NRA convention in TX

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

but what are you protecting them from- wouldnt you remove what is making them at risk?

And let’s be realistic. Governments all over the world have harmed their own citizens. It’s not far-fetched to be concerned about it happening again.

You ok with classrooms of little kids being shot down just in case the gov't attacks you are are ready with your AR?

Mao and Stalin killed many more. So did Hitler, so yeah, I'm concerned. Especially since Democrats seem to be giving things away to China. Look at Ukraine - the citizenry seems to be doing a good job holding back the Russians, who would own Ukraine now if the citizenry wasn't armed.

Do you think that Canada is going to invade us? Do you think that the world's third-largest, best-funded and best-trained military needs help from Cletus and Bubba to stave anybody off?

What color is the sky in your world?

I think we are in deep sh*t regarding China. And yes, I think Cletus and Bubba could be very useful. Matter of fact, yesterday, ClethRA killed a man i Wed night who came to a gathering in Charlestown WV with an AR-15 and started shooting into the crowd. If CletRA had not been armed, it could have been very bad. He killed no one. She had a hand gun. And was clearly a damn good shot:

https://tulsaworld.com/news/national/woman-draws-pistol-kills-man-who-was-firing-ar-15-style-rifle-into-crowd-police/article_a6cd9af6-e276-5b2e-846a-992bd1a4ecd9.html

There's a reason government wants all the guns. And none of those reasons are as benevolent as you think. The same people who tell you not to fear them have lied to you over and over and over again.

So again I assume you support limited police budgets and want to decrease military funding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

And how do you propose doing that?

1) reportedly shooter entered via an unlocked door
2) he easily defeated school officer who was presumably armed. one study found more casualties when school resource officer present.
3) there was a significant delay in police confronting attacker.
4) swat reportedly had trouble fining key to school

1) The door was actually propped open by a staff member. Hate to say it but that was not terribly safe
2) That was an early rumor - the gunman wasn't engaged with law enforcement.
3) Yes, because the gunman now had the advantage. They still should have gone in.
4) Again, that is stupidity. Break the door down.

IF the door had NOT been propped open, the gunman would not have had such easy access. IF there had been a perimeter fence, he would have been slowed down. Once he got inside, he had the tactical advantage. Small town, small law enforcement team = bad news.

He was in the school for a hour and 45 minutes. NRA is all about building fortress so they can sell more powerful guns and breaching equipment. Those police had everything they needed to end this. You can harden the schools and hire more police, have swat team(that don’t show up), it does no good. Your security system is only as good as the people who man it. No one is serious about stopping this type of thing unless they are for removing the guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

but what are you protecting them from- wouldnt you remove what is making them at risk?

And let’s be realistic. Governments all over the world have harmed their own citizens. It’s not far-fetched to be concerned about it happening again.

Which is why you support a limited police force, as well as limited funding, I assume? And a limited military?

I support a limited federal government, as outlined in the Constitution. From there, the power goes to the state level, then to local. Military is determined by global thread. State and local police departments have their own governance.

You support killing kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

but what are you protecting them from- wouldnt you remove what is making them at risk?

And let’s be realistic. Governments all over the world have harmed their own citizens. It’s not far-fetched to be concerned about it happening again.

You ok with classrooms of little kids being shot down just in case the gov't attacks you are are ready with your AR?

Mao and Stalin killed many more. So did Hitler, so yeah, I'm concerned. Especially since Democrats seem to be giving things away to China. Look at Ukraine - the citizenry seems to be doing a good job holding back the Russians, who would own Ukraine now if the citizenry wasn't armed.

Do you think that Canada is going to invade us? Do you think that the world's third-largest, best-funded and best-trained military needs help from Cletus and Bubba to stave anybody off?

What color is the sky in your world?

I think we are in deep sh*t regarding China. And yes, I think Cletus and Bubba could be very useful. Matter of fact, yesterday, ClethRA killed a man i Wed night who came to a gathering in Charlestown WV with an AR-15 and started shooting into the crowd. If CletRA had not been armed, it could have been very bad. He killed no one. She had a hand gun. And was clearly a damn good shot:

https://tulsaworld.com/news/national/woman-draws-pistol-kills-man-who-was-firing-ar-15-style-rifle-into-crowd-police/article_a6cd9af6-e276-5b2e-846a-992bd1a4ecd9.html

There's a reason government wants all the guns. And none of those reasons are as benevolent as you think. The same people who tell you not to fear them have lied to you over and over and over again.

So again I assume you support limited police budgets and want to decrease military funding?

It’s just another “anti-govt, unless that govt is the police/military, literally the armed force of the govt” person. Their beliefs are nonsensical; you won’t get anything helpful out of them. They will continue rambling about some shadowy threat from abroad or, even more bizarrely, within this country- yet exclude the armed part of the govt from their suspicion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Ukrainian and I keep seeing false things said about the war to support continued American gun fetishism.

Ukrainians DID NOT have their own guns! Private gun ownership is rare in Ukraine. We think Americans are crazy for having so many guns. Ukrainians were given weapons by their own military to fight. Ukrainians did not rise up like it’s 1776.

Nothing about these “what if China/Russia/whatever invaded America” posts make any sense at all. America has a huge military. Random citizens will not be deputized to fight. You want to fight bad guys? Join the military.

Keep us out of it.

But you were given guns, right? Why would that be?

DP.. you need some therapy. If the US *ever* is invaded, then the military would hand out guns, much like ^PP Urkainian explained.

There is no earthly reason to own an assault rifle in the richest country in world. I can understand owning a handgun if you live in an unsafe area. But the vast majority of us don't live in unsafe areas, especially those who own assault rifles, except maybe if you consider living in a R controlled state as "unsafe". Are you afraid of R politicians?

People all over the world who live in first world, developed countries don't live in fear of being invaded, and they don't own assault rifles.

The US is the *ONLY* developed country that has this problem.

Maybe you are paranoid. It seems to me that the vast majority of assault rifle owners have mental health issues, something Rs claim is the issue with all these shootings.

Begs the question.. then why don't R politician prohibit those with mental illness from buying guns. ANSWER: because that would mean the vast majority of Rs wouldn't be able to buy guns.

[Anonymous]

If my kid died in a mass shooting at school, I would be parading images of them shot up at the NRA convention. Mimic the anti-abortion folks. No one could turn away.

[Anonymous]

The 2A allows militias guns. Militias like the Oath Keepers. Time to repeal the 2A.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am Ukrainian and I keep seeing false things said about the war to support continued American gun fetishism.

Ukrainians DID NOT have their own guns! Private gun ownership is rare in Ukraine. We think Americans are crazy for having so many guns. Ukrainians were given weapons by their own military to fight. Ukrainians did not rise up like it’s 1776.

Nothing about these “what if China/Russia/whatever invaded America” posts make any sense at all. America has a huge military. Random citizens will not be deputized to fight. You want to fight bad guys? Join the military.

Keep us out of it.

Our gun nuts are irrational and willing work off of alternate facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Ukrainian and I keep seeing false things said about the war to support continued American gun fetishism.

Ukrainians DID NOT have their own guns! Private gun ownership is rare in Ukraine. We think Americans are crazy for having so many guns. Ukrainians were given weapons by their own military to fight. Ukrainians did not rise up like it’s 1776.

Nothing about these “what if China/Russia/whatever invaded America” posts make any sense at all. America has a huge military. Random citizens will not be deputized to fight. You want to fight bad guys? Join the military.

Keep us out of it.

But you were given guns, right? Why would that be?

DP.. you need some therapy. If the US *ever* is invaded, then the military would hand out guns, much like ^PP Urkainian explained.

There is no earthly reason to own an assault rifle in the richest country in world. I can understand owning a handgun if you live in an unsafe area. But the vast majority of us don't live in unsafe areas, especially those who own assault rifles, except maybe if you consider living in a R controlled state as "unsafe". Are you afraid of R politicians?

People all over the world who live in first world, developed countries don't live in fear of being invaded, and they don't own assault rifles.

The US is the *ONLY* developed country that has this problem.

Maybe you are paranoid. It seems to me that the vast majority of assault rifle owners have mental health issues, something Rs claim is the issue with all these shootings.

Begs the question.. then why don't R politician prohibit those with mental illness from buying guns. ANSWER: because that would mean the vast majority of Rs wouldn't be able to buy guns.

The pp is sick. No rational person would think an ar-15 would do anything against “the government”. The poster must be running a meth lab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

but what are you protecting them from- wouldnt you remove what is making them at risk?

And let’s be realistic. Governments all over the world have harmed their own citizens. It’s not far-fetched to be concerned about it happening again.

You ok with classrooms of little kids being shot down just in case the gov't attacks you are are ready with your AR?

Mao and Stalin killed many more. So did Hitler, so yeah, I'm concerned. Especially since Democrats seem to be giving things away to China. Look at Ukraine - the citizenry seems to be doing a good job holding back the Russians, who would own Ukraine now if the citizenry wasn't armed.

Your paranoia is treatable. Please get help, not the ammo type.

[Anonymous]

Shame on these politicians going to speak at this NRA meeting. Unless they are going there to push back on the guns, guns, and more guns agenda of the NRA, then shame shame shame on them.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Abbott is no longer going - will send a video message and hold a news conference in Uvalde instead.

NRA Concert with Lee Greenwood, Don McLean and others canceled.

Lieutenant Governor Patrick pulled out as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make schools the problem .

Guns are the problem.

If you want to protect kids NOW, you secure where they gather.

but what are you protecting them from- wouldnt you remove what is making them at risk?

And let’s be realistic. Governments all over the world have harmed their own citizens. It’s not far-fetched to be concerned about it happening again.

You ok with classrooms of little kids being shot down just in case the gov't attacks you are are ready with your AR?

Mao and Stalin killed many more. So did Hitler, so yeah, I'm concerned. Especially since Democrats seem to be giving things away to China. Look at Ukraine - the citizenry seems to be doing a good job holding back the Russians, who would own Ukraine now if the citizenry wasn't armed.

Your paranoia is treatable. Please get help, not the ammo type.

It's paranoid to state the Mao, Stalin and Hitler killed their own citizens?

You must be an Oath Keeper? Did you poop in the Rotunda and try to overthrow the government?