More prayers for these neo-nazi students
Santa Fe TX citizens want more school prayer and less gun laws since yesterday’s deadly school shooting by a neo nazi student. That’s because the prayers are working?
shareWTF?
share
MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > More prayers for these neo-nazi students...
You’re right, prayer won’t work. We need armed guards at all schools so these helpless children won’t be sitting ducks.
sharePrayer hadn’t worked. More gun control should be the next step
shareThe only way those students could have been protected is if an armed guard was there and engaged with the shooter. Gun control wouldn’t have saved them. Maybe Liberals should focus on how to stop the gang violence in Chicago, the city with the strictest gun laws in the country.
shareTurns out that the Texas school had TWO armed police patrolling the halls because they were a 'hardened target' that had already planned for an active school shooting.
One of those armed guards was shot.
The fact that 10 people still died demonstrates how the conservative "armed guard" fantasy solution for school shootings is a thoroughly deranged failure.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/santa-fe-school-had-a-shooting-plan-armed-officers-and-practice-and-still-10-people-died/2018/05/19/58b1b55e-5b8d-11e8-8b92-45fdd7aaef3c_story.html?utm_term=.5f551438fe36
So less people would have died if no officers were there? Riddle me that.
shareSo far you haven’t proven the merits of armed guards. They were there in Parkland and Santa Fe.
shareLet me ask you this.....give me an argument why it’s better if no security is there at all. Will more lives be saved if no armed officers are present? Those kids at Columbine sure had it made in the shade didn’t they?
Only an idiot would take a few isolated cases where armed guards dropped the ball and then try to justify that “heyyyyy man it’s soooo pointless brahhhhh to try to protect these sitting duck students mannnn, let’s just ban assault rifles instead even though the Texas shooter didn’t use one”.
Should I drudge up 2 isolated incidents of armed bank guards getting shot and killed and failing to prevent a bank from getting robbed....then claim that we shouldn’t have bank security at all because it’s pointless.
The message I'm getting is we need to have guns freely available to everyone, and having 10 people getting gunned down is preferable than having 20+ killed, versus no one getting killed because we don't worship gun culture.
That's the problem, we have a sub-group of people who worship gun culture, and will twist every argument to make it seem normal for guns to be everywhere. Now we are awash in guns and the only solution is -- more guns. It's immoral.
This appears to be very challenging for you so I'll spell it out:
Armed guards make no difference whatsoever. By the time armed guards react to a school shooting, assuming they do at all, the heavy casualties have already taken place.
Now I'll point to an obvious and proven solution. No gun, no school shooting. No heavy casualties. Australia had great success eliminating school shootings this way.
What an idiotic statement....”they make no difference”. 😂
Yeah they make no difference so why do security guards even exist? Heck let’s fire all bank security guards, White House Security, Bar Room Bouncers, Concert Security, Sporting Event Security.
Remember when Ronald Regan got shot? Let’s get rid of the secret service because obviously they can’t do there jobs at all.
Let’s also ban all celebrities from having a Security detail because guns have no business to ever exist. Let’s just give the cops a rubber bat to stop criminals.
You Liberals have zero common sense or logic skills at all. You take two isolated cases and say “ohhhh my gurd, an officer was there and they didn’t do nothing so it clearly makes no difference”.
Yeah never mind the fact that guns save thousands of lives every year, there’s literally hundreds of videos on YouTube from around the world of law abiding citizens stopping criminals by legally carrying guns on them and using self defense.
There have already been two school shootings stopped this year alone by on campus security. The one in South Carolina had zero casualties other than the shooter. Just because the Liberal media tries to hide these stories doesn’t mean that they don’t exist.
A cop was just saved by a stranger who saw that an armed gunman who as about to execute him so he pulled his gun out and shot him dead. This stuff happens all the time and the media never covers it because it doesn’t fit the narrative.
You're talking about band aid to staunch a bloodletting. Armed guards does not resolve the underlying problem of mass shootings happening. It is not a deterrent to mass shooters.
You bringing up guns in the context of self defense is irrelevant to this problem. This is a problem where guns are used to affect as many mass casualties as possible before a gun can even be deployed in self defense. Most of the deaths have already happened by the time any armed guard in the vicinity even knows what is going on. If armed guards is the best you can do to address this problem, then you lack imagination because your solution is just highly ineffective bordering on silly.
Let’s break down your retarded logic here:
Because an armed guard can’t stop the first 10 casualties because it takes time for him to get to the shooter, it’s pointless to save the next 20 victims.
Yup that makes perfect sense, I mean obviously more students are going to die if an armed guard is on campus so we should just have nobody on campus with a gun to stop a mass shooter and wait 15 minutes for the cops to arrive because it’s not like seconds count or anything.
Nope, that's not what I said. You're straw manning.
I'm saying it's a highly ineffective solution that 10 people have to die at all.
So what’s your genius solution? Ban assault riffles? We did that from 1994-2004 yet Columbine still happened.
Should the government just start raiding peoples homes like it’s Nazi Germany and send all guns to camps where they melt them?
Ohhh I know, let’s have high school students stage walk outs and demand politicians to pass laws that take guns away from law abiding citizens and hope that criminals suddenly don’t have access to the black market or hope that gang activity doesn’t sky rocket like it did in Chicago after the gun control was implemented there.
Yes please share your solution that’s so much better than an armed guard on campus lol.
There is no solution that will eliminate shootings altogether. But there are smart laws that can be passed that will decrease the frequency of school shootings that many conservatives and NRA groupies are too dumb to consider.
The profile is always the same, these shootings are conducted by either a current or former student, late adolescent males with a history of rage and alienation.
So you make it harder for this group to obtain guns. Raise the national age limit for gun purchase to 21 and require laws in every state that require gun owners to lock up their firearms. It’s not infringing on anybody’s Second Amendment rights. I'm not against having armed guards, but decreasing this group's accessibility to firearms will decrease the frequency of the occurrence of mass school shootings. It's just simple common sense and not the complicated problem conservatives and the NRA brainwashed would have you believe.
So let’s say that it will take 2 years for these new laws to be passed, in the meantime how do you plan to protect these students over the next 2 years?
If these laws get passed and It has no effect on school shootings then what is your plan? Do you admit that you wasted years fighting for pointless legislation and now you wanna invest more into armed security at schools?
Your solution would actually take more like 5 years to really start working if even at all because there are so many guns available to people in this country right now. This last shooter got his guns from his own father. The sandy hook nut job got his weapons from his mom. You’re solution completely ignores this and I’m not sure you’re even aware how easy it is to obtain an illegal firearm off the black market if one is really determined to get one.
Lastly, you talk about common sense but you fail to see how armed guards is a logical and common sense solution that would benefit schools immediately. If anyone would have engaged the Sandy Hook killer or the Aurora movie theater shooter right away then the body counts wouldn’t be nearly as high. What sense does it make to wait 15 minutes for the local police to arrive when an armed security guard could engage the shooter in a matter of minutes? If you truly cared about saving peoples lives you would much prefer 5 dead victims over 20 dead.
In closing, your solutions aren’t immediate and ignore the fact that people can easily obtain guns from relatives or from the black market. You offer no solution to help students in the immediate future and are somehow against armed guards even though every place else I can think of has armed guards at places with large amounts of people, yet schools are somehow different?
Reading comprehension is not your strong point eh? Re-read my post and see I'm not against armed guards. You also clearly didn't understand my solution for you to claim it wouldn't have prevented Sandy Hook or the last shooting. Yes of course it could have.
Requiring gun owners to lock up their guns could have prevented many shootings where the shooter takes the guns from their parents. Probably not all as some kids would figure out a way to get into their parents gun safe or obtain guns elsewhere, but it would still help decrease the frequency. The presence of armed guards does not deter school shootings.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/01/for-many-mass-shooters-armed-guards-arent-a-deterrent-theyre-part-of-the-fantasy/?utm_term=.03e9069f8bb9
You keep bringing up other shootings, I'm specifically talking about school shootings, which are always conducted by the same profile shooter looking to go out in a blaze of glory and happen with way too much regularity with the highest number of casualties every time they happen. My solution decreases their frequency by making guns for the group that conducts them more difficult to obtain, yours alone does not.
5-7 years to implement makes no sense at all. You clearly don't understand how legislation functions to assume it would take that long. There's no reason why a law raising the guy buying age and requiring all gun owners to lock up their firearms wouldn't start paying dividends immediately.
You offer no evidence that your ideas would even help, you just assume they would. Yes it will take probably 5 years for all the necessary legislation to make it harder for the younger mass shooters. Only recently have the shooters been at or below 18, it’s usually carried out by men in there mid to late 20’s.
I keep bringing up other venues because those on the left have an attitude that armed guards are pointless so I’m asking why we can’t just get rid of them at banks and concerts to highlight their stupidity.
You’re also very naive with thinking that passing legislation will stop people from getting guns or slow it down enough to really make a difference. There are so many guns stock piled everywhere in this country, Liberals have always been a criminals best friend in that they assume that laws alone will be enough to stop them.
Less accessibility to guns by those that would wrongly use them = Less gun violence by those groups.
This is just basic common sense. Why are conservatives and NRA groupies opposed to common sense solutions? This is the real issue that you need to ask yourself.
And no, 5 years to implement legislation is absurd. The only reason it would take that long is because NRA brainwashed dipshits like you oppose common sense solutions.
It’s not common sense when you continually underestimate criminals at every turn. Some mass shooters plan for over year before they carry out an attack, if they are determined there is no stopping them unless someone else with a gun does. No amount of legislation will help but I’m all for giving the whiny left what they want so they can be proven wrong and more people will leave them and start voting Conservative.
shareIt's absolutely common sense and I cite studies and statistics to back me up. The availability of guns in America is the best explanation for the frequency of mass shootings:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html
Your idea that it wouldn't decrease the frequency of mass shootings is just naive and ridiculous. I already said it wouldn't prevent all mass shootings, but the idea is for a solution that decreases the frequency. Armed guards alone does not do that.
An analogy is the high numbers of suicides from jumping off the Golden Gate before they implemented suicide nets. Did it prevent all those intent on killing themselves that way from killing themselves? Of course not. But there were many the nets saved that did not end up killing themselves because the ease and accessibility of jumping off the Golden Gate bridge was no longer an option.
Making guns harder to obtain by the late adolescent males that conduct school shootings will save lives because the ease and accessibility of guns from their parents or buying them at the store will no longer be an option. This isn't rocket science yet NRA brainwashed conservatives seem to think it is.
Excellent post, eYe! Keep them coming
Ronny Reagan made a movie with that exact premise. As long as I'm Sheriff, there will be no guns in my town. Every one, hand in your guns.
Then he became a politician, was bought by the NRA, and here we are.
Funny how RR and C Heston both succumbed to mental frailty after espousing rampant gun ownership.
Then how do you explain the gun violence in Chicago.....ya know the city with the strictest gun control in the country? Do you even know how many black people kill other blacks every year?
shareThe easy availability of guns would seem to be one answer.
You like to point to this Chicago outlier situation as if it applies to school shootings.
Gun control laws may not work in a culture steeped in defending territory using violent means, given that guns can easily be acquired regardless of laws, which falls in the NRAs lap.
But school shootings and suicide are a different circumstance. If we hadn't decided to award everyone a gun as a birth right, we wouldn't be in this mess. But certain parties sure have made a Killing because of it, and they don't give a rat's patoot over all the carnage. They are laughing all the way to the bank, somebody else's problem.
Only 1% of gun deaths result from mass shootings. Most gun deaths are gang related and happen in the inner city. The fact that you blame the NRA and nothing else is very telling.
The real culprit would be the Democratic politicians who make laws that benefit criminals and make it difficult for cops to do there jobs. The easiest way to cut gun crime in half is to allow cops to frisk young African American men in the inner city, this group of the population is responsible for a majority of the homocides in this country but the Liberals desk this as racist.
I agree that guns are too easy to acquire but it’s mostly because of Liberals not cracking down on crime and viewing criminals as victims. Yes the NRA deserves some blame but it’s mostly democratic blunders.
This is a complicated subject, but Racial Profiling is Bad ! Treat a group of people like criminals, they'll either be wrongly accused or be taught they ARE criminals just to survive. I don't know why some segments of the Black community, especially in Chicago as you like to point out, have skewed violent. It's awful.
But to lay the blame on Liberals is a self-serving argument.
I doubt we can bring an epidemic of lawlessness to heel by mistreating a group as a whole.
And maybe there is a time for tougher policing. I think it might have worked in NYC a while back. But it's not simply "Liberals are soft on crime, Cons know how to get the job done." It's more nuanced and difficult than that, and it takes a meeting of the minds (=intellect) to come up with a good game plan - not ram-rodding one side's preferred method over the others.
Frisking young black men in high crime areas isn’t “mistreating” them, it’s called cracking down on crime. When Baltimore stopped doing this the homicide rate nearly doubled.
[deleted]
Let me guess: you’re a local security guard and afraid your job will be eliminated? You want us to support your job security?
shareI’m still waiting for your genius solution lol. I actually hope that this country goes nuts on gun control and completely caters to these whiny Liberals who think they know what’s best for the country.
You know why I want this? So Liberals can see first hand how gun control doesn’t work. Let’s hurry up and ban assault rifles so the next time another school gets shot up
It will be the Liberals having to hem and haw “well we can’t expect results overnight”.
Heck let’s just open our borders completely and not enforce illegal immigration at all. I want to see the smug liberal faces melt away as we slowly turn into a shithole country.
Compromise is my genius solution. Each side needs to compromise with logical heads.
As for your security job at the local bank - you have your security. No immigrants from shithole countries are wanting those jobs, Bubba, so you’re good. No need to worry.
You betray your knee-jerk anti-Progressive views by tossing in illegal immigration in a discussion about gun control. You simply don't like intellectual conversation. You have a giant bias and will defend it arduously and emotionally. You hate Liberals and likely wish the world was filled with good ol' boys who think just like you. Gud luk wi' dat.
shareIf Liberals would come out and denounce progressives I would cut them way more slack, but they refuse to and it’s disgusting. Anyone who supports a progressive agenda is no better than the people who support the racist Alt Right.
shareUm ... let's not Pro-gress. we should Re-gress? Let's not have Enlightenment, we should return to the Dark Ages? Liberals and Progressives are distinctly separate camps?
Sorry, I'm not sure you are using your thought process much. You're just arguing for the sake of showing your distaste for thoughtful discourse.
Damn those Liberal colleges, teaching people to think for themselves and come up with peaceful solutions. Obviously we should just shoot at all our problems. (Sarcasm alert !)
Liberals are taught the opposite of thinking for themselves and conservative thought is pretty much banned on college campuses. This is why these entitled leftists try to ban free speech whenever a conservative speaker gets invited to speak on campus.
sharePeople get entitled by being thoughtful, not reactionary.
And the completely separate topic of conservative speakers on campus,
it's divisive. Sure we can support free speech but when a community doesn't want that sort of presence in their midst, they have a right to quell it. On the one hand, maybe the conservative wants to speak and nobody shows up. Great.
Or maybe the conservative gets a ginned-up group of confederates to hoot and holler for their ill-regarded agenda. Who wants that? It's picking a fight with the resident audience.
Conservatives always seem to think their radical agenda is sanctioned by voting in the jerks they support. The moderate silent majority I hope has different ideas.
Excellent post.
shareHey, I want to thank you for being a voice for the Thoughtful Wing.
(I'm sick of saying they are Right and we are Left.)
Sometimes I'm so exasperated with the ugly belligerence of the Wrong Wing, I get angry and quit or worse, say something stupid like using bad language and calling someone an idiot, thereby lowering myself to their level.
I didn't come to MC to boost politics, but here it is.
The Radical Cons blast off with no concern of how coarsening their rhetoric is, figuring no one will call them on it. Even if sometimes I think you over do it, I also sincerely thank you for not letting the Mongol Horde stampede over us like meek weaklings.
And I hope you think this is an even more Excellent Post. (haha)
[deleted]
America is engrained in a culture of violence, that’s why gun control doesn’t work in cities like Chicago. You can’t compare the US to other countries.
share[deleted]
With a name like Sammy Jackson you’re either one of those angry black men who got brainwashed in your early adulthood or you’re a white progressive nut job with poor taste in movies. I wonder which one hmmmmm.
share[deleted]
Great post eYe!
shareneo-nazi is not a relevant term,
should be expunged from every modern dictionary
As if solely complaining about "thoughts and prayers" works to stop gun violence. Other people will say vague things like "we need to take action". Just saying that the religious and non-religious are equally not contributing anything real here. I remember when Neil Degrasse Tyson did this last time in a tweet and he didn't even add any advice on how to stop these things from happening. Just that religious people were dumb. What a great thing to add after a tragedy.
Anyway, the kid took the guns from his father, who legally owned them. We need better security at these schools, I believe.
Cause gun free zones are totally working right?
share