How do we protect kids in school?

How do we protect kids in school?

There are 6103 comments on the Ruidoso News story from Jan 8, 2013, titled How do we protect kids in school?. In it, Ruidoso News reports that:

During a newsroom discussion about guns about a decade ago, a woman piped up: "I don't understand what the big deal is.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Ruidoso News.

factologist

Huntsville, AL

#83 Jan 31, 2013
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>The only way you can stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun. Concealed carry lowers the crime rate
Bullshite!

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#84 Jan 31, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text> Preconceived?
<quoted text>
This what you wrote.
This is what you said you meant.
<quoted text>
The two statements don't at all line up.
<quoted text> I was hoping you could look at yourself and determine what YOU really meant by bringing that stat up in that context. So, as I said, one inference to be made from doing so was that 11,000 homicides is an acceptable level to live with. If you don't believe that it is an acceptable level, you should have said so in your response to Saint's statement. Instead, you simply discredited what he said.
So, I ask you to think about it and reconsider your answer.( Now please don't misunderstand, I know you believe IN what you wrote and I'm not criticizing that but, these beliefs have no connection to Saint's statement, "With 30,000 Americans dead of gun violence a year"....)
<quoted text>Well duh!
<quoted text>Sounds like NRA motherhood, don't you think?
<quoted text> Not right away, it won't. But maybe, just maybe, if we start now, we can keep future generations from experience this carnage.
<quoted text>Thank you.
<quoted text>It's not difficult for me to see that you believe what you say is the truth.
<quoted text>How stupid. No one, repeat, no one with half a brain believes "restricting" will solve the problem. But eliminating will.
Why don't you just make crime illegal :) That would eliminate it.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#85 Jan 31, 2013
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>Before you can buy a machine gun you need to get a class 3 license and pay the tax.
Do you have to have a psycho exam to get a class 3?

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#86 Jan 31, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Your questions are insulting and show your naivety.
<quoted text>
So am I.
<quoted text>
I guessed as much.
<quoted text>
If they were killed by other means. Maybe a lot of them wouldn't be killed. Lots of GUN violence out there. Read the papers, internet, TV.Take away the guns and you take away "gun violence".
<quoted text>
Criminals and nut jobs aren't controllable.As long as there are guns available they will manage to get them. No, we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".The gun industry, NRA, politicians and people who think like you, stand in the way. THEY/you have become the problem.
That was the program the Nazi used. Politicians don't like armed citizens. They prefer unarmed peasants just like you. You try to take my guns you are in violation of the US Constitution and you could fine out why the 2nd amendment was put in the constitution

“Denny Crain”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#87 Jan 31, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Do you have to have a psycho exam to get a class 3?
You have an extensive back ground check. There are about 85,000 machine guns out there and they are not used in crime. It is very rare that a machine gun is used in a crime. The last I remember was about 15 years ago in LA with two men in body armour

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#88 Jan 31, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Your questions are insulting and show your naivety.
<quoted text>
So am I.
<quoted text>
I guessed as much.
<quoted text>
If they were killed by other means. Maybe a lot of them wouldn't be killed. Lots of GUN violence out there. Read the papers, internet, TV.Take away the guns and you take away "gun violence".
<quoted text>
Criminals and nut jobs aren't controllable.As long as there are guns available they will manage to get them. No, we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".The gun industry, NRA, politicians and people who think like you, stand in the way. THEY/you have become the problem.
Well, it seems we disagree.....adamantly. You would simply trade gun violence for whatever the "new" violence will be. And all of the law abiding citizens that you and those like you will have disarmed will simply be easier victims. I thank you for being honest about your intent/desire to eliminate the 2nd amendment all together. Dan the man will try to rationalize that too, no doubt. I will continue to support and fight for the freedom of the American people to keep and bear arms as well as freedom from psycho killers. Those two things are not mutually exclusive regardless of your opinion. FYI I am not a member of the NRA and have never been much of a "follower", I speak as an individual citizen. I just call 'em as I see 'em. You can continue to believe that those who support and protect our rights (those rights are just as much yours as they are mine) are the problem but we both know where the problem really lies and it won't go away until we attack it directly. It's much easier and way more convenient to place the blame on an inanimate object and vilify those who own that object than it is to tackle the real problem which is much more difficult. Good luck and good night, my friend.
Wondering

Huntington Beach, CA

#89 Jan 31, 2013
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>The only way you can stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun. Concealed carry lowers the crime rate
And, of course, the only way to stop a west bound vehicle traveling 100MPH is an east bound vehicle traveling 100MPH, right???

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#90 Feb 1, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
And, of course, the only way to stop a west bound vehicle traveling 100MPH is an east bound vehicle traveling 100MPH, right???
Well, it would be rather difficult for a psycho killer to harm or kill any innocent people if he is shot repeatedly in the head by an armed citizen as soon as he makes his intent known. That may not be the ONLY way to stop a bad guy with a gun but it is an extremely effective one. At the Killeen TX shooting there was a woman who was convinced by her mother to leave her legal concealed carry weapon in the car as they went in to eat. The woman survived the shootings but both of her parents were killed. She was sure that she could have saved many lives, including her parents, if she had been armed. Psycho killers can't watch everybody at once, there's always a chance if one is prepared. Personally, I'd rather that the psycho had been identified before he acted and had been in a rubber room somewhere pumped full of Thorazine instead of driving his truck through the wall of a restaurant.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#91 Feb 1, 2013
Denny CranesPlace wrote:
<quoted text>You have an extensive back ground check. There are about 85,000 machine guns out there and they are not used in crime. It is very rare that a machine gun is used in a crime. The last I remember was about 15 years ago in LA with two men in body armour
So Saint was correct. No physco test to get a machine gun. My, my.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#92 Feb 1, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Well, it seems we disagree.....adamantly. You would simply trade gun violence for whatever the "new" violence will be. And all of the law abiding citizens that you and those like you will have disarmed will simply be easier victims.
You're doing some projecting here. Besides those "other" methods are around now. Just look a the mid East terrorists activities. Plenty guns in the hands of civilians over there that doesn't seem to stop it.
I also noticed that "law abiding" citizens didn't stop McVeigh, now did they?
So your dog, once again, won't hunt.
I thank you for being honest about your intent/desire to eliminate the 2nd amendment all together.
Did I say that? I don't think so. Here is what I did say;
"... we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".The gun industry, NRA, politicians and people who think like you, stand in the way."
I will continue to support and fight for the freedom of the American people to keep and bear arms as well as freedom from psycho killers. Those two things are not mutually exclusive regardless of your opinion.
How touching. Say your spiel to one of the fathers who lost a child at Sandy Hook.
FYI I am not a member of the NRA....
Well that's something in your favor.
You can continue to believe that those who support and protect our rights (those rights are just as much yours as they are mine) are the problem but we both know where the problem really lies and it won't go away until we attack it directly.
I repeat; we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".
It's much easier and way more convenient to place the blame on an inanimate object and vilify those who own that object than it is to tackle the real problem which is much more difficult.
You sound like a poor picked on, misunderstood teenager who just feels sorry for himself.
No body is "blaming" the freaking gun and certainly nobody is trying to vilify the law abiding owner. I'll say it again- maybe you can get it this time; we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it", my good friend.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#93 Feb 1, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
And, of course, the only way to stop a west bound vehicle traveling 100MPH is an east bound vehicle traveling 100MPH, right???
Excellent! Gotta love it. LMAO!

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#94 Feb 1, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So Saint was correct. No physco test to get a machine gun. My, my.
You should check out the process for obtaining an FFL before you draw any conclusions. It's not something just anyone can qualify for.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#95 Feb 1, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Well, it would be rather difficult for a psycho killer to harm or kill any innocent people if he is shot repeatedly in the head by an armed citizen as soon as he makes his intent known. That may not be the ONLY way to stop a bad guy with a gun but it is an extremely effective one. At the Killeen TX shooting there was a woman who was convinced by her mother to leave her legal concealed carry weapon in the car as they went in to eat. The woman survived the shootings but both of her parents were killed. She was sure that she could have saved many lives, including her parents, if she had been armed. Psycho killers can't watch everybody at once, there's always a chance if one is prepared. Personally, I'd rather that the psycho had been identified before he acted and had been in a rubber room somewhere pumped full of Thorazine instead of driving his truck through the wall of a restaurant.
So to you, it's all about the "psycho killings". Or, to you, is all gun violence perpetrated by psychos?

Just out of curiosity, how do you propose to identify all these psycho killers, before they become killers?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#96 Feb 1, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>
You're doing some projecting here. Besides those "other" methods are around now. Just look a the mid East terrorists activities. Plenty guns in the hands of civilians over there that doesn't seem to stop it.
I also noticed that "law abiding" citizens didn't stop McVeigh, now did they?
So your dog, once again, won't hunt.
<quoted text>Did I say that? I don't think so. Here is what I did say;
"... we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".The gun industry, NRA, politicians and people who think like you, stand in the way."
<quoted text>How touching. Say your spiel to one of the fathers who lost a child at Sandy Hook.
<quoted text>Well that's something in your favor.
<quoted text>I repeat; we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it".
<quoted text>You sound like a poor picked on, misunderstood teenager who just feels sorry for himself.
No body is "blaming" the freaking gun and certainly nobody is trying to vilify the law abiding owner. I'll say it again- maybe you can get it this time; we need stringent controls on guns, ammo and ownership; stiff penalties for violations; more protection for our neighborhoods, schools and public locations; and a SCOTUS that "gets it", my good friend.
Unfortunately you are completely missing my point again (deliberately?) and assigning your own meaning to what I say. What I am saying is that no matter how much gun control you enact, up to and including the complete elimination of guns, it will have no effect on the criminals and psychos out there except for causing them to use a different tool. Until we address the source of the problem it will not go away. You said it yourself in an earlier post "criminals and psychos can't be controlled". So you go after something you think (erroneously) you can control. Criminals and psychos MUST be controlled if we are to ever be free of their violence. Forbidding certain tools will not prevent what they do, it will just change what they use to do it. Timothy McVeigh has given you a glimpse of the future sans guns. All he needed to become a psycho killer was a little barn yard chemistry. Are the people McVeigh killed any less dead than if he had shot them? The pathological mind WILL find a means to its end. One can go on line or to the nearest public library and get the information needed to make countless explosive devices and weapons, many of them very simple. How much trouble is it to make a Molotov cocktail? There are literally hundreds of ways to injure/kill a bunch of unsuspecting people. Do you think the psychos and criminals don't know this? In order to kill the weed we must get to the root.......controlling the criminals and psychos. There is no other way and those who lead you to believe otherwise have an agenda that has nothing to do with safety. There is no sense in sacrificing the rights and freedoms of the American people when it will not acheive the intended result. Once again, no matter what happens in the gun control arena it will have no affect at all on the lawless.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#97 Feb 1, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So to you, it's all about the "psycho killings". Or, to you, is all gun violence perpetrated by psychos?
Just out of curiosity, how do you propose to identify all these psycho killers, before they become killers?
If I knew that I'd be wealthy and we'd all be safe. I know WHAT needs to be done but HOW to do it is not so easy. Which is why folks like you want to put all of our eggs in the gun control basket, because that is so much easier. I never said it would be easy to detect and control the psychos or keep the criminals in check, what I said was that we must find a way to do it or we will never be free of their violence. Throwing your hands in the air and saying it can't be done so let's just restrict everyone's freedom will accomplish absolutely nothing but less freedom for those who have committed no crime. We can put a man on the moon and robots on Mars, I have confidence that a way can be found to control the lawless and psychotic without penalizing all of society in the process. If enough time and resources are applied to the problem instead of wasting our time and resources enacting laws and bans that have no effect on the source of the problem we might actually achieve some real results.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#98 Feb 1, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>If I knew that I'd be wealthy and we'd all be safe. I know WHAT needs to be done but HOW to do it is not so easy. Which is why folks like you want to put all of our eggs in the gun control basket, because that is so much easier. I never said it would be easy to detect and control the psychos or keep the criminals in check, what I said was that we must find a way to do it or we will never be free of their violence. Throwing your hands in the air and saying it can't be done so let's just restrict everyone's freedom will accomplish absolutely nothing but less freedom for those who have committed no crime. We can put a man on the moon and robots on Mars, I have confidence that a way can be found to control the lawless and psychotic without penalizing all of society in the process. If enough time and resources are applied to the problem instead of wasting our time and resources enacting laws and bans that have no effect on the source of the problem we might actually achieve some real results.
I won't respond to your immediately preceding post, except to say I have not - deliberately or otherwise- misunderstood your posts. I understand them perfectly and, I say your plan is not implementable to any degree of success whatsoever. Further, even if identification were to be 100% successful, short of a complete lock up, it would still be possible for a known psycho to get his hands on a semi automatic rifle.
I do agree, however, that we should make every attempt to keep these individuals from legally acquiring firearms of any nature, but certainly for semi auto rifles.(Something the NRA has successfully prevented, BTW). One way to double down on this attempt is to eliminate the availability of semi auto rifles from the general public.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#99 Feb 1, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>I won't respond to your immediately preceding post, except to say I have not - deliberately or otherwise- misunderstood your posts. I understand them perfectly and, I say your plan is not implementable to any degree of success whatsoever. Further, even if identification were to be 100% successful, short of a complete lock up, it would still be possible for a known psycho to get his hands on a semi automatic rifle.
I do agree, however, that we should make every attempt to keep these individuals from legally acquiring firearms of any nature, but certainly for semi auto rifles.(Something the NRA has successfully prevented, BTW). One way to double down on this attempt is to eliminate the availability of semi auto rifles from the general public.
Therein lies the rub. The general public is not the problem, why should people like myself and other honest law abiding citizens be restricted in any way as a result of something or someone we have absolutely nothing to do with? Especially when it will have absolutely no affect on the lawless? Unless you are able to destroy every firearm on the planet they will still be available to those who disregard the law. The pathological mind WILL find a means to its end. You can beat around the bush as much as you like but the fact remains that the killers out there will not be affected by gun control laws, only law abiding people will be affected and law abiding people aren't the problem. We can enact all of the bans and restrictions you like and those who are breaking the laws we have now will continue breaking the laws, new ones included. So, what will that accomplish? You pursue an illusion. I don't know how to make you understand. The violence is not a product of the tools used, it is a product of the mind wielding the tools and unless we address the source we've done nothing.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#100 Feb 1, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
And, of course, the only way to stop a west bound vehicle traveling 100MPH is an east bound vehicle traveling 100MPH, right???
No.If the east bound vehicle has the exact shape but weighs twice as much as the west bound vehicle it only has to do 50MPH.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#101 Feb 1, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>So Saint was correct. No physco test to get a machine gun. My, my.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#102 Feb 1, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Therein lies the rub. The general public is not the problem, why should people like myself and other honest law abiding citizens be restricted in any way as a result of something or someone we have absolutely nothing to do with? Especially when it will have absolutely no affect on the lawless? Unless you are able to destroy every firearm on the planet they will still be available to those who disregard the law. The pathological mind WILL find a means to its end.
Not trying to destroy "every firearm on the planet"; just semi auto rifles in the US. Some will no doubt survive. At least for awhile. But if we stay with it, we can get to 99.9% over time. Much better than what's out there now.
You can beat around the bush as much as you like
Getting rid of semi rifles is not exactly what I call "beating around the bush".
...but the fact remains that the killers out there will not be affected by gun control laws,...
It's not the "law" that will affect them, the guns i'm talking about won't exist.
only law abiding people will be affected and law abiding people aren't the problem.
Law abiding citizens will do just fine without semi auto rifles.
... and unless we address the source we've done nothing.
And, in terms of these mass psycho slayings, that source TODAY is- ta da- the high capacity semi auto rifle. And I don't care if you understand that or not.
BTW, I know what I advocate is not going to occur; at least not during my life time. In the mean time, we will continue to arm ourselves with high capacity assault rifles. In another 10 or 15 years, we will look like a bunch of mid-east Arabs running around shooting them off in the air and whooping and hollering. And, in spite of all this armament, psycho mass killings will continue to occur. And to what end? SAD!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Farmington Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama COUNTDOWN Clock 1000 days left & c... (Apr '14) 14 hr Integrity 723
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) Feb 21 justice is just a... 7,123
News Sites offer kids free lunch at parks (Jun '11) Feb 10 Peacemaker 59
News Protesters gather outside circus in Farmington Feb 9 whooosh 1
News Ruidoso teacher pleads no contest to charges - ... (Jul '11) Feb 2 Karma 59
Jim Bourke RC Groups Slander Bullying (Dec '08) Feb 1 lje4357 46
News Despite few gangs, Aztec joins lesson (Dec '10) Jan 27 Sur s1d3 37

Farmington Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Farmington Mortgages