Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@Ceili,

Let's keep it simple; train & arm teachers and staff, then post signs that inform
evil doers that this school is NOT a Gun Free Zone full of defenseless victims.

0 Replies

@firefly,

You took the words right off the tip of my fingers.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

By your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

Hardly.

0 Replies

@firefly,

This one needs repeating for posterity. It proves over and over how oralboy donesn't have a clue about his own posts.

Quote:

@oralloy,
Quote:

oralboy, You engage in name-calling because you are too stupid to present an intelligent argument.

firefly, And, your next statement proves your point.
Quote:

oralboy, You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own inability to form an argument.

firefly, By your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

Ever wonder what oralboy means "your betters?"

He is totally clueless, because he contradicts his own statements.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Oraboy. If making statemenbts that demonstraight your and Waterdude blatant arrogance and ignorance doesn't make me your 'better', then I'm prooud not to be one.

Rap

1 Reply

@wandeljw,

wandeljw wrote:

Let's not forget the issue of mental health. We need to provide mental health services for any private cititzen who believes they need to own assault weapons.

What's this "need" nonsense??? Have you heard about this little thing called the US Constitution?

I don't have to "need" anything. If I *choose* to own an assault weapon, I have the *right* to do so.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

The ironies, and self-contradictions these people present are astounding.

Pointing out the fact that you will not be allowed to violate the US Constitution is hardly an irony or a contradiction.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

I normally disagree with some of these crazy gun owners but I do not think that the guns are the problem but rather the people. I do not pack a weapon for protection but I do know of many people who do.

Being that we are human and have emotions, some times these emotions could get in our way if we have a gun at hand and we may make some very stupid decisions.

Nothing that I am aware of since the invention of the wheel has caused more deaths. If you take away guns from psychopaths they will find other ways of killing people. They could drive a car full speed into a new years eve parade or something if they wished.
I personally do not know the answer to these problems but I do think moral philosophy could add some insight but who the hell has and interest in moral philosophy?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

@oralloy,
oralloy Quote:

Quote:

You engage in name-calling because you are too stupid to present an intelligent argument.

And, your next statement proves your point.

oralloy Quote:

Quote:

You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own inability to form an argument.

By your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

And you've just proved it again...

Quote:

Having harmless cosmetic features does not make a gun any more dangerous than it already is.

Right, it's the effective killing capacity that determines how dangerous the gun is. Which is why we must disregard the talk about "cosmetic features" and instead focus on the weapon's capacity to effectively kill and wound as many people as possible, as rapidly as possible, when we reconsider banning some weapons, and use a new, more appropriate way, of defining them.

As you've already shown us oralloy, by your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

These crazy, clueless anti-gun nut jobs are spouting all sorts of nonsensical and irrational proposals.

Have they nothing better to do?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

In your rush to defend the USA's proportion of crazies, you miss the point of my post.
We have more than our fair share of disaffected muslim youth, who sometimes try to blow people up, to be sure.
They are protesting the armed invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, of which you doubtless have heard, and are discussed on other threads.

You may be right to chide me about my earlier assumption. It may be that since American crazies can easily arm themselves with state-of-the-art equipment to cause multiple deaths, they attract the headlines.

0 Replies

@Ceili,

Ceili wrote:

You want teachers and various others, an assorted group of staff members to carry weapons, which means training kindergarten teachers fully, in the handling of what? assault weapons? handguns? to calmly shoot and kill and assailant in front of children.. all the while protecting them?

Handguns carried in a holster, sure. And keep some military rifles locked up in the principal's office. Give them the option of training for either or both, as they choose.

I doubt the situation would be very calm. But I'm sure it would be much better than letting all the kids get killed.

Ceili wrote:

Who is going to pay for the guns? the training? the ongoing training?

The teachers can pay for the handguns and the training if they opt for it. Let the taxpayers pay for the military rifles locked up in the principal's office.

Ceili wrote:

Teachers in the US are severely underpaid already and how many schools are underfunded? Will parents now have to work more bingos to pay for arming teachers or guards,

It's an option.

Ceili wrote:

Will schools only start hiring commando teachers? Rambo wanna be's?

No. Not sure that anyone fits that definition to begin with, but anyway no.

Ceili wrote:

Perhaps we should also insist on flak jackets, or at the very least kevlar vests for all students?

Useless. Centerfire rifle rounds punch straight through Kevlar with zero reduction in lethality.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

It sounds as though Ceili is in favor of allowing evil to calmly shoot and kill children
and teachers because it's much better than an armed teacher protecting the students.

1 Reply

@raprap,

raprap wrote:

Oraboy.

You engage in name-calling because you are too stupid to come up with anything intelligent.

raprap wrote:

your and Waterdude blatant arrogance and ignorance

You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own ignorance and arrogance.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

How about if the next shooter--using an easily available gun--decides to shoot through the windows of a school--or pick off children as they wait on a corner for a school bus, or play outside the school during recess?

2 Replies

@firefly,

You would have a DC sniper type situation wouldn't you.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

oralboy

You engage in name-calling because you are too stupid to come up with an intelligent argument.

cicerone imposter wrote:

donesn't have a clue about his own posts.

You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own cluelessness.

cicerone imposter wrote:

he contradicts his own statements.

Only when I discover that I have made an error.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

By your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

Hardly.

firefly wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Having harmless cosmetic features does not make a gun any more dangerous than it already is.

Right, it's the effective killing capacity that determines how dangerous the gun is.

And harmless cosmetic features have no bearing on killing capacity.

firefly wrote:

Which is why we must disregard the talk about "cosmetic features" and instead focus on the weapon's capacity to effectively kill and wound as many people as possible, as rapidly as possible, when we reconsider banning some weapons, and use a new, more appropriate way, of defining them.

Well, YOU are the only one here who keeps wanting to ban harmless cosmetic features. The others have already accepted reality and given up their futile quest to violate the US Constitution.

If you choose to abandon your quest to ban harmless cosmetic features, that would be a big step in the right direction.

firefly wrote:

As you've already shown us oralloy, by your own criteria, you are obviously "too stupid to present an intelligent argument."

Hardly, again.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

You engage in name-calling because you are too stupid to come up with anything intelligent.

Quote:

You trash shouldn't run around falsely accusing your betters of your own ignorance and arrogance.

You're still proving you're "too stupid to come up with anything intelligent"--by your own criteria, oralloy.

And, you're also proving you're a mindless parrot who just keeps repeating the same things, over and over.

You really should change your name to parrotboy.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I know what it is I'm posing fm. Like Veblen said about trying to run a 2012 economic and social system based on a mouldering document concocted in another time and place on behalf of the mercantile classes--you get a muddle.

If you make ALL the places kids gather into armed camps the cost will take lives elsewhere. Probably a lot more. A still a nut-job will surprise you.

Like motor accidents--there's a trade off. Gun ownership v 10,000 deaths a year and 100,000 injuries.

Compromises are no good. You get the worst of both worlds.

0 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know