Shooting Tragedy.
Blame guns.
Call for legislation.
Demonize the NRA.
Search for victims' families to be spokepersons for anti-gun legislation.
Money pours in to a tragedy.
Bills get passed.
Our right - which was once a full cake is a piece of crumb.



as my man Charleston Heston says, the villain is not us, the villain is that criminal that committed the crime
Point your damn fingers away from me You damn ape! 

Yup, and it will keep happening. I think the firearm community needs to come up with something to offer in terms of a solution, otherwise they just keep blaming us. And I don't mean armed teachers either, but ideas towards catching these types of people before they do something.

We have lawmakers who resist gun control but we need real something they can put forth as an alternative instead of just resisting any change.

Yup, and it will keep happening. I think the firearm community needs to come up with something to offer in terms of a solution, otherwise they just keep blaming us. And I don't mean armed teachers either, but ideas towards catching these types of people before they do something.

We have lawmakers who resist gun control but we need real something they can put forth as an alternative instead of just resisting any change.

Won't happen because the media instead of being objective, supports no guns.  Also why hasn't the media ever reported that majority of mass shooters are registered democrats?  The only thing that would help is if gun owners/companies also controlled the main media because that's what mom and pop from Oklahoma watch every night.

Won't happen because the media instead of being objective, supports no guns.  Also why hasn't the media ever reported that majority of mass shooters are registered democrats?  The only thing that would help is if gun owners/companies also controlled the main media because that's what mom and pop from Oklahoma watch every night.

I agree. The Dems paid their membership.
But the media should be objective...in an ideal world where unicorns roam wild

Yup, and it will keep happening. I think the firearm community needs to come up with something to offer in terms of a solution, otherwise they just keep blaming us. And I don't mean armed teachers either, but ideas towards catching these types of people before they do something.

We have lawmakers who resist gun control but we need real something they can put forth as an alternative instead of just resisting any change.

There has been a feasible suggestion by the NRA and the "gun community" on the table ever since Columbine:  Armed faculty members.

We have been met with "the answer to guns can't be more guns," and "I don't think my child needs to spend their school years around guns."

There have been many schools putting these exact measures in place, but we have to scour the net to find the news pieces on them.

The Left/anti-gun/anti-2A types don't want a solution.  They have an agenda.  You are not going to get them to accept ANY solutions that don't follow their agenda:

take guns away from as many people as possible so they can feel safer.  It's all about how they feel, and has nothing to do with their "solutions" being effective.

Yup, and it will keep happening. I think the firearm community needs to come up with something to offer in terms of a solution, otherwise they just keep blaming us. And I don't mean armed teachers either, but ideas towards catching these types of people before they do something.

We have lawmakers who resist gun control but we need real something they can put forth as an alternative instead of just resisting any change.

Please present us with the exact language of your proposed effective law, and any evidence you have that the law would indeed be effective.

I hope you're not hinting at something like an ex parte hearing where a "suspect" can have their rights denied based on hearsay about them being "a danger to self or others" without even being informed the hearing is taking place.

As per  Flapp above, there are many school districts across the nation that have instituted training programs for armed school personnel. No problems so far.

This guy in Florida had already broken laws on multiple occasions, but he was not prosecuted. Law enforcement dropped the ball. Why don't you talk to them and tell them to enforce the already existing laws he violated.

So, please, exact language of your proposal.

There have been instances of cars speeding excessively down this particular stretch of the H1.  I propose a solution, lets turn it into a police car free zone.  That'll surely reduce the number of people speeding and the severity of the speeding, right?

The FBI says proper protocol was not followed in following up on a tip about Nikolas Cruz, the suspect in the mass shooting at a South Florida high school on Wednesday that left 17 people dead. A law enforcement source told ABC News that investigators believe approximately 150 shots were fired in the incident.

A person close to Cruz called an FBI tip line on Jan. 5 with information about Cruz's desire to kill people, erratic behavior, disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting, according to an FBI statement.

“We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami field office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time,” the FBI said in a statement today.

FBI director Christopher Wray said the agency is still investigating and regrets any additional pain the information could cause to victims.
..............
The Broward Sheriff's Office received "20 calls for service over the last few years" regarding Cruz, Broward Sheriff Scott Israel said at a news conference today

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


LEOs already admitting fault. 

Please present us with the exact language of your proposed effective law, and any evidence you have that the law would indeed be effective.

I hope you're not hinting at something like an ex parte hearing where a "suspect" can have their rights denied based on hearsay about them being "a danger to self or others" without even being informed the hearing is taking place.

As per  Flapp above, there are many school districts across the nation that have instituted training programs for armed school personnel. No problems so far.

This guy in Florida had already broken laws on multiple occasions, but he was not prosecuted. Law enforcement dropped the ball. Why don't you talk to them and tell them to enforce the already existing laws he violated.

So, please, exact language of your proposal.

Why are you asking Joy Behar?

There has been a feasible suggestion by the NRA and the "gun community" on the table ever since Columbine:  Armed faculty members.

We have been met with "the answer to guns can't be more guns," and "I don't think my child needs to spend their school years around guns."

There have been many schools putting these exact measures in place, but we have to scour the net to find the news pieces on them.

The Left/anti-gun/anti-2A types don't want a solution.  They have an agenda.  You are not going to get them to accept ANY solutions that don't follow their agenda:

take guns away from as many people as possible so they can feel safer.  It's all about how they feel, and has nothing to do with their "solutions" being effective.

I don't think armed school guards is a solution. It might reduce the body count but I see no reason that it will stop the shooters from deciding to do this. Case in point, there was an armed officer at Columbine and it didn't prevent the shooting.

Sure there are the extreme left who don't want you to have a knife much less a gun but I am not talking about them. I am talking about those that you can reason with. Those that don't mind firearms so much as they just want to stop school shootings.

We can't control the far left but we can come up with real ideas that sane people can discuss and if we don't come up with ideas then we really aren't helping much and we just look like stubborn gun nuts.

I don't think armed school guards is a solution. It might reduce the body count but I see no reason that it will stop the shooters from deciding to do this. Case in point, there was an armed officer at Columbine and it didn't prevent the shooting.

Sure there are the extreme left who don't want you to have a knife much less a gun but I am not talking about them. I am talking about those that you can reason with. Those that don't mind firearms so much as they just want to stop school shootings.

We can't control the far left but we can come up with real ideas that sane people can discuss and if we don't come up with ideas then we really aren't helping much and we just look like stubborn gun nuts.

That's a ridiculous argument.  That's like saying we shouldn't have fire extinguishers in schools because there was a school that caught fire and the extinguisher "didn't prevent it."

There are MANY schools implementing this solution all across the nation.  Just because ONE GUARD at ONE INCIDENT didn't PREVENT a shooting doesn't mean armed faculty (more than one person) can't stop an active shooter to reduce the number of casualties.  This has already been proven to work.  Do some research.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/01/31/armed-guard-stops-school-shooter-after-he-opened-fire-at-atlanta-middle-school

There is no solution that is guaranteed to PREVENT shootings.  The solutions have to be part of a number of security measures based on the variety of incidents and what would have slowed or stopped them from being as deadly.

That's a ridiculous argument.  That's like saying we shouldn't have fire extinguishers in schools because there was a school that caught fire and the extinguisher "didn't prevent it."

There are MANY schools implementing this solution all across the nation.  Just because ONE GUARD at ONER INCIDENT didn't PREVENT a shooting doesn't mean armed faculty (more than one person) can't stop an active shooter to reduce the number of casualties.  This has already been proven to work.  Do some research.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/01/31/armed-guard-stops-school-shooter-after-he-opened-fire-at-atlanta-middle-school

There is no solution that is guaranteed to PREVENT shootings.  The solutions have to be part of a number of security measures based on the variety of incidents and what would have slowed or stopped them from being as deadly.

I warned you about Joy Behar.

I don't think armed school guards is a solution. It might reduce the body count but I see no reason that it will stop the shooters from deciding to do this. Case in point, there was an armed officer at Columbine and it didn't prevent the shooting.

Sure there are the extreme left who don't want you to have a knife much less a gun but I am not talking about them. I am talking about those that you can reason with. Those that don't mind firearms so much as they just want to stop school shootings.

We can't control the far left but we can come up with real ideas that sane people can discuss and if we don't come up with ideas then we really aren't helping much and we just look like stubborn gun nuts.

Police officers are armed but they don't prevent shootings either - they react to stop the threat as soon as they can.
Why are they armed? Why can't we protect children with firearms? We don't have a problem with armed guards carrying cash around. How about we don't arm these guards carrying cash to ATMs?

Police officers are armed but they don't prevent shootings either - they react to stop the threat as soon as they can.
Why are they armed? Why can't we protect children with firearms? We don't have a problem with armed guards carrying cash around. How about we don't arm these guards carrying cash to ATMs?

As far as I know, police (officially) are armed for self protection, NOT force projection.

There is a large difference.

Please present us with the exact language of your proposed effective law, and any evidence you have that the law would indeed be effective.

The resident HPD representative will get right back to you with the approved narrative of the day.

As far as I know, police are armed for self protection, NOT force projection.

There is a large difference.

but they do have AR15 "assault rifles" and they are designed to kill <sarcasm>

but they do have AR15 "assault rifles" and they are designed to kill <sarcasm>

The recent massive FedGov buy had them labeled as "personal defense" weapons, IIRC.

The recent massive FedGov buy had them labeled as "personal defense" weapons, IIRC.

Yep.  A DHS RFP for 7,000 Personal Defense Weapons (PDW) that also have select-fire mode.  Just a little more capable than the civilian models.

That's a ridiculous argument.  That's like saying we shouldn't have fire extinguishers in schools because there was a school that caught fire and the extinguisher "didn't prevent it."

There is no solution that is guaranteed to PREVENT shootings.  The solutions have to be part of a number of security measures based on the variety of incidents and what would have slowed or stopped them from being as deadly.

No more ridiculous than the suggestion that an armed teacher is the solution. Time and time again these shootings have happened and all we can manage is that we need armed teachers. Now I am not against this but it is silly for us to have that as our only idea and act like it will make all the difference when evidence has shown it didn't. We need a more comprehensive set of suggestions.

Police officers are armed but they don't prevent shootings either - they react to stop the threat as soon as they can.
Why are they armed? Why can't we protect children with firearms? We don't have a problem with armed guards carrying cash around. How about we don't arm these guards carrying cash to ATMs?

I am not against armed personnel in our schools.