[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933024]Okay, so now knowing that information, could you tell me how having an individual just about as well trained or better in some cases on a school campus be any more dangerous than having a policeman or security guard of their training equivalent?[/QUOTE]
Because schools are places where kids go to learn and grow, not to be locked down under armed protection because your society has failed so much that you can't keep them safe anymore.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41932964]Please do tell me where a kid is going to buy an illegal gun from (they aren't cheap), to then go shoot up a school? The whole point of gun control legislation is to remove as many guns from circulation as possible without interfering with the jobs of people (hence why we can still get certain firearms in the UK, if not without some effort).
Please, tell me where the flaw in this logic is? Remove legal firearms kept by private citizens, stop the sale and distribution of legal firearms to a certain degree, improve living conditions so firearms aren't considered necessary to save your ass, suddenly criminals have less access to them, and less compulsion to bring one in for petty crime. (considering most illegal guns are legal at some point it would remove a ton (sourced from statistics gathered by the ATF))
Alcohol prohibition and firearms are entirely different matters. Alcohol can be easily brewed and distributed, it just takes a bit of trickery to disguise it and some money for raw materials. Guns (effective guns, not that pipe shotgun shit) require machinery to produce and are harder to disguise and transport due to the fact they will always look like gun parts.
Illegal guns will always be a thing, but with less of them around. They become prohibitively expensive, and only the most serious of criminals will tend to want them.[/QUOTE]
Funny how almost all Brits would rather live like sheep stripped of their rights to live in a [B]peaceful[/B] society. The point of the 2nd amendment isn't to be able to own guns for self-defence. It's put in place so that the people may rise up against their government if it becomes tyranical. I guess you wouldn't understand living in your non-free oppressed society. The second you allow the government to ban one thing they will not stop and just strip you of your rights. Your neighbor Germany seemed to think that was a good idea when Hitler took power. That didn't end too well did it?
[QUOTE=daschnek;41933039]Someone didn't read much about Columbine, did he?
The arms used by Klebold and Harris were illegal arms obtained in an illegal purchase. The law didn't stop those guns from getting in their hands.
If you want something illegal bad enough, there's always a way to get it. I'm sure if we were debating the subject of the War on Drugs, you'd readily agree to this, but you won't because it's about a [I]gun[/I][/QUOTE]
The guns would have been legal at some point somewhere along the line to exist, and I have never denied if you want something bad enough you can get it, stop putting words into my mouth.
My argument has, and [B]always[/B] has been if you'd read for once, that removing guns from legal circulation will quite easily drop guns in illegal circulation assuming the guns are dealt with properly (permanent deactivation, destruction). It will not stop illegal guns, but it will make it both harder, and less desirable to obtain one.
There's a reason we don't have many shootings in the UK. Gun control. It works if you do it right.
[QUOTE=avincent;41933069]Funny how almost all Brits would rather live like sheep stripped of their rights to live in a [B]peaceful[/B] society. The point of the 2nd amendment isn't to be able to own guns for self-defence. It's put in place so that the people may rise up against their government if it becomes tyranical. I guess you wouldn't understand living in your non-free oppressed society. The second you allow the government to ban one thing they will not stop and just strip you of your rights. Your neighbor Germany seemed to think that was a good idea when Hitler took power. That didn't end too well did it?[/QUOTE]
there is no worldwide correlation between private firearm ownership and democracy
whatsoever
infact some of the worst places in the world are awash with personal firearms
soo...?
Your guns didn't stop the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, you're terrible history of civil rights, NSA or just about anything.
[QUOTE=avincent;41933069]Funny how almost all Brits would rather live like sheep stripped of their rights to live in a [B]peaceful[/B] society. The point of the 2nd amendment isn't to be able to own guns for self-defence. It's put in place so that the people may rise up against their government if it becomes tyranical. I guess you wouldn't understand living in your non-free oppressed society. The second you allow the government to ban one thing they will not stop and just strip you of your rights. Your neighbor Germany seemed to think that was a good idea when Hitler took power. That didn't end too well did it?[/QUOTE]
lmao. Looks like you fuckers are using your 2nd amendment [I]~rights~[/I] so fucking well aren't you? Your government is fucked, it's been fucked for years, but you're happy to sit around being complacent and bitching about "muh guns" rather than rise up against it if you hate it so much.
The right to bear arms is outdated, especially today. Your own military could fuck you ten ways over before you even load your rifles. And seeing as you'd be classified as an enemy combatant? You bet your ass you'd get killed.
Good use of Hitler though, shows you really excelled in high school debate class.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41933040]Because schools are places where kids go to learn and grow, not locked down under armed protection because your society has failed so much that you can't keep them safe anymore.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you really understand what concealed means.
These kids aren't being locked in iron cages or being subject to TSA-esque full body searches for their protection. This is just a mere implementation of an already well-known concept, by allowing trained individuals to utilize their tools in the event of an attack, but this time in a formerly restricted location.
I'm soo sorry the concept of preventive measure is so foreign to you that you'd rather have twenty deceased as opposed to two.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933107]I don't think you really understand what concealed means.
These kids aren't being locked in iron cages or being subject to TSA-esque full body searches for their protection. This is just a mere implementation of an already well-known concept, by allowing trained individuals to utilize their tools in the event of an attack, but this time in a formerly restricted location.
I'm soo sorry the concept of preventive measure is so foreign to you that you'd rather have twenty deceased as opposed to two.[/QUOTE]
I just would be ashamed if I lived in a society that my kids needed armed guards just to study safely.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933107]I'm soo sorry the concept of preventive measure is so foreign to you that you'd rather have twenty deceased as opposed to two.[/QUOTE]
This is hardly preventative, it's more reactive. "Oh, schools get shot up? uhh...give the teachers guns! they can shoot the shooters!". It won't stop a shooter until they've started shooting. It probably won't deter a shooter as they all seem to die anyway (suicide or cops), they can still get some killing done before being shot.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933098]lmao. Looks like you fuckers are using your 2nd amendment [I]~rights~[/I] so fucking well aren't you? Your government is fucked, it's been fucked for years, but you're happy to sit around being complacent and bitching about "muh guns" rather than rise up against it if you hate it so much.
The right to bear arms is outdated, especially today. Your own military could fuck you ten ways over before you even load your rifles. And seeing as you'd be classified as an enemy combatant? You bet your ass you'd get killed.
Good use of Hitler though, shows you really excelled in high school debate class.[/QUOTE]
Oh were the Germans not stripped of their rights to any type of firearm? I'm sure the majority of Germans totally agreed with what Hitler was doing!
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41932964]Please do tell me where a kid is going to buy an illegal gun from (they aren't cheap), to then go shoot up a school? [/QUOTE]
Wow could you know any less of what you're talking about? If you live in certain places and know the right people, it is very easy to obtain a gun; and going around telling everyone "If you have them you're not supposed to!!!" isn't going to make them turn them in.
[quote]Remove legal firearms kept by private citizens[/quote]
Hah yeah no. Whenever someone says something like this it becomes clear that they've done no actual research into the subject and just jumped onto the "ALL GUNS ARE BAD AND KILL INNOCENT NICE BABIES" bandwagon
[quote]suddenly criminals have less access to them, and less compulsion to bring one in for petty crime[/quote]
I apologize, we can not all live in a cozy safe little island. The UK doesn't have mexico as it's next door neighbor.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933075]The guns would have been legal at some point somewhere along the line [/QUOTE]
Right.... like the sawn-off shotgun used in the shooting... a type of arm that has been banned in the US since 1934.
[QUOTE=hexpunK]My argument has, and always has been if you'd read for once, that removing guns from legal circulation will quite easily drop guns in illegal circulation assuming the guns are dealt with properly (permanent deactivation, destruction). It will not stop illegal guns, but it will make it both harder, and less desirable to obtain one.[/QUOTE]
Removing guns from legal circulation is not legal in the United States. This is a very basic part of our legal framework. We have right to obtain a gun, be it for the purpose of defending ourselves against people, the environment, or other nations.
And outdated? Hardly. Take a walk through Detroit, or Oakland, or Chicago, and then get back to me about the right to defend yourself being outdated.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41933125]I just would be ashamed if I lived in a society that my kids needed armed guards just to study safely.[/QUOTE]
I'd be ashamed if I lived in a society that lets it's own courts be dominated by Sharia Law.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41933125]I just would be ashamed if I lived in a society that my kids needed armed guards just to study safely.[/QUOTE]
Again, we still have policemen, and whats a police officers job?
To stop or prevent crime. This measure is very well capable of doing that.
You are in the presence of an armed officer at any airport, you are in the presence of and armed officer when you visit most government facilities, you are subject to be within the presence of an armed officer when you walk down the side-walk, drive and even when you sit at home and yes even at school. Policemen receive training in use of their tool and so did these individuals, I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable but this measure may save lives.
[QUOTE=avincent;41933153]Oh were the Germans not stripped of their rights to any type of firearm? I'm sure the majority of Germans totally agreed with what Hitler was doing![/QUOTE]
Hitler didn't reduce the amount of firearm ownership in Germany what so ever. It stayed the same.
It was already curtailed from the treaties imposed since WW1.
Its an invented strawman godwin
[editline]23rd August 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933189]Again, we still have policemen, and whats a police officers job?
To stop or prevent crime. This measure is very well capable of doing that.
You are in the presence of an armed officer at any airport, you are in the presence of and armed officer when you visit most government facilities, you are subject to be within the presence of an armed officer when you walk down the side-walk, drive and even when you sit at home and yes even at school. Policemen receive training in use of their tool and so did these individuals, I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable but this measure may save lives.[/QUOTE]
I'm glad my society functions well enough for teachers not to feel the need to be armed.
hell I'm glad my society functions well enough for policemen not to feel the need to armed.
[QUOTE=Bazsil;41933157]Wow could you know any less of what you're talking about? If you live in certain places and know the right people, it is very easy to obtain a gun; and going around telling everyone "If you have them you're not supposed to!!!" isn't going to make them turn them in.
Hah yeah no. Whenever someone says something like this it becomes clear that they've done no actual research into the subject and just jumped onto the "ALL GUNS ARE BAD AND KILL INNOCENT NICE BABIES" bandwagon
I apologize, we can not all live in a cozy safe little island. The UK doesn't have mexico as it's next door neighbor.[/QUOTE]
Bordering countries aren't a problem if your border agencies and patrols aren't fucked. We could still quite easily receive illegal shipments of shit seeing as there's tons of water around us that we can't keep an eye on all the time. But we crack down on that fuck like it's nothing.
As for "knowing the right people". Yeah, when there's less going around you understand these "right people" aren't going to just hand guns out like sweets? They are going to want more from you, and may not even deal with you unless they know you won't get your dumb ass killed and the gun traced back to them.
Man, you really don't pay attention to any of this shit do you? I've even said in previous threads, gun ownership for self defence and home defence is fucking dumb and isn't helping crime rates. Owning a gun and keeping it at a secure range? Not as questionable. Owning a shotgun for pest control in your farm? Go for it. Owning a gun because "lol gun r cool"? Fuck off. (Also we have a significantly lower homicide rate than the states, it seems guns raise that quite a bit unsurprisingly, if you'd done any research you'd see this)
[editline]23rd August 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=daschnek;41933172]Removing guns from legal circulation is not legal in the United States. This is a very basic part of our legal framework. We have right to obtain a gun, be it for the purpose of defending ourselves against people, the environment, or other nations.
And outdated? Hardly. Take a walk through Detroit, or Oakland, or Chicago, and then get back to me about the right to defend yourself being outdated.[/QUOTE]
Detroit: shithole that your country seems to have given up on.
Oakland: Fuck I don't know or care really, but there must be shitholes if gun crime is rampant.
Chicago: Don't they have gun control? While all the surrounding cities and states don't? There's your fucking problem there.
You shouldn't feel the need to have a piece of metal designed with killing in mind strapped to you everywhere you go, it's just a sign your country has massive societal problems that need fixing. Guns aren't the solution, you're treating a symptom, not the actual illness.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933210]Bordering countries aren't a problem if your border agencies and patrols aren't fucked. We could still quite easily receive illegal shipments of shit seeing as there's tons of water around us that we can't keep an eye on all the time. But we crack down on that fuck like it's nothing.
As for "knowing the right people". Yeah, when there's less going around you understand these "right people" aren't going to just hand guns out like sweets? They are going to want more from you, and may not even deal with you unless they know you won't get your dumb ass killed and the gun traced back to them.
Man, you really don't pay attention to any of this shit do you? I've even said in previous threads, gun ownership for self defence and home defence is fucking dumb and isn't helping crime rates. Owning a gun and keeping it at a secure range? Not as questionable. Owning a shotgun for pest control in your farm? Go for it. Owning a gun because "lol gun r cool"? Fuck off. (Also we have a significantly lower homicide rate than the states, [B]it seems guns raise that quite a bit unsurprisingly, if you'd done any research you'd see this[/B])[/QUOTE]
Illegally owned guns yes. Legally owned guns no. The safest places in America have a majority of legal gun owners. Can you guess what the most dangerous places in America has? Strict gun laws and illegally obtained guns.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933142]This is hardly preventative, it's more reactive. "Oh, schools get shot up? uhh...give the teachers guns! they can shoot the shooters!". It won't stop a shooter until they've started shooting. It probably won't deter a shooter as they all seem to die anyway (suicide or cops), they can still get some killing done before being shot.[/QUOTE]
Again, we go back to the earlier sentiment.
This will not stop killing, this will stop alot of killing. You seem to be convinced I think this is the final solution to all the gun-related mishaps, so allow me to clarify, as apparently you lack the capacity for reading comprehension. I really don't think this will stop every school shooting ever. This act has the capacity to prevent more death than if the act were not taken.
Guns For Teachers = Possibly less dead kids.
No Guns For Teachers = A Few More Dead Kids.
Geddit?
[editline]22nd August 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41933192]I'm glad my society functions well enough for teachers not to feel the need to be armed.
hell I'm glad my society functions well enough for policemen not to feel the need to armed.[/QUOTE]
Good for you. Now come to the 'gun-riddled, school shooting epidemic' that is America, and you could see how this legislation could be a nice thing.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933250]Again, we go back to the earlier sentiment.
This will not stop killing, this will stop alot of killing. You seem to be convinced I think this is the final solution to all the gun-related mishaps, so allow me to clarify, as apparently you lack the capacity for reading comprehension. I really don't think this will stop every school shooting ever. This act has the capacity to prevent more death than if the act were not taken.
Guns For Teachers = Possibly less dead kids.
No Guns For Teachers = A Few More Dead Kids.
Geddit?[/QUOTE]
Well you aren't reading either, so stop this "reading comprehension" shit. I even said it earlier, this might stop some killing. But it isn't going to actually stop shootings in any reasonable amount, so why the fuck bother? Why not try and understand where the shooters are getting the compulsion to do it, and fix that (you could leave this here too for extra measures I guess, it'll be pointless after mind).
Or you can just be a condescending asshole.
That's right fuckers, I'm the red coat who wants you fucking guns! Hide your kids, hide your wives, the Brits are in town! (again)
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933210]
[editline]23rd August 2013[/editline]
Detroit: shithole that your country seems to have given up on.
Oakland: Fuck I don't know or care really, but there must be shitholes if gun crime is rampant.
Chicago: Don't they have gun control? While all the surrounding cities and states don't? There's your fucking problem there.
You shouldn't feel the need to have a piece of metal designed with killing in mind strapped to you everywhere you go, it's just a sign your country has massive societal problems that need fixing. Guns aren't the solution, you're treating a symptom, not the actual illness.[/QUOTE]
Actually, if I remember correctly, Chicago's gun control laws were overturned by the Supreme Court (a court now of many liberal Clinton and Obama appointees, so I'm surprised) a while back.
But I'm all in favor of treating the illness and not the symptom. But until then, people are dying pretty needlessly out there. Some of us need a little something to defend ourselves with. Some of us like to just go in the middle of absolutely nowhere and shoot targets, or camp out without fear of wild animals. Guns for self defense doesn't even necessitate that they're used on people- only that people can be secure in whatever it is they might be doing.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933277]Well you aren't reading either, so stop this "reading comprehension" shit. I even said it earlier, this might stop some killing. But it isn't going to actually stop shootings in any reasonable amount, so why the fuck bother? Why not try and understand where the shooters are getting the compulsion to do it, and fix that (you could leave this here too for extra measures I guess, it'll be pointless after mind).
Or you can just be a condescending asshole.
That's right fuckers, I'm the red coat who wants you fucking guns! Hide your kids, hide your wives, the Brits are in town! (again)[/QUOTE]
"It won't stop a whole lot so why bother trying!" This seems to be the attitude of the average European. Which is probably why the UK is being dominated by Sharia Law hahahaha
[QUOTE=avincent;41933337]"It won't stop a whole lot so why bother trying!" This seems to be the attitude of the average European. Which is probably why the [B]UK is being dominated by Sharia Law[/B] hahahaha[/QUOTE]
Not even close lmao
Man you guys suck at research
but if theres a school shooting and a teacher gets shot and drops his gun i can live my fantasy of saving the school with shootdodge and bullet time
You know there is a problem when you need to arm your school teachers.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933277]Well you aren't reading either, so stop this "reading comprehension" shit. I even said it earlier, this might stop some killing. [U]But it isn't going to actually stop shootings in any reasonable amount, so why the fuck bother?[/U][/QUOTE]
So now actual legislation that can prevent possible deaths is bad because you don't feel comfortable and [B]you[/B] think it can be ineffective?
Ok.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933277]Why not try and understand where the shooters are getting the compulsion to do it, [U]and fix that[/U].[/QUOTE]
This is a stop-gap to help prevent further loss of life while we figure out what needs to be done in this country, not the end-all problem solver you think I claim it to be.
so what happens if the teachers open fire on a gunman, the bullets penetrate the thin walls, and some student gets shot?
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41933388]not the end-all problem solver you think I claim it to be.[/QUOTE]
And. Here. We. Go!
Once again you are putting words into my mouth. Have you ever actually debated properly before or not?
I have never claimed that is what you think it is, I have never claimed that is what I think it is. I have claimed that it might save some lives. That's all. And leaving it in place while you look for the reasons why they shoot up a school would be fine, but it may just direct shooters to other schools instead, or just not do anything (as I said in the beginning, the teachers need the resolve to end another human being, they have to shoot first or they die anyway, so you better hope the teachers get the drop on the shooter).
[QUOTE=avincent;41933337]"It won't stop a whole lot so why bother trying!" This seems to be the attitude of the average European. Which is probably why the UK is being dominated by Sharia Law hahahaha[/QUOTE]
i'm wheezing
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41933358]Not even close lmao
Man you guys suck at research[/QUOTE]
Only a matter of time :dance:
[IMG]http://www.maxfarquar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sharia-law-in-the-UK.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=avincent;41933456]Only a matter of time :dance:
[IMG]http://www.maxfarquar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sharia-law-in-the-UK.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
So which British courts (ones operated by the state) are practicing this?
[QUOTE=avincent;41933456]Only a matter of time :dance:
[IMG]http://www.maxfarquar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sharia-law-in-the-UK.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
None of that is legally recognised by the country, and citizens found trying to enforce it suffer fines or imprisonment if they have caused harm to other citizens.
But good work, it's cute when you try :~)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
