ADVERTISEMENT

Another Texas school shooting

No guard when shooter entered school which was unlocked.Wonder were ABC and others got story shooter shot guard upon entering school.Still think armed guard in school at all times is best deterrent not more gun control.
 
did abbott really say they did a good job containing it and it could have been worse? like contained the shooter in a room full of kids??

btw, its coming to light the local PD completely botched this up. an off duty border patrol officer is who apprehended the shooter. the rest of the police were outside waiting for backup, getting in spats with the parents who were trying to get them to do something. they immediatley lied about the details to get ahead of it. they lied about an officer being shot, they lied about the shooter having armor on.

hey maybe if it was a classroom of fetuses theyd get off their ass
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hall-O-Daze
No guard when shooter entered school which was unlocked.Wonder were ABC and others got story shooter shot guard upon entering school.Still think armed guard in school at all times is best deterrent not more gun control.
Did you see what happened to the security guard at the supermarket at Buffalo? I am not sure whether he was armed or not. However, he didn't have a chance. The fact of the matter is that the attacker has the element of surprise which is huge in these situations.

Let's not forget about Parkland where there was an armed officer at the school who actually ran away.

I just don't understand the resistance of banning these assault weapons.
 
No guard when shooter entered school which was unlocked.Wonder were ABC and others got story shooter shot guard upon entering school.Still think armed guard in school at all times is best deterrent not more gun control.
it camw from the police who tried to make it seem there was a reason for them doing absolutely nothing.
 
Did you see what happened to the security guard at the supermarket at Buffalo? I am not sure whether he was armed or not. However, he didn't have a chance. The fact of the matter is that the attacker has the element of surprise which is huge in these situations.

Let's not forget about Parkland where there was an armed officer at the school who actually ran away.

I just don't understand the resistance of banning these assault weapons.
Very simple. because its not the weapon, its the culture that became rotten. Schools use to have gun ranges and gun clubs back in America's prime. There weren't any mass shootings.
Church and Nuclear family were denigrated slowly over time.



 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09
Very simple. because its not the weapon, its the culture that became rotten. Schools use to have gun ranges and gun clubs back in America's prime. There weren't any mass shootings.
Church and Nuclear family were denigrated slowly over time.



I have no idea what your post means. My high school had a gun range and rifle team. You think that was a deterrent for mass shootings when all the rifles were stored safely in a box? Is this what you think?
 
I have no idea what your post means. My high school had a gun range and rifle team. You think that was a deterrent for mass shootings when all the rifles were stored safely in a box? Is this what you think?
just stop. these whack jobs seriously try to argue that guns werent designed to kill. its bananaland delusion.
 
I have no idea what your post means. My high school had a gun range and rifle team. You think that was a deterrent for mass shootings when all the rifles were stored safely in a box? Is this what you think?

Not a deterrent. Guns were present in schools until the mid 70's. The mass shootings only started in the 90's. Why? It is a symptom of cultural decline in America, not the cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09
Steve Kerr is a left wing political activist. He should stick to basketball as it isn't his job to comment on these issues while representing his employer. An embarrassing display.
So let me get this straight, anyone who has a different opinion from you is a political activist, however your take is always the one of common sense? I regret reading this thread.

Side note in case you did not know, Kerr's father was murdered in a shooting so this hits close to home for him.
 
All for banning assault weapons ,but shooters can use rifle or handgun so how can armed trained guard not be a deterrent to nut job shooters.
 
So let me get this straight, anyone who has a different opinion from you is a political activist, however your take is always the one of common sense? I regret reading this thread.

Side note in case you did not know, Kerr's father was murdered in a shooting so this hits close to home for him.

No, Steve Kerr has a long record of publicly advocating for left wing causes/beliefs.

His father was executed by terrorists.
 
"“The shooter was arrested years ago, four years ago, for having this plan for basically saying, you know, when I’m a senior in 2022, I am going to shoot up a school,” Gonzales claimed"

And completely false.
 
Need a short term and long term plan.
Short term - while the politicians wrangle with this and get little done, towns should pony up money to increase security at all schools. I'd line up to pay more taxes for an armed guard working with local police and more security cameras at schools to help secure our kids. Have local police cover for the armed guard on lunches and breaks and sick days. Make it part of the budget and for larger schools have multiple guards. We have security in banks, federal buildings and more. Why not the same for our schools. It does not militarize our schools. It will help make them safer. It's not a sure fire solution, but we need to do something and if it deters one school shooting it becomes successful.

Long-term - need assault rifles off the streets and a limit on certain types of ammo, federal DB with mandatory checks and waiting periods. Also need federal money to support more security cams at schools so if an incident happens law enforcement uses the cams to track the bad guy right away. And schools need to keep their damn doors locked.
 
Not a deterrent. Guns were present in schools until the mid 70's. The mass shootings only started in the 90's. Why? It is a symptom of cultural decline in America, not the cause.
People were part of a team. This has nothing to do with anything. What specifically is the cultural decline?

Perhaps that there is far greater access to purchase weapons. Perhaps that there are more guns in the country now than in the 70's. Perhaps that we have more assault weapons in the country than in the 70's. Did you consider any of this before going to your conclusion that there is a "cultural decline."
 
So let me get this straight, anyone who has a different opinion from you is a political activist, however your take is always the one of common sense? I regret reading this thread.

Side note in case you did not know, Kerr's father was murdered in a shooting so this hits close to home for him.
youre right. any sniff of "left leaning" ideas is either a) activism b) politicizing or c) whataboutism.

worse with these people, theyve begun to use these terms to turn blatant common sense into some heinous idea. a million mass shootings and you want to get more strict on gun laws?? what?? sick of this politicism!! upset with our representatives over disgusting trends unique to our country?? what terrible activism!!

its bananaland. bizarro world.
 
People were part of a team. This has nothing to do with anything. What specifically is the cultural decline?

Perhaps that there is far greater access to purchase weapons. Perhaps that there are more guns in the country now than in the 70's. Perhaps that we have more assault weapons in the country than in the 70's. Did you consider any of this before going to your conclusion that there is a "cultural decline."

Have you looked at any facts before replying? Norway and Sweden have similar gun ownership rates as the US and don't have this issue so you're wrong. From the birth of the US until the mid 1970's kids brought guns to school and there were no mass shootings.

You can continue to burry your head in the sand and pretend our society has not been declining. Here is the latest NYC Deptartment of Health add saying don't be ashamed of your drug use.

 
  • Like
Reactions: shu09 and Pirata
Texas official said Friday that while the 18-year-old gunman was inside adjoining classrooms, officers stood outside and didn't take action as they waited for a tactical team. More than an hour passed between when officers were first called to the school to when the tactical team entered locked classrooms and killed the gunman.

At a news conference Friday, Texas Department of Public Safety Director Col. Steven McCraw said the person who made the decision not to breach the Uvalde elementary school classroom where a gunman was shooting children and teachers was the school district police chief, calling it the “wrong decision” to not engage the gunman sooner.

The Uvalde School District Police Chief is Pedro “Pete” Arredondo.

"A decision was made that this was a barricaded subject situation," McCraw said of the incident commander's "thought process" at the time.
Pressed by reporters if Arredondo was on the scene during the shooting, McCraw declined to comment

 
Have you looked at any facts before replying? Norway and Sweden have similar gun ownership rates as the US and don't have this issue so you're wrong. From the birth of the US until the mid 1970's kids brought guns to school and there were no mass shootings.

You can continue to burry your head in the sand and pretend our society has not been declining. Here is the latest NYC Deptartment of Health add saying don't be ashamed of your drug use.

Sweden has mandatory military service for men. These people are trained with how to handle weapons. Moreover in those countries they own hunting rifles and shotguns. Not assault weapons. I am not looking to get rid of all guns. I am looking to ban the needless assault weapons.

Again you do not specify what is cultural decline. You out your something about a poster in NYC. Well Portugal legalized all drugs. Is your argument that they went into a cultural decline. In Portugal the crime rate went down.

You offer zero reasons why assault weapon should not be banned.
 
Sweden has mandatory military service for men. These people are trained with how to handle weapons. Moreover in those countries they own hunting rifles and shotguns. Not assault weapons. I am not looking to get rid of all guns. I am looking to ban the needless assault weapons.

Again you do not specify what is cultural decline. You out your something about a poster in NYC. Well Portugal legalized all drugs. Is your argument that they went into a cultural decline. In Portugal the crime rate went down.

You offer zero reasons why assault weapon should not be banned.
There's nothing about being trained or untrained with a weapon that makes someone go or stops someone from going shoot up a school. shoot up park filled with people at a concert, or a house of worship. We've seen plenty of people in this country with military training go off the deep end. If you're deranged and have mental issues you can go into a school with a hunting rifle, shotgun, or assault weapon.

Taking away the assualt weapons is an interesting move because there's no way you're getting every single one. Now those that do have them become more dangerous.

I'm not speaking for Pirata, but I think cultural decline is there's more of me society than we society. Everyone is about themselves and not about the community. Materialism, jealousy, look at me. Good people don't want to get involved in building the community because no good deed goes unpunished and people are looking to file lawsuits eveywhere. I can't tell you how many people don't want to coach youth sports because they don't need the BS that parents provide because God forbid you tell little Johnny he is not the next Lebron, Jeter, or Tiger. So in the long run, young people miss out on great people who had tremendous influences in our life.
 
Last edited:
. If you're deranged and have mental issues you can go into a school with a hunting rifle, shotgun, or assault weapon.

Taking away the assualt weapons is an interesting move because there's no way you're getting every single one. Now those that do have them become more dangerous.
You can’t kill as many people with a shot gun as opposed to an assault weapon. These people want to kill as many people as possible. Yes you can kill people with a knife too. No doubt. But now you have to get close and physical with another person. It’s completely different and again you can’t kill as many. Thus, even if you can’t stop people from acting, u can at least save lives by not having the mass car age that results from the use of an assault weapon.

What does it mean that those that have assault weapons now become more dangerous?

Again, there is no good argument to have them. And the one argument perhaps is a guy who owns a huge ranch to protect his herd. Ok carve out an exception. Other than that, it should be banned and those that have need to give them up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hall-O-Daze
Again, there is no good argument to have them. And the one argument perhaps is a guy who owns a huge ranch to protect his herd. Ok carve out an exception. Other than that, it should be banned and those that have need to give them up.
The best thing in this thread is from @kniespolice and age 25.

What are your thoughts on banning the sale and ownership of assault weapons (with a better definition of assault weapons) to those under 25? If you are under 25 and currently own, you need to turn over to the authorities to be returned when you turn 25. (This may have to be expanded somehow to households with under 25’s.)
 
You can’t kill as many people with a shot gun as opposed to an assault weapon. These people want to kill as many people as possible. Yes you can kill people with a knife too. No doubt. But now you have to get close and physical with another person. It’s completely different and again you can’t kill as many. Thus, even if you can’t stop people from acting, u can at least save lives by not having the mass car age that results from the use of an assault weapon.

What does it mean that those that have assault weapons now become more dangerous?

Again, there is no good argument to have them. And the one argument perhaps is a guy who owns a huge ranch to protect his herd. Ok carve out an exception. Other than that, it should be banned and those that have need to give them up.
Great we will still have people coming in who can kill at lower rate. There's a core problem that goes well beyond anything here that needs to be addressed. Getting rid of the assualt weapons is bandaid on the root of the problem. Yes it will prevent the 50 killings in a short time, but in this situation he killed 20 in over an hour so I don't know how the solution solves this problem.

If I'm the only person in the world with an assualt rifle, anywhere I go, I know no one else has the ammunition I do. That would make me the most dangerous. There's no way you're getting every assault rifle out there. I would love to see the plan to do it. Heck I'd love to know something/anything of this magnitude that the government has accomplished to the degree of 100%.
 
Last edited:
The best thing in this thread is from @kniespolice and age 25.

What are your thoughts on banning the sale and ownership of assault weapons (with a better definition of assault weapons) to those under 25? If you are under 25 and currently own, you need to turn over to the authorities to be returned when you turn 25. (This may have to be expanded somehow to households with under 25’s.)
Makes sense. A 25 year old not only has more maturity, but also has more history, so a thorough background check would actually be worthwhile. A background check on an 18 year old would almost always find nothing, it's like running a credit check on an 18 year old, they either have no score or a fine score because they haven't had time to mess up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Section112
still a lot of silence on the complete disgusting botch job by police. what was it 70 mins they stood outside while an active shooter was slaughtering kids... because the situation was dangerous...

and gov Abbott attributing this atrocity to mental health when just a month ago he cut $200 million from the mental health commission. wow.

we got our few token sentences acknowleging sprinkled in with a considerable defense of anything gun related.

imagine if this was a blue state or a democratic governor. itd be nuclear on here.
 
Great we will still have people coming in who can kill at lower rate. There's a core problem that goes well beyond anything here that needs to be addressed. Getting rid of the assualt weapons is bandaid on the root of the problem. Yes it will prevent the 50 killings in a short time, but in this situation he killed 20 in over an hour so I don't know how the solution solves this problem.

If I'm the only person in the world with an assualt rifle, anywhere I go, I know no one else has the ammunition I do. That would make me the most dangerous. There's no way you're getting every assault rifle out there. I would love to see the plan to do it. Heck I'd love to know something/anything of this magnitude that the government has accomplished to the degree of 100%.
lmao the current situation was that no kid or person in the school had the same ammunition the shooter had. and that was with no restrictions. maybe we should all go to school woth assult weapons. yea thats a good idea. what a dumb comment. and a dumb argument thats been completley proven wrong in every country overseas.

and yea, who wants to lower the rate of people being killed anyway? just an obnoxious way to look at it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT