Page 70 of 77

Little Brother is correct.

Posted: 2017 Nov 12 09:35
by Crux
More people kill themselves than are killed by terrorists in the US over the last 20 years.

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Jan 15 21:06
by Crux

FAKE guns will get you shot by real ones....

Did you notice AO and Stonewall took off all the GUN TOTING and GUN SHOOTING smileys??

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Jan 17 12:31
by Stonewall
Crux wrote:Did you notice AO and Stonewall took off all the GUN TOTING and GUN SHOOTING smileys??

Your Administrator does not understand this remark. Please explain:
  • No change has occurred for years in the list of available smileys. I see two that have guns in them. Do we need more?
  • I do not understand "AO".

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Jan 17 20:06
by Crux
My bad. :violent5: :suicide: :gun:

AO is for "arrogant one", as opposed to "wise one", which he is not...

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 15 00:39
by Cannoneer
Today's school shooting in Florida may have had less people shot if the teachers, principal and vice principal had been armed.

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 15 12:07
by Wise One
That sort of idiotic NRA propaganda has got to stop. Enough, already.

The goal is not to reduce the number of our children who are slaughtered in schools. It is to stop the slaughter.

Yesterday's school shooting in Florida would not have happened if guns had been kept out of the hands of everybody in the school building.

Many other countries figured out how to do this long aga. It is not difficult, although the transition from today's utter chaos and lawlessness to sensible control will take decades. Hundreds of millions of guns are scattered across the land, within easy reach of nearly everybody.

But we have to start. Now.


Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 16 15:52
by Cannoneer
wise one,

What I wrote was not propaganda. It was only a statement of my opinion.

You are dreaming if you think this nation is going to follow the way of much of the world by disarming it's citizens.

As long as things remain status quo, taking counter measures to reduce the numbers of senseless murders by arming responsible people who are

already on site is sound thinking.

Pay attention:

Posted: 2018 Feb 16 17:57
by Crux
Alabama, North Carolina, and FLORIDA are working towards ARMING TEACHERS/STAFF and providing better ARMED SECURITY.
They may join Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Kansas, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Mississippi, and Texas.

Not ALLLLLLLL teachers, of course. Capable willing trained persons. :shakeh:

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 23 17:27
by Coondog
According to the Belle of the NRA, no psycho killer is going to even think about pulling off a mass shooting when they know there are guns on the premises that might shoot back. This is as foolish a statement as any thus far. The case at hand....Mr. Cruz.....There were, according to first hand student interview, more than one uniformed, armed security people on that campus in Florida. Having recently attended that school, Mr. Cruz would have been aware of that fact. Didn't seem to bother him much. So much for the "Trump Theory of Inside The Mind of a Killer".

And, how much of a bonus would we have to pay an ununiformed teacher to whip out his concealed handgun and take on an AR-15? If he or she were lucky enough to prolong the gun fight until the swat team showed up, like as not they'd be the first one shot.

Best we stick to trying to prevent the event from starting, rather than fanaticizing about how to handle it after it's too late. Background checks, age limits, firearm education and, yes, certain levels of gun control........and that includes depriving some socially inept, self loathing souls whose girlfriend just broke up with them from getting a killing machine.

coondog :coffee:

The Pinkertons are there to keep the students in line....not to play Chuck Norris :numc:

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 23 18:58
by Wise One
Amen, Coondog.



Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 24 11:42
by Cannoneer
The paid armed security on site did noting for about four minutes while listening to shots being fired. I don't know why.
Armed teachers would be acting in self defence as well as protecting their students and would most likely act rather than stand arouund and watch.
It would be wonderful if no shooter ever made it onto a campus or if some way was worked out to keep guns out of the hands of people who would murder innocent people, but I think that's a pipe dream.

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 24 13:24
by Wise One
Ridiculous. The solution is not yet more and more guns, all on a hair trigger ready to shoot instantaneously.

Part of the solution is to keep the gun out of the hands of people like Hinckley who should never be allowed to touch one.

But, for the unpteenth time, the tiniest part of the gun problem is crime, mass killings, and political assassinations.

Most killings have nothing to do with the above. They have everything to do with suicide and momentary rage/ killing of friends and relatives ... only because a gun was immediately at hand. Countries that control gun availability responsibly do not have such killings.


Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 24 13:55
by Cannoneer
Dream on wise one.
As long as the USA is a country it's citizens will keep and bear arms. And the more the libs work to fragment the country the more determined those of us on the right will be to hold on to our guns.

squishes and beta control idgits

Posted: 2018 Feb 25 13:37
by Crux
I have coondog "the bar 6 shooter", and AO "the plinker from here to Alaska" down as fearful stooges against self defense. Check.

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 27 12:54
by Wise One
Kurt Andersen reads the Second Amendment and explains its history from 1791 to now.


Blah Blah Blah, when BLAH should be enough.

Posted: 2018 Feb 28 16:01
by Crux
Since a well regulated Militia is a good thing, to protect a Free State,

It is clear. In and of itself, in context, as an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT, etc. This has always been true. It has always been a Natural Right in fact to ball up a fist, take up a club or knife or gun for self defense of a Sovereign Individual, and for a Sovereign "State" to maintain that capability/RIGHT.


This isn't rocket science, unfortunately it's politics for the BIG GOVERNMENT ANTI HUMAN LEFTIST PROGRESSIVE SOCIALISTS...

For the record, AO should not own a gun. Period. :coffee:

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Feb 28 19:21
by Cannoneer
Kurt Andersen does not know what he's writing about.
Yes it's true that the second amendment was not an issue for anyone until gun rights were being taken away from some of the people.
For example Chichago, and New York.
Until then even cannons and machineguns were legal and everyone knew the second amendment gave Americans the right to keep arms.
For all of you libs, that means have them in their possession. And to bear arms. Again for you libs, that means the right to carry arms.
It's a shame that so many educated people do not understand something as simple as a writen sentence.

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Mar 01 18:49
by Wise One

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Mar 02 09:02
by Cannoneer
Well wise and Jugtggler, are a couple of lame liberal cartoons the best you can do to bury my last post insted of comming up with an answer?

I'll make it a little clearer this time so even the most dull witted of liberals can understand what the wording of the second amendment means.

A well regulated Matilia, (When called out that applied to all able bodied males between the age of 16 and 60)

being necessary to a free State, (The meaning here should be plain, even to a liberral.)

The right (Something that cannot be taken away without just cause)

of the people (Citizens of the Uniter States)

to keep (To have in their possesion)

And bear (To have on or with their person)

Arms, (Weapons, in this case meaning firearms)

shall not be infringed. (This right shall not be altered or removed.)

I feel sure that insted of getting a response to this post, I'll just see more stupid cartoons.

By the way, did you see the artical about the mother and daughter in Tulsa who used pistols against a robber with a shotgun?

Re: BANG !

Posted: 2018 Mar 02 12:42
by Wise One
I know what the 2nd Amendment says.
Your interpretation of its meaning is just wrong.
Wrong on 200 years of prior Supreme Court opinions.
And wrong even on the latest cockamamie conservative Supreme Court opinion which invented a "right" that did not formerly exist.
That opinion said that government is fully within its powers under the 2nd Amendment to regulate firearms, but cannot prohibit ownership within one's household without cause. Here are examples of permissible regulation, even under the present ultraconservative Supreme Court:

  • Background checks? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Licensing? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Seizure for cause? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Standards of safety? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Denial of right to purchase for cause? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Taxation? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
  • Mandatory insurance? Totally permissible under the 2nd Amendment.
You are parrotting NRA's absolutist interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, a fantasy of ultra-extremism that we must kill forever.