution. Do you honestly think putting labels on boxes of shells warning against shooting kids will actually have an effect? Do you truly believe restricting access to guns will somehow end all shootings? Perhaps if you lose the preachy BS, kneejerk reaction attitude, we can have a discussion.

As I suggested, deterrence seems to me to be the best solution. Perhaps you think we have a prayer of eliminating guns even if we pass the most draconian laws. The usual response is to go look where they have done that and see if it was effective. Chicago has those laws and they are supposedly the most dangerous city in the country. Perhaps the fear of getting shot at would deter the criminal. I think it's interesting that idiots have selected elementary schools and churches for many of these violent acts.

For the record, I have never owned a firearm, but I understand the deterrence aspect of having one. If we continue to see copycat shootings, I may have to get around to making the purchase. I know that gun purchases were dramatically up last year during all the defund police nonsense. Folks living in tough neighborhoods realized that if the police couldn't be relied on they better prepare themselves.

---

I don't know the answer. But letting the NRA dictate any meaningful action on them is NOT the answer. What is sad is, some people don't want to even consider changes to reduce the availability of ARs or some of the ammo that is available --- that was not available in the romantic periods you want to reference.

Look, we've all just moved on and accept the individual killings in Chicago, NY, Detroit, Miami, etc. No one really cares, clearly, and it'll likely never be stopped.
I mean, you really want Austin and Charlotte and Marshville and _____ to be like Guatemala City and San Pedro Sula and Managua where everywhere you go, you have teenaged guards with rifles parading around (And plenty of people still get killed).
Maybe the guns over life crowd can start some bumper stickers -- we want our schools to be like those in Guatemala instead of Tokyo!!!

I just don't get it....where else do we have to hear stories like today? Or two weekends ago? But we just accept it.

---

Once again comrade I'm here to let you know how wrong you are.

How many votes does the NRA have?

The people vote and decide the lawmakers that go to Washington. I know you and your party are appalled that everyone doesn't goose step in line with your ideologies but they don't.

If enough people vote for politicians that support banning guns then it would have happened already. But you know that pesky piece of paper called the Constitution prevents you and your party from completely destroying what's left of this country.

Werewolf said:

---

I think Congress should remove the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution.

---

You realize that Congress can't actually do that...right?

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

Well, Chem, I would love to hear your well thought out solution. Do you honestly think putting labels on boxes of shells warning against shooting kids will actually have an effect? Do you truly believe restricting access to guns will somehow end all shootings? Perhaps if you lose the preachy BS, kneejerk reaction attitude, we can have a discussion.

As I suggested, deterrence seems to me to be the best solution. Perhaps you think we have a prayer of eliminating guns even if we pass the most draconian laws. The usual response is to go look where they have done that and see if it was effective. Chicago has those laws and they are supposedly the most dangerous city in the country. Perhaps the fear of getting shot at would deter the criminal. I think it's interesting that idiots have selected elementary schools and churches for many of these violent acts.

For the record, I have never owned a firearm, but I understand the deterrence aspect of having one. If we continue to see copycat shootings, I may have to get around to making the purchase. I know that gun purchases were dramatically up last year during all the defund police nonsense. Folks living in tough neighborhoods realized that if the police couldn't be relied on they better prepare themselves.

---

I don't know the answer. But letting the NRA dictate any meaningful action on them is NOT the answer. What is sad is, some people don't want to even consider changes to reduce the availability of ARs or some of the ammo that is available --- that was not available in the romantic periods you want to reference.

Look, we've all just moved on and accept the individual killings in Chicago, NY, Detroit, Miami, etc. No one really cares, clearly, and it'll likely never be stopped.
I mean, you really want Austin and Charlotte and Marshville and _____ to be like Guatemala City and San Pedro Sula and Managua where everywhere you go, you have teenaged guards with rifles parading around (And plenty of people still get killed).
Maybe the guns over life crowd can start some bumper stickers -- we want our schools to be like those in Guatemala instead of Tokyo!!!

I just don't get it....where else do we have to hear stories like today? Or two weekends ago? But we just accept it.

---

You know what makes places like Guatemala, Mexico, and South America so dangerous? The "type" of people who live there. And now we are importing tens of millions of those people here. THAT is the reason that so much of America is becoming crime-infested and dangerous. Because you are allowing the nation to be flooded with tens of millions of these type of people.

If you have good people making up the population (like America from it's founding until the mid 1900s), then you could have every person in the country having 2 or 3 firearms, and you would have virtually zero crime.

Banning weapons does not stop crime. Weapons are not the cause of crime. Wicked people are the cause of crime. Mexico and many central and south American nations have very strict gun control. And yet they have the highest crime in the world.

---

Ahhh yes, the "brown people are bad" argument. I figured it would be you or BBW.

Packchem91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

A whole bunch of things - and I don't think even the most liberal person would argue human influences have changed from the 1940s and 1950s and 1970s. Hey, in the 1940s and 50s, we still made black people go to different bathrooms than us. So...things progress.

in most normal non-gun scenarios, we'd look for enhancements to make things safer. Add seat belts, lower speed limit, put "you're going to die" labels on cigarette packs.

But when 15 elementary kids get killed, gun amendment folks say, "just hire more security guards at churches and schools and give teachers big guns". We can't even afford teachers, and you want to hire 2-3 FT security guards at every. single. school in America, rather than make meaningful changes within the gun proliferation.
I'm sure we'll have lots of $$ to throw at top-notch security guards.

---

We have sent 53 billion to Ukraine over the last few months. There are 130,930 K-12 schools in this country. That breaks down to 404,796 dollars per school to fund top notch security guards. I bet I can find 4 high quality guards per school that are willing to make 100K per year....

The money is there for stuff like that...unfortunately like most things the government doesn't know how to manage it correctly

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Actually - AR-15 rifles have been around since 1963 according to NPR....

I also want to point out that there are several rifles that I can purchase that aren't AR-15's that shoot the same round and can still hold a magazine too. People harp on AR-15s because it looks scary. In all reality there are many more rifles that can do alot more damage, but people get riled up because of the looks of the gun.

smitt86 said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

smitt86 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Glasswolf said:

---

Is there a more sad statement than having to have armed people at church or schools? These are supposed to be safe places to worship and learn. When I was in HS the only guns were in the back glass of most pick up trucks. Never ever saw one brought into a school

---

What do you think has changed since the early 70's when you were in high school?

---

AR-15s weren't available to the public until the 90s. One thing to have a hunting rifle in your back glass, another to have a semi-automatic weapon that can be modified, illegally, to be fully automatic. From a family of avid hunters and concealed-carry certified, but still see zero reason for the general public to own an AR-15, and never will.

---

Define an AR-15 please.

And you know it's illegal to have a fully automatic machine gun right?

---

I do know that, that's why I said it was a "semi-automatic weapon" that COULD be modified ILLEGALLY and there are simple online tutorials on how to accomplish this.

Someone asked what was different from the 70s to now, and one major difference is that 18 year olds in the 70s didn't have access to AR-15s that they could learn to modify to automatic weapons at home. Several of the most high-profile mass shooting have been these type of weapons. I'm not saying ban guns, I just have a really hard time understanding the REASON anyone, let alone an 18 year old, would need a semi-automatic weapon with 30 rounds. My father and brother both own them, and they've ONLY used them at a gun range, so I see no legitimate reason for them to have them other than to say they do and because they can legally.

---

Just because your brother and father only go to the gun range doesn't mean that's what everyone uses their's for. I have an AR-10 (basically the same rifle except chambered in a .308) that I just to hunt hogs with.