School shooting in Parkland Florida

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Tom

Saw a piece on the news the other night about a school in Colorado where they have a program for teachers to carry concealed after a three day training course in handling/shooing the gun and reacting to a mass shooter in action. The names of the teachers not revealed.

Sounds smart - trained in specifics to a mass shooting.
No matter the gun control laws, as Wayne Lapierre pointed out this week, schools are soft target for shooters. City Hall, football games, malls, all are harder targets.

It is really sad we need to have teachers carry guns to protect out kids, but even sadder to have not carrying.

It's very smart! Has been working for the Jews in Israel and it'll work here too. There's a lot of truth in "fighting fire with fire" -- taking a proactive part in preserving life.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I'm not so sure you know much of where anything is.

But yes I noticed your hyperbole and chuckled. Pretty desperate straw-clutching to make a very lame point about a state that isn't even in the top 10 of lax gun laws.

I guess it was hyperbole, too, when you said "everyone is packing", heh?

And was it hyperbole, too, when you ASSumed that everyone or maybe even someone was packing heat inside that Texas church, or was that just a pain ol' stupid assumption?

As I recall, you're not too good at analogies, as I had to correct you on one several years ago. Here's a clue for you, Mr. Admin: If you're going to try to draw an analogy between more liberal gun states and very restrictive ones to show that there is little or no difference in tragic outcomes when shootings occur in both types of states, then it would behoove you to make certain that in the specific location of the more liberal state that there were actually armed people in that place. Your analogy, then, would carry a wee bit more credibility. Just sayin'...

Thanks again, for making me look so smart. I'm starting to feel indebted to you.

The whole point was that potential killers are DETERRED because of more people carrying. That was lambos point.

Whether or not someone in the church had a gun is a pointless matter.

We're talking about potential whackos plotting to kill - being DETERRED because there are GUNS EVERYWHERE and everyone has one...that was lambo's point about Vermont, correct?

Well, Texas has a lot of guns too...and people like to carry them around...in fact, in that Texas shooting, a citizen with a gun confronted the Texas church shooter outside the church.

But the fact that there is likely to be more people in Texas carrying, as opposed to say, NY, didn't stop him from going to the church and killing 26 people.

Why I have to spell this out is shocking to me.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It's very smart! Has been working for the Jews in Israel and it'll work here too. There's a lot of truth in "fighting fire with fire" -- taking a proactive part in preserving life.

I would stop teaching in a heartbeat if I felt I had to carry a gun with me to school.

It's absurd and sick. And a symptom of our society crumbling under the guidance of liberals...

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It's very smart! Has been working for the Jews in Israel and it'll work here too. There's a lot of truth in "fighting fire with fire" -- taking a proactive part in preserving life.

that part makes sense, a hawk is not going after a lion, he's going after a defenseless squirrel.its the same thing with these shooters.

[Tom]

Adapt or die.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

The whole point was that potential killers are DETERRED because of more people carrying. That was lambos point.

Whether or not someone in the church had a gun is a pointless matter.

We're talking about potential whackos plotting to kill - being DETERRED because there are GUNS EVERYWHERE and everyone has one...that was lambo's point about Vermont, correct?

Well, Texas has a lot of guns too...and people like to carry them around...in fact, in that Texas shooting, a citizen with a gun confronted the Texas church shooter outside the church.

But the fact that there is likely to be more people in Texas carrying, as opposed to say, NY, didn't stop him from going to the church and killing 26 people.

Why I have to spell this out is shocking to me.

But that's the point, PA. Guns are not EVERYWHERE even in the more liberal areas, such as Florida. Heck...I know far more non-gun owners than I do gun owners -- and I know quite a few gun owners.

And my second point is that if there had been armed churchgoers in that Texas church, the outcome might have been very different. It's pretty likely someone would have tried to defend his or her fellow congregants.

And finally, gun ownership, even gun totin', does not guarantee an assault-free life. To deter is to is basically to discourage. But some people just won't be. Some people are willing to roll the dice and take their chances. But that being said, where are most people being killed today in this country? Isn't in places with very restrictive gun laws, i.e. Chicago, Baltimore, etc.? Can we not, then, logically infer from this that gun ownership is, generally, a good deterrent since there are fewer fatalities by violence in the more states with more liberal gun laws?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

that part makes sense, a hawk is not going after a lion, he's going after a defenseless squirrel.its the same thing with these shooters.

Man -- Excellent point! Bravo, Lamby!

The lessons we can learn from Nature are innumerable! Heck...even the flesh-eating predators of the jungle learn early on to learn to spot and stalk the weak, sick, injured, young and otherwise more vulnerable members of a herd -- and to go after them before those animals who are more whole!

If irrational animals know this, how come so many of us don't, and are fearful of taking preventive measures to preserve life?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I would stop teaching in a heartbeat if I felt I had to carry a gun with me to school.

It's absurd and sick. And a symptom of our society crumbling under the guidance of liberals...

We live in a very sick world. It's a very sad fact of life. As Tom said, "adapt of die". (And the problem goes a lot deeper than mere liberalism. Liberalism is only a symptom.

Also, I would think that the school system, the police, etc. would only want teachers arming themselves who are willing to do so. Anyone who is not comfortable carrying a weapon should not because they would likely do more harm to themselves or even others.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

But that's the point, PA. Guns are not EVERYWHERE even in the more liberal areas, such as Florida. Heck...I know far more non-gun owners than I do gun owners -- and I know quite a few gun owners.

And my second point is that if there had been armed churchgoers in that Texas church, the outcome might have been very different. It's pretty likely someone would have tried to defend his or her fellow congregants.

None of this followed from lambo's original Vermont post and my follow-up.

The whole original point was about deterrence. Lambo's theory was that people in Vermont are deterred from going on shooting sprees because, apparently, Vermont is a well-armed state.

Texas is also considered another well-armed state...whether it's 11th on the list of 50 or wherever it lies, popular culture has most people believing people in Texas are well armed - whether true or not, it should be an equal deterrent if Lambo's theory holds true.

Didn't stop the church shooter from following through with his plan.

That is the one and only point I was discussing.

[lamboguy]

its time for America to wake up. if no one had guns here, gun control would be great. problem is there are over 300 million guns floating around and every one of them can kill innocent people. now i know the 2nd amendment was when people had to protect themselves against the government and lawmen and if you didn't have a gun you were playing on a non level playing field. today you have drug infested deplorable lowlifes running around that want nothing less than seeing as many mothers that have children cry. its time to make the shooters mothers cry. if kids are going to go to school you are going to need the schools armed up and prepared and ready to take out all threats. i promise you that if they had weapons in schools these dastardly cowards would not walk in them.

on another note, i watched the replay of the town hall. what the hell are they teaching these kids in these schools these days? at the end of the show they were singing some kumbaya song. these kids are all fragile, not one ounce of toughness in them. they all probably need to go in the service to get them toughened up before they go to college.

[MONEY]

Originally Posted by boxcar

"Everyone", huh? And no doubt 24/7, as well?

And Texas is "gun central"? Really? Texas ranks 15 in terms of having the most liberal gun laws. Arizona ranks 1. Alaska ranks 2. These two states must rank gun mania.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/network-t...n-owners-2015/

Heck...even Swampland ranks ahead of Texax.

Texas didn't even make it into the top 9 on this site:

https://www.cheatsheet.com/culture/s...tml/?a=viewall

In Texas we have open carry, in Florida you have this

"Once again Florida Carry, Inc. has demonstrated a lack of concern for Concealed Weapons and Firearms License holders. License holders continue to be abused by law enforcement, prosecutors and the courts. When firearms, that are being lawfully carried concealed, accidentally become exposed to the sight of another person, license holders are being arrested for violating the open carry ban."

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...florida-carry/

[davew]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

its time for America to wake up. if no one had guns here, gun control would be great. problem is there are over 300 million guns floating around and every one of them can kill innocent people. now i know the 2nd amendment was when people had to protect themselves against the government and lawmen and if you didn't have a gun you were playing on a non level playing field. today you have drug infested deplorable lowlifes running around that want nothing less than seeing as many mothers that have children cry. its time to make the shooters mothers cry. if kids are going to go to school you are going to need the schools armed up and prepared and ready to take out all threats. i promise you that if they had weapons in schools these dastardly cowards would not walk in them.

on another note, i watched the replay of the town hall. what the hell are they teaching these kids in these schools these days? at the end of the show they were singing some kumbaya song. these kids are all fragile, not one ounce of toughness in them. they all probably need to go in the service to get them toughened up before they go to college.

but, but, but... the country would be much safer if the only people that had guns are the cops, military and crooks - that's what CNN says

[jocko699]

Originally Posted by davew

but, but, but... the country would be much safer if the only people that had guns are the cops, military and crooks - that's what CNN says

And if we can only get the criminals to legally register their guns and go through some sort of gun safety class..........

[Tom]

Originally Posted by davew
but, but, but... the country would be much safer if the only people that had guns are the cops, military and crooks - that's what CNN says

FNN sees no difference between the three groups.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

None of this followed from lambo's original Vermont post and my follow-up.

The whole original point was about deterrence. Lambo's theory was that people in Vermont are deterred from going on shooting sprees because, apparently, Vermont is a well-armed state.

Texas is also considered another well-armed state...whether it's 11th on the list of 50 or wherever it lies, popular culture has most people believing people in Texas are well armed - whether true or not, it should be an equal deterrent if Lambo's theory holds true.

Didn't stop the church shooter from following through with his plan.

That is the one and only point I was discussing.

But pointing to anecdotal evidence in one or two states, which by definition would be isolated from the much larger context of the full story of all 50 states, really doesn't prove anything. We'd have to examine the data for all 50 states in order to see which states with what kind of gun laws fare better or worse in gun-related violence.

While Florida ranks ahead of Texas in terms of more liberal gun laws, nonetheless violent crimes appear to be on the increase in both Orlando and Tampa. But again, what does this prove unless studied and evaluated in the context of more data?

And what do we know about the church shooter in Texas? What was his motive? Was he a member of the church or former member? Or did he know someone who knew quite a bit about the church's beliefs? Maybe he has a pretty good idea no one inside would be armed. If this were the case, this wouldn't this actually have the opposite effect of deterrence?