Forum Thread

Florida High School mass shooting

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 121 - 135 of 150 Prev 1 .. 6 7 8 9 10 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote:

    So, to pull or show a gun stopped your bad situation, marvelous, what? did someone threaten to beat your ass? Oh, that's a good reason to pull a gun on someone. Isn't that what happened with Zimmerman in Florida, a stand your ground thing? poor, just poor.

    Stats have ceased to exist since around 2010 or maybe before that, I think PEW research stopped doing it because congress cut funding for it.

    Only a person who needs a gun carries a gun.

    This LA Times article pretty much lays it out, good guys w/guns vs bad guys w/guns,

    latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-gu...

    "Oddly, given these combined statistics, nearly half of gun owners say they keep weapons because it makes them feel safer, a proportion that has increased dramatically since 1999 even though violent crime has been in a steady decline."

    No, we do not need guns in classrooms. We do not need more people carrying guns. Both are very bad ideas.

    The details of my personal situation don't matter. I told you that something happened, but having my firearm stopped the situation. No one got hurt, so it's a win. I didn't say anything about "someone threatening to kick my ass". Be careful, you just may be showing a bit of insecurity yourself. You can say it's "poor", as I'm not really sure what you mean by that. But how do you know? You have no details and I'm not going to share them. It could have been a robbery, a car jacking, a whatever. Why does your mind automatically go to, "oh, they were just wanting to kick their ass." You are just making stuff up again. Once again, your fixed, uninformed, and fictitious opinion is taking over in your response. Open your mind just a bit. Learn about what you're speaking on. It's not a bad thing to hear others out and learn from it.

    You say "stats have ceased to exist since 2010 or before"............. What? Now you're just blatantly ignoring facts. That's where things get dangerous. That's how we end up with a White House full of criminals. I just gave you an entire unbiased research dedicated to this exact topic from 2015, AND went ahead and pasted a quote from it, AND put it in bold.

    Where are you getting this information that statistics just.....stop? Here it is again. Please don't just ignore it or say that it isn't real this time.... Once again....Bullet point #7 summarizes this exact discussion.

    You said concealed carriers never are there to stop the bad guy. I 100% proved you wrong by providing a very, very, very small sample of proof. No response back from you on that.

    You said that I couldn't show proof and stats. I 100% proved you wrong by delivered statistics, research, and a few news stories on the topic. No response back from you on that.

    How many times do I have to ask you this one simple question:

    What would you do if you were in this exact situation? Locked down in a classroom/gas station/grocery store/whatever, when a gunman came in and was slowly picking people off. Now say a genie appeared and offered you a firearm. Would you accept the firearm or not?

    It's getting very obvious that you're afraid to answer the question. I think it's because you may, just maybe, see my point in the question. Scary right? To think about something in more than just your point of view. That is called growth. We would get absolutely nowhere if everyone was close minded about everything. For instance, I am a ccw that also wants stricter gun laws, banning certain firearms, etc.

    Since you seem to not want to acknowledge that I proved you wrong or answer direct questions to anything, I'll make it straight forward. Go ahead and Ignore all the above. Please respond back to:

    The one question I've now asked you three times. (you oddly forgot to answer that 3 times in a row)

    You asked me to PROVE that firearm carriers are sometimes there at the right time. So I did. (you said there was none)

    The statistics I provided on concealed carriers. You asked me to PROVE this with statistics, so I did. And yet, your only response is that it doesn't exist? Nope. It does. You're wrong. You can't just deny it because you don't like it.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    We should all, especially me, believe a gun rights, right leaning columnist for faux news, ah ha.

    I should have been more specific in asking for proof, I should have asked for non biased proof. But, this is what to be expected from a gun hugger.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    It doesn't have to be a threaten situation. Unhappy with service, or whatever, just put the gun on the table and you will find that the problem instantly goes away. Don't need to say anything. If they are unclear, they will ask you what you want, how fast you want it, etc. No need to threaten them, the gun on the table is more than enough.

    Guns in homes reduces domestic abuse because if disagreements gets out of hand, it comes to a quick end never to occur again, but mostly it just never occurs because both know what is going to happen if either starts to raise their voice. Guns keep things civil.

    Guns are great at parties too when people get drunk and want to have some fun. Ever play that party prank where you take out the bullets, walk up to someone, put the gun to their head and pull the trigger. When they hear the click they piss and shit in their pants. People are rolling on the floor laughing, spilling their beers. Its great. Man, those stories last for decades.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote:

    Chet, none of these mass shootings at schools has ever been stopped by a kill shot by police or security. The killers either commit suicide or they are apprehended.

    That is not what you said in a general statement. You are you using an exception . There may have been multiple school shootings that did not take place because of the presence of police or security. Just as in the case of the Broward Officer that did not enter the school. He was at that school for 9 years and there is no telling how many lives he may have saved just by his presence of being their for 9 years. Now he is a coward because he didn't confront an AR15 with a hand gun. A police officer who had no chance of success because he will be immediately identified as a target being the only person in an open hallway going toward the killer is supposed to confront the most devastating killing weapon ever devised? That guard might have confronted the shooter if he was in full body armor carrying a tactical 12 gauge shotgun. But the sight of properly dressed and equipped and armed officers patrolling a school would have offended sensibilities. So the result is post a guard that has no possible deadly situation response then call him a coward because he was exactly what was demanded of him.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Trump is indeed the dumbest ass ever! They had multiple guards at this high school; they all stayed far away from the shooting. Thus "guards nor teachers" can prevent these things; it is a question of either being at such location at such time and place and at the right position to be able to act etc. Guess what; if a gunman starts shooting the first thing you do, is duck and try to find out where the shooter shoots from; by that time it is already too late and killed in 3 minutes dozens of kids; the proof is there. Also with these types of bullets used, you have no chance to survive, because it chews up all your body guts to hamburger meat. All Trumps proposals don't solve anything; the AR's are just about sold out during all the "wasted" talk of the asshole. As well this dangerous ammunition is sold by the truck load in the meantime. Furthermore the "asshole" forgets that background checks do nothing, because all the "nut heads" already owned stacks of guns before any background checks were implemented, let alone the private "trade" as well "underground" trade taking place. So I guarantee that nothing will change; ask the NRA. The money handouts will continue to our leaders who are in bed with the NRA anyway.

    But yeah in this country only money counts not "life's" . A scrap of outdated 1800's molded paper, seems to be the "boss" here; brains are "optional".

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote:

    We should all, especially me, believe a gun rights, right leaning columnist for faux news, ah ha.

    I should have been more specific in asking for proof, I should have asked for non biased proof. But, this is what to be expected from a gun hugger.

    You can’t win this by just making stuff up.

    But hey! Look at that! You acknowledged that it exist now. So before, it didn’t exist at all. Now it exist, but it’s “biased”? And that right there is why congress or anyone can’t agree on anything these days. People just blatantly lie, make stuff up, and ignore ALL facts that don’t push their opinion.

    Please prove that the research paper I posted is biased. Prove me wrong. It’s based on statistics. I find it hilarious you actually said that, considering the last LA link you posted is 100% an opinion article. It’s even categorized as such.

    You still didn’t answer my question.

    Did you SERIOUSLY just throw out the term “fake news”..... On an unbiased research paper. You do realize that that’s exactly what Trump and his team would say, right?

    I’m done with this conversation. And I feel like you should know the reasons:

    1. You can’t back up anything you say with stats.

    2. You refuse to answer simple questions.

    3. You are repeatedly contradicting yourself.

    4. You asked for proof. When provided the proof you say it doesn’t exist. Moments later you say it does exist, but it’s “fake news.”

    5. You resort to name calling like “asswipe, gun hugger” because you seem to be terrified that you ARE wrong. It is painfully obvious.

    All of these are strikingly similar to Trump’s technique. You may want to take a step back and reevaluate.

    You are wrong. Period. You can make up anything you want from here out. I will not respond until you have provided anything useful or even factual to the conversation.

    Just know that I provided detailed statistics, proof, etc, all while keeping an open mind and an adult conversation.

    You on the other hand, resorted to name calling, making stuff up, blatantly ignoring facts, contradicting yourself several times, not answering questions, and posting semi-related opinion articles.

    I genuinely hope that you broaden your knowledge on the subject one day. It’s never good to have the characteristics I posted above about any certain topic. See the White House.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    ClayTaylorNC Wrote:
    Dockadams Wrote:

    We should all, especially me, believe a gun rights, right leaning columnist for faux news, ah ha.

    I should have been more specific in asking for proof, I should have asked for non biased proof. But, this is what to be expected from a gun hugger.

    You can’t win this by just making stuff up.

    But hey! Look at that! You acknowledged that it exist now. So before, it didn’t exist at all. Now it exist, but it’s “biased”? And that right there is why congress or anyone can’t agree on anything these days. People just blatantly lie, make stuff up, and ignore ALL facts that don’t push their opinion.

    Please prove that the research paper I posted is biased. Prove me wrong. It’s based on statistics. I find it hilarious you actually said that, considering the last LA link you posted is 100% an opinion article. It’s even categorized as such.

    You still didn’t answer my question.

    Did you SERIOUSLY just throw out the term “fake news”..... On an unbiased research paper. You do realize that that’s exactly what Trump and his team would say, right?

    I’m done with this conversation. And I feel like you should know the reasons:

    1. You can’t back up anything you say with stats.

    2. You refuse to answer simple questions.

    3. You are repeatedly changing what you said.

    4. You asked for proof. When provided the proof you say it doesn’t exist. Moments later you say it does exist, but it’s “fake news.”

    5. You resort to name calling like “asswipe, gun hugger” because you seem to be terrified that you ARE wrong. It is painfully obvious.

    All of these are strikingly similar to Trump’s technique. You may want to take a step back and reevaluate.

    You are wrong. Period. You can make up anything you want from here out. I will not respond until you have provided anything useful or even factual to the conversation.

    Just know that I provided detailed statistics, proof, etc, all while keeping an open mind and an adult conversation.

    You on the other hand, resorted to name calling, making stuff up, blatantly ignoring facts, contradicting yourself several times, not answering questions, and posting semi-related opinion articles.

    I genuinely hope that you broaden your knowledge on the subject one day. It’s never good to have the characteristics I posted above about any certain topic. See the White House.

    ClayTaylorNC, I believe a moderator would have required the factual objectivity you asked of and presented to Dockadams. The sight does incredibly well requiring moderating hardly ever. Somethings escape objectivity for arguments. Generalizations inclusive of an entire group are simply argumentive sensationalism.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Q: Why is the focus on guns rather than investigating why white teenage boys with no criminal history commit mass school shootings?

    I ask this question because the shooters fit a very specific profile. Its not gang members, its not 1st generation immigrant children, its not girls, its not crazed adults, it not criminals.

    My bet is that when we figure out why white teenage boys commit mass shootings, we will be able to fix the problem. If we simply prevent them from committing mass shooting at schools, they will find other targets using some other kind of weapon that can kill lots of people.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:

    Q: Why is the focus on guns rather than investigating why white teenage boys with no criminal history commit mass school shootings?

    I ask this question because the shooters fit a very specific profile. Its not gang members, its not 1st generation immigrant children, its not girls, its not crazed adults, it not criminals.

    My bet is that when we figure out why white teenage boys commit mass shootings, we will be able to fix the problem. If we simply prevent them from committing mass shooting at schools, they will find other targets using some other kind of weapon that can kill lots of people.

    No, it is an "society" problem. Here it is an combination of a lot of things which drive these things; like decent "orphan" care; "mental" care ( Trump cuts funds to these institution) ; drugs; bullying, having parents who don't care; the "money" driven society; always have to be number one; second place does not count; the "media"; watching too much "killing movies ; reading the wrong books; capitalism; never been taught about "cause and effect". Way to few social workers; the "pressures of making a living"; having the wrong "friends" etc etc.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Plain and simple and easy . Keep guns out of schools and school shootings will stop. Schools need limited metal detector weapons detector armed attendant entrances. Armed guards or armed teachers are after the fact, after dead students, solutions. Keeping guns out of schools is the solution. Saving lives is the solution. Keep guns out of schools.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "bullying"

    Melanie Trump is against cyberbullying.

    Parkland survivor tells Melania Trump: To combat cyberbullying, start with Trump Jr ...

    CNN.com › 2018/02/24 › politics

    23 hours ago - (CNN)A Parkland school shooting survivor is calling for Melania Trump to fulfill her pledge to combat cyberbullying -- starting with her own family. "Hey @FLOTUS you say that your mission as First Lady is to stop cyber bullying," 14-year-old Lauren Hogg tweeted Friday.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    No, it is an "society" problem. Here it is an combination of a lot of things which drive these things; like decent "orphan" care; "mental" care ( Trump cuts funds to these institution) ; drugs; bullying, having parents who don't care; the "money" driven society; always have to be number one; second place does not count; the "media"; watching too much "killing movies ; reading the wrong books; capitalism; never been taught about "cause and effect". Way to few social workers; the "pressures of making a living"; having the wrong "friends" etc etc.

    Those issues are important and they universal to everyone, so why is it just White Teenage Boys that commit mass shootings at white middle class suburban schools?

    The shooters are not Black, Hispanic, or Asian teenage boys, and they are not teenage girls. Why is that the shooters have no past criminal history and they targeted schools in white middle class neighborhoods. Urban schools in minority\gang neighborhoods don't have mass shootings. Gangs are not targeting schools, nor are adult criminals.

    My point is those who traditionally commit the most crimes, don't commit mass shootings, while White Teenage Boys, with no criminal history, go out of their way to massacre people. I am wondering why?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    No, it is an "society" problem. Here it is an combination of a lot of things which drive these things; like decent "orphan" care; "mental" care ( Trump cuts funds to these institution) ; drugs; bullying, having parents who don't care; the "money" driven society; always have to be number one; second place does not count; the "media"; watching too much "killing movies ; reading the wrong books; capitalism; never been taught about "cause and effect". Way to few social workers; the "pressures of making a living"; having the wrong "friends" etc etc.

    Those issues are important and they universal to everyone, so why is it just White Teenage Boys that commit mass shootings at white middle class suburban schools?

    The shooters are not Black, Hispanic, or Asian teenage boys, and they are not teenage girls. Why is that the shooters have no past criminal history and they targeted schools in white middle class neighborhoods. Urban schools in minority\gang neighborhoods don't have mass shootings. Gangs are not targeting schools, nor are adult criminals.

    My point is those who traditionally commit the most crimes, don't commit mass shootings, while White Teenage Boys, with no criminal history, go out of their way to massacre people. I am wondering why?

    Good point and deserving more research. Income , family etc... history. The massacre to fame is probably an answer but not the motive .
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:
    wwjd Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:
    No, it is an "society" problem. Here it is an combination of a lot of things which drive these things; like decent "orphan" care; "mental" care ( Trump cuts funds to these institution) ; drugs; bullying, having parents who don't care; the "money" driven society; always have to be number one; second place does not count; the "media"; watching too much "killing movies ; reading the wrong books; capitalism; never been taught about "cause and effect". Way to few social workers; the "pressures of making a living"; having the wrong "friends" etc etc.

    Those issues are important and they universal to everyone, so why is it just White Teenage Boys that commit mass shootings at white middle class suburban schools?

    The shooters are not Black, Hispanic, or Asian teenage boys, and they are not teenage girls. Why is that the shooters have no past criminal history and they targeted schools in white middle class neighborhoods. Urban schools in minority\gang neighborhoods don't have mass shootings. Gangs are not targeting schools, nor are adult criminals.

    My point is those who traditionally commit the most crimes, don't commit mass shootings, while White Teenage Boys, with no criminal history, go out of their way to massacre people. I am wondering why?

    Good point and deserving more research. Income , family etc... history. The massacre to fame is probably an answer but not the motive .
    Yes, why "white"? At least I've got the idea"why". Most "white" kids" are "bored" because mostly the parents are too busy with their own lives by making "money" for their payments on their Caddilac's and Mortgages, Loans and junk. These kids are just "a pain in the ass" for them. That is America.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I hope college Psychology classes are discussing this. An explanation of the why would be interesting. Perhaps it's being looked at. Certainly society is asking the questions.