Author Topic: Gun Control?  (Read 21886 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #225 on: February 22, 2018, 09:32:48 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18706
  • Tommy Points: 2085
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I understand armed guards. Armed teachers, though? Even if the logistics and liability issues could be worked out, I’m skeptical.

There was an armed guard at Parkland - heck there was an armed guard at Columbine! - but it's kinda hard for them to have an impact when one person can kill 17 people in less than 5 minutes. Even with the argument that they might sometimes stop mass shooters from shooting more people, there's still the underlying issue that shooters can almost always rack up a massive body count before they ever get there.

Armed teachers, especially actively carrying, fails risk-benefit assessment so hard I have to assume people that are gungho about it either haven't considered any risks or have a vested interest in selling more guns.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #226 on: February 22, 2018, 09:36:25 AM »

Offline More Banners

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3770
  • Tommy Points: 250
Don't worry - Florida has come to the rescue! The Florida House has approved a bill to post, "In God We Trust" in a conspicuous place in all public schools. We don't need gun control - religion will save us all  ::)

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/gradebook/2018/02/21/florida-house-approves-bill-to-post-in-god-we-trust-in-all-public-schools/
Ludicrous. Only in the south! ::)

First, I am not sure that is legal given the fact that its supporting Christian beliefs over others in a public facility, but why stop there? Why isn't Florida putting "In God we Trust" in every gay bar in the state? Surely that will protect innocent gay people from being massacred in a mass killing.

You should incinerate all your US currency if you feel so strongly about the phrase. Sure it's a silly thing to engrave, but who really cares? And the Orlando nightclub thing was a bit much.

The phrase totally goes against how this country was built. Personally, I have a major problem with it being added to our money [in 1957] and with 'under god' being added to the Pledge of Allegiance [in 1954]. I am not going to turn this into a freedom of religion argument (although god and guns are very intertwined in our country), but sweeping all of this under the rug and saying that god will protect us is insane...like clinically insane.

Says a lot about the national culture in the 50's. Outwardly (almost competitively) religious, and of course male and white dominated.

Also nutso-commie-phobic, because communism was supposedly "atheistic" by nature, whatever that means. He

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #227 on: February 22, 2018, 09:55:25 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18706
  • Tommy Points: 2085
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Wow, after taking a 6 day weekend post-Parkland, the NRA's new attack line, in ads and CPAC speeches, is that "the media loves mass shootings" and "are putting out the casting call for the next mass shooter".  Utterly shameless and despicable.  Can we just completely cut them out of the national discussion already?

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #228 on: February 22, 2018, 10:38:23 AM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8230
  • Tommy Points: 903
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY
« Last Edit: February 22, 2018, 10:45:04 AM by Eddie20 »

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #229 on: February 22, 2018, 10:47:51 AM »

Online mmmmm

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3456
  • Tommy Points: 581
The notion that the solution to this is to arm teachers is insane.

The notion that raising the age limit to 21 for purchase of semi-automatics is going to help anything is either pathetically stupid or pathologically cynically dismissive.

Both notion also tend to misrepresent this issue as being a 'school' problem, which completely dismisses the huge number of victims in Las Vegas and other venues such as the Florida nightclub or the Colorado theatre.  As well as the thousands -- yes, thousands -- of other victims of mass shootings that have happened in this country in recent years that no one talks much about.

The problem is not school shootings.  The problem is mass shootings, of which school events are just some of the most visible, horrific examples.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.
#OneCitizenOneVote - True Election Reform:  Eliminate the anti-democratic Electoral College farce now.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #230 on: February 22, 2018, 11:01:03 AM »

Online rondohondo

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10673
  • Tommy Points: 1184
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY

Also what's going to happen when 3D printers are widely available? This is a serious question.....

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #231 on: February 22, 2018, 11:03:37 AM »

Offline Snakehead

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6846
  • Tommy Points: 448
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY

I'd say every other major country that doesn't have these problems says otherwise.  You people need to wake up.  America is the one that can't figure this out and some delusional people want to just keep on this path.  It makes me sick that people don't care about kids dying.  This is the least we can do to start and we go from there. 

There's no arguments otherwise unless you don't care about kids dying.
"I really don't want people to understand me." - Jordan Crawford

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #232 on: February 22, 2018, 11:07:52 AM »

Offline Snakehead

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6846
  • Tommy Points: 448
I understand armed guards. Armed teachers, though? Even if the logistics and liability issues could be worked out, I’m skeptical.

There was an armed guard at Parkland - heck there was an armed guard at Columbine! - but it's kinda hard for them to have an impact when one person can kill 17 people in less than 5 minutes.

We had a police officer armed every day in my school.

True story: My history teacher was an Iraq war vet and reserve officer who helped rebuild the Iraqi government (put us on a conference call with the interim President of Iraq once even in fact).

One day we had basically a school shooting equivalent drill.  This man was very funny with a dry sense of humor and no reservations, so he told us what the code was ("Dr. ____ is in the building) for the active shooter that would come over the PA.  He said at that point everyone should just run from the building because that's what he was going to do.  He said "I love officer ____ (our cop at school) but I wouldn't trust him with my life or to take down any shooter". 

Absolutely right on.  I think conservatives have watched too much Die Hard and Under Siege.  It'd be funny if kids weren't dying.
"I really don't want people to understand me." - Jordan Crawford

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #233 on: February 22, 2018, 11:23:00 AM »

Online rondohondo

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10673
  • Tommy Points: 1184
I understand armed guards. Armed teachers, though? Even if the logistics and liability issues could be worked out, I’m skeptical.

There was an armed guard at Parkland - heck there was an armed guard at Columbine! - but it's kinda hard for them to have an impact when one person can kill 17 people in less than 5 minutes. Even with the argument that they might sometimes stop mass shooters from shooting more people, there's still the underlying issue that shooters can almost always rack up a massive body count before they ever get there.

Armed teachers, especially actively carrying, fails risk-benefit assessment so hard I have to assume people that are gungho about it either haven't considered any risks or have a vested interest in selling more guns.

There was only one guard at a school with over 3,00 students, and multiple buildings.

There has to be a limited amount of entrances into these schools(maybe 3 or 4), and should have an armed guard at each enterance. This could come from  active/retired police/military.

You're right it only takes 5 mins to go on a killing spree, and it takes swat teams 5-10 minutes to even enter the building. To me this means you need armed guards to be able to stop, and alert at the point of entry .

Also should have cameras in the parking lot and entrance points of the buildings to be able to alert a lockdown as soon as possible.

« Last Edit: February 22, 2018, 11:29:27 AM by rondohondo »

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #234 on: February 22, 2018, 11:23:56 AM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8230
  • Tommy Points: 903
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY

I'd say every other major country that doesn't have these problems says otherwise.  You people need to wake up.  America is the one that can't figure this out and some delusional people want to just keep on this path.  It makes me sick that people don't care about kids dying.  This is the least we can do to start and we go from there. 

There's no arguments otherwise unless you don't care about kids dying.

So is your point that AR's are the problem? That's blaming the tool and not the individual, despite the fact that there is a direct correlation between mental illness and mass shooters. In fact, there is evidence that our country has the highest rate of illness/lowest amount of treatment when compared to other advanced country.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/05/030507080958.htm

Removing AR's will eliminate one tool, but not the problem. Like the video above demonstrated, in close quarters a full auto glock is more deadly than a stock AR. Just like the VTech shooter used 2 semi-auto handguns to kill 30 something innocent people.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #235 on: February 22, 2018, 11:28:31 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32774
  • Tommy Points: 1527
  • Pre-school artwork
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY

I'd say every other major country that doesn't have these problems says otherwise.  You people need to wake up.  America is the one that can't figure this out and some delusional people want to just keep on this path.  It makes me sick that people don't care about kids dying.  This is the least we can do to start and we go from there. 

There's no arguments otherwise unless you don't care about kids dying.

So is your point that AR's are the problem? That's blaming the tool and not the individual, despite the fact that there is a direct correlation between mental illness and mass shooters. In fact, there is evidence that our country has the highest rate of illness/lowest amount of treatment when compared to other advanced country.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/05/030507080958.htm

Removing AR's will eliminate one tool, but not the problem. Like the video above demonstrated, in close quarters a full auto glock is more deadly than a stock AR. Just like the VTech shooter used 2 semi-auto handguns to kill 30 something innocent people.


Seems like an easy combining of idea.


Remove the easy to access tools while improving the ways we diagnose these individuals and improve how we help them. 

Knicks: Irving, Drummond, Marcus Morris, S. Muhammad, C. Lee, Sullinger, Hield, M. Chriss , V. Carter, T. Zeller, N. Cole, T. Prince, Livio Jean-Charles, Tyler Ulis, N. Collison

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #236 on: February 22, 2018, 11:48:32 AM »

Offline seancally

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 216
  • Tommy Points: 24
"The game honors toughness." - President Stevens

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #237 on: February 22, 2018, 11:51:30 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19541
  • Tommy Points: 927
I understand armed guards. Armed teachers, though? Even if the logistics and liability issues could be worked out, I’m skeptical.

There was an armed guard at Parkland - heck there was an armed guard at Columbine! - but it's kinda hard for them to have an impact when one person can kill 17 people in less than 5 minutes. Even with the argument that they might sometimes stop mass shooters from shooting more people, there's still the underlying issue that shooters can almost always rack up a massive body count before they ever get there.

Armed teachers, especially actively carrying, fails risk-benefit assessment so hard I have to assume people that are gungho about it either haven't considered any risks or have a vested interest in selling more guns.

There was only one guard at a school with over 3,00 students, and multiple buildings.

There has to be a limited amount of entrances into these schools(maybe 3 or 4), and should have an armed guard at each enterance. This could come from  active/retired police/military.

You're right it only takes 5 mins to go on a killing spree, and it takes swat teams 5-10 minutes to even enter the building. To me this means you need armed guards to be able to stop, and alert at the point of entry .

Also should have cameras in the parking lot and entrance points of the buildings to be able to alert a lockdown as soon as possible.
Who is paying for the armed guards?  Are you willing to pay more in taxes to fund armed guards at every entrance of every school?  We are talking billions of dollars to do this, which means a lot of money you are giving up out of your own pocket.  Isn't it just easier to make AR 15's (and similar guns) harder (if not impossible) to get.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #238 on: February 22, 2018, 11:58:23 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
You can ban all AR's and then people will adjust. Put a sear and the problem isn't solved, just the weapon changes. In fact, this is a lot more deadly than the AR Cruz used.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JSIX0HsczlY

Also what's going to happen when 3D printers are widely available? This is a serious question.....
So, let's not try to make it harder for folks to shoot a large number of other folks dead because we won't be able to root out shootings completely?

If you don't see why this argument is morally bankrupt, you should pause and think why you aren't applying the same logic to border control and illegal border crossings.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #239 on: February 22, 2018, 12:37:30 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35970
  • Tommy Points: -27665
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I think there’s too much focus on AR-15s, frankly.  They kill way, way fewer people than handguns.  Even if all “assault rifles” disappeared tomorrow, it would make a relatively small dent in the problem.  I think we need general solutions that apply to all guns, such as a reduction on magazine size and a national registry.



Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...