Expert Actress on Gun Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bon_Croix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thom18 said:
read any of the links I posted earlier? A knife attack in China left 33 dead and
Click to expand...
That was a group of at least 5 men.

If that group of 5 men had AR-15’s instead of just knives I’m sure it would have been more like 100 dead and 200 injured.

I’m flabbergasted that somebody is actually arguing that an AR-15 is no more lethally effective than a butcher knife. I just don’t even know how to respond to that.
 
Last edited:
LilyM said:
There are plenty of people who deplore the senseless loss of life in both situations. I realise you’re not directing it at every person calling for gun control, but it’s not an either/or situation.
Click to expand...
Ah, yeah, it IS an either/or situation. Of course I am not directing what I said at everybody wanting gun control, but I just have a really hard time taking s lot of the outrage over school killings seriously when these VERY SAME lives are meaningless 18 or 19 years earlier. A child’s life is either important or it’s not, it can’t be both ways. And we as a society have chosen that some stages of human development are more worthy of life than other stages. No problem with viciously killing children at one stage of their human development, but big huge problem with killing the VERY SAME ones at another stage of their human development. There is no logic or consistency in that. I have a big problem when people pick and choose which lives are important to fit whatever agenda they are moving forward.
 
Spyridon said:
40.png
phil19034:
It’s not about the number dead, it’s about the terror inflicted.
Click to expand...
Methinks the parents of children who were slain would beg to differ with such an assertion.
Click to expand...
Please understand… I am NOT taking anything away from the parents or classmates who lost children/friends. If this happened to one of my kids, I would want to kill the shooter personally, with my bare hands.

And honestly - such a charge that I can’t imagine what the parents are going though insults me.

What I mean is WHY do people commit commit mass murders like this in the first place and what is their goal? (1) they obviously have something deeply wrong with them and have a seriously malformed conscience. (2) but is their goal to kill everyone or to inflict terror, fear, chaos, etc? I would say it’s the later. Yes, they have no issue killing the innocent - and want to kill people - but the deaths alone are not the goal, the terror is.

My point: if you don’t make schools as secure (if not more secure) than city office buildings, school manicures will continue to happen (even if all the AR-15s are taken away.

Also, we MUST get to the bottom of why people are going on these killing sprees in the first place and stop that. Because these killers are going to kill with or without an AR-15. We need to stop promoting a society which breeds these kinds of people.

My daughter’s school is very secure, with key cards, etc. No one can just walk in and when let in, no one can leave the lobby without a keycard. BUT, they don’t have a security guard. Once a shooter gets in the front door, they could take a key card from the office. You don’t need an AR-15 for that. A hand gun is all you need.

Personally, I would like to see a security desk / station where no one gets past without some kind of screening before getting to speak with someone in the office. Personally, I think metal detectors would be a great addition.

Two jobs ago, to get in my office, I had to do the following:
  1. use key card to open outer most door
  2. use key card to open 2nd door
  3. walk though metal dector
  4. have my eyeball scanned
  5. walk though rotating door that only turned enough and was only large enough to allow one person to walk though.
  6. all of this was in front of a security guard.
  7. then we had to use a key card to access our servers or offices.
Every tight security. And you know what… none of that is very expensive today.

God bless
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
That was a group of at least 5 men.

If that group of 5 men had AR-15’s instead of just knives I’m sure it would have been more like 100 dead and 200 injured.

I’m flabbergasted that somebody is actually arguing that an AR-15 is no more lethally effective than a butcher knife. I just don’t even know how to respond to that.
Click to expand...
@spyridon

NO ONE is saying that AR-15s don’t make it easier to kill more people. Of course they do, it is self-evident. A person would have to have a completely diminished mental capacity not to realize that.

We are simply saying that 1 life dead is already FAR TOO MANY.

To me, the ONLY ACCEPTABLE NUMBER IS ZERO DEAD.

I want us to focus on things that WILL make the number dead ZERO. I’m not interested in simply lowering the number of people a mass murder can kill. I want to stop him before it happens.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
DeniseNY said:
But maybe talking about mental health and society’s lack of respect of life doesn’t lend itself to the grandstanding and chest thumping we see after tragedies like this.
Click to expand...
I prefer to talk about both, but this thread is on gun control.
 
pnewton said:
40.png
DeniseNY:
But maybe talking about mental health and society’s lack of respect of life doesn’t lend itself to the grandstanding and chest thumping we see after tragedies like this.
Click to expand...
I prefer to talk about both, but this thread is on gun control.
Click to expand...
No, this thread is about how Mayim Bialik calls for ‘civil disobedience’ to change gun laws.
 
“No” is an incorrect word, as you give the exact topic and I gave a general description. That does not change the fact the topic is not on mental health, so I do not understand why you interjected this. One could also legitimately discuss Mayim Bialik’s other political stances, or how celebrities on whole use their status to make statements… or gun control.
 
The FBI and State/Local Police do not want to leak out all of their
“sources and methods” for quelling gun violence.

The kid worked at Dollar General. Do you not think the surveillance there
is part of an overall plan to quell gun violence?

The cameras in the schools nearby where we live are hooked to the city’s
police department.

The issue of guns is sensitive b/c of the 2nd Ammendment, so it is hard to
take guns away. Other tactics are used to control certain people.
Unfortunately, these tactics also violate the rights of the law abiding.

Then there is the topic of private security forces… These people need
much more control; they are loose cannons. They are not government
employees (2nd Ammendment limits government’s power not private power).
 
Last edited:
DeniseNY said:
It would be better if more people wanted to address the underlying causes of why kids are looking to mass slaughter their classmates. As we’ve seen in terror incidents, one does not need a gun to take out large groups of people.

But maybe talking about mental health and society’s lack of respect of life doesn’t lend itself to the grandstanding and chest thumping we see after tragedies like this.
Click to expand...
This is precisely why abortion “rights” are central to the problem and yet, incomprehensibly are being ignored.

On the one hand you have an identifiable group, women, who are handed a “right” to end the life of another human being for completely casual reasons – because that human being might present certain “inconveniences” to the lifestyle of the woman considering the abortion or it may be that she just doesn’t “want” the new human being in her life.

The mere fact of being unwanted is sufficient warrant to justify her killing and disposing of the body (abetted by a willing abortionist) with no sanction by society and, in fact, to the applause of a large sector of it.

On the other hand, a young man whose life has already been left in complete shambles by circumstances beyond his control (deaths of both parents) and the rejection of pretty much his entire peer group, is left without recourse as far as separating himself from the human beings he perceives have made his life utterly miserable.

On the one hand, society says a woman can and should kill and freely walk away from a human being who threatens to impose even a slight burden on her “freedom” and lifestyle, whereas a young man whose “lifestyle” has been a disaster to a great extent by factors beyond his control and he himself has been left bereft of any support from that same society that falls ever backwards to provide carte blanche “remedies” to some members of society while completely denying any possible recourse to others.

It is no wonder that deep resentment and animus has become the principal motivators on the part of a growing number of individuals.

Continued…
 
Does this justify what Cruz did? Not at all. His actions are, if we are honest, understandable, but not excusable. And still reprehensible. No less reprehensible, however, than much of what passes for acceptable in our decadent society.

Until our society focuses on each of us as individuals taking our responsibilities very seriously – and not on the endless contriving of new sets of “rights” for novel victim states – society will continue to splinter, and profound aggrievement, and the lashing out behaviours that go with it, will continue to manifest themselves. Justice and fairness are what bind and unify society together, but deeply engrained and real injustice will drive people apart and continue to splinter society into a legion of warring groups and, finally, an infinite array of embittered individuals.

Individuals need to stop identifying with some identity group or other and stop focusing on their disadvantages and aggrievements. This mindset can only lead literally to hell. Every human person on earth has to cope with those, but people of good will move beyond being motivated by evil to striving to bring about good on earth.
 
I have a hunch that private security forces may have had something to do
with this kid going ballistic.
 
Last edited:
I read an article this morning that claimed he bought ten guns over the period of less than a year leading to the attack. This fact, if true, needs to be explained.

By explained, I don’t mean why it was permitted by current laws, but how it was even possible, given his circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
40.png
phil19034:
And honestly - such a charge that I can’t imagine what the parents are going though insults me
Click to expand...
When did I say such a thing?
Click to expand...
When you said “Methinks the parents of children who were slain would beg to differ with such an assertion,” that’s how I took it.

If that was not your intent, fine. However, as a Father of two, that’s not how it looked (felt) to me.

When these shootings happen, don’t think for a minute I’m not afraid for my kids, my wife, and all my loved ones. The high school in my school district had a gun incident a few years ago (but no one was hurt because they simply busted the kid by finding the gun in the locker).

And when I was in high school, a girl brought a gun to school and was busted there too.

So please do not think for a moment that these incidents do not have an affect on me.

And frankly, I used to be 100% for a total ban on AR-15s. When my brother bought one, I was disgusted (and trained as an MP in the Air Force). But over time, I did my research regarding why he felt it was necessary. And while I will most likely never own a gun myself, I now understand why men like Thomas Jefferson felt we must allow civilians to be armed. Because men like Jefferson didn’t only feel that men should be able to protect their families, but also men like Jefferson didn’t trust govts (even though he was the 3rd President).

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Bon_Croix said:
Then there is the topic of private security forces… These people need

much more control; they are loose cannons. They are not government

employees (2nd Ammendment limits government’s power not private power).
Click to expand...
I think schools (at least public ones) should have a police presence. I can see working at a school as a great job for some older police officers past normal retirement age and/or reaching retirement age.
 
phil19034 said:
that was not your intent, fine. However, as a Father of two, that’s not how it looked (felt) to
Click to expand...
It was not my intent at all - I simply meant the parents I’m sure would mostly disagree with what you said.

And I’m not very strong on a total ban so much as I am on severe restrictions - I’d like to see the same restrictions put in place for civilians to own an AR-15 as if they wanted to own an M-16.
 
Well, at least the tin foil has not utterly cut off circulation to the brain like the folks who claim the MStone massacre is a total hoax like Sandy Hook!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top