portslade seagull
Well-known member
Trouble is that's probably only 1 gun of the arsenal that have at their disposal
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Misc] Here We Go Again - Breaking News Florida Shooting At High School
- Thread starter Beach Hut
- Start date
Trouble is that's probably only 1 gun of the arsenal that have at their disposal
It's easy (well for me at least) to forget the obvious:-
[tweet]966710494689185792[/tweet]
[tweet]966710494689185792[/tweet]
More today on the radio defending the idea of better arming teachers and janitors in schools in the US. If your premise is 'we have had guns since day 1, and it is in our constitution' then it is likely to be a popular position in the US. Trump has said similar.
I can understand the argument that it is legal to have a gun (concealed in many states) so people should carry one and they will be safer. But does this add up?
Consider, surely, in London, teenagers would, equally, be safer if they carried a gun or knife? The only difference is it isn't legal to carry, here. If being armed makes people safer, why don't we make it legal for kids to carry knives? The kids themselves would certainly claim they carry for safety.
If, on the other hand, people aren't safer (statistically) when more people are armed, and this is a fact, then the only argument for arming teachers and janitors is that it supports the constitution and tradition. This is similar if not identical to the arguments we have had here about foxhunting, smacking children, and going back in time, drink driving, smoking and using the rule of thumb when selecting a stick with which to beat the wife.
This can all surely be resolved by the provision of facts. So, are there more deaths in places where it is legal to carry a gun? If there are then the only argument for carrying is 'tradition'.
If the latter is the case it means that anyone advocating arming the British public, a public who traditionally have not been armed, is a driveling fool, charlatan and moron.
So would someone mind posting the facts (if they haven't already - I don't have time or patience to read all the nonsense on this thread)?
I can understand the argument that it is legal to have a gun (concealed in many states) so people should carry one and they will be safer. But does this add up?
Consider, surely, in London, teenagers would, equally, be safer if they carried a gun or knife? The only difference is it isn't legal to carry, here. If being armed makes people safer, why don't we make it legal for kids to carry knives? The kids themselves would certainly claim they carry for safety.
If, on the other hand, people aren't safer (statistically) when more people are armed, and this is a fact, then the only argument for arming teachers and janitors is that it supports the constitution and tradition. This is similar if not identical to the arguments we have had here about foxhunting, smacking children, and going back in time, drink driving, smoking and using the rule of thumb when selecting a stick with which to beat the wife.
This can all surely be resolved by the provision of facts. So, are there more deaths in places where it is legal to carry a gun? If there are then the only argument for carrying is 'tradition'.
If the latter is the case it means that anyone advocating arming the British public, a public who traditionally have not been armed, is a driveling fool, charlatan and moron.
So would someone mind posting the facts (if they haven't already - I don't have time or patience to read all the nonsense on this thread)?
I keep thinking I should stop just twittering this thread and then, once again I'm put in a position where I just have to share.
The replies are brilliant:-
[tweet]966692831422107648[/tweet]
The replies are brilliant:-
[tweet]966692831422107648[/tweet]
Lyndhurst 14
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2008
- 5,242
A guy in the office used to live in Colorado and he told us there is a town there called Nucla where the head of each household is mandated by law to own a gun. I didn't believe him so googled it and he was right. There were some exceptions to the rule but still a scary state of affairs.
This country has a long way to go
https://www.denverpost.com/2013/05/24/nucla-becomes-colorados-first-and-only-town-mandating-gun-ownership/
This country has a long way to go
https://www.denverpost.com/2013/05/24/nucla-becomes-colorados-first-and-only-town-mandating-gun-ownership/
looney
Banned
- Jul 7, 2003
- 15,652
CNN shill would be a better term but whatever.
daveinprague
New member
Come on then. As youre the only person on NSC who would get an assault rifle in the US on the basis of your name alone.
Lets hear the story of the 'crisis actor'.
Maybe some links? Maybe from some credible source?
Lets see if your bullshit stands up.
Wrong-Direction
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 13,638
It was tough to find a bit to copy and paste:-
Sen. Pat Roberts: Nobody under 21 should have an AR-15
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article201598559.html
The Kansas Republican said he believes Congress is ready to act and expects President Donald Trump to take the lead.
"This is an opportunity, if you look at these youngsters who are so emotionally tied in to this grief of losing their friends — but it’s more than gun control. But I think we’re ready as a Congress to actually pass something and I think it’s going to be better background checks. Certainly nobody under 21 should have an AR-15,"
There just aren't enough
s in the world.
Sen. Pat Roberts: Nobody under 21 should have an AR-15
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article201598559.html
The Kansas Republican said he believes Congress is ready to act and expects President Donald Trump to take the lead.
"This is an opportunity, if you look at these youngsters who are so emotionally tied in to this grief of losing their friends — but it’s more than gun control. But I think we’re ready as a Congress to actually pass something and I think it’s going to be better background checks. Certainly nobody under 21 should have an AR-15,"
There just aren't enough
s in the world.
That is a bit of an insult to BG. Do you really think BG would endorse Trump's views on women or his support for the right to bear arms?
Jim Van Winkle
Well-known member
Can’t wait for when a teacher with a gun has a bad day and turns it on a student. Or a student gets hold of the gun.
The dialogue goes from bad to worse.
The dialogue goes from bad to worse.
looney
Banned
- Jul 7, 2003
- 15,652
Very credible Loonster, especially from the website that spells ‘Blatant’ with an ‘e’. Clearly very intelligant people behind it.
https://www.facebook.com/WorldCloudLA/videos/701263916664460/
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,201
daveinprague
New member
Klaas
I've changed this
- Nov 1, 2017
- 2,663
Randsta
New member
I'm sure he get's most of his ideas / "policies" from watching Veep 
The Birdman
New member
Just thinking if Trumps rule about gun control are adopted he would not be aloud to have a gun.
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
Nobody can own an assault rifle because there's no such thing as an assault rifle.
It's actually not a gun nor a class of gun.