Moiraine Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: Well that’s certainly helpful analysis. It is exactly what has always happened. You have said nothing to refute it. You then asked me what the Democrats have done. I posted an article for you to read. It seems to me the ones who get defensive about this stuff are the ones who treat politics as a sport. We're all individuals. We shouldn't be lining up with one political party on all topics as if the parties are sports teams. Maybe that's not you, but the reason I think it might be is because it's pretty clear the policy inaction is due to the GOP and NRA. But that's different than a claim that school shootings are the GOP's fault or that the actions that have been considered are the right ones. Edited February 22, 2018 by Moiraine 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, TheSker said: Yes, I've read the thread. Often times I read something I disagree with. I rarely comment. I like the premise of actions speaking louder than words. Political discourse is full of words. It is my sincere hope that action is taken. I agree. But no one in this topic is doing what Ric is claiming in the post you're quoting, hence my confusion. Edited February 22, 2018 by Moiraine Link to comment
TheSker Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, Moiraine said: I agree. But no one in this topic is doing what Ric is claiming in the post you're quoting, hence my confusion. I liked Ric's post and it reminded me of the quote I posted. You (or anyone else) are free to agree, disagree, comment or not comment. BB Hemingway had made some posts that raise some valid points from my perspective also. There is a lot of Trump and NRA bashing, which is fine. I have feeling both Trump and the NRA will be around for a while. It feels like political discourse vs action from both sides to me. Link to comment
Ric Flair Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 23 minutes ago, Moiraine said: It is exactly what has always happened. You have said nothing to refute it. You then asked me what the Democrats have done. I posted an article for you to read. It seems to me the ones who get defensive about this stuff are the ones who treat politics as a sport. We're all individuals. We shouldn't be lining up with one political party on all topics as if the parties are sports teams. Maybe that's not you, but the reason I think it might be is because it's pretty clear the policy inaction is due to the GOP and NRA. But that's different than a claim that school shootings are the GOP's fault or that the actions that have been considered are the right ones. What constitutes policy inaction is a matter of perspective. Why not allow teachers to carry guns? Why not hire unemployed veterans and arm them to guard schools? Why do you assume that any policy action necessarily has to require limitations on gun ownership? 1 Link to comment
TheSker Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 29 minutes ago, Moiraine said: Maybe that's not you, but the reason I think it might be is because it's pretty clear the policy inaction is due to the GOP and NRA. So are these generalities or solutions? Link to comment
commando Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: What constitutes policy inaction is a matter of perspective. Why not allow teachers to carry guns? Why not hire unemployed veterans and arm them to guard schools? Why do you assume that any policy action necessarily has to require limitations on gun ownership? and when the police get to the school looking for the gunman.....they will have to sort through all the armed teachers, janitors, and security guards who are running around with their guns and try to identify who is a teacher and who is the gunman. 1 Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: What constitutes policy inaction is a matter of perspective. Why not allow teachers to carry guns? Why not hire unemployed veterans and arm them to guard schools? Why do you assume that any policy action necessarily has to require limitations on gun ownership? Because a teacher's vocation is to teach, not to play cop or soldier. Even cops have said more guns on the scene will cause confusion and a host of new issues. Clearly the current policies are broken, surely you agree... Edited February 22, 2018 by ZRod 1 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 17 minutes ago, commando said: and when the police get to the school looking for the gunman.....they will have to sort through all the armed teachers, janitors, and security guards who are running around with their guns and try to identify who is a teacher and who is the gunman. Or, the armed guard/vet/teacher pops them in the head before anything tragic happens and instead of calling the cops we call the mourge. Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Redux said: Or, the armed guard/vet/teacher pops them in the head before anything tragic happens and instead of calling the cops we call the mourge. Then the cops pop the guard in the head because he's the one firing a gun... Link to comment
Redux Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, ZRod said: Because a teacher's vocation is to teach, not to play cop or soldier. Even cops have said more guns on the scene will cause confusion and a host of new issues. Clearly the current policies are broken, surely you agree... But if it saves even one life shouldn't we try? Wasn't that the narrative when I suggested super strict gun laws would result in black market sources, we should still try. 1 minute ago, ZRod said: Then the cops pop the guard in the head because he's the one firing a gun... No, the cop isn't there yet.....cause gunman dead. Edited February 22, 2018 by Redux Link to comment
commando Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Redux said: Or, the armed guard/vet/teacher pops them in the head before anything tragic happens and instead of calling the cops we call the mourge. the armed guard at this florida school didn't get that done. and whoever is going to shoot the gunman won't know there is an active shooter until there is...an active shooter. . Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 I know it's complicated, but if America is about to become a country that builds walls instead of bridges -- literally -- and defunds our schools of everything except armed guards, we are not a great nation. Not even close. 4 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, commando said: the armed guard at this florida school didn't get that done. and whoever is going to shoot the gunman won't know there is an active shooter until there is...an active shooter. . So in other words, having an actual line of defense bwtween a threat and students is useless or more dangerous than it's worth. I'm just not buying that. Edited February 22, 2018 by Redux Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Redux said: But if it saves even one life shouldn't we try? Wasn't that the narrative when I suggested super strict gun laws would result in black market sources, we should still try. No, the cop isn't there yet.....cause gunman dead. I don't understand why introducing more of the object creating the problem into the environment seems like a good idea... Cop happens on the school as the shooter is active... Cuz hypotheticals all around. Link to comment
commando Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 the nra wants the armed guards in schools...more sales that way. it's going to happen so..heck with it. Link to comment
Recommended Posts