Active shooter situation at Florida high school, at least 20 injured so far

[Deleted]

If they all had guns, nobody would have died but the shooter.

[Jtbrig7390]

Well there goes that antifa theory lmao.

Yep.

/10char

[Gaidax]

If they all had guns, nobody would have died but the shooter.

People in Vegas had guns, multiple armed guards too... where are they now?

[mvaliz]

Hey man, I absolutely agree with you. I'd love for guns to go extinct. Hell I'd be on board with removing every gun off the planet and making hunters resort to bows and arrows. Believe me I would, no guns not even for soldiers.
But that's fantasy and idealism, and I don't take you for a fool with no grasp on realism, so I'm going to assume you realize the gun issue in America won't be solved simply by laws. Yeah it's a fantastic stepping stone, but it'll take much more than that.

I think that's the big problem here is people (and you) don't realize that we, who are advocating gun regulation/laws and banning AR-15s, aren't trying to SOLVE ALL VIOLENT CRIME in one swoop via these laws, we're just trying to stop or greatly reduce mass shootings, not all violent crime ATM. We KNOW it is a first stepping stone, as you say! :P Absolutely NO country has figured out how to stop all violent crime. This isn't an either/or thing like "It must solve ALL gun violence or it shouldn't be implemented" kind of argument people put forth. :P However, the more lives we save, the more minds can exist to work on solving all our problems in future. Maybe some of those lives saved will develop breakthrough treatments to curbstomp violent tendencies with some kind of scientific DNA tweak at birth. Then, if implemented to enough people, gun laws can be relaxed again.

Basically, you're right but we KNOW that it's only a stepping stone - but it's one that's needed right now, and that is the easiest thing to do to help stop mass shootings than arguing with people who want to love their penis replacements.

- - - Updated - - -

If they all had guns, nobody would have died but the shooter.

Seriously... try harder. This was just lame. =/

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I don't think the country is willing to accept the needless deaths of innocent people with AR's and its variants, it's more of a product of the political dysfunction caused by an ideology that has successfully deluded millions of people via propaganda and suppressed the morale of citizens from anti-democratic actions to curb voting, civic engagement.

Well, you’re wrong, about a great many things. I think you ought to allow for the possibility that perfectly rational people can disagree with you about something and vote accordingly. Screaming “propaganda, and suppression, and curbing voting!” is generally what people say when they’ve lost an argument and don’t want to face up to that fact. Please don think I’m just picking on liberals either, because conservatives do this too.

[Dextroden]

I think that's the big problem here is people (and you) don't realize that we, who are advocating gun regulation/laws and banning AR-15s, aren't trying to SOLVE ALL VIOLENT CRIME in one swoop via these laws, we're just trying to stop or greatly reduce mass shootings, not all violent crime ATM. We KNOW it is a first stepping stone, as you say! :P Absolutely NO country has figured out how to stop all violent crime. This isn't an either/or thing like "It must solve ALL gun violence or it shouldn't be implemented" kind of argument people put forth. :P However, the more lives we save, the more minds can exist to work on solving all our problems in future. Maybe some of those lives saved will develop breakthrough treatments to curbstomp violent tendencies with some kind of scientific DNA tweak at birth. Then, if implemented to enough people, gun laws can be relaxed again.

Basically, you're right but we KNOW that it's only a stepping stone - but it's one that's needed right now, and that is the easiest thing to do to help stop mass shootings than arguing with people who want to love their penis replacements.

So all that means is once someone inevitably shoots a public space , you have no more talking points. People still died in school despite a gun ban. What can you say after that? "We need to double ban guns!"?

[cubby]

Right on Cubby I enjoy responding to you because agree or disagree, I like that you can think beyond just the short moments in the text, and I for sure understand what you are saying too. It is a good conversation to have, and I think whether we agree or disagree, I think it's important to establish foundation as to why that is. Which is why I like reading your thoughts too.

Agreed. I can't get pretty jerky at times on these forums, but overall I enjoy a good discussion on a difficult topic.

As for GP most of the time I totally disagree with him, but the problem is based on the last couple of years with Elected Moron in the White House, I really hope regardless this becomes more than just talking points, or hallow symbols that get reported in the media until the next one and people play selective amnesia again at what the problem is.

I'm starting to lean towards not engaging him anymore - he seems to have a real problem with admitting when he's wrong. That kind of thing bothers me more than most.

I am also not saying that concern can't be expressed differently at different times, but I hope if anything this gets people to stop being complacent, which honestly seems to be the biggest issue in all this.

If people can't be bothered to care about politics and being informed every 2 to 4 years if that, then why only care about people dying whenever the News Breaks in. Kind of like the Dog Whistle you know.

Agreed - if people are concerned, they need to start actively engaging in politics and not just shrugging their shoulders with a "what can I do about it?" and not even vote. If you want change, you have to go at it.

[Ghostpanther]

You are - and you just admitted it. Your analogy was equating traffic accidents will school shootings, and those are not the same. At all. Your goal was to get cars banned as well as guns, using your analogy - which you just admitted was flawed.

I'm sorry you can't seem to get past this simple point. I wish you could. It's mildly disappointing.

On a side note - have you ever been wrong in these forums? And admitted it? If so - could you show me? I would be happy to do the same (my most recent total flub was BRUTAL).

In this thread. I said a person can not legally own a firearm unless they are 21. I was corrected by another poster, who said they only need to be 18 for a long rifle. I told the poster he was right and thanked him for the correction. I can find other times too...hold on for sec while I check.....Oh, when I apologized to Mail Security for a post I made in his thread which was inappropriate. There are other times I admitted i was wrong. You may be purposely forgetting them or simply have not seen them.

[cubby]

People in Vegas had guns, multiple armed guards too... where are they now?

Exactly. The answer to gun violent is NOT more guns. The people in particular that want to put teachers with guns really don't get it.

[Kiljaedon]

Don't link me things from Infowars.....

Also re-read what I said you seemed to miss a few key points.

- - - Updated - - -



Now show me where that happens weekly.

Fun Fact: Its easier to get a gun than it is to get a truck.

Not sure what linking something from a post that is a legitimate discussion has to do with anything. Even if the website itself has trash posts that makes quite a few points that counter what you said which basically sums up that guns kill more people then knives which is not totally accurate..

Ban guns then the kid could make a bomb with house hold items and fertilizer. Ban fertilizer and he can make a pressure cooker bomb, Ban pressure cookers and he can get a vehicle. And no getting a vehicle is as easy as getting a gun. He can steal it quite easily and if a man is willing to kill 17 people then he doesnt give a crap about laws..

[cubby]

In this thread. I said a person can not legally own a firearm unless they are 21. I was corrected by another poster, who said they only need to be 18 for a long rifle. I told the poster he was right and thanked him for the correction. I can find other times too...hold on for sec while I check.....Oh, when I apologized to Mail Security for a post I made in his thread which was inappropriate. There are other times I admitted i was wrong. You may be purposely forgetting them or simply have not seen them.

I didn't see them - thank you. My biggest was having to admit to Ransath (*shudder*) that I misread a post of his that we were discussion, and the entirety of my points were wrong. That HURT. But there are many more, too.

[Deleted]

Yee , and this is what a dumb ass people get for not doing anything for gun control ,
A high school shooting happens , there should be gun control but no no no , new idea is they will teach teacher to fire guns , they will give children guns so that they can defend them self.
A country that know solution to one of its biggest problem but they cannot do a thing to stop it

As a brit I'm pritty pro gun bans. But I have to question how effective can gun control really be in a country with so many guns just out and about all ready in circulation. I mean it worked in the UK because we banned them when guns were rare and expensive so mopping the few up and being an island blocking import was effective but you guys have as many guns as we have car's so wouldent any legislation just be hot air and paper in reality with how accessible a gun would still be from any black market?

[Ghostpanther]

Same to you, same to you, my exceptional friend. I am not in service any longer doing about in high tech for over 10 years since, I don't need any guns - I have seen enough guns and rifles for a life time, I am trained to used everything starting from Kalashnikov equivalents and ending with Tavor - these things are not some toys. You need to cure your society of that perception.

You can keep hugging you revolver there while you see the mass shooting news every two weeks.

I do not hug it. It is in close reach however.

[Somewhatconcerned]

I think that's the big problem here is people (and you) don't realize that we, who are advocating gun regulation/laws and banning AR-15s, aren't trying to SOLVE ALL VIOLENT CRIME in one swoop via these laws, we're just trying to stop or greatly reduce mass shootings, not all violent crime ATM. We KNOW it is a first stepping stone, as you say! :P Absolutely NO country has figured out how to stop all violent crime. This isn't an either/or thing like "It must solve ALL gun violence or it shouldn't be implemented" kind of argument people put forth. :P However, the more lives we save, the more minds can exist to work on solving all our problems in future. Maybe some of those lives saved will develop breakthrough treatments to curbstomp violent tendencies with some kind of scientific DNA tweak at birth. Then, if implemented to enough people, gun laws can be relaxed again.

Basically, you're right but we KNOW that it's only a stepping stone - but it's one that's needed right now, and that is the easiest thing to do to help stop mass shootings than arguing with people who want to love their penis replacements.

- - - Updated - - -



Seriously... try harder. This was just lame. =/

Haven't you heard, criminals will try to break laws therefore we should never pass them.

[mvaliz]

Someone driving a car at a high speed, recklessly and endangering others , can still kill others. Better ban those. But wait, we are willing at the cost of kids losing their lives to pay the price.

You do realize that, over time, we've issued a lot of regulations in regards to automotive safety that has removed dangerous aspects to cars to reduce car deaths - right?

To borrow from @Breccia "But that's not the same as BANNING specific guns! You're not banning specific cars, are you!?"

Oh contraire! There are vehicles that are specifically banned from being used on the roads and even for owning! for example, you cannot own a tank or drive it to work. Your vehicle has to meet specific guidelines (height, weight, treads, ect) to be used on the road and also implement very specific safety regulations before being allowed to purchase it and used in a specific area.

Also (and it's sad this even needs to be said to you) but cars can't exactly navigate school halways like a kid with an AR-15 can. >_< As a weapon, cars are basically a one-shot deal that can only work in the RIGHT moment (ie. Charloletesville), while also risking the idea that

also (and even sadder this even needs to be said to you) cars are pretty much a neccessity for most people in America, paritcularly the middle class. Guns are not neccessary for your daily routines and workplace unless you're police or Military.

[Ghostpanther]

I didn't see them - thank you. Mine biggest was having to admit to Ransath (*shudder*) that I misread a post of his that we were discussion, and the entirety of my points were wrong. That HURT.

pfft. Being wrong is a common human trait. I do not feel bad about being wrong. I do if I do not apologize for it however or make admends. I thought Hillary was going to win. Sure am glad I was wrong about that. lol!

[Jtbrig7390]

Not sure what linking something from a post that is a legitimate discussion has to do with anything. Even if the website itself has trash posts that makes quite a few points that counter what you said which basically sums up that guns kill more people then knives which is not totally accurate..

Ban guns then the kid could make a bomb with house hold items and fertilizer. Ban fertilizer and he can make a pressure cooker bomb, Ban pressure cookers and he can get a vehicle. And no getting a vehicle is as easy as getting a gun. He can steal it quite easily and if a man is willing to kill 17 people then he doesnt give a crap about laws..

So by ur Infowar's logic lets not ban or regulate anything.

[Kiljaedon]

Chicago's "gun controll" is largely meaningless because it does nothing to stop people from simply driving 45 minutes to a place outside of Chicago which does not have similar restrictions and buying a gun.

And no, sorry, but the correct answer is never "more guns".

The problem with Chicago has nothing to do with guns. The core root of the problem is the government created an atmosphere that breeds drugs and gangs and will not do what is really needed to be done to solve the problem. Rip out the roots of the cause which are the hoods. Go with military and bulldozers and plow the entire nest that has concentrated violence and chaos.

Until that is dealt with we will continue to have killing issues.

[Dextroden]

Haven't you heard, criminals will try to break laws therefore we should never pass them.

No. It means Eurotrash cunts that love these threads to bash America can't snarkily go "If only guns was banned!" if the law gets passed and a shooting still happens.

[zenkai]

In this thread. I said a person can not legally own a firearm unless they are 21. I was corrected by another poster, who said they only need to be 18 for a long rifle. I told the poster he was right and thanked him for the correction. I can find other times too...hold on for sec while I check.....Oh, when I apologized to Mail Security for a post I made in his thread which was inappropriate. There are other times I admitted i was wrong. You may be purposely forgetting them or simply have not seen them.

That's why I respect posters like you more, they admit when they make a mistake. Most people on here just deflect or change the argument.