Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you are disputing the results of someone else's research, how does your unsubstantiated, UN-RESEARCHED opinion add anything to the discussion? America has over 320 million people, and a well-documented history of over 200 years--a pretty big database for statistical analysis. Even if you could find an incident where a normal (non-psychotic) armed citizen shot someone by mistake every year while defending against a mass murderer, it would be so rare as to be statistically "none."
And while negatives can't be proven, you can certainly get a good idea of how common (or rare) something is. In this case, there's an excellent reason to conclude that normal (non-mentally ill) armed citizens are an asset, rather than a liability, during an attack: the lack of any reports of an armed citizen harming bystanders while defending an attack, even though the vast majority of American media & news conglomerates are desperate to find ANY news to support their owners' agenda (disarming the American citizen).
If there were any such incidents, our biased media would have found them, exaggerated and mis-reported them, and made sure that the intellectually-challenged masses thought they were common events (via endless repetition for months after the incident, and then perpetual inclusion in every subsequent gun-related incident).
Everyone has an opinion on every subject, but the importance of that opinion depends on how it was formed:
(1) Via research on all sides of the issue, followed by critical analysis (conscious and subconscious bias of sources, overt attempts to push an agenda; ignoring data when the conclusion is inconvenient, whether assumptions are justified and conclusions logical, etc.), or
(2) By parroting back whatever an authority figure (or the media in general) wants everyone to think.
When a poster admits they haven't bothered to research, and wouldn't believe research anyway, it's pretty clear how they form their opinions--and consequently how much their opinion should count in the minds of those who actually want to understand and improve the world.
There were only 4 words of your post you needed to bother with: "negatives can't be proven." You (or someone else, can't remember) had previously confidently proclaimed a negative, and I was refuting that.
I agree with you about the importance of research and critical analysis. But I'm not going to waste my time reading websites that would be so foolish as to claim that NO innocent bystander has EVER been harmed.
You are ignoring the fact that every time a school shooting happens there is a call for more do nothing gun laws.
Is this about a militia to protect children in schools or about gun laws? Because if this is about the gun laws for you then that is a problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55
America’s favorite rifle is always the focus. Additionally, there is no immediate counter for the shooter.
The past assault rifle bans ironically made Americans buy better guns but made high capacity magazines a commodity. I keep wanting to buy about 300 30rd mags to sell the next time they restrict the sale of new ones but the market seems flooded right now. I think they are a long term commodity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55
I disagree with your assertion that teachers are not capable of providing a defense when they and their students lives are on the line. I’m not calling for all teachers, I’m calling for those who are qualified and desire the task with training.
I am not saying they are not capable, I am saying they can also be the problem. Nobody says they want to grow up and be a school shooter when they are 4 years old.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55
Millions of Americans, that are not police, carry responsibly everyday with no issues. You are vastly misjudging CC’s as incompetent.
One of my good friends was a firearms trainer for a federal police agency and some of the stories he told me were just plain tragic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55
For you to say “wedging guns in” as not a solution. Are you suggesting police guns as well? Or only teachers/citizens?
No, what I mean is that every topic you see on this your answer is the the same "More guns", this is not because your want to save children but you just want more guns. Police are generally reactionary for a reason, because we do not want them to arrest people who "we think" might be bad and violate the Rights of innocent people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55
Again, your comment reeks of statism.
OH look, maat55 was spoon fed a new word and is trying to wedge it into every conversation she can.
Look, I not a liberal, I ****ing served in my countries military (US Army, Airborne, Air Assault, Infantry) am not anti-gun so keep trying to label me. You like labels because they make it so you do not have to think and can just listen to your talk radio and use their thinking for yourself.
Did you ever serve in the US military? If you love guns so much why not? Don't you want to save kids?
How about just voting like the rest of us and understand that to a reasonable degree the majority rules the nation.
There comes a time when voting is no longer effective though, look at our current Govt, and how tyrannical many of its laws and regulations are...yet everyone seems to be under a spell, that its all for their benefit, or to protect their health/ safety.
I dont think the founding fathers could have foreseen or guarded against whats happening today, the mass brainwashing/ conditioning of the public, all so popular public opinion lines up better with what a tyrannical govt desires. Its really very clever and very effective.
The exact same thing is happening with drugs, govt cracked down on doctors and opioid prescription drugs, under the guise of protecting health and safety of the public, now most people actually applaud govt for taking these steps, they believe its truly about protecting their health and safety. They actually are completely fine with a govt agency coming between them and their doctor!!
I just do not see that these two things are related and you seem to be mashing them together. On top of that you announce ideas and do not address criticism of your ideas.
Look, nothing against teachers but they are normal people. The percentage of teachers that are criminals is probably very similar to the rest of the population. So arming teachers does not seem to be the answer to me. To add to that are school systems, and as a result our teachers, are under budget stress almost constantly. So you are taking a group of people that I feel believe they are underpaid in general and arming them around children. I really am not thinking this is the answer.
No matter what the criticism you keep wedging guns in as the solution which to me is irresponsible. YMMV
It's being brought up, in my view, for 2 reasons. First, some people are obsessed with guns. They love guns. Love to play with them. See them as an answer to many problems. And this gives them a way to spread more guns and gun activity around. Second, whether the solution is good or bad, they see it as being a cheap way to secure schools. Well, just as in most cases, you get what you pay for.
The VERY LARGE school system I worked in for 20 years put a cop in every middle and high school. It was an extremely effective program for the schools and solved many issues when cops untrained in dealing with adolescents would cause many problems when they would go to a school (and I witnessed that personally more than once). As principal, I didn't have to "pay" for the police officer in my school, but I would have gladly given up an assistant librarian for that police officer, making it a fairly equal trade-off. And, on school holidays and vacations, those same police officers were sent back out to work in the "regular field".
It's being brought up, in my view, for 2 reasons. First, some people are obsessed with guns. They love guns. Love to play with them. See them as an answer to many problems. And this gives them a way to spread more guns and gun activity around. Second, whether the solution is good or bad, they see it as being a cheap way to secure schools. Well, just as in most cases, you get what you pay for.
The VERY LARGE school system I worked in for 20 years put a cop in every middle and high school. It was an extremely effective program for the schools and solved many issues when cops untrained in dealing with adolescents would cause many problems when they would go to a school (and I witnessed that personally more than once). As principal, I didn't have to "pay" for the police officer in my school, but I would have gladly given up an assistant librarian for that police officer, making it a fairly equal trade-off. And, on school holidays and vacations, those same police officers were sent back out to work in the "regular field".
I graduated high school in 1994, these were the days before most schools had a police resource officer, and yet these kinds of mass shootings were rare back in the 80s and 90s, how do you explain this?
There comes a time when voting is no longer effective though, look at our current Govt, and how tyrannical many of its laws and regulations are...yet everyone seems to be under a spell, that its all for their benefit, or to protect their health/ safety.
I dont think the founding fathers could have foreseen or guarded against whats happening today, the mass brainwashing/ conditioning of the public, all so popular public opinion lines up better with what a tyrannical govt desires. Its really very clever and very effective.
The exact same thing is happening with drugs, govt cracked down on doctors and opioid prescription drugs, under the guise of protecting health and safety of the public, now most people actually applaud govt for taking these steps, they believe its truly about protecting their health and safety. They actually are completely fine with a govt agency coming between them and their doctor!!
No. Simply no.
Because your premise assumes that a "militia's rights" to change the government are greater than the voter's rights to change the government.
Because your premise assumes that a "militia's rights" to change the government are greater than the voter's rights to change the government.
A 'militia' would know when a govt has become tyrannical, or when its beginning to overstep its bounds, and would know when its time to take action.
After all, a govt that is or seeks to be, tyrannical, is NEVER going to come out and admit itself to be tyrannical, they would always try to disguise tyranny as something else, safety, health, etc.
To a tyrannical govt a patriot is the same thing as a terrorist.
I graduated high school in 1994, these were the days before most schools had a police resource officer, and yet these kinds of mass shootings were rare back in the 80s and 90s, how do you explain this?
There comes a time when voting is no longer effective though, look at our current Govt, and how tyrannical many of its laws and regulations are...yet everyone seems to be under a spell, that its all for their benefit, or to protect their health/ safety.
I dont think the founding fathers could have foreseen or guarded against whats happening today, the mass brainwashing/ conditioning of the public, all so popular public opinion lines up better with what a tyrannical govt desires. Its really very clever and very effective.
The exact same thing is happening with drugs, govt cracked down on doctors and opioid prescription drugs, under the guise of protecting health and safety of the public, now most people actually applaud govt for taking these steps, they believe its truly about protecting their health and safety. They actually are completely fine with a govt agency coming between them and their doctor!!
That's absurd. Your militia is going to launch a war against the US government because you don't like the crack down on opioid prescriptions? Good luck with that
A 'militia' would know when a govt has become tyrannical, or when its beginning to overstep its bounds, and would know when its time to take action.
After all, a govt that is or seeks to be, tyrannical, is NEVER going to come out and admit itself to be tyrannical, they would always try to disguise tyranny as something else, safety, health, etc.
To a tyrannical govt a patriot is the same thing as a terrorist.
You and your little groups have no more right to change the direction of this country than anyone else.
And the real American way to change the government is to vote, not to throw a temper tantrum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
