Wow, what a stupid fucking thing to say.

i didnt know that in the US the soldiers have to bring their own guns :upsidedow

and you can thanks dumb America rednecks as well... most of the causalities in battle are southern men... so how about a big thank you, while sit there and have the freedom to sell porn online

Jesus christ. Armed teachers.

America sounds more and more like a nice place to live.

:1orglaugh

hummmm.. his kids have more right to live than my kids? and BTW I do pay for that :2 cents:

okay next time you guys get fucked up we'll stay home... I wish :( indirectly is was the peace movement after WWI that helped produce WWII, look it up. schools were forced to put anti war sentiment in text books as well as trying to place the suffering on both sides not just the French side but the German soldiers as well. Hitler did not have the military strength to take on France and his generals begged him not to attack France.... France lost in what... 3 weeks or some shit? the French had been betrayed by their intellectual class and the media... the young men had no will to defend their homes, their family's and their sovereign country.

you were brought up the same way I guess, which is fine if you don't live in a dangerous world like we do. peace is better than war, yes. unfortunately only a strong military allows peace.

as far as guns go, yes guns are dangerous BUT crazy people are more dangerous. maybe you should consider not blaming the tool and start looking at the carpenter? :2 cents:

Sure seems to be a lot of talk about guns for such a non-gun related problem.
If the problem is mentally unstable people and not guns then lets see a list of reasons why all schools should hire professionals in talking down suicidal nuts. After all, even if they didn't have a gun they'd break into a school and attack with an alligator, so lets go to the source of the problem.

i am pro putting (unarmed ) guards at schools and other public places. But the gun control thing has become to complicated. We need better regulations and learn to be more social. Its an attitude problem.

the gun issue is a much better political platform than crazy people, the problem is a giant civil rights nightmare when you start going after whack-jobs.

pretty sure more people are killed by alcohol than guns every year and we sure can't ban that, been tried didn't work. same with cars... can't really ban cars...

yes it's growing pains for society, and I do believe in trained armed guards... I see it at the Jewish schools when I've went with friends to pick their kids up.... maybe we could leave the miserable fucking Arabs alone and take care of our kids...

We need to arm the cops!


Gunman dead after shooting 3 cops at N.J. police station
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...e-station?lite

You want everyone's kids to have secret service protection?

There is no oil downtown.

actually you have no idea how it is to live in a place where people drop bombs on your head, all you get from your media is how "precision" bombs took out "terrorists".

i am pretty sure that if you would ever experience how that feels, the lust for war would go down quite a bit.

but this whole issue is not about military and wars - it's about people hording guns and ammunition at home.

but i said it in other threads already, i have learned that you guys feel different about this issue and i stopped arguing about it.

but yeah, i am happy to live in a place where i dont need to worry about guns (even though concealed carry is allowed here, just no one does it)

because i can :2 cents:

So the solution to the gun problem is more guns?

Why not hire more qualified teachers? They are qualified - to teach. They aren't law enforcement and shouldn't be required to. The majority of teachers I know aren't the kind to own or shoot firearms, no less take out a shooter in a tactical situation. You all watch way too much TV.

Your solution of arming teachers is like saying "Let's just remove security at the airports and arm the pilots". At that point, it's too late.

Why is it I have to take a written and a driving test to get my driver's license, and renew it every year, AND register my car every year but yet I can walk into any gun show and buy a fire arm no questions asked? That's fucking insane.

All I'm saying is we need to have some better monitoring and better laws here. You should be required to have a firearm license and register your firearms on a yearly basis. Pretty simple - if they can take away your DL because your blind as a bad and can no longer drive, they should be able to take away your license and your firearms. Common sense. When my father died, he left behind a handgun. He had no license for it and it wasn't registered; When he died it was passed on to my mother who had no interest in it and didn't know what to do with it. My mother has since remarried and divorced, and moved cross country. When I ask her what happened to the firearm she had no idea - it's unaccounted for. My wife also had a handgun and twenty years later we have no idea what happened to it. Why aren't these things tracked?

In order to pass my motorcycle test I took two days of classes - with Tanker and Lightspeed. When I purchased my handgun here in California the only test I had was making sure I knew if it was loaded or unloaded. Seriously. If I purchased at a gun show it would have been even easier.

You should be required to have a license to own a firearm of any sort - all that is required to have it is no felonies, no recent arrests for violent crimes such as robbery, assault, rape, etc, and a quick check of their mental health. If anyone lives with you has any history of mental health issues or is on certain kinds of medication, your license is revoked. This is common sense, and if the mother of this shooter obeyed such laws she wouldn't have owned firearms and this wouldn't have happened.

I have a friend of mine who is partially retarded. He's had a dozen or operations on his brain and operates on the level of a sixteen year old. He's on so much medication he doesn't know which way is up; He's had four or five automobile accidents in the past four or five years. He's on antidepressants, is divorced, hasn't gotten laid in nearly fifteen years, and has a host of medical problems. With the current system in place there was nothing stopping him from getting both handgun and an assault rifle. Even now, although he's a perfect candidate for going into the mall and killing a dozen people, there is nothing we can do to take away his firearms. (Ironically, he's the one who helped me get my assault rifle.)

I am okay with a handful of teachers arming themselves, but at the point a teacher has to pull out a firearm to protect hundreds of kids it's too late.

I dunno, I think it's a toss-up :-)

The person who made that text should have the stupidity beaten out of him. Preferable with the heads of the people who use this pic on forums.
My god...

Close all borders, making sure no American citizen can leave the United States.
Then let Darwin's theory of evolution solve the problems.

Seriously
From my experiences in life it appears to me that the vast majority of gun fanatics have either 1) a small penis ... or 2) erection or premature ejaculation problems... or 3) gay in denile.

Arming school teachers will work until one day some teacher goes on a rampage killing. (Most probably because she had sex with a student and then caught him fooling around.) The solution is to clean up the social problems that plague the United States... Not turn it into a war zone.

Guess who's kids have 9 to 11 armed guards and secret service at their school? If it's good enough for his kids, it's good enough for ours, right? :thumbsup

The photo of armed guards at the school don't bother you? Just the text? :winkwink:
They should definitely shut whoever made this down. Hurts the no armed guards in school argument for sure, when the elites have em for their kids. :thumbsup

Ma I have no lust for war, just pointing out the reality of the world, just because I state a position doesn't mean I am a war lover or gun lover ... yes it would be very nice to live where I didn't need a gun or schools didn't need armed guards... just not the way it is over here... and you have no idea who is carrying a concealed weapon just because your drinking buddies and cronies don't :2 cents:

do you feel better now that you have called people with guns fanatics with small penises, that are closet fags?

this is a great example of the anti gun peeps... no facts, just trying to degrade anyone that disagrees with you or your position. :thumbsup

I agree with more training more investigation... so we'll just let creepos wonder into the schools and kill kids for the next few years while we work all that out? armed guards could be in the schools within a month... they could put the fucking national guard there tomorrow.

sure am glad a bigot like you doesn't have a gun :thumbsup

bigot: somebody with strong opinions, especially on politics, religion, or ethnicity, who refuses to accept different views :thumbsup

No, they can't put guards into the schools "next month". Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind seeing it - two to four guards per school.

But long before you can make it happen you have to answer a lot of questions - such as who is going to pay for this. I read someplace it would cost $5billion just for California alone. Then you need to figure out who is going to train them, what qualifications are needed - heaven forbid should some school district hire some pedo or vet with mental issues, what weapons will be needed, etc etc....

I would imagine each local police department could hire two or three full time officers per school....

But still, is that the solution? We are talking about public schools here - The general public has full access to them, and most of us attend events at schools on a regular basis. We know the school layouts and Google Maps doesn't much either. Armed guards in schools is going to cost billions, will not prevent attacks, and will leave churches, movies, shopping malls, and government buildings wide open. This is only a small part of the solution - and it will cost a lot of money.

Armed guards in schools is a step we should take. We should also think about arming the mall cops too. But we need to do so much more, including creating a better mental health system and more checks and security features on gun ownership over all.

Yes!!!!! Why are we talking about costs? You know how much money we send to other countries? Maybe hold that back to protect our kids. You do realize all this talk about banning weapons has created a rush on them and 10 year worth of them will be sold in 1 year. We can not take guns out of the hands of crazy people with laws. If we could then we would just pass it and secret service could disarm. You know they won't, and you know why. I think my family is just as important as the elites. But you will notice that they don't agree with me. :thumbsup

To get cold medicine I have give id and if I buy alot of it from different places. I will get a knock on my door. But 6000 rounds no questions asked.

Why are we talking about costs? Because the costs will be astronomical, it will only protect schools, and it does not fully protect school kids. They had armed guards at Columbine and that failed to prevent the shooting. Having armed guards at a school doesn't mean they can prevent a shooting, but only increases the odds that law enforcement will be able to respond quicker.

For example, take a look at airport security. They have hundreds of armed guards, some with assault rifles, and that will not stop a gun man from driving up the curb and opening fire.

And then the problem is this ONLY protects schools - not malls, churches, movie theaters, government offices, etc....

This is an example of a new law we should create:

Authorities have charged a woman for allegedly providing a convicted killer with the Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle he used when he ambushed four volunteer firefighters and an off-duty cop at a fire scene in upstate New York on Christmas Eve, federal prosecutors said.

Dawn Nguyen, 24, was arrested today after allegedly making an illegal purchase of the weapon used by William Spengler, 62, who set a house and car on fire in Webster, N.Y., the morning of Dec. 24, then shot dead two firemen and himself.

(source)

Very simple law - if your handgun is used during a crime, you are held liable for it, and if found guilty it's a felony with a minimum of ten years in prison. Make this a federal law, make sure that everyone purchases a firearm knows and understands it....

Lock down the dealings at gun shows, and require a mental health check to purchase a firearm and now we are talking!

So basically the victim of a gun theft, should be liable for the crime committed? Wrong. How about this one. If someone steals your property you should be charged as an accessory to the crime since you didn't lock it up well enough. Come on. That will just punish the innocent. You guys love to punish the innocent for the crimes of the guilty.

My feelings are irrelevant the simple fact is that I wrote what I see based on my experiences.

Therefore if the people of the United States can not smarten up and turn away from their culture of war.
I think the only solution is to prevent americans from leaving their nation and let them go about killing themselves off. So if you can not clean up your social problems I hope you make more guns and buy more guns and get on with the job of killing each other.

Because less warmongers equals more peace for the rest of the world.

We give astronomical amounts to other countries. Now you libs want to save money? LOL
Having one armed guard at columbine saved lives. Google it. But I think I like your idea of having four armed guards. Columbine was a failed bombing, not really meant to be just a shooting. Had they been better at timers, they would have killed 500 people. What law would have prevented that?

Armed guards won't save every one. But it is at least a sporting chance. Stop making malls, theaters, etc "Gun Free" zones. I won't need a guard.

That's the kind of thinking that starts wars. :1orglaugh

Not really. If you purchase a firearm with the attention of handing it over to a felon to kill people, yes, you should be held liable.

At the same time, if you are careless with your firearms and have multiple firearms that people have access to, yes, you can be held liable. If you and your wife keep a handgun in your dresser draw next to your bed for protection and someone breaks into your house and steals it, I don't believe you should be held liable. But if you have half a dozen assault rifles not secured and a sixteen year old son who has a shrink and is on antidepressants and he kills sixteen people at the mall, yes, you should be held liable.

I do agree with some of what you say Rochard. If you can prove intent, then you have an actual accomplice. However, with a child that has never committed a violent act, suddenly kills lots of people, you can not be expected to know that will happen. If they can prove negligence, then of course that could be a crime. But the woman you speak of died, so she didn't believe it would happen. She bet her life it wouldn't. If you have a psychopath that wants to get your weapons, they can get them. They could even kill you to get them. Spending money to go after the person who had their gun taken without their consent or knowledge seems like misplaced priorities. I would say that the policies that let that murderer out of jail to shoot the firemen in the recent case should be put on trial.

The mother of the shooter who died is a great example.

Her son had mental issues, had a shrink assigned to him in high school, and everyone called him a "loner". The mother should have known he had a potential for violence. Instead of doing the right thing - and keeping firearms out of the house completely - she instead encouraged her son by taking him out shooting and thought nothing of the fact that her son spent most of his time in his room in the basement of the house playing Call Of Duty surrounded by posters of military hardware.

How could she not have seen this as being a potential problem?

She should be held liable here - she kept firearms in the house of someone who had recently received psychiatric help....

Most NRA members have no problem with laws to keep guns away from mentally ill people :2 cents::2 cents:

but everyone has a crazy cousin thats just not right and 99.9% of these people never do anything violent so where do you draw the line ?

My wife(a teacher) just got an email...

A portion of the supply budget is being re-directed towards armed security for every school in our city. It'll be for 2 months, and after that they'll decide if they make it permanent.

I'm all for it. Arming teachers is just the dumbest fucking idea I've ever heard -- but having a security professional on the grounds would be enough to deter a mass murderer, because if we're totally honest we know those people are cowards who don't want to get into an exchange of gunfire. They want the softest target possible.

It's the equivalent of having an air marshall. Maybe they wouldn't be able to stop an intruder, but they probably won't show up in the first place.