How do we protect kids in school?

Jan 8, 2013 Full story: Ruidoso News 6,103

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

Full Story
factologist

Farmington, NM

#233 Feb 14, 2013
MD Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals don't want guns? Fine.
FTR. I'm a liberal and I have guns. I'm for me having guns; it's you I don't want to have a gun. I'm worried that you may be- or become- a psycho and I certainly don't want psychos having guns. Do you?
factologist

Farmington, NM

#234 Feb 14, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>I don't need to. In case you haven't noticed, I had nothing to do with that killing, none of my guns had anything to do with that killing, and I don't owe them any explanation at all. You keep trying to blame all of society for the acts of criminals and psychos. It's never going to work and TRUE AMERICANS will NEVER surrender their arms....nor should they.
Should I feel flattered that you GAVE me the explanation? But I disagree with-AGAIN. You, and all who think like you, owe the parents of all children of gun violence the explanation as to why their child's death was necessary.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#235 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>You mean like the children at Sandy Hook? Is that what you mean? Let them be "cannon fodder" so you can claim owning a weapon that can hold a 30 or 100 rd. mag. Is that what you mean, brave man?
You want to protect your home and life, get a shot gun.


A 110 lb woman must love defending her home with a shotgun.

"Celia Bigelow and Aubrey Blankenship summed up their praise for the AR-15 in their National Review column:“The AR-15 is lightweight and practical. As light as five pounds, it produces low levels of recoil, and it’s easy to shoot. It also looks intimidating, which is what you want when facing an assailant or intruder.… Accuracy? Check. Ease in handling? Check. Intimidation factor? Check. An AR-15 might be a woman’s best friend."

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/22-year-old-school...
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#237 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Should I feel flattered that you GAVE me the explanation? But I disagree with-AGAIN. You, and all who think like you, owe the parents of all children of gun violence the explanation as to why their child's death was necessary.
Shouldn't the parents be asking the person that shot their child? When there is an auto accident that killed four people on I 95 I don't ask my neighbor why he owns an automobile.

“leaning left”

Since: Mar 09

local

#238 Feb 14, 2013
Squach wrote:
Take the violent criminals and homicidal psychos off of our streets and keep them locked up until they're not a danger or execute them. They are the problem....not the honest law abiding citizens guns. Each and every one of them is INDIVIDUALLY responsible for their actions.
By Jove, I think I've got it. Every psychiatrist, psychologist, councilor, therapist, priest, doctor and attorney, etc. should be required by law to divulge every iota of personal, private information they are privy to. Seems fair to me. Executing the mentally ill also seems a reasonable solution. This surely includes the autistic, citizens suffering from Downs Syndrome, cerebral palsy etc., maybe we should go even further and include the physically handicapped and the elderly. Hmmmmm.

You right wing nut-jobs never cease to amaze me.......

You have not offered one reasonable idea or solution to getting mentally ill and criminals off the street.

I challenge you to find someone with serious mental illness and get them the help they need or have them committed long term.

Get your congressman/woman to submit a bill requesting more $$$$ for police, judges, care for mentally ill, and prisons. Good luck with that "Squat"
xando

Chandler, AZ

#239 Feb 14, 2013
All you people who are hysterically ranting about your rights to own guns and guess what--NO ONE IS EVEN BEGINNING TO SUGGEST THEIR CONFISCATION--that's just your wet dream because you extremists fanstasize about a day when you will have to barracade yourselves and fend off who knows who or what coming to get your guns.

How utterly ignorant. With today's war power weapons, your little guns (even assault types) would be useless.

Mor US citizens own guns than ever before with few to no restrictions.
factologist

Farmington, NM

#240 Feb 14, 2013
MD Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
I have (2) shotguns. A 1920's era Ithaca 22 gauge side-by, and a Browning 12 gauge pump.
DAMN! I have the Browning 12 ga pump but not the Ithaca. IMO the Browning is the best home defense weapon around.
Now please cite where I have made a claim to owning a weapon which holds a 30-100 round magazine. I challenge you. Quit making sh1t up Skippy, it only proves your ignorance.
Please accept my sincerest apologies. I thought you were one of the gun nut jobs who would stand in the way of banning those clips and the weapons that hold them so that "the innocent" wouldn't become cannon fodder to some idiot who does own one.(Did I make any shit up there Cap'n?) I do apologize. But in my defense, most gun nuts who stand in the way of such legislation, don't own such weapons. Are you one of those Cap'n?
"Cannon fodder" you would wish people who don't want to - or can't- carry a gun be "cannon fodder". What a guy. May you burn in hell for wishing that!(Did I make that shit up, Cap'n?)
factologist

Farmington, NM

#241 Feb 14, 2013
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Shouldn't the parents be asking the person that shot their child? When there is an auto accident that killed four people on I 95 I don't ask my neighbor why he owns an automobile.
Then there is this kind of excuse to not ban hi capacity clips.
factologist

Farmington, NM

#242 Feb 14, 2013
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Shouldn't the parents be asking the person that shot their child?
You know something, downhill, the people who kill children who, by happenstance, are caught in a crossfire, don't give a shit about the 2nd. The just know it's easy to lay there hands on a weapon. The 2nd has made it that way, for sure. But these people probably don't even know about that. Ironically, it's the law abiding people who know about the 2nd and fight to hold onto every morsel of it, that make it easy for these people to get these weapons.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#243 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Should I feel flattered that you GAVE me the explanation? But I disagree with-AGAIN. You, and all who think like you, owe the parents of all children of gun violence the explanation as to why their child's death was necessary.
No, we don't. We have done nothing to those families. The one who owes them an explanation is the one who killed their family member......and no one else. Those children's deaths was not necessary for any purpose of mine or any law abiding citizen. Those children's deaths were the responsibility of the individual who pulled the trigger.......and no one else. Should the parents of a young person who is killed in a car wreck hold every one who owns a car responsible? Do all car owners owe them an explanation? NO! Only the individual who was driving recklessly and caused the wreck is responsible and owes any explanation. You are blinded by your own selfish interpretation of the situation and in favor of punishing millions of law abiding Americans who have committed no crime nor are they ever likely to. People who think like you would turn America into the land of the subjugated and the home of the defenseless.
factologist

Farmington, NM

#244 Feb 14, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>No, we don't. We have done nothing to those families. The one who owes them an explanation is the one who killed their family member......and no one else. Those children's deaths was not necessary for any purpose of mine or any law abiding citizen. Those children's deaths were the responsibility of the individual who pulled the trigger.......and no one else. Should the parents of a young person who is killed in a car wreck hold every one who owns a car responsible? Do all car owners owe them an explanation? NO! Only the individual who was driving recklessly and caused the wreck is responsible and owes any explanation. You are blinded by your own selfish interpretation of the situation and in favor of punishing millions of law abiding Americans who have committed no crime nor are they ever likely to. People who think like you would turn America into the land of the subjugated and the home of the defenseless.
How stupid. Rarely, I say rarely, does someone take a car, which was built only to kill, into a crowded theater and run over over and kill and maim people. You are a very stupid person if you believe the two actions are comparable.
As long as you stand up for a so called right to mfg.,dist, and own a weapon which is used over and over again for senseless mass killings, not self defense, mind you but senseless killings, you owe the rest of society a reasonable explanation of WHY?
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#245 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text> DAMN! I have the Browning 12 ga pump but not the Ithaca. IMO the Browning is the best home defense weapon around.
<quoted text>Please accept my sincerest apologies. I thought you were one of the gun nut jobs who would stand in the way of banning those clips and the weapons that hold them so that "the innocent" wouldn't become cannon fodder to some idiot who does own one.(Did I make any shit up there Cap'n?) I do apologize. But in my defense, most gun nuts who stand in the way of such legislation, don't own such weapons. Are you one of those Cap'n?
"Cannon fodder" you would wish people who don't want to - or can't- carry a gun be "cannon fodder". What a guy. May you burn in hell for wishing that!(Did I make that shit up, Cap'n?)


The last mass killing in the UK which resulted in twelve dead and eleven wounded was done with a double barrel shotgun and a 22 bolt action rifle.Eric Harris, one of the Columbine shooters, used a rifle that conformed to the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 with a ten round magazine. He carried thirteen magazines. If he was limited to a five round magazine he probably have carried two dozen.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#246 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Then there is this kind of excuse to not ban hi capacity clips.


Then there is this kind of gun control nut who claims my post is an excuse to not ban high capacity magazines.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#247 Feb 14, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>How stupid. Rarely, I say rarely, does someone take a car, which was built only to kill, into a crowded theater and run over over and kill and maim people. You are a very stupid person if you believe the two actions are comparable.
As long as you stand up for a so called right to mfg.,dist, and own a weapon which is used over and over again for senseless mass killings, not self defense, mind you but senseless killings, you owe the rest of society a reasonable explanation of WHY?
You want a reasonable explanation?

We have had massive looting and even murders in weather emergencies like Hurricane Andrew, Hugo, Katrina and Sandy.

We have had looting,widespread arson,savage beatings and murders in the LA riots of 1992. During the 1992 Los Angeles riots, 2,383 people were injured, 8,000 were arrested, 51 were killed and over 700 businesses burned. Property damage was estimated at over one billion dollars. Of the 51 killed,at least ten of them were shot by police or National Guard forces.In terms of self-defense, AR-15s and other so-called “assault weapons” were used many times by Korean business owners during the L.A. Riots. They provided the firepower needed to fend off the mobs of people attempting to loot their stores.

In 1967 the Newark riots caused by the assassination of Martin Luther King took place.. By the sixth day riots, looting, violence, and destruction — ultimately left a total of 26 people dead, 725 people injured, and close to 1,500 arrested. Property damage exceeded $10 million.

Similarly, the 2005 civil unrest in France lasted over three weeks and spread to nearly 300 towns. By the end of the incident, over 10,000 vehicles were destroyed and over 300 buildings burned. Over 2,800 suspected rioters were arrested and 126 police and firefighters were injured.

If I have to defend my family,possessions and even friends I want the best bang for my buck, no pun intended. The AR 15 will suffice and it has what I call 'awe' power. If a guy is defending his home with an old deer rifle you wonder if he even knows how to use it. If the defender is armed with an AR-15 you kind of know he does. If you are a looter with half a brain you will leave and go to the next home that isn't defended.
Wondering

Los Angeles, CA

#248 Feb 14, 2013
dowhhill246
If you have defended yourself, family, and neighbors with an AR-15 that you are "well trained" to use, then the "looter" leaves and goes to the next home that isn't defended, then you are a piss poor shot!!!
GET MORE TRAINING!!!!!!

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#250 Feb 15, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>How stupid. Rarely, I say rarely, does someone take a car, which was built only to kill, into a crowded theater and run over over and kill and maim people. You are a very stupid person if you believe the two actions are comparable.
As long as you stand up for a so called right to mfg.,dist, and own a weapon which is used over and over again for senseless mass killings, not self defense, mind you but senseless killings, you owe the rest of society a reasonable explanation of WHY?
You really are impaired by your own erroneous opinions, aren't you. It's okay to use a "car analogy" if you are attempting to make a case for disarmament but if I use it to show how incredibly screwed up your thought process is, it's stupid. Why don't you just come out and say guns should be banned "BECAUSE I SAY SO"? That's all you've got. There is no logical reason to punish and criminalize millions of law abiding citizens no matter what YOU think. This is America and we are talking about the inalienable rights guaranteed by the constitution. Yes, I stand up for those rights. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. I and the millions of other law abiding patriotic Americans who own semi-auto rifles do not owe you or anyone else an explanation for what psychos and criminals do. We have no control over or part in the actions of the lawless. If you want an explanation, ask the criminals and psychos. You condemn those psychos for killing innocent people indiscriminately yet you want to indiscriminately punish and criminalize millions of American citizens who have committed no crime. Go figure.
xando

Chandler, AZ

#251 Feb 15, 2013
What is wrong with you people? Not only are guns NOT banned, more people own guns than ever in the history of the US.

Laws regulating firearms are nothing new--the first one was in 1860, and there have been FEW since then. In fact, taking into account the expiration and repeal of some restrictions, there are FEWER gun laws now.

Despite the passage of restrictions over 150 years, I have yet to see anyone ban or confiscate another's guns. Where does this exaggeration come from??? It has NEVER proven to be the case, and yet there are those if you who react as if your life is on the line if anyone suggests restricting automatics designed for quick, multiple kills.

If these laws are some kind of attack on your freedom, why, after 150 years, are you still able to own as many guns as you like?

You and your kind are deluded, and history has proven you so.
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>You really are impaired by your own erroneous opinions, aren't you. It's okay to use a "car analogy" if you are attempting to make a case for disarmament but if I use it to show how incredibly screwed up your thought process is, it's stupid. Why don't you just come out and say guns should be banned "BECAUSE I SAY SO"? That's all you've got. There is no logical reason to punish and criminalize millions of law abiding citizens no matter what YOU think. This is America and we are talking about the inalienable rights guaranteed by the constitution. Yes, I stand up for those rights. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. I and the millions of other law abiding patriotic Americans who own semi-auto rifles do not owe you or anyone else an explanation for what psychos and criminals do. We have no control over or part in the actions of the lawless. If you want an explanation, ask the criminals and psychos. You condemn those psychos for killing innocent people indiscriminately yet you want to indiscriminately punish and criminalize millions of American citizens who have committed no crime. Go figure.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#252 Feb 15, 2013
xando wrote:
What is wrong with you people? Not only are guns NOT banned, more people own guns than ever in the history of the US.
Laws regulating firearms are nothing new--the first one was in 1860, and there have been FEW since then. In fact, taking into account the expiration and repeal of some restrictions, there are FEWER gun laws now.
Despite the passage of restrictions over 150 years, I have yet to see anyone ban or confiscate another's guns. Where does this exaggeration come from??? It has NEVER proven to be the case, and yet there are those if you who react as if your life is on the line if anyone suggests restricting automatics designed for quick, multiple kills.
If these laws are some kind of attack on your freedom, why, after 150 years, are you still able to own as many guns as you like?
You and your kind are deluded, and history has proven you so.
<quoted text>
No reason to be insulting. I am not deluded and I don't belong to any "kind". Have you been reading the posts of Factologist? Your problem is that you think "some kind" of restrictions are going to help. Those restrictions will have absolutely no effect on the psychos and criminals. And when the gun grabbers realize (many of them already know and are already planning the next wave if this ban is enacted) that the restrictions aren't working they will start lobbying for more restrictions and when those restrictions don't work they will start screaming for more restrictions. The ultimate goal of the anti-gun lobby is to completely abolish guns from our society. Those, like you, who naively believe that that bans and restrictions they purpose now will be the end of the assault on the second amendment are sadly mistaken. People like you and Factologist are exactly the kind of people they need to push their agenda along. Whether you do it knowingly or not you are promoting the loss of freedom and the ability to defend ourselves. The leftist mind set does not tolerate armed citizens and if allowed to flourish it will abrogate the second amendment. Each little step in that direction sets a precedent for the next one. Once the second amendment is abrogated they will then move on to abrogate other rights that make total government control difficult. The liberal mind set assumes that the government should be responsible for everything in our daily lives and the logical conclusion of that mind set is complete government control of everything in pursuit of the nonexistent "common good". It's the same pattern that has been used many times to subjugate people and achieve a totalitarian state........with the people's own naive assistance. The founders knew this over 200 years ago and the only thing that has changed in all that time is the date. That's why the second amendment was written and must be held inviolate. Stop avoiding the only solution that makes any sense and address the root of the problem.......the criminals and psychos who walk free among us to commit heinous crimes. Until we find a way to do that the safety you seek is nothing but a pipe dream. The only thing gun legislation does is restrict the honest law abiding citizens in their ability to defend themselves from the criminals and psychos. Criminals and psychos just love gun bans (which they will completely ignore) because they depend on their victims being unarmed. The notion that you can disarm criminals and psychos while weapons exist anywhere in this world is a fallacy. Remove the criminals and psychos and the problem no longer exists. Guns could be hanging from every tree and without the criminals and psychos there wouldn't be any indiscriminate mass killings of innocent people. The problem is not which tools these individuals choose to use, the problem is THE INDIVIDUALS no matter what tools they choose.

“Polymath”

Since: Jul 08

Farmington

#253 Feb 15, 2013
Squach wrote:
. Those restrictions will have absolutely no effect on the psychos and criminals
So, apparently japan has no psychos or criminals at all then? Because they have managed to almost completely eliminate gun violence.

I hear this "criminals" argument over and over again. The Japan example proves that it is a lie. As guns got harder to get for everyone, even criminals and "psychos" found that they could not gain access. It took decades, but now they are free to walk the streets without fear of being shot.

I see the same thing happening in the U.S. It'll take a while, possibly as much as a century, but as people worldwide become more mature, more civilized, and more intelligent, gun owners will become a doomed breed.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#257 Feb 15, 2013
Saint_ wrote:
<quoted text>
So, apparently japan has no psychos or criminals at all then? Because they have managed to almost completely eliminate gun violence.
I hear this "criminals" argument over and over again. The Japan example proves that it is a lie. As guns got harder to get for everyone, even criminals and "psychos" found that they could not gain access. It took decades, but now they are free to walk the streets without fear of being shot.
I see the same thing happening in the U.S. It'll take a while, possibly as much as a century, but as people worldwide become more mature, more civilized, and more intelligent, gun owners will become a doomed breed.
And there you have it. Japan has also almost completely eliminated gun ownership as well. That is completely unacceptable in America where we are free individuals, not subjects of the state. Those folks who fear total confiscation of their arms aren't so paranoid after all. Are they? I wonder how their sword crime is. You can try to deflect all you like but anyone with any sense knows that the criminals and psychos out there are the problem and they will continue to be the problem with or without guns. Stop trying to blame all of society for the acts of a few individuals and go after the individuals who break our laws.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
-- Mahatma Gandhi

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.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 5 hr Here Is One 11,894
Eric Frein manhunt turns up explosives 5 hr FormerParatrooper 28
Moms Demand Action Calls On Kroger Family Of St... 6 hr Frank 49
Locked And Loaded: Thank God These 'Good Guys' ... 9 hr Squach 96
FOX&#x27;s Resident Windbag Claims Prez&#x... Mon caesar 2
Elk restoration plan is moving forward with the... Sun dried 4
Comfortably Numb: The Navy Yard shooting rampag... (Sep '13) Sun Enough already 3

Guns People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE