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.

xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2320 May 6, 2013
Yes, I was on a cell phone, and for some reason it auto "corrected" and I posted before catching it.

If you WOULD pay attention, you would notice in my subsequent posts, I did note that it was 3.75%(or .0375) who had responded--not .03%. And still, as I pointed out, if you WOULD pay attention, that is a low number and hardly representative.

It would benefit you to read posts if you're going to reply.
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>A
A political poll of 1000 voters out of 100 million voters is what percent? In addition,you seem to be playing loose with the math.It is almost 4% and the percent of LEO for assault weapons is over 3%(.03) not .03%.
.03% is three one hundreds of one percent(.0003) or 120 of 400,000.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2321 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
So now you're changing course. I thought it was about me inferring you broadly applied the results of that (meaningless) poll, but you corrected my assumption, saying you were simply reporting what the respondents' reactions were.
From the PoliceOne membership of 400,000, only 15,000 (or 3.75%) responded. That's rather meaningless, and I think even you see the insignificance of it.
Quit blubbering.
<quoted text>
I never said anything about it's significance. I simply commented on your stupid comment about how those who responded being happy about criminals having access to guns. You're a freakin' idiot who made an incredibly stupid comment. I just pointed out your stupidity. Now you are attempting to deflect attention away from the fact that you made an incredibly stupid comment. You're the one doing all of the blubbering. I'm talking about one poll and the group who responded........nothing more.
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2322 May 6, 2013
Ok..........
and I still say......whooppee. A few law enforcement officers have an opinion. And I still ask.....does that mean they want to see more assault weapons out there?

There IS an answer to that question in the link you posted.
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I never said anything about it's significance. I simply commented on your stupid comment about how those who responded being happy about criminals having access to guns. You're a freakin' idiot who made an incredibly stupid comment. I just pointed out your stupidity. Now you are attempting to deflect attention away from the fact that you made an incredibly stupid comment. You're the one doing all of the blubbering. I'm talking about one poll and the group who responded........nothing more.
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2323 May 6, 2013
.....and BTW, I said nothing about police being happy if criminals had guns.

Pay attention and READ.
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2324 May 6, 2013
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would go with the LEO opinion rather than some old lady's opinion whose knowledge of firearms is based on the Lone Ranger tv series way back when.
LOL!

The Lone Ranger was well before my time; have never seen that tv program, but I think Johnny Depp is starring in a Lone Ranger movie.

Calm down now.

LOL

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2325 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
So now you're changing course. I thought it was about me inferring you broadly applied the results of that (meaningless) poll, but you corrected my assumption, saying you were simply reporting what the respondents' reactions were.
From the PoliceOne membership of 400,000, only 15,000 (or 3.75%) responded. That's rather meaningless, and I think even you see the insignificance of it.
Quit blubbering.
<quoted text>
Also, I find it interesting that you resort to slandering LEOs who disagree with you. Let's see, you denigrate fellow forum members who disagree, you disrespect veterans and active duty military who disagree, and now LEOs who disagree with you are "insignificant". So anyone who disagrees with you is a POS right? Your pseudo-intellectual, condescending, megalomania is fun to watch though, especially coming from one as mentally challenged as yourself.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2326 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
Ok..........
and I still say......whooppee. A few law enforcement officers have an opinion. And I still ask.....does that mean they want to see more assault weapons out there?
There IS an answer to that question in the link you posted.
<quoted text>
I didn't post any links. Pay attention. I suggest you ask them what they meant. What I read told me that they thought a ban would have no impact on violent crime.......nothing more........nothing less. What's the matter? Just can't believe that there are LEOs who disagree with you?
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2327 May 6, 2013
You do have a comprehension issue. Didn't I acknowledge that a few LEOs had that opinion? My question to you is why would such a low number have such significance to you? If it didn't, why would you even call attention to it? After all, there were other poll questions. Why did you not call attention to those?

I'm simply pointing out the low number of respondents; nothing more, nothing less.

It must bother you.
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't post any links. Pay attention. I suggest you ask them what they meant. What I read told me that they thought a ban would have no impact on violent crime.......nothing more........nothing less. What's the matter? Just can't believe that there are LEOs who disagree with you?
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2328 May 6, 2013
It's difficult to keep your various screen names straight. Why not just stick to one? Oh well.

How have I denigrated LEOs? How do I denigrate other forum posters.....any more than you do?

You just have issues with anyone--especially a female--who will challenge your ignorant statements.
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Also, I find it interesting that you resort to slandering LEOs who disagree with you. Let's see, you denigrate fellow forum members who disagree, you disrespect veterans and active duty military who disagree, and now LEOs who disagree with you are "insignificant". So anyone who disagrees with you is a POS right? Your pseudo-intellectual, condescending, megalomania is fun to watch though, especially coming from one as mentally challenged as yourself.
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2329 May 6, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>you disrespect veterans and active duty military who disagree, and now LEOs who disagree with you are "insignificant". So anyone who disagrees with you is a POS right?
LOL! Disrespect veterans? Are you losing it? Actually, I think you are.

If you can't handle the discussion, I don't know what to tell you other than you may be in the wrong place or out of your element.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2330 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
You do have a comprehension issue. Didn't I acknowledge that a few LEOs had that opinion? My question to you is why would such a low number have such significance to you? If it didn't, why would you even call attention to it? After all, there were other poll questions. Why did you not call attention to those?
I'm simply pointing out the low number of respondents; nothing more, nothing less.
It must bother you.
<quoted text>
I assigned no significance to this poll other than it's face value. You're the one who seems intent on trying to make it a world wide mandate. The poll doesn't bother me a bit. YOU and people who would restrict/abrogate our individual rights and freedoms are what bothers me.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2331 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
It's difficult to keep your various screen names straight. Why not just stick to one? Oh well.
How have I denigrated LEOs? How do I denigrate other forum posters.....any more than you do?
You just have issues with anyone--especially a female--who will challenge your ignorant statements.
<quoted text>
I post under one name and one only. Don't try to blame me for your inattention. I had no idea that you are female until now. This whole conversation started with ME challenging YOUR ignorant statement. Any other excuses you'd like to offer for your stupidity?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2332 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! Disrespect veterans? Are you losing it? Actually, I think you are.
If you can't handle the discussion, I don't know what to tell you other than you may be in the wrong place or out of your element.
You just live in your own little world and ignore reality, don't ya?
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2333 May 6, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I assigned no significance to this poll other than it's face value. You're the one who seems intent on trying to make it a world wide mandate. The poll doesn't bother me a bit. YOU and people who would restrict/abrogate our individual rights and freedoms are what bothers me.
Again I would ask you: If only 10 LEOs had responded, would you have been commenting on that?

As for abrogating freedoms, have you checked The Patriot Act lately?
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2334 May 6, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I post under one name and one only. Don't try to blame me for your inattention. I had no idea that you are female until now. This whole conversation started with ME challenging YOUR ignorant statement. Any other excuses you'd like to offer for your stupidity?
You never answer questions. I will ask again: where did I say police would be happy if more criminals had assault weapons?

(BS on the screen names.)
xando

Phoenix, AZ

#2335 May 6, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You just live in your own little world and ignore reality, don't ya?
Again I will ask you: where and how have I disrespected veterans?

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#2336 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, that's nice that law enforcement has an OPINION. I wonder if that means they would like to see more people having assault weapons. I'm sure they would.
I would not give a rats ass what they say.

If someone is breaking in to my home they are not going to be there and further to the point it is not the only reason to have one .

Cops are far better at responding to crime then they are at preventing it.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#2337 May 6, 2013
Get Out wrote:
<quoted text>
Will the school teachers or staffs that are now trained firefighters or EMTís stop an active school shooter? Will they be armed as well? Could be a great working scenario too, after the school shooter is put down by the armed firefighters and EMTís they could treat his wounds so he could be found guilty and executed later. Good thinking WIMA.
You would not get the point if it was on the end of a nail banged in to your head.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2338 May 6, 2013
xando wrote:
<quoted text>
Again I would ask you: If only 10 LEOs had responded, would you have been commenting on that?
As for abrogating freedoms, have you checked The Patriot Act lately?
Yes, I would comment on 10 LEOs if, as in this case, a squirrelly loon like you is accusing them of wanting criminals to have access to guns just because they disagree with your stupid ban.

I have spoken out against the Patriot Act since day one. The Patriot act is a knee-jerk reactionary clusterfuck that is a clear violation of the constitution and the American way of life. It needs to be repealed and Homeland Security needs to be dismantled and decommissioned before we lose control of it and need to repeal it by force.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#2339 May 6, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, I would comment on 10 LEOs if, as in this case, a squirrelly loon like you is accusing them of wanting criminals to have access to guns just because they disagree with your stupid ban.
I have spoken out against the Patriot Act since day one. The Patriot act is a knee-jerk reactionary clusterfuck that is a clear violation of the constitution and the American way of life. It needs to be repealed and Homeland Security needs to be dismantled and decommissioned before we lose control of it and need to repeal it by force.
Extremely well said.

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.

Kirtland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Worse place I've ever lived 1 hr The Green Watch Dog 21
Barack Obama COUNTDOWN Clock 1000 days left & c... (Apr '14) 5 hr scirocco 430
Disabled Parking 16 hr Leaving 2
News Who still takes global warming seriously? (Jan '10) Thu Earthling-1 30,812
Kirtland Music Selection (Aug '12) May 18 Musikologist 13
News New Mexico VA clinic among nationa s worst for ... May 16 Lupe 6
rip b.b. May 15 XandO 2
More from around the web

Kirtland People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]