Proud of our Youth !

[Touch'EmAll]

I am opening myself up for attack on this one, I am fully aware. However, today I am very proud of our youth and all who protested!

Today at the Nation's Capital and at cities across America were some of the biggest youth protests since the Vietnam era.

These massive gun control rallies and protests hope to bring an end to the increasing gun violence and deaths so prevalent in today's world all across America.

The NRA doesn't realize one critical point - back in George Washington's day they didn't have automatic assault rifles capable of mass destruction and mortality.

Times change and we need to change our laws accordingly to help protect and serve our citizens.

Now if the NRA wants to defend the rights to own a single shot rifle, no problem, I will march alongside the NRA.

Steve

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

I am opening myself up for attack on this one, I am fully aware. However, today I am very proud of our youth and all who protested!

Today at the Nation's Capital and at cities across America were some of the biggest youth protests since the Vietnam era.

These massive gun control rallies and protests hope to bring an end to the increasing gun violence and deaths so prevalent in today's world all across America.

The NRA doesn't realize one critical point - back in George Washington's day they didn't have automatic assault rifles capable of mass destruction and mortality.

Times change and we need to change our laws accordingly to help protect and serve our citizens.

Now if the NRA wants to defend the rights to own a single shot rifle, no problem, I will march alongside the NRA.

Steve

Opening yourself up for attack, how about hopefully being banned for posting this political garbage.

[Slinger]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Opening yourself up for attack, how about hopefully being banned for posting this political garbage.

This ^^^

[egri]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Opening yourself up for attack, how about hopefully being banned for posting this political garbage.

Agree completely.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by egri

Agree completely.

2nd


There's literally 100,000s of forums you can post on

[Leon]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Opening yourself up for attack, how about hopefully being banned for posting this political garbage.

Is it political? I am not sure we can have this gun debate without it being political but in essence it's not. I think both lefties and righties want to own guns. But how do we make America safer? (I reserve the right to lock this thread if it goes too far downhill.)
.

[barrysloate]

These kids are 17 and 18 years old, many who will be able to vote for the first time in November. We'll see where this all goes. Ideally, both sides of the gun debate can come to some understanding, but given the mood in America today, we'll probably see more shouting and less listening.

I see good points on both sides, and I'm happy to see young people getting so involved, whether you agree with them or not.

[Jim65]

You can ban all guns but it does not get to the root of the problem, why are they shooting up schools? Why blame our mental health laws or the media that glorifies all these mass shootings when guns are the easiest targets?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jim65

You can ban all guns but it does not get to the root of the problem, why are they shooting up schools? Why blame our mental health laws or the media that glorifies all these mass shootings when guns are the easiest targets?

It would seem that we can all agree on not letting mentally unstable people have guns. That might be a pretty big task in itself.
As for the media, they are what they are. They just report the stuff though I agree it seems they glorify it by how much they cover it. But if it didn't happen they wouldn't cover it. It is going to be tough to make meaningful changes, imo. Even if they appear meaningful I have a feeling it might only slightly curb the issue. There are so many guns in our society (and elsewhere) I don't see the problem going away soon. And I am usually mostly an optimist.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I see good points on both sides, and I'm happy to see young people getting so involved, whether you agree with them or not.

Spot on.

[bnorth]

Some people collect guns, target shoot with guns, and hunt with guns. Banning guns is as stupid to them as banning baseball card collecting would be to most on this forum.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

I am opening myself up for attack on this one, I am fully aware. However, today I am very proud of our youth and all who protested!

Today at the Nation's Capital and at cities across America were some of the biggest youth protests since the Vietnam era.

These massive gun control rallies and protests hope to bring an end to the increasing gun violence and deaths so prevalent in today's world all across America.

The NRA doesn't realize one critical point - back in George Washington's day they didn't have automatic assault rifles capable of mass destruction and mortality.

Times change and we need to change our laws accordingly to help protect and serve our citizens.

Now if the NRA wants to defend the rights to own a single shot rifle, no problem, I will march alongside the NRA.

Steve

Steve- Thank you for being willing to speak at a time when it's needed, but not popular.

Clearly, regardless of where you stand on this issue, needed solutions cannot come about without healthy (that means polite, though spirited back and forth) discussion.

The very fact that it is taking our children, even survivors, to get anything started in this area, speaks volumes about the mess our generation has forced upon them.

I say this as a conservative with an open mind when it comes to the better good.

Leon - I hope my post doesn't cause this very vital thread to be blocked.

-Raymond

[Leon]

As I said earlier, I don't know why this has to be political? Yeah, everyone seems to make it be that way but it doesn't have to be. We all want the same things it's just a matter of how we get there. There are good arguments on all sides. If this thread goes way south then it can be locked. Hopefully it can be discussed in a civil manner. thanks

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Steve- Thank you for being willing to speak at a time when it's needed, but not popular.

Clearly, regardless of where you stand on this issue, needed solutions cannot come about without healthy (that means polite, though spirited back and forth) discussion.

The very fact that it is taking our children, even survivors, to get anything started in this area, speaks volumes about the mess our generation has forced upon them.

I say this as a conservative with an open mind when it comes to the better good.

Leon - I hope my post doesn't cause this very vital thread to be blocked.

-Raymond

[mikemb]

I too am proud of our young adults. They speak very well and want to change things. Whatever side you are on, what we have now is not working and change is needed.

But these young adults have their most powerful tool ahead of them. their vote. Some can vote now, just about all will have that in a few years. That is where we all have the power to elect those who we want to represent us and our views and if not, vote them out.

Mike

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

I am opening myself up for attack on this one, I am fully aware. However, today I am very proud of our youth and all who protested!

Today at the Nation's Capital and at cities across America were some of the biggest youth protests since the Vietnam era.

These massive gun control rallies and protests hope to bring an end to the increasing gun violence and deaths so prevalent in today's world all across America.

The NRA doesn't realize one critical point - back in George Washington's day they didn't have automatic assault rifles capable of mass destruction and mortality.

Times change and we need to change our laws accordingly to help protect and serve our citizens.

Now if the NRA wants to defend the rights to own a single shot rifle, no problem, I will march alongside the NRA.

Steve

so much wrong with this post, time to break it down:

Today at the Nation's Capital and at cities across America were some of the biggest youth protests since the Vietnam era.

and they will be just as ineffective, protests are a tired monument to the delusional wasteland of the 60's that is half of our nation's issues today

These massive gun control rallies and protests hope to bring an end to the increasing gun violence and deaths so prevalent in today's world all across America.

please explain how a bunch of dumb children marching is going to stop one angry, crazy person from killing a lot of people in the future. please, I'd love to hear it.

They aren't prevalent , not at all, of the 36k annual gun deaths in the USA 20k of those are suicide, and the majority of the remaining are the result of gang violence, only a tiny % are due to "mass shootings" gun control has been proven to show it won't do one tiny thing to that % either, as anyone determined to kill a lot of people is not going to be stopped by a gun law

why isn't the media reporting this accurately? hmmmm?

The NRA doesn't realize one critical point - back in George Washington's day they didn't have automatic assault rifles capable of mass destruction and mortality.

A- no mass shooting in the history of the USA has been done by an automatic weapon, semi-auto sure, but not a fully automatic, so ,by proxy, not one single "assault weapon" has been used in a school shooting either.

B- fully automatic weapons are expensive to buy (grandfathered in relics that cost tens of thousands) and require a year's wait and more $$$ in tax stamps and fees.

C- AR-15 is not high powered, nor fully automatic, nor a military weapon, nor an assault rifle, it's a moderate to low powered semi-automatic, varmint and home protection weapon. It looks scary because of it's cool tactical garb, but underneath the weapon itself is just a hunting rifle with a magazine

D- did the founding fathers plan for the computer and mass media ? so does your first amendment rights to freedom of speech end with the quill and ink? that's a fallacious and silly argument, (and btw, they knew of gatlin gun type weapons and the early attempts at semi-auto)

Times change and we need to change our laws accordingly to help protect and serve our citizens.

times may change, but my natural rights to protect myself with firearms does not, neither does the power of my constitution, want to change it? fine, follow the rules and pass an amendment, get it through 2/3rds of Congress and have it ratified by 3/4ths of the states. Something tells me you KNOW this will never happen as 100m+ gun owners would oppose you 100%.





You need to learn about guns before you make one more statement about them as you come off as woefully ignorant of the issue and are making naive and embarrassing cliche'd arguments.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

so much wrong with this post, time to break it down:



and they will be just as ineffective, protests are a tired monument to the delusional wasteland of the 60's that is half of our nation's issues today



please explain how a bunch of dumb children marching is going to stop one angry, crazy person from killing a lot of people in the future. please, I'd love to hear it.

They aren't prevalent , not at all, of the 36k annual gun deaths in the USA 20k of those are suicide, and the majority of the remaining are the result of gang violence, only a tiny % are due to "mass shootings" gun control has been proven to show it won't do one tiny thing to that % either, as anyone determined to kill a lot of people is not going to be stopped by a gun law

why isn't the media reporting this accurately? hmmmm?




A- no mass shooting in the history of the USA has been done by an automatic weapon, semi-auto sure, but not a fully automatic, so ,by proxy, not one single "assault weapon" has been used in a school shooting either.

B- fully automatic weapons are expensive to buy (grandfathered in relics that cost tens of thousands) and require a year's wait and more $$$ in tax stamps and fees.

C- AR-15 is not high powered, nor fully automatic, nor a military weapon, nor an assault rifle, it's a moderate to low powered semi-automatic, varmint and home protection weapon. It looks scary because of it's cool tactical garb, but underneath the weapon itself is just a hunting rifle with a magazine

D- did the founding fathers plan for the computer and mass media ? so does your first amendment rights to freedom of speech end with the quill and ink? that's a fallacious and silly argument, (and btw, they knew of gatlin gun type weapons and the early attempts at semi-auto)





times may change, but my natural rights to protect myself with firearms does not, neither does the power of my constitution, want to change it? fine, follow the rules and pass an amendment, get it through 2/3rds of Congress and have it ratified by 3/4ths of the states. Something tells me you KNOW this will never happen as 100m+ gun owners would oppose you 100%.





You need to learn about guns before you make one more statement about them as you come off as woefully ignorant of the issue and are making naive and embarrassing cliche'd arguments.

Nick, thank you for the great post.

[JollyElm]

So, I'm going to listen to little snowflakes, who think eating Tide Pods is fun, telling me that my guns need to be taken away from me???? What a bunch of BS. They're blatantly being used by a certain side of the aisle as political pawns, and it's laughable.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Criminals who do illegal things would love for more types of guns to get banned and out of the law abiding owners...more unarmed people to go after who follow the law

bump stocks i can see being banned but without a constitutional amendment, all of this protesting will only amount to some very narrow law for the political 'victory' and on to the next thing

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

please explain how a bunch of dumb children marching is going to stop one angry, crazy person from killing a lot of people in the future. please, I'd love to hear it.





You need to learn about guns before you make one more statement about them as you come off as woefully ignorant of the issue and are making naive and embarrassing cliche'd arguments.

What’s frustrating about debating are arguments that A. Make such broad generalizations and B. Are done mainly to denigrate the opposite view.

If you do want to have honest debate, a little respect helps. And please, if somebody on the other side is misinformed, HELPING them works a lot better than aggressive condescension.

I have a great deal of respect for Leon allowing this discussion to take place, because while people here may come from all over the political landscape, we share a common interest. I had hoped that would foster constructive discussion, but that is not the case in many responses.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

What’s frustrating about debating are arguments that A. Make such broad generalizations and B. Are done mainly to denigrate the opposite view.

If you do want to have honest debate, a little respect helps. And please, if somebody on the other side is misinformed, HELPING them works a lot better than aggressive condescension.

I have a great deal of respect for Leon allowing this discussion to take place, because while people here may come from all over the political landscape, we share a common interest. I had hoped that would foster constructive discussion, but that is not the case in many responses.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have tried so many times and been ignored so many times that at this point I have concluded it's 100% willful. The opposition simply doesn't care about the facts, they are only interested in the abolition of the 2nd amendment.

ETA: and for the record, I never attacked the man, but rather, his argument.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

I have tried so many times and been ignored so many times that at this point I have concluded it's 100% willful. The opposition simply doesn't care about the facts, they are only interested in the abolition of the 2nd amendment.

ETA: and for the record, I never attacked the man, but rather, his argument.

With all due respect, This is the part I disagree with and don't think is going on generally. That side of the argument doesn't want to abolish all of gun ownership rights. I lean to more gun ownership for protection. But the left is ok with guns just not assault guns, I think. And I think they want a lot more common sense things too which we should all be able to agree on.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

I have tried so many times and been ignored so many times that at this point I have concluded it's 100% willful. The opposition simply doesn't care about the facts, they are only interested in the abolition of the 2nd amendment.

ETA: and for the record, I never attacked the man, but rather, his argument.

The opposition is in no way calling for the abolition of the second amendment. That is absolutely false. And how can you complain that we are not interested in the facts when you have the facts all wrong yourself? And you complain we don't listen to you, but you surely don't listen to our concerns, you just preach.

Sounds to be like both sides are equally culpable.

[packs]

I find it surprising that some people could think of protests as not adding up to much. Women were granted the right to vote, we passed the Civil Rights Act and desegregated our schools and public spaces because of protests. We pulled out of the Vietnam War due in large part to the pressure of public opinion as well. They are extremely powerful statements and the solidarity needed to pull them off is what brings people together for change.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

The opposition is in no way calling for the abolition of the second amendment. That is absolutely false.

If you're speaking for the opposition, then I have a question. You tell us what they don't want (abolition of the 2nd Ammendment), but how about telling us what the do want? All I hear from the left are vague terms like "gun control measures." What does that even mean?

I think that's what makes a lot of gun owners nervous. When the left isn't specific about what they want, then how is the right supposed to interpret that, other than a total gun ban? Again, if that's not what they want, then tell us what they do want. Be specific.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

The opposition is in no way calling for the abolition of the second amendment. That is absolutely false. And how can you complain that we are not interested in the facts when you have the facts all wrong yourself? And you complain we don't listen to you, but you surely don't listen to our concerns, you just preach.

Sounds to be like both sides are equally culpable.

this is all just not true.

death by 1000 cuts against our inalienable rights is abolition over time.

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"


and anyone who says "assault weapons" in regards to the AR-15 is either ignorant to the reality of firearms, or purposely lying to garner sympathy.

pick one.


I do not own a single firearm, but i am a veteran and i joined to protect and defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic, I believe this duty continues to this day. If you try to take away my rights, I will fight you with my entire being

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

The opposition is in no way calling for the abolition of the second amendment. That is absolutely false.

Really?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...-repealed.html

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

so much wrong with this post, time to break it down:



and they will be just as ineffective, protests are a tired monument to the delusional wasteland of the 60's that is half of our nation's issues today



please explain how a bunch of dumb children marching is going to stop one angry, crazy person from killing a lot of people in the future. please, I'd love to hear it.

They aren't prevalent , not at all, of the 36k annual gun deaths in the USA 20k of those are suicide, and the majority of the remaining are the result of gang violence, only a tiny % are due to "mass shootings" gun control has been proven to show it won't do one tiny thing to that % either, as anyone determined to kill a lot of people is not going to be stopped by a gun law

why isn't the media reporting this accurately? hmmmm?




A- no mass shooting in the history of the USA has been done by an automatic weapon, semi-auto sure, but not a fully automatic, so ,by proxy, not one single "assault weapon" has been used in a school shooting either.

B- fully automatic weapons are expensive to buy (grandfathered in relics that cost tens of thousands) and require a year's wait and more $$$ in tax stamps and fees.

C- AR-15 is not high powered, nor fully automatic, nor a military weapon, nor an assault rifle, it's a moderate to low powered semi-automatic, varmint and home protection weapon. It looks scary because of it's cool tactical garb, but underneath the weapon itself is just a hunting rifle with a magazine

D- did the founding fathers plan for the computer and mass media ? so does your first amendment rights to freedom of speech end with the quill and ink? that's a fallacious and silly argument, (and btw, they knew of gatlin gun type weapons and the early attempts at semi-auto)





times may change, but my natural rights to protect myself with firearms does not, neither does the power of my constitution, want to change it? fine, follow the rules and pass an amendment, get it through 2/3rds of Congress and have it ratified by 3/4ths of the states. Something tells me you KNOW this will never happen as 100m+ gun owners would oppose you 100%.





You need to learn about guns before you make one more statement about them as you come off as woefully ignorant of the issue and are making naive and embarrassing cliche'd arguments.

Perfect post A+++

[KMayUSA6060]

Son of a gun (see what I did there? ). I get busy outside of the hobby, visit this site less often over the past couple of months, and I miss the start of this thread. Let's dig into the entire picture here, boys.

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

so much wrong with this post, time to break it down:

and they will be just as ineffective, protests are a tired monument to the delusional wasteland of the 60's that is half of our nation's issues today

please explain how a bunch of dumb children marching is going to stop one angry, crazy person from killing a lot of people in the future. please, I'd love to hear it.

They aren't prevalent , not at all, of the 36k annual gun deaths in the USA 20k of those are suicide, and the majority of the remaining are the result of gang violence, only a tiny % are due to "mass shootings" gun control has been proven to show it won't do one tiny thing to that % either, as anyone determined to kill a lot of people is not going to be stopped by a gun law

why isn't the media reporting this accurately? hmmmm?

A- no mass shooting in the history of the USA has been done by an automatic weapon, semi-auto sure, but not a fully automatic, so ,by proxy, not one single "assault weapon" has been used in a school shooting either.

B- fully automatic weapons are expensive to buy (grandfathered in relics that cost tens of thousands) and require a year's wait and more $$$ in tax stamps and fees.

C- AR-15 is not high powered, nor fully automatic, nor a military weapon, nor an assault rifle, it's a moderate to low powered semi-automatic, varmint and home protection weapon. It looks scary because of it's cool tactical garb, but underneath the weapon itself is just a hunting rifle with a magazine

D- did the founding fathers plan for the computer and mass media ? so does your first amendment rights to freedom of speech end with the quill and ink? that's a fallacious and silly argument, (and btw, they knew of gatlin gun type weapons and the early attempts at semi-auto)

times may change, but my natural rights to protect myself with firearms does not, neither does the power of my constitution, want to change it? fine, follow the rules and pass an amendment, get it through 2/3rds of Congress and have it ratified by 3/4ths of the states. Something tells me you KNOW this will never happen as 100m+ gun owners would oppose you 100%.

You need to learn about guns before you make one more statement about them as you come off as woefully ignorant of the issue and are making naive and embarrassing cliche'd arguments.

First, let's start with this post, as it is phenomenal. I do have a few things/details to add...

- AR (as in AR15 or AR10) stands for ArmaLite, not Assault Rifle. Assault is an action, not a tangible item.

- AR15s can be powerful if chambered in something bigger than the traditional 5.56 or .223. I know Alexander Arms has a 50 Beowulf AR15, there is a .458 SOCOM AR15 - those are both hard hitting, powerful rounds. However, to my knowledge, no shooting in the US has ever utilized those rounds, or any round bigger than the 5.56/.223. Those larger-caliber AR15s and AR10s - chambered in 7.62/.308 - are more powerful than the traditional AR15, but are also more expensive, thus the use of the 5.56/.223. I mention this because AR15s can definitely be higher powered, but the mass shootings everyone points to use the lower-powered calibers.

- The estimated number of civilian-owned firearms in this country is over 300 million. That's estimated to be around 42% of the world's civilian gun ownership total. America rocks. If guns were a problem, this country and the world would know it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for my thoughts...

- I am not proud of our youth for their sheepish protests; the majority are following, ignorantly following to boot. I'm even more disappointed in our "educators" for not pressing them on the issues. I emailed my high school's principal and superintendent when I heard that they allowed a walkout. I challenged them to challenge the students, because that is their job. The students have the right to protest, but as educators, they should be challenging the students to prevent protest in ignorance. I asked them if they challenged the students to research the group Empower (the one who started the mass school walkout protests) and its origins. I asked if they questioned the students on what AR stands for, and what a semi-automatic rifle is and how it functions compared to a bolt-action rifle and fully automatic rifle. I asked if they were challenging the kids on the type of legislation they are pushing for and how it would prevent any previous mass shootings, and any future mass shootings. I asked if they were questioning the kids on the details of the Parkland shooting.

- It has been 1.5-2 months since the Parkland shooting, and we're finding out more and more about the negligence of our government which enabled the shooting to occur. Cruz and his brother had been known to law enforcement over 40 times (I think the number is up to 60), including a YouTube comment under Cruz's name literally stating that he wants to become a professional school shooter. Cruz was then permitted into the PROMISE program, a program designed to limit the number of arrests of youth, to lower the uneven number of minorities vs. white youth in jail or whatever. I believe the superintendent of the school system down there implemented the program; he is from politically-corrupt Chicago. Had Cruz been properly documented and not protected by law enforcement and such a program, he never would have been able to purchase a firearm. Strike 1 against our government.

- We now know that the school resource officer AND the law enforcement that arrived on scene failed to engage Cruz during the shooting. In fact, they stayed outside the building, and didn't arrest Cruz until he had left school grounds. Strike 2 against our government.

- The most common denominator/factor of most - if not all - mass shootings is medication. Cruz and nearly - again, if not all - mass shooters have been on some sort of anti-depressent/anxiety medication. Who is in charge of our healthcare system? The government. However, I have yet to see a protest against the over/improper prescription of these medications. Strike 3.

I mentioned 3 issues with the shooting, not one of which was the firearm itself. Someone has to pull the trigger on a firearm for a projectile to be fired.

We have common sense gun laws in this country already. It's up to the government officials to properly enforce those laws, which they did not with Parkland.

Additionally, to direct the attention back onto our youth, I believe they are being used as puppets by the establishment and the media to push an agenda. They won't give pro-2A-Parkland-survivor Kyle Kashuv the time of day, but will parade David Hogg and pro-Cuba Emma Gonzalez onto their networks 24/7.

Also, who is challenging these youth "protesters" how their proposed legislation will actually work and prevent mass shootings? They're just letting them spew ignorant talking points.

Here's what I propose...

- Hire former law enforcement and military veterans to be armed guards at schools.

- Arm the teachers in a voluntary manner, while providing proper training. Cut funding elsewhere, most likely athletically, to balance the expenses and not burden taxpayers any further.

- Overhaul the education system to get back to the fundamental essentials that used to be taught - i.e. life lessons, skilled labor education, and basic morals - instead of the social justice indoctrination and bloated emphasis on "testing" currently found in our school systems (again, run by government).

- Target drug smugglers and dealers HARD to get drugs off the streets. This should help prevent addiction problems at an early age, as well as stabilize the traditional family.

- Keep improving the economy, measuring our welfare programs by the number of people coming off. Again, this should help stabilize the traditional family, thus giving our youth a more stable upbringing.


I'm not a Republican, I'm not a Democrat; I am an American, and a proud one at that. Therefore, my beliefs center around the Constitution, a blessing from our Founding Fathers and God Himself in response to a war for freedom against a tyrannical government. That's why the Second Amendment is written, that's why it's so high on the list, and that's why it includes the phrase "shall not be infringed".


I didn't read all of the posts in this thread, so I apologize if any of this has been stated before.

[packs]

The federal government and local government are two separate entities and your post is blurring the lines between them in several areas. Our government is not the government of Florida unless you live in Florida. People aren't corrupt by default because of where they come from (Chicago, for example) and you don't really give any credit to high school students being able to think for themselves. You are simultaneously suggesting these kids are victims of group think while also suggesting they should think the way you do. That's a contradiction.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by packs

The federal government and local government are two separate entities and your post is blurring the lines between them in several areas. Our government is not the government of Florida unless you live in Florida. People aren't corrupt by default because of where they come from (Chicago, for example) and you don't really give any credit to high school students being able to think for themselves. You are simultaneously suggesting these kids are victims of group think while also suggesting they should think the way you do. That's a contradiction.

- Not sure where I blurred the lines between the two. Both the FBI and local law enforcement were aware of Cruz.

- Not sure what your point is about our government not being Florida's government. So are only people from Florida allowed to comment on this matter?

- You're right, people aren't corrupt by default because of where they are from. However, context clues, a track record of corruption, and common sense tells us not to trust politicians, let alone from Chicago. By the way, Chicago is a perfect example of gun control being not only ineffective, but detrimental to the public's safety.

- I refuse to give credit for their ability to think for themselves when the original school walkout was organized by Empower, not individual students. I've also seen many interviews that suggest they are very uneducated on the subjects they are bringing attention to.

- They are absolutely victims of group think, but I do not want them to think like me. I want them to have all of the facts, something I know for a fact they aren't provided with in school, and simply for them to think. If they end up thinking like me in the end, fine, but I just want them to think.


Instead of trying to (incorrectly) nit-pick any sort of semantics in my post and try to demean me politically, do you have any comments on my suggestions to prevent future mass shootings?

[packs]

I wasn't demeaning you at all. I just thought it's important to distinguish between generalities. For example, you had said our government gets a strike because the guard on duty and local law enforcement didn't enter the school. That's not a strike against our government, that's a strike against two individuals who work for local law enforcement.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

... do you have any comments on my suggestions to prevent future mass shootings?

"Arm the teachers in a voluntary manner, while providing proper training. Cut funding elsewhere, most likely athletically, to balance the expenses and not burden taxpayers any further".

While I do like your suggestions, in general, I personally place a very high value on youth athletics. I know my town does spend a lot of money on youth sports, but a lot of it is also parents volunteering (coaching/concession stand/running the leagues/maintaining fields) and donations from sponsors. I rank kids being active higher than arming the teachers, if I was in charge of portioning money.

And I'm also torn on whether to arm the teachers. Good points have been made for/against it, so while I'd be open to it, I wouldn't "pull the trigger" (bad pun, sorry) if I were in charge of making the decision.