ADVERTISEMENT

Hooray for the 2nd Amendment

My wife is a 6th grade teacher and constantly fighting the cell phone issue.

I tell her all the time when I retire I want to go become a sub. I will bring a box each day and kids will have to drop their cell phones. She tells me it will never work. Parents would throw a fit. I say who cares.
lol good luck with that..
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and Lucy01
That stupid Constitution! If we could just get rid of it and be like... Cuba. Yeah, Cuba. Dang things would be wonderful! Said nobody... except your typical Marxist.
RkDp.gif
 
We could also stop prescribing SSRI's and Adderall to every kid who is having a bad day or doesn't feel like studying.

Almost everyone of these shooters in zonked out on some doctor prescribed meds.
Total agreement on your first point.
Have no idea about the second.
 
Wow. Dad didn’t fail to keep his assault rifle away from son after police warning. He bought it for him as a gift. Later dad.
 
Dad sounds really dumb in audio interview. That’s another problem with assault rifles….it’s pretty much exclusively dumb people that want them.
 
  • Love
Reactions: UncleMark
My wife is a 6th grade teacher and constantly fighting the cell phone issue.

I tell her all the time when I retire I want to go become a sub. I will bring a box each day and kids will have to drop their cell phones. She tells me it will never work. Parents would throw a fit. I say who cares.

You know what they do to substitutes?
Yep, I suspect he will face charges. At a minimum a massive civil suit

Big news

GBI Director Chris Hosey said Colin Gray “allowed” his son to possess the weapon used in the deadly school shooting in a news conference.

7:37 p.m.

The GBI has announced that they will be charging Colt Gray’s father, 54-year-old Colin Gray, with four counts of involuntary manslaughter, two counts of second degree murder and eight counts of cruelty to children
 
Bombs don’t kill either. Maybe we should start selling those then.
Absolutely.....Everyone has the means to use military artillery. Not sure about your neighborhood, but mine?---At least 3-4 folk with F14 hornets....rocket launchers as well....Couple of them have missle silos....

JFC----Really? THis is your analogy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ulrey
Absolutely.....Everyone has the means to use military artillery. Not sure about your neighborhood, but mine?---At least 3-4 folk with F14 hornets....rocket launchers as well....Couple of them have missle silos....

JFC----Really? THis is your analogy?

The logic was guns don’t kill, people kill so no reason to regulate guns. The logical extension of that is there is no need to regulate any weapon because weapons require human interface. It’s not that complicated. Are you slow?
 
I agree and the 2A supporters push back on these. Universal background checks? They say no.
There already are background checks. If you go and purchase a gun the store is required to have you fill out a 4473 form and then your info is run through NICS. Any store not doing that is already breaking the law. If we think that is what is occurring, then maybe we should look at sending the ATF out to try and purchase weapons with info that is flagged in NICS and shut down stores that are selling to people they shouldn't.

Solutions that don't involve removing those types of rifles from law abiding citizens were mentioned up above. I am OK with red flag laws to an extent. I think there should be a process involved that provides protection against false accusations. Criminals can't have them already but penalties for those who do have them illegally should be increased. Hold people accountable (like this father is being) when they do things like purchase a weapon for someone they reasonably know they shouldn't be and a subsequent shooting occurs.

There are some gun related things you can add to my list of what I believe is the real issue, the idea that our society is broken and each subsequent generation of children is producing more and more individuals who are maladapted to cope with life.
 
The logic was guns don’t kill, people kill so no reason to regulate guns. The logical extension of that is there is no need to regulate any weapon because weapons require human interface. It’s not that complicated. Are you slow?
Nope----not slow. Your analogy still dumb as ****.

Ever seen a gun load itself....walk into a shopping mall, and start shooting people?

Me, neither.

Wanna ban AR? Ok----You really think that solves the problem of insane people, disturb people, wanting to kill others---And finding ways to do so? I dont.

Would you feel "better" if these mass shooters started using GLocks? Which can hold 15-33 rounds, and be emptied within seconds?

Or, if shooters just used a couple of shotguns? Cannot kill as many----so maybe that'd make you feel better?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
There already are background checks. If you go and purchase a gun the store is required to have you fill out a 4473 form and then your info is run through NICS. Any store not doing that is already breaking the law. If we think that is what is occurring, then maybe we should look at sending the ATF out to try and purchase weapons with info that is flagged in NICS and shut down stores that are selling to people they shouldn't.

Solutions that don't involve removing those types of rifles from law abiding citizens were mentioned up above. I am OK with red flag laws to an extent. I think there should be a process involved that provides protection against false accusations. Criminals can't have them already but penalties for those who do have them illegally should be increased. Hold people accountable (like this father is being) when they do things like purchase a weapon for someone they reasonably know they shouldn't be and a subsequent shooting occurs.

There are some gun related things you can add to my list of what I believe is the real issue, the idea that our society is broken and each subsequent generation of children is producing more and more individuals who are maladapted to cope with life.
How do checks work with a gift? Would the father submit the son's name or his own?
 
Nope----not slow. Your analogy still dumb as ****.

Ever seen a gun load itself....walk into a shopping mall, and start shooting people?

Me, neither.

Wanna ban AR? Ok----You really think that solves the problem of insane people, disturb people, wanting to kill others---And finding ways to do so? I dont.

Would you feel "better" if these mass shooters started using GLocks? Which can hold 15-33 rounds, and be emptied within seconds?

Or, if shooters just used a couple of shotguns? Cannot kill as many----so maybe that'd make you feel better?
If you don’t understand the difference in lethality between an AR and a Glock, then it’s time to pipe down.
 
If you don’t understand the difference in lethality between an AR and a Glock, then it’s time to pipe down.
The third worst mass shooting in U.S. history was committed by a 100 pound Asian kid with a Glock and Walther P22.

This might make mass shootings less deadly at the margins. That’s it. If that’s the goal fine. I would hope we can think bigger.

A total ban on personal ownership of firearms is more intellectually honest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All4You
Doubt it. Dad bought the gun as a gift AFTER having the FBI show up at his door because his son was threatening to shoot up a school. They will make an example out of him.

Mom was a real sweetheart too.

 
  • Wow
Reactions: JamieDimonsBalls
How do checks work with a gift? Would the father submit the son's name or his own?
His own...and all the states have different laws about minors and firearms. I think more recently you are seeing laws like this one passed in North Carolina hitting the books:

A parent or legal guardian may be held civilly liable to a school or other educational entity for negligent supervision if the minor commits any felony with a firearm that injures people or property on educational premises.

The parent or legal guardian will only be liable if he or she:

-Knew or should have known of the minor’s likelihood to commit the act
-Had the opportunity and ability to control the minor
-Made no reasonable effort to correct, restrain or properly supervise the minor

I think that is something most people could/would get behind. In quite a few of these shooting instances, you have the parents not securing their weapons properly around or flat out buying guns for troubled kids. This recent example and Lanza come to mind. Also the one up in Michigan. I think that is an acceptable step to try and curb some of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BadWakeboarder
Mom was a real sweetheart too.

Ok, that is a confirmation of the rumors I saw on Twitter last night and mentioned earlier. To say this kid grew up in a messed up household to two complete morons as parents is an understatement.
 
The third worst mass shooting in U.S. history was committed by a 100 pound Asian kid with a Glock and Walther P22.

This might make mass shootings less deadly at the margins. That’s it. If that’s the goal fine. I would hope we can think bigger.

A total ban on personal ownership of firearms is more intellectually honest.
That kid had the “benefit” of it being early in the history of school shootings. The crowds are now trained and better prepared and pistols won’t take out an entire class again.
 
We knew that without knowing it.
Sometimes. I think some parents are just generally oblivious to what their kids are going through. Like Dylan Klebold, I don't think that kid had what I would consider bad parents. Sometimes you are just blind to what is going on.

That being said, the FBI showing up at your doorstep about your 13 year old child is a sign you could see from Pluto.
 
If you don’t understand the difference in lethality between an AR and a Glock, then it’s time to pipe down.
Of course I do. But its irrelevant. You think banning AR's, solves, or even dilutes the problem? Highly unlikely. A person can do serious damage with a Glock. 15-30+ rounds, in seconds, can and would kill many; of course not at the rate of an AR. A bullet from an AR is no more deadly than one from a Glock.

Making AR's illegal suddenly removes this weapon from bein obtained?

Riiiiight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
That kid had the “benefit” of it being early in the history of school shootings. The crowds are now trained and better prepared and pistols won’t take out an entire class again.
78% of ALL mass school shootings, involved the use of "hand guns." Between 1982 and June of 2024, there was a total of 117 incidents...with a total of 167 different handguns being used.

A person could walk into a crowded lunchroom, with two handguns, i.e. glocks, and kill a lot of people. TO think otherwise is being very naive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Of course I do. But its irrelevant. You think banning AR's, solves, or even dilutes the problem? Highly unlikely. A person can do serious damage with a Glock. 15-30+ rounds, in seconds, can and would kill many; of course not at the rate of an AR. A bullet from an AR is no more deadly than one from a Glock.

Making AR's illegal suddenly removes this weapon from bein obtained?

Riiiiight.
None of this is true. Literally none.
 
None of this is true. Literally none.
Ok.....

Can you prove that? Or is this just an opinion... I'll help ya out----Its an opinion.

1. You dont think a shooter, armed with two Glocks, in a croded area such as a gym, cafeteria, etc---coudn't kill or wound a lot of people? Why?

2, Banning AR's would not make them unattainable.. Nor would it stop school, or mass shootings.

WHich part of that, is not true?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and Lucy01
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT