Why are our schools left vulnerable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know, OP. By your standards, schools in European countries, China, Japan, or Australia are very vulnerable. Yet this does not happen. Gee, I wonder why?

Have they ever had the crime the US has? Also plenty of school massacres in china.

With guns? Really? Could you please link to news reports of two or three of those school massacres with guns in China?

No, those other countries have never had the levels of gun crime the US has, because they regulate guns more than the US. The US doesn't have more crime (in general) than other countries; what the US has more of, is gun crimes.

Not every country with the highest homicide rates in the world has to be gun related. Actually guns in these countries are heavily regulated and almost never used when carrying out murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is insane. The answer is getting rid of Republicans and extraordinarily tighter gun control.

I could not have more contempt for the vile OP here who pretends the answer is “knowing” why Cruz fel @sad,” and OP’s generosity in offering done restrictions onAR-15s. Can we ignore him forever?

Well said, and those children who lost their friends in the latest episode of gun carnage( who rightfully call out the fake mourners) have far more sense than the adult merchant of death apologists, and their chronically confused sympathizers. These gun rights activists (an oxymoronic term if you ask me) gaslight this debate and argue nonsensical non-sequitur about family, moral decay and all kinds of garbage that have nothing to do with the laxed laws around guns, and the insane lengths the gun lobby and their allies in state -to-federal government go to continue the proliferation of weapons of mass murder on our soil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is insane. The answer is getting rid of Republicans and extraordinarily tighter gun control.

I could not have more contempt for the vile OP here who pretends the answer is “knowing” why Cruz fel @sad,” and OP’s generosity in offering done restrictions onAR-15s. Can we ignore him forever?

Amen! Full ban and confiscate assault rifles. Period. End of story.

Do you really want to set the precedent that the government can commission officer to come into your home and take whatever they deem to dangerous for you to have? In our quest for change lets not do things that will harm us in the future.

Well start with the rules Sessions is changing about police confiscating things. It starts on the right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is insane. The answer is getting rid of Republicans and extraordinarily tighter gun control.

I could not have more contempt for the vile OP here who pretends the answer is “knowing” why Cruz fel @sad,” and OP’s generosity in offering done restrictions onAR-15s. Can we ignore him forever?

Amen! Full ban and confiscate assault rifles. Period. End of story.

Do you really want to set the precedent that the government can commission officer to come into your home and take whatever they deem to dangerous for you to have? In our quest for change lets not do things that will harm us in the future.

Well start with the rules Sessions is changing about police confiscating things. It starts on the right.

So we should continue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is insane. The answer is getting rid of Republicans and extraordinarily tighter gun control.

I could not have more contempt for the vile OP here who pretends the answer is “knowing” why Cruz fel @sad,” and OP’s generosity in offering done restrictions onAR-15s. Can we ignore him forever?

Well said, and those children who lost their friends in the latest episode of gun carnage( who rightfully call out the fake mourners) have far more sense than the adult merchant of death apologists, and their chronically confused sympathizers. These gun rights activists (an oxymoronic term if you ask me) gaslight this debate and argue nonsensical non-sequitur about family, moral decay and all kinds of garbage that have nothing to do with the laxed laws around guns, and the insane lengths the gun lobby and their allies in state -to-federal government go to continue the proliferation of weapons of mass murder on our soil.

You don't think any of the people who were murdered were Republicans or have Republican parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is insane. The answer is getting rid of Republicans and extraordinarily tighter gun control.

I could not have more contempt for the vile OP here who pretends the answer is “knowing” why Cruz fel @sad,” and OP’s generosity in offering done restrictions onAR-15s. Can we ignore him forever?

Amen! Full ban and confiscate assault rifles. Period. End of story.

Do you really want to set the precedent that the government can commission officer to come into your home and take whatever they deem to dangerous for you to have? In our quest for change lets not do things that will harm us in the future.

When Australia banned them, what did Australia do?

I'm fairly certain they didn't go to homes and take guns.

[Anonymous]

Here is a question to the OP and your allies on this thread.
Why stop at schools?

What about I don't know...
1) Churches
2) Concerts
3) Sheik Temples
4) Baseball fields where Congressmen play (or Congressional rallies.)
5) Movie theaters
6) Airports


Shouldn't we be arming those places to the teeth to deter this sort of thing.

I have to give credit to the Merchants of Death (gun lobby) and their allies in Congress and the media. They have filled incredible levels of junk into the heads of people who believe the premise that OP laid out.

Your points have been refuted by the actions of jurisdictions (including those that permit the ownership of firearms under a proper regulatory framework) that are not beholden to gun fanaticism or held hostage by a deranged industry intent on continuing the proliferation of firearms by all means necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is a question to the OP and your allies on this thread.
Why stop at schools?

What about I don't know...
1) Churches
2) Concerts
3) Sheik Temples
4) Baseball fields where Congressmen play (or Congressional rallies.)
5) Movie theaters
6) Airports


Shouldn't we be arming those places to the teeth to deter this sort of thing.

I have to give credit to the Merchants of Death (gun lobby) and their allies in Congress and the media. They have filled incredible levels of junk into the heads of people who believe the premise that OP laid out.

Your points have been refuted by the actions of jurisdictions (including those that permit the ownership of firearms under a proper regulatory framework) that are not beholden to gun fanaticism or held hostage by a deranged industry intent on continuing the proliferation of firearms by all means necessary.

The stats you quote are false statics.
How many of those areas had multiple mass shootings before the laws were changed?
Tomorrow someone could roll up to one of their schools and murder everyone inside and their laws would mean shit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is a question to the OP and your allies on this thread.
Why stop at schools?

What about I don't know...
1) Churches
2) Concerts
3) Sheik Temples
4) Baseball fields where Congressmen play (or Congressional rallies.)
5) Movie theaters
6) Airports


Shouldn't we be arming those places to the teeth to deter this sort of thing.

I have to give credit to the Merchants of Death (gun lobby) and their allies in Congress and the media. They have filled incredible levels of junk into the heads of people who believe the premise that OP laid out.

Your points have been refuted by the actions of jurisdictions (including those that permit the ownership of firearms under a proper regulatory framework) that are not beholden to gun fanaticism or held hostage by a deranged industry intent on continuing the proliferation of firearms by all means necessary.

We;re talking about schools. Why are you against taking steps to physically protect children in addition to passing legislation?