Uvalde School Shooting

[troypwr]

troypwr:

I agree with you… regarding ”w.” For me, he was the “better of two evils.” The more I learn about the bush family, the less I respect them.


Looking back, it should have been obvious… his father, (ex CIA) and grandfather’s legacy. The clintons and bushes, only care about power and money, not the best for you and I. (We the People)

In my opinion… An “independent” is someone who doesn’t have the confidence to publicly stand up for what they believe in. The vast many I know, are democrats too embarrassed to publicly admit, they voted for biden. I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt.
However; many of your positions are liberal democrat supported.

We’re probably not going to agree, I’m NOT here to convince you.

My response to your above meme…

View attachment 198552

Can’t wait for this fall and Trojan FOOTBALL ! FIGHT ON!

I have EVERY confidence in facts and my vote. I voted for Biden because the idea of voting for a wannabe dictator, Manchurian moron and all around piece of warthog dung, unacceptable. You probably can't say the same. Your meme happens to be opinion not fact. That seems to be much of the problem. "My opinion is equal to your facts." Respect your intellect and look at data. Set the propaganda aside and be better for it.

 

[Fight On Era]

How many died as a result of BLM, can they top 45000 a year. Deflect deflect deflect. Republican party has made their stand, guns first. Now live with the results and quit trying to blame others. The rest of the world thinks the US gun policy is a total joke. Countries that made the changes required. Supporting the right to own assault rifles is insanity. Own it

Own this chuckles. AR15's and other purely semi automatic rifles are not assault weapons. Only rifles with full automatic capability are used in the military.

 

[DaFireMedic]

A update on my post. I wanna address point 4.


I heard a statement by rep. Tony Gonzalez dist 23 Texas on Joe Pags show. He said he was briefed.

Key points:
1. The grandmother who was shot alerted police.
2. The assailant lived approx 1 mile from the school very close. On the way to the school he crashed. School officials heard the crash and responded not knowing what his intetentions were but to help.
3. He ran and entered though a teachers entrance that was not secure.
4. Then he entered a classroom and immediately started shooting. (This broke my heart because these poor children and the staff were ambushd)
5. LE responded and apparently got into a gun fight. They were able to cut him off and trap him in a room. Preventing him from entering another classroom.
6. This also gave them more time to evacuate the other 600 students and staff. (This is that 30 min window) that the parents were complaining about.
7. During the efforts to trap him and surround him officers were injured and at least one shot.
8. A well trained border patrol agent was finally able take him down.
9. It appears this school had no armed security.

This changes the whole narrative that the cops stood down. There was alot of LE from multiple depts on site. The ones in the Daily Mail video were probably there for crowd control and to maintain a perimeter. We didn't see what was going on inside the building or other side of the campus.

If this is true, and the guy was not an active shooter during the time that the police were waiting for SWAT, and that all the shooting had already been done, then there may be justification for them waiting.

But I think we still need to hear more from law enforcement as to how this went down and why they did what they did. Did they have the shooter trapped in a room with injured children that needed help that they couldn’t get to? We need more information.

 

[troypwr]

troypwr:

I agree with you… regarding ”w.” For me, he was the “better of two evils.” The more I learn about the bush family, the less I respect them.


Looking back, it should have been obvious… his father, (ex CIA) and grandfather’s legacy. The clintons and bushes, only care about power and money, not the best for you and I. (We the People)

In my opinion… An “independent” is someone who doesn’t have the confidence to publicly stand up for what they believe in. The vast many I know, are democrats too embarrassed to publicly admit, they voted for biden. I’ll give you the benefit of a doubt.
However; many of your positions are liberal democrat supported.

We’re probably not going to agree, I’m NOT here to convince you.

My response to your above meme…

View attachment 198552

Can’t wait for this fall and Trojan FOOTBALL ! FIGHT ON!

I have EVERY confidence in facts and my vote. I voted for Biden because the idea of voting for a wannabe dictator, Manchurian moron and all around piece of warthog dung, unacceptable. You probably can't say the same. Your meme happens to be opinion not fact. That seems to be much of the problem. "My opinion is equal to your facts." Respect your intellectnd look at data. Set the propaganda aside and be better for it.

Own this chuckles. AR15's and other purely semi automatic rifles are not assault weapons. Only rifles with full automatic capability are used in the

Own this chuckles. AR15's and other purely semi automatic rifles are not assault weapons. Only rifles with full automatic capability are used in the military.

You do realize, that none of the above belongs in a civilized citizenry right? Moreover a simple cog can make a rifle fully automatic. You must know that. The issue isn't what kind of killing machine is readily available but whether it should be available so easily at all. Those that vote for and propagate these asinine ideas are complicit in the loss of young lives. There's no way around it.

 

[Moon4Cimoli]

It’s quite backwards to look for fault by police and to point out “ lack of security” and “ no on premise armed guard” as breakdowns that should not have occurred.

Schools shouldn’t need armed security and instant response times from police, period. I was in Berlin yesterday and it did not seem that school kids feared for their lives.

 

[IETrojanFan]

The underlying issue is guns. Look at any other country. Does Japan contribute to the world economy. You guys are a joke, same story over and over. 19 elementary schools kids shot, time to care about something other than your stupid guns

In the past, we've tried to ban:
Alcohol: fail
marijuana: fail
cocaine: fail
heroine: fail
illegal immigrants: fail

What makes you think banning guns would be any more successful?

And of all of that list, our right to guns is the ONLY one actually protected by our Constitution.

In short, it's not the guns themselves that are the problem. Guns are inanimate objects.

 

[troypwr]

In the past, we've tried to ban:
Alcohol: fail
marijuana: fail
cocaine: fail
heroine: fail
illegal immigrants: fail

What makes you think banning guns would be any more successful?

And of all of that list, our right to guns is the ONLY one actually protected by our Constitution.

In short, it's not the guns themselves that are the problem. Guns are inanimate objects.

None of the above kill OTHERS. With all these guns we should be the safest country on Earth. But instead Kids are being mowed down. How is that constitutional? Too many guns. No other country has this problem. Too much access. Like the saying goes, "It's the guns, stupid."

 

[aimeedee]

Antifa and BLM as well as those who support them are the true douchebags who undermine public safety, and are the reason decent Americans need to have access to "mass killing machines".

Really? Because AnTEEfuh and BLM are fairly recent movements. Merca's need for "mass killing machines" pre-dates those movements.

 

[aimeedee]

Heartbreaking -- the widower of school shooting victim died suddenly of a heart attack. The couple leaves behind 4 children. This is just devastating:

Husband of teacher killed in Texas school shooting dies from heart attack

Joe Garcia, the husband of Irma Garcia, died of a heart attack just days after his wife was tragically killed after a gunman entered Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and opened fire.

www.fox7austin.com

 

[aimeedee]

~eyeroll~

I guess I spoke too soon:

I've been at work and just got the news. Feel free to start a thread. Frankly, I'm glad you took notice and aren't calling it a hoax.

Gunman kills 19 children, 2 teachers at Texas elementary school

A teenage gunman murdered at least 19 children and two teachers after storming into a Texas elementary school on Tuesday, the latest bout of gun-fueled mass killing in the United States and the nation's worst school shooting in nearly a decade.

www.reuters.com

Comments on the second article are crazy already:

Governor identifies Texas school shooting suspect

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott identified the gunman in Tuesday’s massacre at a Uvalde elementary school. Salvador Ramos, 18, was killed, the governor said.

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[aimeedee]

In the past, we've tried to ban:
Alcohol: fail
marijuana: fail
cocaine: fail
heroine: fail
illegal immigrants: fail

What makes you think banning guns would be any more successful?

And of all of that list, our right to guns is the ONLY one actually protected by our Constitution.

In short, it's not the guns themselves that are the problem. Guns are inanimate objects.

Banning certain types of guns was successful because some "inanimate objects" are more efficient at killing than others:

Biden says mass shootings tripled post assault weapon ban

There was no mistaking President Joe Biden’s plea for some sort of concrete response to the slaying of 19 elementary sch

www.politifact.com

Other Countries Had Mass Shootings. Then They Changed Their Gun Laws. (Published 2022)

Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway: All had a culture of gun ownership, and all tightened restrictions anyway. Their violence statistics now diverge sharply from those of the U.S.

www.nytimes.com

Is banning all guns the answer? Of course not. We need to get to the root cause, which is the heart and mind of the killer. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can to make it as difficult as we can for a crazed person to carry out mass murder.

Is banning all abortions going to stop abortions? Of course not. We need to get to the circumstances that cause a woman to seek an abortion. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do all we can to reduce abortions, including making incremental changes in the law where we can.

 

[SoCalN8tiv]

Like the saying goes, "It's the guns, stupid."

Uh, no, "It's the criminals stupid." You're an idiot.

 

[Cacadetoro]

I have EVERY confidence in facts and my vote. I voted for Biden because the idea of voting for a wannabe dictator, Manchurian moron and all around piece of warthog dung, unacceptable. You probably can't say the same. Your meme happens to be opinion not fact. That seems to be much of the problem. "My opinion is equal to your facts." Respect your intellect and look at data. Set the propaganda aside and be better for it.

It sounds more like you hate for Trump has overshadowed your reasoning when you voted for Biden IMO. I find that the democrats seem to go after one or two issues every four years as their mainstay. Guns, race, abortion, gays....There is a commonality. I am not a gun owner. However, I have fired about every small arms the military has and know what a weapon can do if PUT IN THE WRONG HANDS. I am not anti-gun. It is mass murders like this that get everyone in a rage. I know this sounds tiresome but we kill more people in our cities with hand guns in cities with oppressive/restrictive gun laws than any other situation. Most of the guns are not by the owner. How do you control this?

You stated in your post above that heroin, cocaine etc. do not kill others. Have you looked at the amount of deaths each year from each especially those laced with fentanyl? If you are a dealer would you not be killing others? What has happened in this case was another breakdown in the system. Look at the demographics of most of the school shooters....17-21 years old. This kid posted what he was going to do on social media before he was going to do it. When he bought these weapons how was he able to pay for them? Why would a high school kid need these kinds of weapons? He also bought body armor. You have to look at the individual cases. Most all of the shooters had the same MO and there were obvious signs that would send up red flags. If more strenuous background checks for this age group were ever needed it is now. While I am not an anti-gun person I would want to know why a person wants to purchase an AR style weapon....Is it for protection, target practice, a collector or for some nefarious reason? If you do not do a good background check and do not ask the question with this group of individuals you won't find out. I am not crazy about AR type weapons. That is my personal view of them.

I guess it all boils down to the question after all of this is a question I asked another poster. Please do not take my comments above as being snarky. It was not my intention. Without playing the blame game, what is the solution here? What would you do to remedy this thing. You know you are not going to eliminate gun ownership. You cannot punish the millions of responsible gun owners for the actions of a few. That would be like punishing a Japanese baby born in the 21st century for Hiroshima. I do not think anyone on this board believes that we should not figure out a way to prevent these incidents from happening and we all agree of the many lives it affects. Again, I ask what is the solution?

 

[IETrojanFan]

None of the above kill OTHERS. With all these guns we should be the safest country on Earth. But instead Kids are being mowed down. How is that constitutional? Too many guns. No other country has this problem. Too much access. Like the saying goes, "It's the guns, stupid."

Murder is not Constitutional.
Banning guns is not Constitutional.

Those are two truths that need to be reconciled against each other. It's not the guns, it's the people wielding them that needs to be addressed.

You want to ban guns because they "cause" mass murder? Fine. Then what? Those with evil intent will turn to bombs. Ok, ban all fertilizer, or whatever they use to make the bombs. So they turn to molotov cocktails to start massive raging fires. Now you have to ban all glass bottles, etc. It's a never ending process if your solution is to ban whatever you think "causes" murder, rather than deal with whomever causes murder.

Besides, my original point was much simpler. I was merely pointing out the impossibility, in this country, of banning guns, based on our track record of trying to ban other things.

 

[IETrojanFan]

Banning certain types of guns was successful because some "inanimate objects" are more efficient at killing than others:

Biden says mass shootings tripled post assault weapon ban

There was no mistaking President Joe Biden’s plea for some sort of concrete response to the slaying of 19 elementary sch

www.politifact.com

Other Countries Had Mass Shootings. Then They Changed Their Gun Laws. (Published 2022)

Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway: All had a culture of gun ownership, and all tightened restrictions anyway. Their violence statistics now diverge sharply from those of the U.S.

www.nytimes.com

Is banning all guns the answer? Of course not. We need to get to the root cause, which is the heart and mind of the killer. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can to make it as difficult as we can for a crazed person to carry out mass murder.

Is banning all abortions going to stop abortions? Of course not. We need to get to the circumstances that cause a woman to seek an abortion. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do all we can to reduce abortions, including making incremental changes in the law where we can.

I have no problems with making certain types of weapons more difficult to obtain. The average person doesn't need an Uzi, or even an assault rifle. However, that leads to a very slippery slope; many people (liberals?) will then use that argument to call for bans on ALL rifles, and then shotguns, and then handguns, then pellet and BB guns... THAT'S unconstitutional, as the Constitution currently stands. I can't see how it can be argued any other way. That's all.

 

[xuscx]

Keep up. No one is proposing banning guns.

 

[SonofGodzilla]

So the great state of Texas, where law and order rules, where the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, has cowards for cops.

 

[SonofGodzilla]

people (liberals?) will then use that argument to call for bans on ALL rifles, and then shotguns, and then handguns, then pellet and BB guns

Yeah the old slippery slope defense to allow deranged 18 year olds to murder innocent children . Pathetic, at best.

 

[aimeedee]

I have no problems with making certain types of weapons more difficult to obtain. The average person doesn't need an Uzi, or even an assault rifle. However, that leads to a very slippery slope; many people (liberals?) will then use that argument to call for bans on ALL rifles, and then shotguns, and then handguns, then pellet and BB guns... THAT'S unconstitutional, as the Constitution currently stands. I can't see how it can be argued any other way. That's all.

Fair point, but pro-aborts make the same argument. The extremes don't want to give an inch and perceive modest, reasonable restrictions as a threat to their rights.

 

[IETrojanFan]

Yeah the old slippery slope defense to allow deranged 18 year olds to murder innocent children . Pathetic, at best.

Fact: owning firearms is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. As such, guns will be available to wackos who want to misuse them. The guns aren't the problem.

 

[aimeedee]

So the great state of Texas, where law and order rules, where the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, has cowards for cops.

Let's wait for all the facts. I imagine there is a logical reason/procedure for the police response.

 

[IETrojanFan]

Fair point, but pro-aborts make the same argument. The extremes don't want to give an inch and perceive modest, reasonable restrictions as a threat to their rights.

I fail to understand how murder (abortion) is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. The way I read it, it protects the right to life, not the right to kill.

 

[xuscx]

Fact: owning firearms is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. As such, guns will be available to wackos who want to misuse them. The guns aren't the problem.

guns are the problem and other countries have proven it. Look at Canada laws, very sensible. Virtually no restrictions on legitimate hunting rifles, no chance on buying an assault rifle. They do not have these problems

 

[HRPickenstuff]

If this is true, and the guy was not an active shooter during the time that the police were waiting for SWAT, and that all the shooting had already been done, then there may be justification for them waiting.

But I think we still need to hear more from law enforcement as to how this went down and why they did what they did. Did they have the shooter trapped in a room with injured children that needed help that they couldn’t get to? We need more information.

Hear for yourself the testimony starts at the 7:00 mark.
Rep. Gonzalez. This is his district 23. He hits on several points. One key point he makes is the district gets alot of money and they spend very little on security.

 

[xuscx]

What about churches, shopping centers, theaters, its more than just schools

It doesn't, but he'll persist because he doesn't really do his homework and yet insists that everyone else defend THEIR stats.

"The number of people wounded by gunfire surged in New York City during the pandemic and remains stubbornly high....In New York, it’s sort of this dual situation,” crime analyst Jeff Asher said. “It’s important to know that this is not the worst it has ever been, while also understanding that it has gotten significantly worse in the last few years."

Deucex is also appallingly or purposely naïve to not consider other factors which I tried to point out WRT to large metro areas. “Typically larger cities have been doing well economically. Meaning that while there’s crime, there’s also economic opportunity and related tax revenue,” says Milnes. “There is research that jobs reduce crime and also tax revenues can help fund departments and programs that help curtail crime. These might not all be law enforcement departments—it could be job placement programs or better school systems.” This would apply to New York City.

The top 10 most dangerous cities all suffer from economic poverty. Criminal behavior is a result and criminals will get guns by illegal means. Looking at the 15 least dangerous cities with populations over 300,000, 3 are in Texas; El Paso, Arlington, Austin. Yet, deucex only wants to talk about Dallas. There are ZERO cities in Texas that make the top 10 most dangerous. Heck Nevada permits the open carry of firearms without the need for a license or registration and allows a CCW with a permit and yet Henderson and Las Vegas are on the top 15 safest cities list.


Cherry-picking Houston is disingenuous. Houston not only has been hit particularly hard economically, by covid, they also experienced a significant population boom over the course of the last 20-30 years. Their homicide rate didn't start to skyrocket until the last 3 years....covid....more people with no jobs....crime results. "NYPD reported 488 murders in 2021 – approximately 5.5 per 100,000 residents." "In 2021, Los Angeles reported 397 murders and had a murder rate of 10.62 per 100,000 residents." LA is in CA....you know, the state with the most restrictive gun laws?

Most dangerous city in the country....St Louis. Tishaura O. Jones, Democratic mayor.
#2 most dangerous....Jackson, Mississippi. Chokwe Antar Lumumba , Democratic mayor.
#3 most dangerous....Detroit, Michigan. Michael Edward Duggan , Democratic mayor.
#4 most dangerous....New Orleans, LA. LaToya Cantrell, Democratic mayor.
#5 most dangerous....Baltimore, MD. Brandon Scott, Democratic mayor.
#6 most dangerous....Memphis, TN. Jim Strickland, Democratic mayor.
#7 most dangerous... Cleveland, OH. Justin Bibb, Democratic mayor.
#8 most dangerous.....Baton Rouge, LA. Sharon Weston Broome , Democratic mayor.
#9 most dangerous.....Kansas City, MO. Quinton Lucas, Democratic mayor.
#10 most dangerous..Shreveport, LA. Adrian Perkins, Democratic mayor.

Louisiana holds 3 spots there. Thank you to Democratic Governor John Bel Edwards.

You were saying?

• Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy said people need AR-15 rifles to kill "feral pigs."
• Cassidy made the comment to a Vice reporter who asked why people would ever need assault weapons.
• He said people who kill "feral pigs" in "the middle of Louisiana" would object to a ban on them.

Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy this week said that he thought people still needed assault weapons to kill "feral pigs," inadvertently echoing an old meme about gun control.

In an interview published on Thursday, Vice News asked Cassidy whether he believed there was any room to ban assault weapons in the country.

 

[aimeedee]

I fail to understand how murder (abortion) is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. The way I read it, it protects the right to life, not the right to kill.

I agree with you. But that is not what the SCOTUS has said. We shall see what happens when the ruling comes out. My point, as I'm sure you know, is that neither group is willing to give an inch on what they see as their cherished rights.

 

[xuscx]

We will see if states rights apply to guns, or just abortions. The 2A people always want to ignore that pesky militia word, it is the subject on the sentence. A true student of the constitution that the republicans claim to be would understand the purpose of the statement

 

[DaFireMedic]

None of the above kill OTHERS.

Uh…..wanna bet?

 

[uscvball]

None of the above kill OTHERS. With all these guns we should be the safest country on Earth. But instead Kids are being mowed down. How is that constitutional? Too many guns. No other country has this problem. Too much access. Like the saying goes, "It's the guns, stupid."

Yes, they do, when combined with a motor vehicle. Cars in park without a driver under the influence don't kill people.

No other country is or is like the US. This "other country" comparison is just stupid and useless.

In the last 3 years, almost 3,000 teenagers have died from overdose, most of them accidental fentanyl overdose. It's just a different kind of "mowing down". Dealers accessing children through a variety of social media apps who were forced to stay at home, isolated, due to covid "rules". Where is the liberal outcry about those kids? Liberals are too busy defending their draconian policies. Liberal AND conservative politicians are too busy padding their bank accounts with big pharma donations that have resulted in a massive increase in addicts, suicides, and unintentional overdose deaths.

"Seventy-two senators and 302 members of the House of Representatives cashed a check from the pharmaceutical industry ahead of the 2020 election — representing more than two-thirds of Congress. Pfizer’s political action committee alone contributed to 228 lawmakers. Amgen’s PAC donated to 218, meaning that each company helped to fund the campaigns of nearly half the lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Overall, the sector donated $14 million.

Three of the lawmakers who will lead the House next year as Congress focuses on skyrocketing drug costs are among the biggest recipients of campaign contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, a new KHN analysis shows. On Wednesday, House Democrats selected Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland to serve as the next majority leader and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina as majority whip, making them the No. 2 and No. 3 most powerful Democrats as their party regains control of the House in January. Both lawmakers have received more than $1 million from pharmaceutical company political action committees in the past decade. Adding Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the California Democrat expected to be the next speaker, the three-person House Democratic leadership team has collected more than $2.3 million total in campaign contributions from drugmakers since the 2007-08 election cycle."

And you want to talk "blood on their hands"?

Keep up. No one is proposing banning guns.

Yes they are.

Democrats Need to Start Talking About Repealing the Second Amendment

It’d likely be a decades-long campaign, but it’s long past time to take disarming America seriously.

newrepublic.com

"Repeal the Second Amendment" by Allan Lichtman

There's an average of one mass shooting per day in the United States. In 2020, Distinguished Professor of History at American University Allan Lichtman wrote the book: "Repeal the Second Amendment" - the first book that uses history, legal theory and up-to-the-minute data to make a compelling...

www.wamc.org

Is it time to repeal the Second Amendment?

The relatively unregulated freedom to bear arms is literally

www.lgbtqnation.com

Repeal the Second Amendment | Opinion

I cried as I wrote this essay on Tuesday evening, after the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. I am more than disheartened.

www.inquirer.com

Repeal the Second Amendment

Though we cannot create an absolutely safe world, we can create a safer world.

www.americamagazine.org

Speaking the Unspeakable: We Must Repeal the Second Amendment

Though we can never bring back the estimated 30,000 victims of gun violence each year, by gutting the Second Amendment we can give our residents a greater chance at life.

goodmenproject.com

"President Joe Biden said Wednesday that “the Second Amendment is not absolute”

 

[SoCalN8tiv]

This "other country" comparison is just stupid and useless.

Everything troyflower has posted here is "useless and stupid." He's an idiot.

 

[uscvball]

We will see if states rights apply to guns, or just abortions. The 2A people always want to ignore that pesky militia word, it is the subject on the sentence. A true student of the constitution that the republicans claim to be would understand the purpose of the statement

Lol. YOU, of all people......as a subject matter expert....on the Constitution? Lol, again.

What about churches, shopping centers, theaters, its more than just schools

Always trying to move the carrot after you fail to address your inaccurate and completely ignorant statements and misinterpretation of statistics.

 

[xuscx]

Lol. YOU, of all people......as a subject matter expert....on the Constitution? Lol, again.

Always trying to move the carrot after you fail to address your inaccurate and completely ignorant statements and misinterpretation of statistics.

Name one inaccurate statement I made. You are the one all over the map. Post a bunch of crap and say you are the winner. No one in congress has introduced a law to ban all guns, another one of your stupid arguments. Firearm safety like other countries do

The top states by gun death rates per 100,000 are: Mississippi -- 28.6. Louisiana -- 26.3. Wyoming -- 25.9. Missouri -- 23.9. Alabama -- 23.6. Alaska -- 23.5. Canada--.5

 

[Gr8ythunter]

This isn't Ukraine, and the Russians are not going to storm our shores. If you believe that, you are very paranoid.

You are correct .... this isn't Ukraine and I am less worried about Russia storming our shores that others that could try to take over the US.
And if you don't believe that, you are naive or a lib .... or both !

 

[Rodgarnay51]

Quite sensible to responsible law-abiding citizens that perhaps would have no qualms IF bad guys followed laws. You assuming bad guys give a sheit that 30-rd mags are/would be illegal just because a lawmaker said so?

You also in favor of ‘gun-free zones’….where there’s zero defense and everybody is a sitting duck for assailants? Any correlation to the uprise in school, post office, and church shootings? Do bad guys disarm in gun-free zones…per law….like I do?

.

The other thing is, do criminals give a rat’s *** about background checks? Although in this case the shooter’s background was right in front of their noses.

 

[Pudly76]

The top states by gun death rates per 100,000 are: Mississippi -- 28.6. Louisiana -- 26.3. Wyoming -- 25.9. Missouri -- 23.9. Alabama -- 23.6. Alaska -- 23.5. Canada-

Deaths are not murders.

 

[Rodgarnay51]

The laws for security guards are pretty limiting, at least in California and Nevada. Essentially they are distinctly different from law enforcement and they are really deterred from taking any action unless it’s a felony in progress (and how many security guards really know the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony). In California just about every theft code has been reduced to misdemeanors which is why vehicle break ins and a lot of identity theft get a free pass. Then there’s the Traymon “this could have been my son” case that pretty much destroyed that security guards life. The pay and conditions deter most former law enforcement (who left in good standing) into going into the work unless they have a personal interest. I would (and am) rather do a paid part time surveillance job than work security.

Security guards in general really aren’t very useful other than a deterrent unless you go with a big company, and in the big cities in California they are not even that. They are generally undertrained, underpaid, and not given a lot of latitude to do much. It’s really a fixable issue if people are serious about using them, but I suspect most don’t want to pay the cost for the good ones.

You ought to see the security at a coin show.

 

[DaFireMedic]

Fair point, but pro-aborts make the same argument. The extremes don't want to give an inch and perceive modest, reasonable restrictions as a threat to their rights.

I agree. But I think the vast majority of pro-gun people out there are open to modest, reasonable restrictions, if they trusted it to stop there and not continue to push through further legislation that takes away freedoms but doesn’t actually solve anything. Most pro-gun people already agree with previously enacted reasonable restrictions such as 15 day waiting periods, felons not being able to own guns, and numerous others.

The concern they have is that once you give them an inch, they will continue to take inches, and eventually take it all. And that has happened on other issues.

So how do the two sides come to a point of reasonable trust for the good of all? I’m not sure what the answer is.

 

[Pudly76]

You ought to see the security at a coin show.

Or at marijuana dispensaries…

At least that’s what I’ve heard.

 

[uscvball]

Name one inaccurate statement I made. You are the one all over the map. Post a bunch of crap and say you are the winner. No one in congress has introduced a law to ban all guns, another one of your stupid arguments. Firearm safety like other countries do

The top states by gun death rates per 100,000 are: Mississippi -- 28.6. Louisiana -- 26.3. Wyoming -- 25.9. Missouri -- 23.9. Alabama -- 23.6. Alaska -- 23.5. Canada--.5

You attempted to compare a state to 2 cities. Start there. Then move to the part about "blaming" Democratic-run cities using ONE city as proof of your point of view. I posted TEN to support that concept. You claim NYC has "super low" murder rate, yet fail to acknowledge that it has been ON THE RISE for the last few years....same as Houston. You fail to acknowledge the totality of causes having to do with the use of guns in committing crimes. You said, "no one is proposing banning guns. I gave you several examples proving the opposite but that's "crap" apparently.

Now you want to move the argument to states AFTER trying to make an issue out of Dallas and Houston and New York City and Los Angeles. You are really bad at analysis, always have been. You have no ability to dissect 2A. Go back and read what Trojan JST had to say. THAT is an analysis.

 

[Pudly76]

I agree. But I think the vast majority of pro-gun people out there are open to modest, reasonable restrictions, if they trusted it to stop there and not continue to push through further legislation that takes away freedoms but doesn’t actually solve anything. Most pro-gun people already agree with previously enacted reasonable restrictions such as 15 day waiting periods, felons not being able to own guns, and numerous others.

The concern they have is that once you give them an inch, they will continue to take inches, and eventually take it all. And that has happened on other issues.

So how do the two sides come to a point of reasonable trust for the good of all? I’m not sure what the answer is.

The issues have risen out of the definition of an assault weapon. There are many who believe that semi automatic pistols fall in this group too.