........'Gun-free zones' have been the most popular response to previous mass killings. But many law-enforcement officials say they are actually counterproductive. "Guns are already banned in schools. That is why the shootings happen in schools. A school is a 'helpless-victim zone,'" says Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff. "Preventing any adult at a school from having access to a firearm eliminates any chance the killer can be stopped in time to prevent a rampage," Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. Indeed, there have been many instances -- from the high-school shooting by Luke Woodham in Mississippi, to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo. -- where a killer has been stopped after someone got a gun from a parked car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter...........continued
Quote from: string in that other ForumThese new teaching methods. In my day it used to be detention, now it's learn or die.Oh, how I wish I'd had that option when I taught. This is just one more case of media hype. One state, Utah, is teaching teachers to kill intruders and it looks like the U.S. has gone dafter than it really has. Why single out school shootings? There are shootings of innocent people across the country. And why put guns in the hands of people who ought not have them inside a classroom? How long will it be before some deranged and stressed out teacher shoots one of his students?
These new teaching methods. In my day it used to be detention, now it's learn or die.
How long will it be before some deranged and stressed out teacher shoots one of his students?
Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) released a bipartisan letter this week signed by 48 of their colleagues pledging to oppose the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which Secretary of State John Kerry signed on behalf of the United States in September. This letter makes it clear that the Senate will not ratify the treaty in the foreseeable future.Since a treaty requires a two-thirds majority to win the Senate's advice and consent, the ATT is at least 17 votes short of the 67 votes needed to secure ratification. And if anything, the Moran-Manchin letter understates Senate opposition to the treaty.
Of course Smiley doesn't know that Obama suggested allowing schools to hire armed guards
I already discussed with you the tactical advantages a gunman would have over the few teachers that have a gun.
If you get rid of the gunfree zones, you'll need additional security to reduce the possibility of a gunman making into the school in the first place.
Oh yeah Svengali Refresh my memory ....... Where did this supposed discussion take place???
All they do provide those would be defenseless victims/targets is a false sense of security, as if a clear thinking, deranged, potential gunman just might leave his guns outside simply because the sign says "Gun-Free Zone....No Guns Permitted Beyond This Point'
You seriously don't remember this from the D&D thread? I shouldn't be surpised. Republicans can't remember anything before Obama. I'm not digging through the massive thread all day for your amnesia
Somebody in West Suburban St. Charles, Illinois found a novel use for his gun. He used a .22 to shoot icicles that were hanging from his roof
Gee, I always used a pole to knock down icicles.
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2014-01-16, 05:27:31Somebody in West Suburban St. Charles, Illinois found a novel use for his gun. He used a .22 to shoot icicles that were hanging from his roofNow, I've done a lot of things with a firearm, but that's a first to me. Did you know the .22, as bullets go, is one of the least accurate at longer distances, so depending on the distance this guy must have been either 3 donuts shy of the looney bin, or a freekin ' outrageous marksman!
A democRat way of saying I made that all up, I have no idea why, & I don't care -- so leave me to my usual wet dreams fresh at hand
Quote from: SmileyFaze on 2014-01-15, 04:23:41A democRat way of saying I made that all up, I have no idea why, & I don't care -- so leave me to my usual wet dreams fresh at handHow can you not remember that entire discussion? Go get a CAT scan, you might have brain damage or maybe Alzheimers.
I say you probably made it up, or your lying, or are honestly confusing me with someone else, for if you were so absolutely sure, you'd be more than willing to back up your 'story', if for nothing else to resurrect your shattered credibility.
We most have argued for pages about who would actually have the tactile advantage, a teacher with a gun in her purse or the gunman. The only thing I'm not sure of is your intent. Is it to waste my time by looking through that thread for you, or do you seriously not remember me pointing how that the student gunmen can shoot the teacher while her/his back is turned?
Murderous nut jobs are attracted to them like stink to shit.
Why did Lanza choose that particular school and not some other gun-free zone? Why did Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold choose Columbine? I'm leaving out all Sociology, Psychology, Criminology and anything else you might consider "liberal" to let common sense kick in. If Harris and Klebold merely wanted to shoot random people up, it might have been tactically better and less risky to choose an elementary school. Remember Columbine did have a guard, but he happened to be in the parking lot at the time. The elementary school would have no guard at all. Sure, some shootings are random but most of the time there's a reason besides a sign.
On July 20th, 2012, James Eagan Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58 more at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado.Those are facts. But many questions still remain, and one of the most notable asks why the shooter choose that particular theater? Location? Convenience? Or something else?You might think that it was the one closest to the killer's apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned.Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater's entrance............So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans guns? The answer should be obvious, though it apparently is not clear to the media - disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks.................continued
Hey, SF, I've found a new gun for the family Barbecue, or - just the thing to take to a picnic!A gun designed for Indian women
I disagree with your theoretical positions.There's a slight chance I may be wrong--but I doubt it.
Further, I don't think any of the large movie house chains (they own most of the them...) allow guns. If they caught you with a gun, they wouldn't allow in you with it - sign or no sign and your CCW not withstanding............... a person with a CCW would have been take out Holmes (and hopefully not actually add to the death toll?)
I don't think
Page created in 0.335 seconds with 54 queries.