PDA

View Full Version : Assault Weapons??



road kill
12-18-2012, 08:26 AM
What is it about so called "assault weapons" that scare you so?


It is much ado about nothing.
It is simply whipped up hysteria be secular progressives to take another increment.

Maybe someone can explain to me, in your own words what frightens you about these weapons?

I mean other than the way they look?:cool:

Jason Glavich
12-18-2012, 08:38 AM
If we paint them pink would they not be as scary?

BonMallari
12-18-2012, 08:40 AM
Assault weapons dont scare me....would I own one...probably, but for my personal use they are impractical for the type of hunting that I do...now for personal defense, I like the tactical style handgun, coupled with a 12 gauge shotgun

sick lids
12-18-2012, 08:54 AM
i wonder how many of theese mass killings with assult weapons also involved motor vehicles, seems to me alot of cooling of could be had if we we were still on horse back lol. my assult rifle 0 ted kennedys car i belive 1

Buzz
12-18-2012, 09:00 AM
Last night on the news I saw that the shooter was using a rifle equipped with this.

http://www.brownells.com/magazines/rifle-magazines/magazines/ar-15-m16-90-rounder-reg-magazine-prod23282.aspx


So RK, you keep saying that a .223 isn't a high powered weapon. So I guess one of those equipped with one of these isn't a powerful and destructive weapon?

I'm getting one of these & deer hunting with it. I can take out an entire herd with that bad boy!



Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Funhttp://www.brownells.com/userdocs/products/p_556000006_1.jpg

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:08 AM
Last night on the news I saw that the shooter was using a rifle equipped with this.

http://www.brownells.com/magazines/rifle-magazines/magazines/ar-15-m16-90-rounder-reg-magazine-prod23282.aspx


So RK, you keep saying that a .223 isn't a high powered weapon. So I guess one of those equipped with one of these isn't a powerful and destructive weapon?

I'm getting one of these & deer hunting with it. I can take out an entire herd with that bad boy!



Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Funhttp://www.brownells.com/userdocs/products/p_556000006_1.jpg

Point #1--That is NOT, I repeat NOT an assault weapon, that is an after market add on magazine.
And I defy you to produce one credible report that says he used that in the commision of this crime.
Everything I have read says the "bushmaster" was left in the car.
Point #2--NO, you could NOT take out an entire herd with that.

You guys always have to exagerate to make your weak points!

.223 or 7.62 X 39 are small calibers.
Low-power, inaccurate weapons that look mean.

It's all emotion with you guys!

2tall
12-18-2012, 09:10 AM
Stan, what is a secular progressive and what does it have to do with assault weapons? Why do assault weapons enter a discussion about CCP? Why do you own a AK or other such? So many questions!

Ken Bora
12-18-2012, 09:13 AM
The Name!
The son of my boss. An odd lefty, liberal, save the world, but not in my back yard kind of person. Who duck and goose hunts on occasion with me, because the geese poop on the lawn were he keeps his sea-doo. Was asking me why we had these assault weapons saying he would never own one. I told him he already did. He has a Remington 870 I sold him. I had him use his smart telephone to view the accessories available for his 870 and said “see, you own an assault weapon”. So he asked if I thought he should register it? We have no need for that in Vermont anyway.
What we need is a more better definition of the term. Another friend of mine shot a very nice buck just last week during our black powder deer season. He was in a big scrub field. Not open woods or meadow, but years overgrown pastureland. A scrub field. So he spots the buck and gets buck fever bad. Shoots him in the front hoof. Deer takes off running. Now John was the kid back in middle school who always knew he would be a Marine. Enlisted while he was still in high school. To this day still runs for fun and does the iron-man stuff. So John takes off running after the deer. Buck fever bad! When all was said and done the deer ran in a huge almost a mile circle finally dropping very close to John’s truck. During the pursuit, John reloaded his single shot black powder rifle 4 times on the run! While it is unclear how many of the 5 rounds hit the deer, at least the first and last ones did. Fricken Jarhead! I think the “assault” label lies on the human, not the iron.

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 09:13 AM
I hate using the term 'Assault Rifle' personally.

It's a Semi-Auto Rifle.

I can use a New Haven Semi-Auto .22 with 7 round mag to ASSUALT something. Does that make IT an Assault Rifle?

It's a term created by the media to do exactly what it has done. Make these rifles seem like something they are not. It's the Anti's Greatest Tool. Deception.

In fact the current Bozo DA we have now suggested this Brain Washing Type deception back in 1995.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYyqBxD-3xw


I would like to hear from someone who agrees with these Anti-Gun folks, and hear just one single Law that they think should exist so we can discuss whether or not it would actually be effective.

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:16 AM
Stan, what is a secular progressive and what does it have to do with assault weapons? Why do assault weapons enter a discussion about CCP? Why do you own a AK or other such? So many questions!

The secular progressives are those in the party formerly known as Democrats.
They have a progressive agenda, which includes disarming the citizenry.

I do NOT own an "Avtomat Kalashnikova" aka: AK 47.
I have been fired at with such, a distinctive sound one never forgets.

I do have a variety of weaponry in my possesion.
Any time you wanna visit, I'd be proud to show you.:D

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 09:23 AM
Everything I have read says the "bushmaster" was left in the car.
You guys always have to exagerate to make your weak points! Not sure what news you are listening to but current reports list the rifle as the weapon used. Also reported was the discovery of "Hundreds of rounds in magizines not yet used " becasue of the swift police response. .223 or 7.62 X 39 are small calibers.
Low-power, inaccurate weapons that look mean. BS. Unless you have a really crappy platform or surplus, most AR platforms can put sub inch groups at 100-250 yds consistently. Small calliber does not equate to inaccurate. And with frangible bullets, they are deadly.

It's all emotion with you guys! And Stan, most of the "secular's " use facts and data in there responses not regurgitated retoric heard on the radio.



While it is not an assault rifle, it is a deadly addition if used in a horrific manner.

Cool the posturing and focus on some solutions Regards

BonMallari
12-18-2012, 09:24 AM
Last night on the news I saw that the shooter was using a rifle equipped with this.




and the news originally reported that the shooter's mother was the teacher at the school, when in fact she was an occasional volunteer at the school...

Did you also notice how quickly the media named the brands of the guns used (Glock, Sig Sauer, Bushmaster)

whether or not the shooter used a drum magazine, or even extended mags in the handguns is not really the issue , but if it fits the narrative and makes the guns look more sinister the better to advance the agenda

Sue Kiefer
12-18-2012, 09:24 AM
Stan,
There has been conflicting reports on the media of the type of weapons used at the school. First I too heard that the rifle was found in his mother's car.
Then I heard he used it to shoot his way into the school.
I personally see NO need for weapons that rapidfire THAT many rounds at anything whether it's hunting or protecting yourself.
If I need something that shoots that many rounds that fast in the woods than I need to go back to the practice range or maybe find a target that is within normal safe gun range to start. That goes for birds as well.
If I'm protecting myself from the buggerman I see NO need to shoot him that many times that fast when I know that 1 or 2 bullets will stop him, make him run or kill the poor bastard.
Just my take on that type of assult weapon.
Sue

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 09:26 AM
Last night on the news I saw that the shooter was using a rifle equipped with this.


You can hear it all you want but that doesn't make it true. You'll need to provide at least some shred of information that backs up that claim.

B/c so far I heard that it was an AR15 Bushmaster (CA MODEL)
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/12/18/weapons-used-in-conn-shooting-sold-in-socal/
which (WOULD) mean, that the Mag capacity was no more than 10 rounds per Mag and that Mag must NOT be detachable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15s_in_California

Buzz
12-18-2012, 09:27 AM
Point #1--That is NOT, I repeat NOT an assault weapon, that is an after market add on magazine.
And I defy you to produce one credible report that says he used that in the commision of this crime.
Everything I have read says the "bushmaster" was left in the car.
Point #2--NO, you could NOT take out an entire herd with that.

You guys always have to exagerate to make your weak points!

.223 or 7.62 X 39 are small calibers.
Low-power, inaccurate weapons that look mean.

It's all emotion with you guys!


This article from yesterday's USA today identifies the Bushmaster as the weapon. I was mistaken about the clip he used, he had a pile of 30 round clips. This one will hold 90 rounds. Probably easier to swap out the 30 round ones than this thing. Easier to carry too.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/

I realize that clip is an after market add on. Do you think I'm stupid or something???

Here is the website description of the clip. We all need something like that, think of the FUN we could have!

Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Fun

Precision built, ultra-high capacity, drum-style magazine allows extended shooting strings and plenty of shooting fun with your favorite AR-15 or M16 rifle. Made from extra-strong polycarbonate resin with a clear back cover so you can see at a glance the remaining rounds. Holds a maximum of 90 rounds of .223 Rem./5.56 NATO ammunition and is guaranteed not to jam or malfunction. Offset design keeps the weight of all rounds directly below the magazine well, so the balance point of your rifle remains unchanged. Very easy to load, includes a 10-round loading chute and stripper clips to help speed reloads.

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:31 AM
This article from yesterday's USA today identifies the Bushmaster as the weapon. I was mistaken about the clip he used, he had a pile of 30 round clips. This one will hold 90 rounds. Probably easier to swap out the 30 round ones than this thing. Easier to carry too.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/

I realize that clip is an after market add on. Do you think I'm stupid or something??? Based on your post, I wasn't sure if you knew the difference.........
Here is the website description of the clip. We all need something like that, think of the FUN we could have!

Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Fun

Precision built, ultra-high capacity, drum-style magazine allows extended shooting strings and plenty of shooting fun with your favorite AR-15 or M16 rifle. Made from extra-strong polycarbonate resin with a clear back cover so you can see at a glance the remaining rounds. Holds a maximum of 90 rounds of .223 Rem./5.56 NATO ammunition and is guaranteed not to jam or malfunction. Offset design keeps the weight of all rounds directly below the magazine well, so the balance point of your rifle remains unchanged. Very easy to load, includes a 10-round loading chute and stripper clips to help speed reloads.

Do you really beleive that eliminating these weapons will solve this issue??
This is based on whipped up emotion and not letting a tragedy go to waste.
"Rules for Radicals."

I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223.

dixidawg
12-18-2012, 09:34 AM
Last night on the news I saw that the shooter was using a rifle equipped with this.

http://www.brownells.com/magazines/rifle-magazines/magazines/ar-15-m16-90-rounder-reg-magazine-prod23282.aspx


So RK, you keep saying that a .223 isn't a high powered weapon. So I guess one of those equipped with one of these isn't a powerful and destructive weapon?

I'm getting one of these & deer hunting with it. I can take out an entire herd with that bad boy!



Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Fun

http://www.brownells.com/userdocs/products/p_556000006_1.jpg



Many states do not allow .223 for deer hunting as they believe it to be underpowered.

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:36 AM
While it is not an assault rifle, it is a deadly addition if used in a horrific manner.

Cool the posturing and focus on some solutions Regards
Making more laws will not make outlaws obey them.

The whipped up emotional outrage over "assault weapons" would be "cool posturing" to the ultimate.:cool:

A tri tronic e-collar can be used in an "horrific manner."

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 09:37 AM
I was mistaken about the clip he used, he had a pile of 30 round clips.

I realize that clip is an after market add on.

Here is the website description of the clip.

.

Note in the info you provided they don't call it a 'clip'


Precision built, ultra-high capacity, drum-style magazine allows extended shooting strings and plenty of shooting fun with your favorite AR-15 or M16 rifle. Made from extra-strong polycarbonate resin with a clear back cover so you can see at a glance the remaining rounds. Holds a maximum of 90 rounds of .223 Rem./5.56 NATO ammunition and is guaranteed not to jam or malfunction. Offset design keeps the weight of all rounds directly below the magazine well, so the balance point of your rifle remains unchanged. Very easy to load, includes a 10-round loading chute and stripper clips to help speed reloads


It's a Magazine. Just sharing/

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/7004/dummylist1dt6.jpg

Buzz
12-18-2012, 09:45 AM
Do you really beleive that eliminating these weapons will solve this issue??
This is based on whipped up emotion and not letting a tragedy go to waste.
"Rules for Radicals."

I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223.


The issue is not shooting at 250 yards. There aren't too many 250 yard shots to make inside a school.

I am against arming teachers. I have no problem with hiring trained & armed security for schools. Putting a gun in everyone's hands isn't the answer. I have a permit to carry but I don't feel really comfortable about it, but I do it when I'm traveling alone.

Buzz
12-18-2012, 09:45 AM
Note in the info you provided they don't call it a 'clip'



It's a Magazine. Just sharing/



Whatever...

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 09:47 AM
Whatever...

I was trying to keep you from looking uneducated about firearms http://forum.qip.ru/images/smilies/pardon.gif

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:51 AM
The issue is not shooting at 250 yards. There aren't too many 250 yard shots to make inside a school.

I am against arming teachers. I have no problem with hiring trained & armed security for schools. Putting a gun in everyone's hands isn't the answer. I have a permit to carry but I don't feel really comfortable about it, but I do it when I'm traveling alone.
I was responding to another question Buzz.
I agree, I don't beleive we should ask teachers to be armed.
If we are serious, we should look at the model of security at schools that has been successful.
Who might that be??

Oh, yeah, the Israeli's.:cool:

road kill
12-18-2012, 09:58 AM
This article from yesterday's USA today identifies the Bushmaster as the weapon. I was mistaken about the clip he used, he had a pile of 30 round clips. This one will hold 90 rounds. Probably easier to swap out the 30 round ones than this thing. Easier to carry too.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/

I realize that clip is an after market add on. Do you think I'm stupid or something???

Here is the website description of the clip. We all need something like that, think of the FUN we could have!

Ultra High Capacity For Increased Shooting Fun

Precision built, ultra-high capacity, drum-style magazine allows extended shooting strings and plenty of shooting fun with your favorite AR-15 or M16 rifle. Made from extra-strong polycarbonate resin with a clear back cover so you can see at a glance the remaining rounds. Holds a maximum of 90 rounds of .223 Rem./5.56 NATO ammunition and is guaranteed not to jam or malfunction. Offset design keeps the weight of all rounds directly below the magazine well, so the balance point of your rifle remains unchanged. Very easy to load, includes a 10-round loading chute and stripper clips to help speed reloads.
Buzz, it appears your issue is with clips!!!!:cool:

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 10:04 AM
Making more laws will not make outlaws obey them. Nothing said about more laws.

The whipped up emotional outrage Response was clarifiying mistakes by the OP and not-emotional over "assault weapons" would be "cool posturing" might want to re-read Stan. It was Cool the posturing. Not cool lposturing. to the ultimate.:cool:

A tri tronic e-collar can be used in an "horrific manner."

Roadkilll wrote:
"I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223. "

Maybe, big claim as we have never seen you shoot. But I digress.

Your comparison is way off. The murders were commited at extremly close range with a light weight, easily concealed, highly moble, and effective platform. The ease in which an AR platform can be made to be mis-used is, IMO, the issue, not the platform itself. I have not seen any magizines offered in the "holds 30 rounds" class for my BAR.

Again, Cool the posturing and work on solutions Regards
"

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 10:06 AM
I want answers too.

I want to know why every year since the 60's MORE & MORE Gun Regulation Laws have been passed under the guise of 'Protecting the Innocent' yet they have done just the opposite and a strong argument could be made that these laws actually have put MORE innocent people in harms way.

So why? why are all these new laws year after year not working?

Good Read here;
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036.html

2tall
12-18-2012, 10:08 AM
Stan, "Secular Progressive" is a term entirely created by Bill O'Reilly. If you read or listen to him expound on the subject, he makes McCarthyites look like Boy Scouts. If you break it down, it actually means "non religious affiliated person or group that seeks new and improved methods". Does NOT mean God hating communists. I know why we own the firearms we do, but definitely do not believe they should be bragged on, advertised, pushed on other people or placed in the hands of any person who accepts a teaching certificate. (I know a lot of really immature, not so bright teachers, also some very talented and capable individuals). What people fear from "assault weapons" is......uh.......assault! People today are so quick to use catch phrases and slogans, that the things are identified by their names, not their function. Weird freakin' world.
PS, was that a new way of saying, "show me yours and I'll show you mine";););) Little too old for those kinda games!

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 10:08 AM
Oh, yeah, the Israeli's.:cool:

So, Stan, you are now advocating we live in an armed camp?

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:14 AM
So, Stan, you are now advocating we live in an armed camp?
Versus you advocating we live in an unarmed camp????:cool:

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:16 AM
Roadkilll wrote:
"I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223. "

Maybe, big claim as we have never seen you shoot. But I digress.

Your comparison is way off. The murders were commited at extremly close range with a light weight, easily concealed, highly moble, and effective platform. The ease in which an AR platform can be made to be mis-used is, IMO, the issue, not the platform itself. I have not seen any magizines offered in the "holds 30 rounds" class for my BAR.

Again, Cool the posturing and work on solutions Regards
"

Nice deflection, OMG I let my fat finger slip, don't address the issue.
YOU are posturing based solely on emotion, not facts.

Making more laws will not slow down outlaws.

The issue is broader than liberals feeling good about their knee jerk emotions.:D

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 10:16 AM
The secular progressives are those in the party formerly known as Democrats.
They have a progressive agenda, which includes disarming the citizenry.Give us some facts Stan, not parroted comentary.

I do NOT own an "Avtomat Kalashnikova" aka: AK 47.
I have been fired at with such, a distinctive sound one never forgets.

I do have a variety of weaponry in my possesion.
Any time you wanna visit, I'd be proud to show you.:D


Stan, you do know that "secular's" in the Muslum countries are the ones trying to make things safe and secure and want to have peace between the US and their neighbors and the"religous right "of the region are the ones wanting to destroy us non-believers?

Seculars: One size does not fit all Regards

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:19 AM
Stan, you do know that "secular's" in the Muslum countries are the ones trying to make things safe and secure and want to have peace between the US and their neighbors and the"religous right "of the region are the ones wanting to destroy us non-believers?
Seculars: One size does not fit all Regards
So, are you claiming Muslims "HATE" America?

Interesting thought.

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 10:25 AM
Nice deflection, OMG I let my fat finger slip, don't address the issue.
YOU are posturing based solely on emotion, not facts.

Making more laws will not slow down outlaws.

The issue is broader than liberals feeling good about their knee jerk emotions.:D


Stan your responses are not unexpected. I should know better than to try to responde in a thoughtful manner with you.

IF, you can show where I advocate more laws, do it.

IF, you can show any response I have made to this thread is a "knee jerk" reaction, show it.

IF, you can show I am posturing on the issue, show it.

IF, you can prove I am a regestered liberal, prove it.

IF, you can show I am aginst owning any gun, show it.

Learn to read the written word Regards

Brandoned
12-18-2012, 10:26 AM
Roadkilll wrote:
"I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223. "

Maybe, big claim as we have never seen you shoot. But I digress.

Your comparison is way off. The murders were commited at extremly close range with a light weight, easily concealed, highly moble, and effective platform. The ease in which an AR platform can be made to be mis-used is, IMO, the issue, not the platform itself. I have not seen any magizines offered in the "holds 30 rounds" class for my BAR.

Again, Cool the posturing and work on solutions Regards
"

Golddogs I hate to tell you this, but if you don't think for one minute they aren't going after BAR's in this whole Assault Weapons Ban you are going to be heartbroken! Even people on this thread have posted about not needing guns that shoot like that, of course they are like many others don't have a clue what they are talking about. The "like that" comment means Semi-Auto's!! Trust me I have several BAR's, 742's and I am very worried about this whole "ban"!

We as responsible gun owners need to stick together, because if you give the anti's an inch, they are going to take a mile!! A ban on assault rifles is not going to do one thing to prevent these things from happening again. Until we have armed people in schools, it will continue. Anyone that doesn't think having armed people in schools works, just Google Pearl Mississippi school shooting and read what assistant principal Joel Myrick did to prevent a horrible incident from being even worse.

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:27 AM
Stan, "Secular Progressive" is a term entirely created by Bill O'Reilly. If you read or listen to him expound on the subject, he makes McCarthyites look like Boy Scouts. If you break it down, it actually means "non religious affiliated person or group that seeks new and improved methods". Does NOT mean God hating communists. I know why we own the firearms we do, but definitely do not believe they should be bragged on, advertised, pushed on other people or placed in the hands of any person who accepts a teaching certificate. (I know a lot of really immature, not so bright teachers, also some very talented and capable individuals). What people fear from "assault weapons" is......uh.......assault! People today are so quick to use catch phrases and slogans, that the things are identified by their names, not their function. Weird freakin' world.
PS, was that a new way of saying, "show me yours and I'll show you mine";););) Little too old for those kinda games!
2tall, when I'm too old for that game, time to check out!!!!:p

I used that phrase long before O'Reilly.
There is a progressive movement, Obama has called himself such.
BTW--George Bush was a Harvard progressive.
Harvard is the mecca of progressivism in the US.
When your party boos God, well figger it out!

To me, secular progressives do NOT beleive in God or America as it was designed to be.

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:29 AM
Stan your responses are not unexpected. I should know better than to try to responde in a thoughtful manner with you.
Feel free to not respond to me, in fact invoke the "ignore" feature if it suits you!!
IF, you can show where I advocate more laws, do it.

IF, you can show any response I have made to this thread is a "knee jerk" reaction, show it.

IF, you can show I am posturing on the issue, show it.

IF, you can prove I am a regestered liberal, prove it.

IF, you can show I am aginst owning any gun, show it.

Learn to read the written word Regards
Kind of bossey aren't you??

So, then you do NOT beleive in any new legislation to deal with any kind of gun laws (including assault weapons)???

If not, the you agree with me!!!!:D








It's all emotion with you guys! And Stan, most of the "secular's " use facts and data in there (since you started, did you mean "their??") responses not regurgitated retoric heard on the radio.
Where exactly do you get your "facts??"

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 10:42 AM
Golddogs I hate to tell you this, but if you don't think for one minute they aren't going after BAR's in this whole Assault Weapons Ban you are going to be heartbroken! Even people on this thread have posted about not needing guns that shoot like that, of course they are like many others don't have a clue what they are talking about. The "like that" comment means Semi-Auto's!! Trust me I have several BAR's, 742's and I am very worried about this whole "ban"!

We as responsible gun owners need to stick together, because if you give the anti's an inch, they are going to take a mile!! A ban on assault rifles is not going to do one thing to prevent these things from happening again. Until we have armed people in schools, it will continue. Anyone that doesn't think having armed people in schools works, just Google Pearl Mississippi school shooting and read what assistant principal Joel Myrick did to prevent a horrible incident from being even worse.

Completly agree, but, it must be done in a non-emotional manner. I contend that people who view AR platform rifles as evil tools are scared because of the association of the platform used by the military, and the ability to use these large magizines. Thats why I resent the damning of the platform. A stock AR is no different than a stock BAR, and that is the message I feel needs to be focused on.

The plaform has a bad immage and it should be pointed out that it is not the cause of a sick individual deciding to murder a classroom of children. Gun owners sticking together will only go so far if a scared nation forms against us due to misinformation or just plain ignorance. Sensible soluitons are out there, we just need to fully engage and work toward finding them.

Don't want to live in fear Regards.

caryalsobrook
12-18-2012, 10:46 AM
Stan, "Secular Progressive" is a term entirely created by Bill O'Reilly. If you read or listen to him expound on the subject, he makes McCarthyites look like Boy Scouts. If you break it down, it actually means "non religious affiliated person or group that seeks new and improved methods". Does NOT mean God hating communists. I know why we own the firearms we do, but definitely do not believe they should be bragged on, advertised, pushed on other people or placed in the hands of any person who accepts a teaching certificate. (I know a lot of really immature, not so bright teachers, also some very talented and capable individuals). What people fear from "assault weapons" is......uh.......assault! People today are so quick to use catch phrases and slogans, that the things are identified by their names, not their function. Weird freakin' world.
PS, was that a new way of saying, "show me yours and I'll show you mine";););) Little too old for those kinda games!
You define what O'Reilly means by the term secular progressive as if it were fact. I have to dissagree. I believe he uses the term to refer to a "non religious affiliated person or group that seeks old and failed methods of government". An example that being the Failed USSR which not only eliminated religions from gov. but persecuted them whether they be Jewish, Catholic, Protestant or Moslem. I would call your phrase "MAKES McCARTHYITES LOOK LIKE BOY SCOUTS" a catch phrase would you not???

I would not be surprised if there were "really immature, not so bright" policemen or Judges or business owners(including dentists;)), all have been known to possess guns at their place of work. It has been shown that judges, local, state and federal have kept guns behind the bench.

I have always felt you should let the parents send their children to school of their choice via vouchers. There would, to be sure, many alternatives tried and the best would prevail. That idea is proobably to radically liberal and progressive and makes me a radical liberal. At least it would not propagate more laws, rules, regulations, and firmly established failed policies as a solution to the problem.

I do have one question. Are you aware of the effects of either a teacher or principle using a weapon to stop such events in a school?

road kill
12-18-2012, 10:47 AM
Completly agree, but, it must be done in a non-emotional manner. I contend that people who view AR platform rifles as evil tools are scared because of the association of the platform used by the military, and the ability to use these large magizines. Thats why I resent the damning of the platform. A stock AR is no different than a stock BAR, and that is the message I feel needs to be focused on.

The plaform has a bad immage and it should be pointed out that it is not the cause of a sick individual deciding to murder a classroom of children. Gun owners sticking together will only go so far if a scared nation forms against us due to misinformation or just plain ignorance. Sensible soluitons are out there, we just need to fully engage and work toward finding them.

Don't want to live in fear Regards.
Pretty much what I have been stating throughout this thread.
So, I guess your attacks are personal and have nothing to do with the topic what so ever.

Thanks for the spelling lesson though!!:D

If people want to correct spelling, it is "THEIR" perogative!!!!;-)

Ken Bora
12-18-2012, 10:56 AM
2tall, when I'm too old for that game, time to check out!!!!:p
.

and I hear Jeff Foxworthy's voice talkin'...... "Like a Basset Hound in a shower cap!"

Golddogs
12-18-2012, 11:00 AM
Kind of bossey aren't you??

So, then you do NOT beleive in any new legislation to deal with any kind of gun laws (including assault weapons)???

If not, the you agree with me!!!!:D Can't agree with you Stan. Untill the laws on the books are reviewed and more so fully enforced, no one can say of different or additonal laws are needed. Maybe closing a few loopholes like no backround checks at gun shows, but I see no new laws needed at this time





Gotta find a way Regards

achiro
12-18-2012, 11:01 AM
Stan,
There has been conflicting reports on the media of the type of weapons used at the school. First I too heard that the rifle was found in his mother's car.
Then I heard he used it to shoot his way into the school.
I personally see NO need for weapons that rapidfire THAT many rounds at anything whether it's hunting or protecting yourself.
If I need something that shoots that many rounds that fast in the woods than I need to go back to the practice range or maybe find a target that is within normal safe gun range to start. That goes for birds as well.
If I'm protecting myself from the buggerman I see NO need to shoot him that many times that fast when I know that 1 or 2 bullets will stop him, make him run or kill the poor bastard.
Just my take on that type of assult weapon.
Sue
I'm sure everyone here knows this but as a reminder, the 2nd Amendment isnt about hunting.
It is very easy to obtain body armor now. Pistols and shotguns may not be the best choice to protect your home.

road kill
12-18-2012, 11:10 AM
[QUOTE Originally Posted by road kill ]
Kind of bossey aren't you??

So, then you do NOT beleive in any new legislation to deal with any kind of gun laws (including assault weapons)???

If not, the you agree with me!!!! Can't agree with you Stan. Untill the laws on the books are reviewed and more so fully enforced, no one can say of different or additonal laws are needed. Maybe closing a few loopholes like no backround checks at gun shows, but I see no new laws needed at this time




Gotta find a way Regards

You do understand that I am steadfastly AGAINST any new gun laws, don't you?

I mean you admonish me for my spelling (and misspell words) and my reading skills, then argue with me against gun laws.
Which we agree 100% on..........funny!:confused:

Is it too soon to wish a "MERRY CHRISTMAS???":cool:

paul young
12-18-2012, 11:15 AM
I'm sure everyone here knows this but as a reminder, the 2nd Amendment isnt about hunting.
It is very easy to obtain body armor now. Pistols and shotguns may not be the best choice to protect your home.

There is body armor available to the public to protect your face, head, arms and legs from #4 buckshot (.25) coming out of the muzzle at 1400fps at 10 yards?-Paul

road kill
12-18-2012, 11:26 AM
There is body armor available to the public to protect your face, head, arms and legs from #4 buckshot (.25) coming out of the muzzle at 1400fps at 10 yards?-Paul
I would hate to get a 3.5" #2 Black Cloud in the face!!!!

RetrieverNation
12-18-2012, 11:39 AM
So lets assume its year 2020 and there are no guns in America as of today. Back in 2012 assault rifles were used in mass kilings but since then, most wackos are using grandpa's shotgun, moms purse derringer and dads service revolver. So in 2020, we outlaw all guns. How will these wackos carry out their demonic attacks? I can think of a few right off the top:
1. Fill moms car with open buckets of gas and drive into something while igniting it.
2. do a mass poisoning? seems to be popular in countries with no guns.
3. make home made pipe bombs from products gathered at a local hardware store.

I think once guns are outlawed, the list of other outlawed items will grow exponentially.

Why are rational people (at least most of you are) trying to come up with rational ideas on how to solve this? If your not a wacko, you need to think like a wacko in order to solve this. No one in a state of mind like that is going to think to themselves "gee, there are no guns available so I guess I just have to deal with it and not kill anyone!"

For all the hard work this group does to figure out how better to communicate with their dogs, you would think we would apply the same to the twisted, deranged, wacko, pshyco's out there. Anyone who thinks they can solve this problem without understanding this is a fool in my book.

2tall
12-18-2012, 11:42 AM
For you Stan,

From the Urban Dictionary:



Secular Progressive
60 up (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Secular%20Progressive#), 95 down (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Secular%20Progressive#)



A term coined by FoxNews' Bill O'Reilly to describe liberals in a negative way as a means to perpetuate the conservative myth that all liberals are evil and want to destroy America as we know it.

A thinly veiled attempt to further divide our country in a time of national crisis in order to solidify the conservative base of "Traditionalists" as described by Mr. O'Reilly.




Cary, are you saying the term "McCarthyites" is not real? Or referring to them as "Boy Scouts" is a cliche? Sorry, don't get your argument there.

Somehow the murder of 20 children has become another lib vs con name-calling fest. I hate that. Our problems are so much deeper than gun legislation.

Franco
12-18-2012, 11:42 AM
I was responding to another question Buzz.
I agree, I don't beleive we should ask teachers to be armed.
If we are serious, we should look at the model of security at schools that has been successful.
Who might that be??

Oh, yeah, the Israeli's.:cool:

My feeling is that if a teacher is qualified to have a Carry permit that they should have the Right to have it in the classroom, out of sight. That they have the Right to protect themselves just like any other law abiding citizen. We can NOT require this of all teachers becasue some will go into a anxiety attack at the sight of a pistol while others are well adapted in the handling of firearms. It is about choices.

paul young
12-18-2012, 11:46 AM
So lets assume there are no guns in America as of today. How will these wackos carry out their demonic attacks? I can think of a few right off the top:
1.

Getting rid of the weapons won't help; the very first murder was documented in the Old Testament - one brother strangling the other. Murder has to do with what is in your heart and soul, not what is in your hands.-Paul

zeus3925
12-18-2012, 11:58 AM
Stan; I object to your characterization of Democrats. I am proudly a Democrat and proudly a gun owner. I plan to keep those two facts true until the day I die!!

Wikipedia:

Progressivism is a general political philosophy advocating or favoring gradual social, political, and economic reform. Modern Progressivism emerged as part of a more general response to the vast social changes brought by industrialization.

It is left of center in the political spectrum and is to be contrasted with conservatism on the right and the revolutionary left, the former generally resisting changes it advocates and the latter rejecting its gradualism.

The political fault line here is not Dems /Repubs , or Lib/Cons. It is more urban/ rural.

caryalsobrook
12-18-2012, 12:15 PM
For you Stan,

From the Urban Dictionary:



Secular Progressive
60 up (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Secular%20Progressive#), 95 down (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Secular%20Progressive#)



A term coined by FoxNews' Bill O'Reilly to describe liberals in a negative way as a means to perpetuate the conservative myth that all liberals are evil and want to destroy America as we know it.

A thinly veiled attempt to further divide our country in a time of national crisis in order to solidify the conservative base of "Traditionalists" as described by Mr. O'Reilly.




Cary, are you saying the term "McCarthyites" is not real? Or referring to them as "Boy Scouts" is a cliche? Sorry, don't get your argument there.

Somehow the murder of 20 children has become another lib vs con name-calling fest. I hate that. Our problems are so much deeper than gun legislation.

I was referring to your condemnation of catch phrases and slogans. The pot calling the kettle black don't you think? As for the urban dictionary, given it's definition of Secular Progressive, I would have about as much faith in it as I would a German Arian dictionary, ZERO!! The myth would be that all conservatives believe that progressives want to destroy the country and that all progressives believe that conservatives are "mean spirited and want to kill old people and women". These phrases as well as your McCarthyite- Boy Scout slogan are catch phrases which in effect drives the wedge even deeper, something you so heartily object to. Hopefully, this makes my thoughts more clear.

BonMallari
12-18-2012, 12:21 PM
Stan; I object to your characterization of Democrats. I am proudly a Democrat and proudly a gun owner. I plan to keep those two facts true until the day I die!!

Wikipedia:


The political fault line here is not Dems /Repubs , or Lib/Cons. It is more urban/ rural.


Finally....someone else thinks that the gun issue is not a D vs R or Lib vs Con

for many including those of us here on the RTF, guns are part of our lifestyle and outdoor activities

for many including those on the RTF, their use for guns goes no further than needing one to shoot the flyer in the first series of the test/trial

I get that some on here dont think that "assault type weapons" are necessary in society, but it leads to a slippery slope when you start banning weapons

dixidawg
12-18-2012, 12:30 PM
Right. "Assault type weapons" are magazine fed semi autos. Nothing more, nothing less.

road kill
12-18-2012, 12:32 PM
Stan; I object to your characterization of Democrats. I am proudly a Democrat and proudly a gun owner. I plan to keep those two facts true until the day I die!!

Wikipedia:



Progressivism is a general political philosophy advocating or favoring gradual social, political, and economic reform. Modern Progressivism emerged as part of a more general response to the vast social changes brought by industrialization.

It is left of center in the political spectrum and is to be contrasted with conservatism on the right and the revolutionary left, the former generally resisting changes it advocates and the latter rejecting its gradualism.


The political fault line here is not Dems /Repubs , or Lib/Cons. It is more urban/ rural.
I have heard Obama describe himself as being a progressive.
So has Bill Clinton.

I also know the difference between a Democrat and a progressive.
I also include George Bush in the progressive movement.

I have used the term for some time.

Maybe O'Reilly got it from me.

Many of you KNOW I have used that term for years.
Secular was added when your parties convention attendees booed God.

Progressives want your guns.
And eventually (incrementally) they will get them.
I just saw Nancy Pelosi on Andrea Mitchell's show saying we should outlaw all assault weapons immediately, for the children!!!
Nancy Pelosi would be the reigning Queen of "incremental secular progresivism

luvmylabs23139
12-18-2012, 12:37 PM
The worst school mass murder in the US did not involve firearms. In 1927 38 children plus several adults were murdered at an elementary school. The murderer blew up the school.

2tall
12-18-2012, 01:33 PM
I was referring to your condemnation of catch phrases and slogans. The pot calling the kettle black don't you think? As for the urban dictionary, given it's definition of Secular Progressive, I would have about as much faith in it as I would a German Arian dictionary, ZERO!! The myth would be that all conservatives believe that progressives want to destroy the country and that all progressives believe that conservatives are "mean spirited and want to kill old people and women". These phrases as well as your McCarthyite- Boy Scout slogan are catch phrases which in effect drives the wedge even deeper, something you so heartily object to. Hopefully, this makes my thoughts more clear.

I quoted the Urban Dictionary as it is the only one I could find with a definition. You guys did not accept or did not understand when I broke the term down and gave the def for its parts. As far as the bolded quotes, I certainly agree that they are the type of catch phrases and fear/hate mongering I despise. McCarthy used many such comments to further his own agenda. And I am sorry if you consider my use of Boy Scouts to represent what is good and decent too cliched.

charly_t
12-18-2012, 01:34 PM
I was responding to another question Buzz.
I agree, I don't beleive we should ask teachers to be armed.
If we are serious, we should look at the model of security at schools that has been successful.
Who might that be??

Oh, yeah, the Israeli's.:cool:

My youngest son mentioned that model of security this last week-end as a good one.

road kill
12-18-2012, 01:43 PM
I quoted the Urban Dictionary as it is the only one I could find with a definition. You guys did not accept or did not understand when I broke the term down and gave the def for its parts. As far as the bolded quotes, I certainly agree that they are the type of catch phrases and fear/hate mongering I despise. McCarthy used many such comments to further his own agenda. And I am sorry if you consider my use of Boy Scouts to represent what is good and decent too cliched.
So, there are no secular progressives and they have no agenda?
Even though Obama and Bill Clinton have described themselves as such?

And the secular progressives don't play on any fear mongering. oh, say between races and classes?
(I believe it was Joe Biden that mentioned "chains")

charly_t
12-18-2012, 01:45 PM
Versus you advocating we live in an unarmed camp????:cool:

I recommend that our military be used as school guards ( with very high level screening before giving this job to anyone ). I think that you have brought up a very good point.

P.S. spelling again .....well actually not hitting keys hard enough.

zeus3925
12-18-2012, 01:46 PM
Progressives want your guns.
And eventually (incrementally) they will get them.



That like the corollary argument that all Republicans want to close out public hunting lands and drill any that's left. Both statements are gross exaggerations, Stan.

road kill
12-18-2012, 01:55 PM
That like the corollary argument is that all Republicans want to close out public hunting lands and drill any that's left. Both statements are gross exaggerations, Stan.
No, I beleive the secular progressives claim the Republicans want to starve and kill (push granny off of a cliff).
And they beleive that.

Or you to denying the existance of the group when Obama and Clinton both have described themselves as such?

zeuss, you may well be a JFK Democrat, or a HHH Democrat, but in my travels, there are not many of you left.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are not Democrats.
Read about progressivism.....then listen to Obama's speech about "fundamentally transforming America" and tell me that is not the very definition of progressivism.

Sorry, I know what I see and hear.
You may not like it, resulting in distasteful comments coming my way, but it's OK. I have been thru worse.:D

I do respect where you are, you traveled many roads to get there.
I find it amusing that progressives (those that support progressivism and it's disciples) bristle at the identification of what they stand for.

And, you will ultimately win.

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 01:59 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcbvoIrqpz8

road kill
12-18-2012, 02:11 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcbvoIrqpz8
"incremental secular progressivism" personified.

(even though there is no such thing!!);-)

M&K's Retrievers
12-18-2012, 02:21 PM
The issue is not shooting at 250 yards. There aren't too many 250 yard shots to make inside a school.

I am against arming teachers. I have no problem with hiring trained & armed security for schools. Putting a gun in everyone's hands isn't the answer. I have a permit to carry but I don't feel really comfortable about it, but I do it when I'm traveling alone.

Me too or when I'm with someone.

cotts135
12-18-2012, 02:47 PM
Do you really beleive that eliminating these weapons will solve this issue??
This is based on whipped up emotion and not letting a tragedy go to waste.
"Rules for Radicals."

I guaruntee you I can out shoot a bushmaster .223 at 250 yards with some weapons I own.
And the calibers are much larger than a .223.

This is a false equivalency your promoting here. Does it matter what caliber it is if it's killing humans? Yeah I agree with you that it is a small caliber in the larger scope of things and not something you would try to knock down a Rhino with, but for humans it is deadly efficient.

road kill
12-18-2012, 02:54 PM
This is a false equivalency your promoting here. Does it matter what caliber it is if it's killing humans? Yeah I agree with you that it is a small caliber in the larger scope of things and not something you would try to knock down a Rhino with, but for humans it is deadly efficient.
These weapons are identified in the state run media as "HIGH POWERED."

That is incorrect.
If I had posted that you would be correcting me immediately.
These are NOT High powered rifles.
That was my point.

Your side always has to exagerate to fluff up a weak point.

Make all the laws you want.
Outlaws will not even read them.

coachmo
12-18-2012, 03:07 PM
Cotts135, so exactly what caliber would not be effective for hunting humans? I'm thinking any (and I emphasize any) caliber gun can be potentially deadly when targeting human beings. The one SMALL point that some people fail to realize or admit is a mentally-deranged individual (not the gun) did the unimaginable when he made a decision to kill innocent children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School. I'm really not sure if the caliber of gun made that much of a difference. This atrocity was done by a mad-man who choose to use guns as his instruments of destruction instead of explosives, a knife, his car, etc.

caryalsobrook
12-18-2012, 04:01 PM
I quoted the Urban Dictionary as it is the only one I could find with a definition. You guys did not accept or did not understand when I broke the term down and gave the def for its parts. As far as the bolded quotes, I certainly agree that they are the type of catch phrases and fear/hate mongering I despise. McCarthy used many such comments to further his own agenda. And I am sorry if you consider my use of Boy Scouts to represent what is good and decent too cliched.



It would appear to me that your McCarthy- Boy Scout phrase in order to vilify O'Reilly is exactly the type of phrase-slogan that you profess to despise. That is what I meant by the pot calling the kettle black. Given the supposed definition of Secular Progressive by the so called urban dictionary, I would rate it right up there with the Arian Nation, no better and no worse.

2tall
12-18-2012, 04:27 PM
I give up Cary. I admit to being completely confused by your comments on my comments. I don't even know O'Reilly, much less vilify him.. The definition provided by urban dictionary is the only one I found when looking it up. As to comparing "Arian nation" to secular progressives...... Just mystified. Carry on.

caryalsobrook
12-18-2012, 04:50 PM
Finally....someone else thinks that the gun issue is not a D vs R or Lib vs Con

for many including those of us here on the RTF, guns are part of our lifestyle and outdoor activities

for many including those on the RTF, their use for guns goes no further than needing one to shoot the flyer in the first series of the test/trial

I get that some on here dont think that "assault type weapons" are necessary in society, but it leads to a slippery slope when you start banning weapons

The issue, no matter whether it be gun rights, homosexual rights, labor rights, ect., is really individual freedoms as opposed to collective rights. Many solutions have been offered here and all have been criticised. That is to be expected for there is no perfect solution. Does anyone really doubt that each and every one of us want children protected, sheltered, nurtured, and raised free of such fear at so young an age? Many here grew up hiding under desks during nuclear war drills. I'm sure our parents were sad that we had to experience such things. Each person here sincerely believes that their solution is the best possible and I respect that. I have no idea why one would want to kill 20 kindergarten children. I don't even know the difference between an assault weapon and one that is not.

This is truly an issue of how we deal with each other, how we respect each other and communicate in a civil manner willing to disaagree but also willing to tolerate each's opinion. Could we talk about what doesn't work and what can work best in a civil manner?

zeus3925
12-18-2012, 06:26 PM
No, I beleive the secular progressives claim the Republicans want to starve and kill (push granny off of a cliff).
And they beleive that.

Or you to denying the existance of the group when Obama and Clinton both have described themselves as such?

zeuss, you may well be a JFK Democrat, or a HHH Democrat, but in my travels, there are not many of you left.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are not Democrats.
Read about progressivism.....then listen to Obama's speech about "fundamentally transforming America" and tell me that is not the very definition of progressivism.

Sorry, I know what I see and hear.
You may not like it, resulting in distasteful comments coming my way, but it's OK. I have been thru worse.:D

I do respect where you are, you traveled many roads to get there.
I find it amusing that progressives (those that support progressivism and it's disciples) bristle at the identification of what they stand for.

And, you will ultimately win.
Ultimately you know Stan that each party has acquired adherents by accident or design that grade from moderate to extreme.

However, the society is dynamic. It ain't your father's USA of the 50's. Things were a lot more innocent and holy, then. But that died on a November day in 1963 in Dallas.

The society is in a state of constant change. I believe government must respond to that change. But it must also adhere to its core principals of providing the bare minimum of regulation to preserve order and yet provide the maximum freedom and opportunity for all. It must innovate as the business place innovates to survive. It must also be prepare to back down when innovation doesn't work. Does that make me a Progressive? I don't know.

Dustin D
12-18-2012, 08:37 PM
From the FBI Website;

Please note that 'Knives or cutting instruments' are used 4x more than Rifles in murders.


http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll312/dhessco/MurderGunsStatistics_zps244f1854.jpg

huntinman
12-18-2012, 10:55 PM
I was trying to keep you from looking uneducated about firearms http://forum.qip.ru/images/smilies/pardon.gif

Too late...

huntinman
12-18-2012, 11:03 PM
My feeling is that if a teacher is qualified to have a Carry permit that they should have the Right to have it in the classroom, out of sight. That they have the Right to protect themselves just like any other law abiding citizen. We can NOT require this of all teachers becasue some will go into a anxiety attack at the sight of a pistol while others are well adapted in the handling of firearms. It is about choices.

Agree 100%.......

Sue Kiefer
12-18-2012, 11:34 PM
And where does this teacher store or put this weapon of protection???? In his desk draw perhaps and locked of coarse so that his/her students doen't accidentally open it .
Next picture the next idiot that blasts his way into the school..........................
"If" this draw is indeed locked how much time do you think it will take for this teacher to go to his/her desk, find the key ,open the desk and pull out this weapon of protection before the next idiot starts shootin up his/her classroom with his automatic weapon of his choice.??
My understanding was that these assult weapons were developed during wartime to kill as many enemies as possible.
Does anyone think that our forefathers had these types of weapons in mind when they wrote the 2nd amendment???
My understaning of the shooter was that he was mentally disturbed. So my question is why did his mother take him to the gun range? and how did he have access to her guns? why did she have such a large arsenal of weapons and ammo? Did she need that many to protect herself or was this mother a gun collector?
Many questions?
Sue

BonMallari
12-19-2012, 12:20 AM
And where does this teacher store or put this weapon of protection???? In his desk draw perhaps and locked of coarse so that his/her students doen't accidentally open it .
Next picture the next idiot that blasts his way into the school..........................
"If" this draw is indeed locked how much time do you think it will take for this teacher to go to his/her desk, find the key ,open the desk and pull out this weapon of protection before the next idiot starts shootin up his/her classroom with his automatic weapon of his choice.??
My understanding was that these assult weapons were developed during wartime to kill as many enemies as possible.
Does anyone think that our forefathers had these types of weapons in mind when they wrote the 2nd amendment???

the founding fathers also didnt account for a man like John M Browning to come along and invent the tyoe of weaponry, heck they didnt even think about Samuel Colt either

of course not but then again they didnt exactly think about the internet when they drafted the First Amendment either


My understaning of the shooter was that he was mentally disturbed. So my question is why did his mother take him to the gun range?

One report was that his mother would do just about anything to indulge and coddle her son, but that has not been substantiated


and how did he have access to her guns? why did she have such a large arsenal of weapons and ammo? Did she need that many to protect herself or was this mother a gun collector?
Many questions?

You are correct, there are MANY questions...that is why its so disturbing that people are so quick to call for anti gun legislation without hearing all the facts....Had he not killed his mother would be looking to hold her accountable for his actions since she purchased the weapons
Sue


My responses in blue....

The only facts we know for sure are that 27 people lost their life needlessly ( sorry cant add the shooter to that number)..my blood boils and my heart aches when I think about what that little twerp did, he can't die enough deaths in hell to satisfy me

Brandoned
12-19-2012, 06:13 AM
And where does this teacher store or put this weapon of protection???? In his desk draw perhaps and locked of coarse so that his/her students doen't accidentally open it .
Next picture the next idiot that blasts his way into the school..........................
"If" this draw is indeed locked how much time do you think it will take for this teacher to go to his/her desk, find the key ,open the desk and pull out this weapon of protection before the next idiot starts shootin up his/her classroom with his automatic weapon of his choice.??
My understanding was that these assult weapons were developed during wartime to kill as many enemies as possible.
Does anyone think that our forefathers had these types of weapons in mind when they wrote the 2nd amendment???
My understaning of the shooter was that he was mentally disturbed. So my question is why did his mother take him to the gun range? and how did he have access to her guns? why did she have such a large arsenal of weapons and ammo? Did she need that many to protect herself or was this mother a gun collector?
Many questions?
Sue

Sue, can you please tell me when the last time anyone used a Automatic weapon in a crime??? I think you need to find out what the difference in semi-auto and full auto is, because trust me it is big! Anyone that says thereís not a difference has never shot a full auto like I have many, many times! Also if you use a full auto weapon in a crime, you get an automatic 5 years added to your sentence, even if the gun is obtained legally. Trust me I have paperwork with a $200 ATF stamp on it that explains that very, very clearly. So people like myself take offense to people saying "a fully automatic weapon was used." Because I can assure you the people who will actually pay the price for a full auto and go through the legal process (6+ month wait) are some of the most responsible gun owners there are.

Now to try and answer your question, yes I would think the gun would need to be locked up in the teachers room so that kids who are not brought around guns would not get their hands on it. I was brought up around guns from day one, I was also taught by my dad that if I touched any of those guns that I would get my butt whipped. Sad to say but I don't think that is the way most kids are brought up today. I would think that in the Sandy Hook case, teachers would have had enough time to get their gun out of a locked storage.

I am not saying that a gun would have saved everyone at the school on that horrible day, but even if it could have saved one personís life, don't you think that it just might be worth it?

I also would not call what she had as a "large arsenal of weapons." I think the liberal media considers anyone that has more than one or two guns as having a "large arsenal." Believe it or not there are a lot of people like myself that were brought up shooting guns for fun and through the years have bought many different guns for shooting. I personally do not have any AR style rifles, but I also don't have anything against responsible gun owners owning them either.

I have not heard an exact amount on how much ammo she actually had at her house, only speculation. However I myself have what would be considered way too much ammo by most people. I started buying up ammo several years ago when ammo was starting to go in short supply and the prices started going through the roof! It is really know different than someone going to the store and stocking up on items because they hear the prices are going up and there could be a shortage in the future on that exact item.

Remember the media are the ones that labeled AR and AK rifles as "Assault Rifles," they are shot by thousands and thousands of people every day and somehow manage not to assault people. Calling them assault rifles is about as fair as it would be for me to call your dog mean because he/she is a golden and I don't like the way goldenís look. For the record I like goldenís.

Oh yea one last thing, I do agree with you on one thing. I do not think that our founding fathers had weapons of the future in mind when the wrote the 2nd Amendment. BUT I also don't think they had the internet, social media, etc, etc in mind when they wrote the 1st Amendment and we all know how that gets abused every day, but I guess that is ok?

road kill
12-19-2012, 06:25 AM
Sue, can you please tell me when the last time anyone used a Automatic weapon in a crime??? I think you need to find out what the difference in semi-auto and full auto is, because trust me it is big! Anyone that says thereís not a difference has never shot a full auto like I have many, many times! Also if you use a full auto weapon in a crime, you get an automatic 5 years added to your sentence, even if the gun is obtained legally. Trust me I have paperwork with a $200 ATF stamp on it that explains that very, very clearly. So people like myself take offense to people saying "a fully automatic weapon was used." Because I can assure you the people who will actually pay the price for a full auto and go through the legal process (6+ month wait) are some of the most responsible gun owners there are.

Now to try and answer your question, yes I would think the gun would need to be locked up in the teachers room so that kids who are not brought around guns would not get their hands on it. I was brought up around guns from day one, I was also taught by my dad that if I touched any of those guns that I would get my butt whipped. Sad to say but I don't think that is the way most kids are brought up today. I would think that in the Sandy Hook case, teachers would have had enough time to get their gun out of a locked storage.

I am not saying that a gun would have saved everyone at the school on that horrible day, but even if it could have saved one personís life, don't you think that it just might be worth it?

I also would not call what she had as a "large arsenal of weapons." I think the liberal media considers anyone that has more than one or two guns as having a "large arsenal." Believe it or not there are a lot of people like myself that were brought up shooting guns for fun and through the years have bought many different guns for shooting. I personally do not have any AR style rifles, but I also don't have anything against responsible gun owners owning them either.

I have not heard an exact amount on how much ammo she actually had at her house, only speculation. However I myself have what would be considered way too much ammo by most people. I started buying up ammo several years ago when ammo was starting to go in short supply and the prices started going through the roof! It is really know different than someone going to the store and stocking up on items because they hear the prices are going up and there could be a shortage in the future on that exact item.

Remember the media are the ones that labeled AR and AK rifles as "Assault Rifles," they are shot by thousands and thousands of people every day and somehow manage not to assault people. Calling them assault rifles is about as fair as it would be for me to call your dog mean because he/she is a golden and I don't like the way goldenís look. For the record I like goldenís.

Oh yea one last thing, I do agree with you on one thing. I do not think that our founding fathers had weapons of the future in mind when the wrote the 2nd Amendment. BUT I also don't think they had the internet, social media, etc, etc in mind when they wrote the 1st Amendment and we all know how that gets abused every day, but I guess that is ok?
The liberals always exagerate to prop up a weak point!

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 06:52 AM
And where does this teacher store or put this weapon of protection???? In his desk draw perhaps and locked of coarse so that his/her students doen't accidentally open it .

Presumably, the teacher would have a concealed weapon permit. Concealed means concealed. "Storage" would be in aholster or in a pocket.

As for much orf the rest of your post, please take 10 minutes to watch this older video that explains auto vs semi auto and the difficulty of even trying to define what an "assault" weapon really is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8)

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 07:01 AM
And where does this teacher store or put this weapon of protection???? In his desk draw perhaps and locked of coarse so that his/her students doen't accidentally open it .


It's called Biometric Finger Print Gun Safes. Not even your son or daughters finger print will work. Only Yours!

http://images2.opticsplanet.com/365-240-ffffff/opplanet-gunvault-speedvault-biometric-pistol-safe-svb500-v2.jpg
http://www.rangemastertacticalgear.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/GunVault-Gun-Safes.gif




So of course the teacher whose class the Active Shooter chooses to START on, well that teacher is obviously going to have to be quick, God Speed. BUT At least the REST OF THE SCHOOL can be prepared upon hearing the first gun shot.


Now as far as the 'kid' as folks keep saying, being mental. He was 20 years old with Aspergers maybe. He's not some 8 yr old that doesn't have the mental aptitude to know how to get access to the Gun Safe. 20 yrs old, you know 2+ years older than 70% of our Countries Military Service members that we trust with all sorts of responsibilities. He wasn't some turd head little kid he was a young man.

My Dad sure didnít keep guns laying around the house either, but I saw where he hid the key one time too when I was around 10. You guys act like he was a mental headcase. He wasnít. Aspergers is not to be confused with mental illness. In fact in some cases, Aspergers folks are quite the genius.

Maybe most folks here donít really know much about Asperger.

mngundog
12-19-2012, 08:11 AM
It's called Biometric Finger Print Gun Safes. Not even your son or daughters finger print will work. Only Yours!

http://images2.opticsplanet.com/365-240-ffffff/opplanet-gunvault-speedvault-biometric-pistol-safe-svb500-v2.jpg
http://www.rangemastertacticalgear.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/GunVault-Gun-Safes.gif




So of course the teacher whose class the Active Shooter chooses to START on, well that teacher is obviously going to have to be quick, God Speed. BUT At least the REST OF THE SCHOOL can be prepared upon hearing the first gun shot.


Now as far as the 'kid' as folks keep saying, being mental. He was 20 years old with Aspergers maybe. He's not some 8 yr old that doesn't have the mental aptitude to know how to get access to the Gun Safe. 20 yrs old, you know 2+ years older than 70% of our Countries Military Service members that we trust with all sorts of responsibilities. He wasn't some turd head little kid he was a young man.

My Dad sure didn’t keep guns laying around the house either, but I saw where he hid the key one time too when I was around 10. You guys act like he was a mental headcase. He wasn’t. Aspergers is not to be confused with mental illness. In fact in some cases, Aspergers folks are quite the genius.

Maybe most folks here don’t really know much about Asperger.


Unless the kids have access to youtube. These safe can be broken into in about 1 minute. As stated before permit to carry, means the person is carrying it on their person.

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 08:21 AM
You guys act like he was a mental headcase. He wasnít. Aspergers is not to be confused with mental illness. In fact in some cases, Aspergers folks are quite the genius.

Maybe most folks here donít really know much about Asperger.


Not so sure about that. Yes he may have had Asperger's, but I'm betting he also had a LOT of other issues too. Reportedly he never had ANY friends, and this morning on the radio it was reported he was on the verge of being committed.

mngundog
12-19-2012, 08:23 AM
Those gun safes are easily broken into, they have the videos of how to do it on youtube, rest assured if they used those safes you mentioned 8 year olds would get a hold of the gun that was in it. The bottom safe in you picture is simply broken into by sticking a bent piece of wire through the tiny holes on the side and hitting the reset button.

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 08:26 AM
Unless the kids have access to youtube. These safe can be broken into in about 1 minute. As stated before permit to carry, means the person is carrying it on their person.

Actually there's like 2 videos from the same guy on the same CHEAP Safe. Like anything, buy cheap and pay the price.

You can't bounce open the Name Brand Bio-Safes, either way who's getting into it? The scenarios are endless. Like has been said too, if the teachers can carry, that's what they should be doing, carrying.

The Bio-Safe is just an idea for certain situations.



Not so sure about that. Yes he may have had Asperger's, but I'm betting he also had a LOT of other issues too. Reportedly he never had ANY friends, and this morning on the radio it was reported he was on the verge of being committed.

There's plenty of STUFF floating around out there but the facts is something we really don't know. He did have friends a few of them were interviewed.

Golddogs
12-19-2012, 09:16 AM
Interesting take on the subject.


Madmen donít need assault rifles ó and we donít either

The word ďneedĒ becomes carefully parsed by gun owners on high alert for people who use the word ďneedĒ as it pertains to owning a so-called assault rifle.

If I were to say, for example, that you ó meaning the lot of us ó donít need a high-capacity magazine for purposes of holding as much ammunition as possible to spend as quickly as possible to inflict as much damage as possible, I would be met with, and have been, by people saying, ďWell, you donít need a car.Ē Yes, I do.

And I am perfectly willing to agree that you ó meaning whoever is legally qualified ó need to own a gun. They are useful tools to own.

So, and keeping in mind we are trying to get our heads
around the unknowable horror of Sandy Hook Elementary School, let us agree that I need a car and you need a gun, or that I need a gun and you need a car.

What I donít need is a car with a jet engine bolted to the roof.

I need a car because the bus doesnít suit my schedule or the train isnít ready yet or because I have to haul equipment for my landscaping business, or, well, the reasons are endless why we need cars. Like a gun, they are useful tools to own. But I donít need a car that eclipses the boundary of what is reasonably thought to be the purpose of the invention in the first place.

With a jet engine bolted to the roof, I could probably get from here to Duluth in about six minutes, but that isnít what a car is for. Not to mention that I probably would be in violation of a dozen laws.

Because it is possible, I suppose, to order a jet engine from Pratt & Whitney and then figure out how to bolt it to the roof of my car doesnít mean that it would be something I would do. That takes me from need to want, or wanton.

The 20-year-old disturbed and, yes, evil man who showed up at Sandy Hook Elementary School showed up with a jet engine.

Limiting magazine capacity wonít stop evil. Limiting guns wonít stop evil. There are always bombs, knives, clubs and rocks.

But good and responsible gun owners have to know that Sandy Hook is a game changer. The children were shredded.

I believe the nation owes those children and their parents a heartfelt reckoning. And because they are good and responsible, gun owners can lead the way, getting out in front of the politicians.

The country seems to be divided into two factions. On the one side are the people who wish to ban assault rifles, meaning a weapon that fires, semiautomatically, a bullet with each squeeze of the trigger. On the other side are those who would wish to ban gun-free zones so that teachers and principals and theater managers and mall cops be armed so that they can intervene in the event that evil shows its face.

Well, we are not going to get rid of guns and we are not going to be free from evil and mental illness and alienation and lost souls. So where are we? Maybe we should tone down the equipment, limiting the ability of madness to commit mayhem with jet engines.

Magazines with less capacity ó I donít even know the number ó do not threaten my liberty nor do they corrupt the Second Amendment, written with a quill pen at a time when the equipment was a musket. Good and responsible gun owners are not interested in committing mayhem, anyway. They certainly donít need the capacity to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. Nor does evil.

Slippery slope? No. There are an estimated 300 million guns in America. They cannot and will not be taken. Nor should they be.

I need a car, up to and including a Ferrari, if I could afford one. But I donít need a jet engine bolted to it.

Joe Soucheray can be reached at jsoucheray@pioneerpress.com or 651- 228-5474. Soucheray can be heard from 3 to 6 p. m. weekdays on 1500ESPN.

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 09:25 AM
I missed the part of the constitution that guarantees you the right to have a car.

I also missed the part of the constitution where you had to justify need to exercise a civil right.

Sue Kiefer
12-19-2012, 09:43 AM
My thoughts exactly with regards to the "jet" engine.
I could care less if you have a million guns more power to ya. I know some people that collect other things. I too was raised around guns(shotguns and deer rifles)My dad would have kicked all our asses "If" we should even look at his gun cabinet. But given what the teachers are limited to do with regards to discipline in the classrooms that spanking or ass kicking will never happened "If" Johnny breaks open the teachers desk draw.
And as far as teachers' walking around with guns in holsters like John Wayne ???
Are you kidding me?
Beefed up security yes, gun- toting teachers ???
My whole family are teachers from elementary -secondary to special ed. I hear what they go through everytime we all get together.
I'm just hoping that folks don't forget that 20 little babies lives were lost last Friday as well 6 heroes trying to protect them.
It's NOT about politics it's about them.
Sue

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 09:53 AM
Why do you think the 2nd Amendment exist?

zeus3925
12-19-2012, 10:24 AM
Those of you that want to tote your guns into a school building might consider a few things:
1. These mass murderers are not rational. The presence of guns that may or may not be there doesn't fit into their calculus. Most of them are intent on killing themselves or committing suicide by justice. They want to do it in dramatic fashion by taking as many people with them. The risk of them getting shot is no deterrent.

2.A shooter is more likely to determine that any adult maybe carrying heat and the first on that may go down is you before you can react.

3.The chances that you blunder into one of these situations is practically nil. You are far more likely to get struck by lightening. But, lets say you just happen to be in the building to pick up your kid and some gun play breaks out. You ride to the rescue and commence a gun battle as law enforcement arrives. You have a gun. They know there is a active incident and they see you with your heater out. Your next job may be growing the daisies at Forestlawn.

4. Arming teachers is no solution either. Any teacher that is worth, their salt develops an emotional bond to their students. I have been a teacher and I know for a fact that if one of my stray bullets hit a kid I could not live with that. Besides, you want to pay the court judgement for the liability for an armed teacher's misdirected shot? I didn't think so.

5. More guns in a classroom is a moronic solution whose time should never come. More lead flying around in civilian hands is only an occasion for more death and destruction. If an armed presence is necessary for a school, put it in the hands of a well trained constabulary, not some Walter Mitty who thinks that handgun in his pocket makes him an instant savior of the universe.

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 10:37 AM
I believe that they DO deliberately choose a venue where they can do the most destruction with the least possibility of resistance. It is not a coincidence that so many of these happen in schools. Yes things can go wrong. But things can and do go right when citizens are armed. It should be the CITIZENS choice as to whether or not they are willing or able to take on the responsibility of being armed. On school property or otherwise.


I just don't understand how we prepare for most other emergency with fire extinguishers, CPR training etc, yet we explicitly prohibit the one tool that could end the emergency.

zeus3925
12-19-2012, 10:53 AM
They also happen in post offices, factories, shopping malls, college dorms, movie theaters --even in Russia.

Bottom line, son, you walk into my classroom with a gun and you will damn well find out why they call me "Sarge". Our government gives us rights in the constitution but that doesn't mean you should do it in all instances. Just because you have $500 e-collar doesn't mean you should go ahead and get $500 worth of use out of it.

road kill
12-19-2012, 11:15 AM
Those of you that want to tote your guns into a school building might consider a few things:
1. These mass murderers are not rational. The presence of guns that may or may not be there doesn't fit into their calculus. Most of them are intent on killing themselves or committing suicide by justice. They want to do it in dramatic fashion by taking as many people with them. The risk of them getting shot is no deterrent.

2.A shooter is more likely to determine that any adult maybe carrying heat and the first on that may go down is you before you can react.

3.The chances that you blunder into one of these situations is practically nil. You are far more likely to get struck by lightening. But, lets say you just happen to be in the building to pick up your kid and some gun play breaks out. You ride to the rescue and commence a gun battle as law enforcement arrives. You have a gun. They know there is a active incident and they see you with your heater out. Your next job may be growing the daisies at Forestlawn.

4. Arming teachers is no solution either. Any teacher that is worth, their salt develops an emotional bond to their students. I have been a teacher and I know for a fact that if one of my stray bullets hit a kid I could not live with that. Besides, you want to pay the court judgement for the liability for an armed teacher's misdirected shot? I didn't think so.

5. More guns in a classroom is a moronic solution whose time should never come. More lead flying around in civilian hands is only an occasion for more death and destruction. If an armed presence is necessary for a school, put it in the hands of a well trained constabulary, not some Walter Mitty who thinks that handgun in his pocket makes him an instant savior of the universe.

I'm gonna go with zeuss here.
I don't think guns in the classrooms, teachers or otherwise, solves anything.
It creates potential for some serious "unintended consequences!"

There is EVIL in the world, you can not legislate it away.

Cold hard truth.

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 11:20 AM
1. These mass murderers are not rational. The presence of guns that may or may not be there doesn't fit into their calculus. Most of them are intent on killing themselves or committing suicide by justice. They want to do it in dramatic fashion by taking as many people with them. The risk of them getting shot is no deterrent.

2.A shooter is more likely to determine that any adult maybe carrying heat and the first on that may go down is you before you can react.

3.The chances that you blunder into one of these situations is practically nil. You are far more likely to get struck by lightening. But, lets say you just happen to be in the building to pick up your kid and some gun play breaks out. You ride to the rescue and commence a gun battle as law enforcement arrives. You have a gun. They know there is a active incident and they see you with your heater out. Your next job may be growing the daisies at Forestlawn.

4. Arming teachers is no solution either. Any teacher that is worth, their salt develops an emotional bond to their students. I have been a teacher and I know for a fact that if one of my stray bullets hit a kid I could not live with that. Besides, you want to pay the court judgement for the liability for an armed teacher's misdirected shot? I didn't think so.

5. More guns in a classroom is a moronic solution whose time should never come. More lead flying around in civilian hands is only an occasion for more death and destruction. If an armed presence is necessary for a school, put it in the hands of a well trained constabulary, not some Walter Mitty who thinks that handgun in his pocket makes him an instant savior of the universe.



You're letting perfect get in the way of good and you also are throwing out mere hypotheticalís to justify a non-response on your end, letís remember that.

First off there have been incidents where armed citizens HAVE ended or stopped Mass Shootings at schools. They're just not as exciting so they don't break headlines.

The fear of being shot by 1st responders is legitimate, however not guaranteed. It's not a factor that should be considered when children are being slaughtered!! It's called sacrifice! You get in the fight and do what you can NOW. If you die doing it, you died a good death in my opinion. If you respond by chance and hear 1st Responders arriving on the scene(Job Over) you holster your weapon and retreat to safety or make contact with the 1st responders etc etc.

Your List;

1 - Not True. These events happen where they can inflict as much damage as EASILY as possible. Hence the reason schools are so effective.(B/c the Government has prohibited Self-Defense in schools). Also if you take a look at these events and HOW/WHEN they end, it's always when the first responders show up or they run out of ammo. Why? B/c getting caught and facing responsibility is NOT part of the plan. The desire is to do mass damage. If that plan is interrupted they quickly END the mission with one to the grape. This has been documented over and over again in almost every Mass Shooting. Almost all mass shootings end b/c they run out of time b/c responders are showing up and they meet resistance.

Nothing spells resistance like Armed Trained Adults shooting BACK AT YOU!

2 - So the Active Shooter will kill all armed adults immediately? Uh No! That's essentially what you're saying. Plus the idea is to have the Shooter fight YOU, at least first before the children.

3 - Answered above. Maybe you can bow out and run away while children are being slaughtered, but that's not in my blood. I'll take the risk of being shot by First Responders if it saves at least 1 Child.

4 - Again the weasels talk. Speak for yourself on Teachers mindsets. You DO NOT make up the majority of how teachers feel, at least not the ones I know. IMO If a Teacher REALLY did care about their children and protecting them they should want the best chance of saving them if an event like this happen. That chance is to escape and evade IF possible but if not to meet the Active Shooter with equal or Greater Force of that in which he is attempting to use. If saving the life on ONE child is accomplished, Court Cost is not the issue.

5 - In this case your initial thought on the Armed Adult getting shot first would ABSOLUTELY be the Armed Guard! If a few teachers and are Principal or assistant is carrying, the Active shooter is in for a surprise. If ONLY the armed guard is the threat, then yea he'll be the first one sought out, now what do you suggest? Lock the doors and wait 5 minutes and 200 rounds later for the Cops to show up right? Yea, right.


It seems as if you know very little about Active Shooters and Firearms Training. You view anyone who carries as some sort of ignorant red neck with a gun completely incapable of using it properly. While that might be the case for some folks it certainly is wrong to blanket everyone with such falsehood. Iíd challenge you to look at your local Police Force. Not bashing Cops, I know and train with plenty but the majority of them are no more proficient with a Firearm than Famer Joe is with his. Much less Trained Adults which is what the suggestion is. Most Police Forces rarely ever train after initial qualification, until of course itís time to Re-Qual.

You also have the 'Head in the Sand' approach. These shootings are effective b/c of people like you. Too scared to face reality and therefore throwing out all these weak scenarios to justify your own inability to do whatís RIGHT while in the mean time setting up fish in a barrel situations and doing NOTHING to solve the problem which is NOT GUNS! Itís PEOPLE! All the.....What if you get shot?.....What if you get fined for a stray bullet?...../ What if instead we just grow some balls and meet Evil on the playing field and smack it in the mouth! That's what needs to really happen,(and HAS HAPPENED successfully in the past) not this pussy-footing around with 6"x6" Metal signs that say "No Guns Allowed.....please"/.


Here is a renowned Firearms Instructor telling it like it is.

*STRONG LANGUAGE WARNING*

Part#1; Nov. 29th (Before the recent Shooting);
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPkARaCVqFo

Part #2; Dec. 14th (Day of)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prS_QpGIB8Q




I believe that they DO deliberately choose a venue where they can do the most destruction with the least possibility of resistance. It is not a coincidence that so many of these happen in schools. Yes things can go wrong. But things can and do go right when citizens are armed. It should be the CITIZENS choice as to whether or not they are willing or able to take on the responsibility of being armed. On school property or otherwise.

I just don't understand how we prepare for most other emergency with fire extinguishers, CPR training etc, yet we explicitly prohibit the one tool that could end the emergency.

Great Post!

zeus3925
12-19-2012, 11:58 AM
Well Dustin I know about firearm training and I did it in an NRA sponsored program. I do know about teacher mind set as I have been one. I take it you have not. I also worked in child protection for 18 years. Before that 8 years in protective services for vulnerable adults. We were never welcome on people's doorstep. If you want to get people ticked off then pull their kids out of the house. I dealt with some pretty bad a$$ed dudes, including murderers, child molesters, crazy people, druggies of all sorts and description. But, I never in those 26 years carried a firearm on the job nor did I feel a need for one.

By the way I do own firearms and I don't wish to see a day when I have to surrender them. But if I am teaching, I am responsible for the education of those charged to me. That makes me the captain of that "ship". It is my right to declare my classroom a no gun zone, if and when I feel it to be appropriate.

I am not after your firearms, but, don't bring your guns to my school.

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 12:23 PM
They also happen in post offices, factories, shopping malls, college dorms, movie theaters --even in Russia.

Bottom line, son, you walk into my classroom with a gun and you will damn well find out why they call me "Sarge". Our government gives us rights in the constitution but that doen't mean you should do it in all instances. just because you have $500 e-collar doesn't mean you should go ahead and get $500 worth of use out of it.


Right. Post offices. College Dorms, some malls, and the most recent movie theater shooter were all in "Gun free" zones.


Are you saying you would rather go unarmed against someone with a gun in your class room?

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 12:33 PM
But, I never in those 18 years carried a firearm nor did I feel a need for one.

First of all, forgive me Sarge, I was a little heated on that last post and more or less was just writing out some feelings.

2nd and in response to your post, It's B/c you didn't, but you didn't know that. No one ever does, until they do.

I'm a safe driver and I'm pretty much on back roads the entire 30 minute drive to and from work/home. But I wear my seat belt.....just in case.

I'm not a fool in the kitchen, neither is my wife. But we have a Fire Extinguisher.....just in case.

I'm not an aggressive person and hate conflict and avoid it at all cost. But I carry everywhere I go.....just in case.

I don't know the future, and don't pretend that I do. I do know a few facts of life though. Life is surprising and there are evil people in this world that wish to do me and mine harm for no reason at all. I refuse to be a helpless victim and I refuse to be ill-equipped in order to protect that in which I love.

So I take it serious. I train, practice and exhaust all means available(To include knowing all related firearm Laws of my state) to me to be prepared for IF that day ever happens. To include praying to God every night that it never does.

So that's it IMO. We don't KNOW the future, all we know is the past and in the past we see clearly that Evil isn't going anywhere soon so we might as well prepare to deal with it with equal or greater force. You can't negotiate with Evil.

HPL
12-19-2012, 12:43 PM
Those of you that want to tote your guns into a school building might consider a few things:
1. These mass murderers are not rational. The presence of guns that may or may not be there doesn't fit into their calculus. Most of them are intent on killing themselves or committing suicide by justice. They want to do it in dramatic fashion by taking as many people with them. The risk of them getting shot is no deterrent.

2.A shooter is more likely to determine that any adult maybe carrying heat and the first on that may go down is you before you can react.

3.The chances that you blunder into one of these situations is practically nil. You are far more likely to get struck by lightening. But, lets say you just happen to be in the building to pick up your kid and some gun play breaks out. You ride to the rescue and commence a gun battle as law enforcement arrives. You have a gun. They know there is a active incident and they see you with your heater out. Your next job may be growing the daisies at Forestlawn.

4. Arming teachers is no solution either. Any teacher that is worth, their salt develops an emotional bond to their students. I have been a teacher and I know for a fact that if one of my stray bullets hit a kid I could not live with that. Besides, you want to pay the court judgement for the liability for an armed teacher's misdirected shot? I didn't think so.

5. More guns in a classroom is a moronic solution whose time should never come. More lead flying around in civilian hands is only an occasion for more death and destruction. If an armed presence is necessary for a school, put it in the hands of a well trained constabulary, not some Walter Mitty who thinks that handgun in his pocket makes him an instant savior of the universe.

The highlighted portion above points to what seems to be lost in the entire conversation: These incidents, although widely publicized, are unbelievably rare. The chances of getting struck by lightning are far greater. Perhaps what that really means is that we are looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't actually exist.

cotts135
12-19-2012, 01:19 PM
Those of you that want to tote your guns into a school building might consider a few things:
1. These mass murderers are not rational. The presence of guns that may or may not be there doesn't fit into their calculus. Most of them are intent on killing themselves or committing suicide by justice. They want to do it in dramatic fashion by taking as many people with them. The risk of them getting shot is no deterrent.

2.A shooter is more likely to determine that any adult maybe carrying heat and the first on that may go down is you before you can react.

3.The chances that you blunder into one of these situations is practically nil. You are far more likely to get struck by lightening. But, lets say you just happen to be in the building to pick up your kid and some gun play breaks out. You ride to the rescue and commence a gun battle as law enforcement arrives. You have a gun. They know there is a active incident and they see you with your heater out. Your next job may be growing the daisies at Forestlawn.

4. Arming teachers is no solution either. Any teacher that is worth, their salt develops an emotional bond to their students. I have been a teacher and I know for a fact that if one of my stray bullets hit a kid I could not live with that. Besides, you want to pay the court judgement for the liability for an armed teacher's misdirected shot? I didn't think so.

5. More guns in a classroom is a moronic solution whose time should never come. More lead flying around in civilian hands is only an occasion for more death and destruction. If an armed presence is necessary for a school, put it in the hands of a well trained constabulary, not some Walter Mitty who thinks that handgun in his pocket makes him an instant savior of the universe.


6. A teacher snaps pulls the weapon starts shooting his students. Unlikely but a possibility.

luvmylabs23139
12-19-2012, 01:23 PM
6. A teacher snaps pulls the weapon starts shooting his students. Unlikely but a possibility.

BUt you would rather leave everyone in the building as a forced sheep while outlawing sheepdawgs?

BonMallari
12-19-2012, 01:34 PM
6. A teacher snaps pulls the weapon starts shooting his students. Unlikely but a possibility.


Got to admit THAT is the one that scares the heck out of me

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 01:43 PM
6. A teacher snaps pulls the weapon starts shooting his students. Unlikely but a possibility.

Do you put corks on your forks so you don't stab yourself in the face while eating?

coachmo
12-19-2012, 02:09 PM
Dustin,
I was thinking something very similar to your response. If we looked at every "what if" that could occur in our daily lives...geez I shudder to think! I just hope I make it home safely today in rush hour traffic. No joke!!!

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 02:49 PM
6. A teacher snaps pulls the weapon starts shooting his students. Unlikely but a possibility.

Sure. It's possible that anyone with a gun could snap at any time and start shooting people. The same way a bus driver could snalp and start running people over.

But at least the teacher would have gone through background checks etc to get properly licensed.


I heard a report today that said the police station is 2.3 miles from the school. It took twenty minutes for the first responder to arrive. Can you imagine being in there that long with no real way to protect yourself or the kids? We really don't believe the people that we allow in the school are trustworthy enough to be able to handle a gun in such an emergency?

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 03:03 PM
I heard a report today that said the police station is 2.3 miles from the school. It took twenty minutes for the first responder to arrive. Can you imagine being in there that long with no real way to protect yourself or the kids? We really don't believe the people that we allow in the school are trustworthy enough to be able to handle a gun in such an emergency?

We trust them with educating our children, but not saving their life?

Most teachers are also Parents and the majority women? Ever get in between a Momma and her cubs?

I think teachers are smart enough and bold enough and care enough to handle the Training Proficiently and be well capable of putting rounds on target when their kids are being threatened.

Maybe I have too much faith in teachers?

Right now across the nation and especially here in Louisiana Firearms Instructors are offering free Basic Defensive Handgun courses and many are offering Concealed handgun Classes FOR FREE to Teachers who qualify.

zeus3925
12-19-2012, 03:18 PM
Sure. It's possible that anyone with a gun could snap at any time and start shooting people. The same way a bus driver could snalp and start running people over.

But at least the teacher would have gone through background checks etc to get properly licensed.

I heard a report today that said the police station is 2.3 miles from the school. It took twenty minutes for the first responder to arrive. Can you imagine being in there that long with no real way to protect yourself or the kids? We really don't believe the people that we allow in the school are trustworthy enough to be able to handle a gun in such an emergency?

Simple: station a cop in the school. Put several in for that matter. But put a firearm in a rookie elementary teacher's hands? I may be over generalizing but in my experience those people hate guns and want to see them sent off to the scrap yard ASAP.

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 03:23 PM
If you've never heard it, you should.

Luby's massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby's_massacre

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis

paul young
12-19-2012, 04:32 PM
Simple: station a cop in the school. Put several in for that matter. But put a firearm in a rookie elementary teacher's hands? I may be over generalizing but in my experience those people hate guns and want to see them sent off to the scrap yard ASAP.


I just sent an email to my Congressman urging him to seek funding to help our state do just that. I asked him to cut funding on programs that have a lot of waste and divert them to do this. Knowing there is an armed policeman at every school would certainly be a big deterrent to these nut cases. And if they decide to try their luck, at least there would be someone there to call in back up and engage them.-Paul

TY 4
12-19-2012, 05:45 PM
For those of you against guns. Remember Timothy Mc Veigh? He killed 19 children under the age of 6 and 100+ adults and he didn't use a gun. He used a bomb, should we ban fertilizer and diesel fuel? 9-11 hundreds of people died no guns used either, ban planes? The point I'm trying to make is people kill people not guns. This is a NEW world, take ALL the guns off the face of the earth and I bet the killing are not going to stop.

Golddogs
12-19-2012, 05:52 PM
For those of you against guns. Remember Timothy Mc Veigh? He killed 19 children under the age of 6 and 100+ adults and he didn't use a gun. He used a bomb, should we ban fertilizer and diesel fuel? 9-11 hundreds of people died no guns used either, ban planes? The point I'm trying to make is people kill people not guns. This is a NEW world, take ALL the guns off the face of the earth and I bet the killing are not going to stop.


And after that it became harder to obtain the components to repeat that horrid act.

Policies were enhanced following the takeover of the airlines and chances of it re-occuring are slim.

Acts of horrific violence will continue, but we don't have to make it easy to carry out.

Marvin S
12-19-2012, 05:59 PM
For those of you against guns. Remember Timothy Mc Veigh? He killed 19 children under the age of 6 and 100+ adults and he didn't use a gun. He used a bomb, should we ban fertilizer and diesel fuel? 9-11 hundreds of people died no guns used either, ban planes? The point I'm trying to make is people kill people not guns. This is a NEW world, take ALL the guns off the face of the earth and I bet the killing are not going to stop.

We should also remember what incited McVeigh - had the government not been so generous in the support of the Wacko's many wives the siege would have been unnecessary. The MSM quickly forgets the many overkill's of their chosen party :(.

Brad Turner
12-19-2012, 06:01 PM
School Resource Officers (SROs) are rarely, if ever, placed in elementary or middle schools. They are usually placed in high schools. In the system I work for, we had an armed gunman enter a high school and the SRO was successful in keeping the students and faculty safe. That being said, the middle school I work at does not have an SRO and the exterior doors cannot be locked during the day.

I have been thinking about what would happen if a similar situation was to occur at my school. There are 4 classrooms in one large room that are seperated by partitions without individual doors. In our lockdown drills, we have to chain the doors to this area. There is no way that I could get the hall doors chained fast enough if a gunman was to come to our area first, and we are located right next to an entrance.

The only thing that I could do is put myself between a gunman and my students.

I would like to be able to defend my students and myself without leaving my wife and children on their own in this world.

zeus3925
12-19-2012, 06:13 PM
I just sent an email to my Congressman urging him to seek funding to help our state do just that. I asked him to cut funding on programs that have a lot of waste and divert them to do this. Knowing there is an armed policeman at every school would certainly be a big deterrent to these nut cases. And if they decide to try their luck, at least there would be someone there to call in back up and engage them.-Paul


Don't even have to do that. Either put cop stations in a wing of the school or somewhere on the grounds. It could serve the community and be close for quick response.

luvmylabs23139
12-19-2012, 06:33 PM
Don't even have to do that. Either put cop stations in a wing of the school or somewhere on the grounds. It could serve the community and be close for quick response.

This wasn't a big city. There probably weren't even enough police on duty to have one in each
school. This is an area with lots of small towns (except the city of Danbury) with generally very low crime.
If something major happens officers from surrounding small towns respond if assistance is requested.

dixidawg
12-19-2012, 07:10 PM
Simple: station a cop in the school. Put several in for that matter. But put a firearm in a rookie elementary teacher's hands? I may be over generalizing but in my experience those people hate guns and want to see them sent off to the scrap yard ASAP.


I agree that a lot of teachers that I know hate guns. I'm not saying to arm those that don't want it. I also know some that are gun enthusiasts. Remove the "gun free zone" from schools. Any teacher or other school employee that already carries outside school would then be able to carry at school.

BonMallari
12-19-2012, 07:43 PM
I agree that a lot of teachers that I know hate guns. I'm not saying to arm those that don't want it. I also know some that are gun enthusiasts. Remove the "gun free zone" from schools. Any teacher or other school employee that already carries outside school would then be able to carry at school.

That right there is probably the most sensible way to handle things....the only thing I would add is leave it up to the school districts themselves, even up to the point of leave it up to those that have kids in those particular school...We have campus cops at most universities, we should also have them at elementary schools

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 08:00 PM
We also have University's that allow Conceal Carry by students. Are their lives more valuable?

Dustin D
12-19-2012, 08:11 PM
WELL WORTH the Listen. Very well spoken here;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6R5VxAebCng

cotts135
12-20-2012, 05:30 AM
Do you put corks on your forks so you don't stab yourself in the face while eating?

I am just not convinced that arming all the teachers with a weapon is the answer. Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that the odds of this happening are incredible small. Does anyone think that with all those weapons in classrooms that those odds are going to go down?

Giving all teachers weapons is as extreme an idea on the right as the lefts solution to ban all weapons from everyone.

The solution is somewhere between those. A good start though is having cops in the schools.

zeus3925
12-20-2012, 07:00 AM
I am just not convinced that arming all the teachers with a weapon is the answer. Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that the odds of this happening are incredible small. Does anyone think that with all those weapons in classrooms that those odds are going to go down?

Giving all teachers weapons is as extreme an idea on the right as the lefts solution to ban all weapons from everyone.

The solution is somewhere between those. A good start though is having cops in the schools.

Like Tasers?

Bryan Manning
12-20-2012, 07:08 AM
Sorry if this has been said because I did not read this whole thread.

But I have two proposals to this problem:

First I believe it could be required that at least 10-15% of the faculty at all schools should carry. And I can guarantee that at least that many will come forward willing to do so. But I don't believe that just obtaining a conceal carry Is enough. A special 2 week camp designed just for teachers with weapons training and emergency response training. You will have to renew this every year while school is out. And if you don't pass you don't carry! Along with a psychiatric assessment.

Second choice is there are thousands of veterans looking for jobs so give them one. Again psychiatric assessment would be required. But these wonderful people need some one to protect it's the way they where trained it's in there blood. Put at least 1 in each school. Government program should pays these soldiers. I know doesn't sound like much or we are in debt enough but i would gladly pay a new tax to fund such a program. The government has spent millions training these fine men and women to defend this country only to bring them back and say we don't need you any more. let's give these men and women someone to protect! And they could also be the ones running the previous mentioned 2 week camps.

dixidawg
12-20-2012, 07:17 AM
I am just not convinced that arming all the teachers with a weapon is the answer. Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that the odds of this happening are incredible small. Does anyone think that with all those weapons in classrooms that those odds are going to go down?

Giving all teachers weapons is as extreme an idea on the right as the lefts solution to ban all weapons from everyone.

The solution is somewhere between those. A good start though is having cops in the schools.

Maybe I missed it, but where did anyone suggest we arm all the teachers?

Didley
12-20-2012, 08:34 AM
The armed teacher argument is valid. Of course the immediate, knee-jerk argument is WHAT IF THE TEACHERS GO CRAZY?! Well, they can still go crazy on any other day with a pair of scissors, yet I haven't ever heard of it.

Personally, I think an armed police officer or two would be better. At my church we have 2 or 3 armed officers posted at the entrances inside the church.

You're not talking about the banning of "assault weapons." That is a false term created by Holder and his lunatic, like-minded people. An assault weapon is a weapon capable of both automatic and semi-automatic fire. That was the definition until so many people were incorrectly using the term, that society forced the actual definition to be changed to include guns that only fire semi-automatically. What is being talked about is the banning of semi-automatic rifles with things like a pistol-grip, collapsible stock, bayonet lug (I laugh about that one), and removable magazine.

You should all be offended that these people are trying to capitalize on your ignorance to fulfill their agenda. The arguments they use are ALL inaccurate. I believe it was the mayor in Connecticut that said "no one uses these guns to hunt deer;" False. Many, many people use them to hunt deer, hogs, coyotes, squirrels, raccoons, etc, etc, etc. That argument really pisses me off. For one, it's not true. And even if it were true, it doesn't matter. The second amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting rights. It is there as a last check on the government.

Our founding fathers were very intelligent. They were coming from oppression and understood what it meant for the populace to have some power against their government. I don't feel our government means to remove the rights (other than our 2nd amendment) from us right now, but through our own arrogance we focus on the here and now with no thought to the future and the administrations that come and may desire to oppress the people.

For those of you on the fence with this issue, please take some time to familiarize yourself with what the bans actually do (nothing). I'd invite you guys out to the range, but I sold my semi-automatic rifle this summer. They are nothing to be afraid of. What I fear are psychopaths. It doesn't matter what they're armed with.

Bryan Manning
12-20-2012, 08:56 AM
I believe it was the mayor in Connecticut that said "no one uses these guns to hunt deer;" False. Many, many people use them to hunt deer, hogs, coyotes, squirrels, raccoons, etc, etc, etc.

I didn't know I wasn't supposed to use it deer hunting. I guess I assaulted 2 deer and a coyote this year.;).

If I thought for 1 second that if I gave up all my guns and gun rights that it would have stopped what happened or anything in the future I would do it in a heart beat. But that's just not rational thinking. Let's figure out a way to protect our children not make them sitting ducks!

Didley
12-20-2012, 09:00 AM
I didn't know I wasn't supposed to use it deer hunting. I guess I assaulted 2 deer and a coyote this year.;).

If I thought for 1 second that if I gave up all my guns and gun rights that it would have stopped what happened or anything in the future I would do it in a heart beat. But that's just not rational thinking. Let's figure out a way to protect our children not make them sitting ducks!

I agree with what you're saying, but you have to remember, our 2nd amendment is there to protect us from over-reaching administrations as well as criminals meaning to do us harm.

Dustin D
12-20-2012, 09:26 AM
I am just not convinced that arming all the teachers with a weapon is the answer. Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that the odds of this happening are incredible small. Does anyone think that with all those weapons in classrooms that those odds are going to go down?


NO! That's the point we've been trying to make. You can't make evil people not be evil. The point is that when they decide to be evil, we meet them on the playing field with Equal or Greater Force!



Maybe I missed it, but where did anyone suggest we arm all the teachers?

No one said that, it's just another attempt to exaggerate a logical point to the point of an illogical suggestion by way of erecting a strawman argument.

Golddogs
12-20-2012, 09:28 AM
Don't even have to do that. Either put cop stations in a wing of the school or somewhere on the grounds. It could serve the community and be close for quick response.

Like the WalMart in St Paul.

Bryan Manning
12-20-2012, 09:29 AM
Didley I agree and understand even though it's not a laughing matter sometimes I can't help myself because political thinking is just ridiculous. See I am not a democrat nor am I a republican I am an American!

mngundog
12-20-2012, 09:35 AM
Like the WalMart in St Paul.
They did that outside of a trailer park here, basically a RV where cops could do there paperwork and stuff, not staffed full time but instead of having 3 officers in the main office there was usually one posted in an area that had a high amount of calls.

charly_t
12-20-2012, 10:34 AM
Sorry if this has been said because I did not read this whole thread.

But I have two proposals to this problem:

First I believe it could be required that at least 10-15% of the faculty at all schools should carry. And I can guarantee that at least that many will come forward willing to do so. But I don't believe that just obtaining a conceal carry Is enough. A special 2 week camp designed just for teachers with weapons training and emergency response training. You will have to renew this every year while school is out. And if you don't pass you don't carry! Along with a psychiatric assessment.

Second choice is there are thousands of veterans looking for jobs so give them one. Again psychiatric assessment would be required. But these wonderful people need some one to protect it's the way they where trained it's in there blood. Put at least 1 in each school. Government program should pays these soldiers. I know doesn't sound like much or we are in debt enough but i would gladly pay a new tax to fund such a program. The government has spent millions training these fine men and women to defend this country only to bring them back and say we don't need you any more. let's give these men and women someone to protect! And they could also be the ones running the previous mentioned 2 week camps.

Bingo ! I would sure vote for this.

Didley
12-20-2012, 01:11 PM
Didley I agree and understand even though it's not a laughing matter sometimes I can't help myself because political thinking is just ridiculous. See I am not a democrat nor am I a republican I am an American!


I wasn't even aware there were any of those left.

Bryan Manning
12-20-2012, 01:14 PM
I wasn't even aware there were any of those left.

:) plenty of us still around!

luvmylabs23139
12-20-2012, 01:57 PM
They did that outside of a trailer park here, basically a RV where cops could do there paperwork and stuff, not staffed full time but instead of having 3 officers in the main office there was usually one posted in an area that had a high amount of calls.

What you guys with your plans don't seem to understand is that in Newtown and the other surrounding small towns there are no large volumes of calls. We're talking mostly responding to traffic accidents and smashed mailboxes. The only time police are "busy" is during really bad weather.

mngundog
12-20-2012, 02:08 PM
What you guys with your plans don't seem to understand is that in Newtown and the other surrounding small towns there are no large volumes of calls. We're talking mostly responding to traffic accidents and smashed mailboxes. The only time police are "busy" is during really bad weather.
Sorry was never my plan, I was just responding to a comment, I live outside a town of 300, probably get about 2 calls a year. I would be willing to bet that in you were to look in the trunks in the high school parking lots around my area you would find guns in probably 30% of them, heck we use to build them in shop class along with brass cannons, yet not a whole lot of shoot-outs. I know a lot of soldiers and a lot of teachers and I wouldn't say that the soldiers were any more stable than the teachers yet I don't see a lot of soldiers going postal, just a thought.

Brad Turner
12-20-2012, 02:13 PM
Sadly, suicide rates of those returning from war are some of the highest of any sub-group in the country.

luvmylabs23139
12-20-2012, 02:50 PM
Sorry was never my plan, I was just responding to a comment, I live outside a town of 300, probably get about 2 calls a year. I would be willing to bet that in you were to look in the trunks in the high school parking lots around my area you would find guns in probably 30% of them, heck we use to build them in shop class along with brass cannons, yet not a whole lot of shoot-outs. I know a lot of soldiers and a lot of teachers and I wouldn't say that the soldiers were any more stable than the teachers yet I don't see a lot of soldiers going postal, just a thought.

I'm from one of those small towns in that area. In that town the police station is almost next to the school with k-2. The main firehouse is the only in between. Less than a one minute walk. Only thing is, the police station does not really have any officers in it.

Bryan Manning
12-20-2012, 06:13 PM
Sadly, suicide rates of those returning from war are some of the highest of any sub-group in the country.

You are absolutely right, exactly why psych evals. would be mandatory. I would also say with no fact to back this up so just a theory that a lot of those soldiers either couldn't find a job or that the job they was not filling a void to protect. Of course you have to deal with the PTSD but maybe something occupy there minds would help and just visiting with the kids day in and day out would help. I don't know if thats an answer or not but also if not that then they could at least use there training to teach the teachers. Very complicated situation but I can tell you one thing I would much rather have somebody there that might be able to save my child than no chance at all.

Brad Turner
12-20-2012, 06:28 PM
You are absolutely right, exactly why psych evals. would be mandatory. I would also say with no fact to back this up so just a theory that a lot of those soldiers either couldn't find a job or that the job they was not filling a void to protect. Of course you have to deal with the PTSD but maybe something occupy there minds would help and just visiting with the kids day in and day out would help. I don't know if thats an answer or not but also if not that then they could at least use there training to teach the teachers. Very complicated situation but I can tell you one thing I would much rather have somebody there that might be able to save my child than no chance at all.

I completely agree.

zeus3925
12-21-2012, 08:09 AM
Borderline personalities can be difficult to detect.

Great portrayal of one by Bill Murray in "What about Bob?"