What a terrible day - 21 dead most are children

If this has been posted before I have not seen it. Here is a short statement by Mark Levin on a very good web site. Thanks to ATS for leading me here. Chris Russo's response hit home for me also. I like Massachusetts policy and wonder if it could be adopted nationally ? It seems like a pretty good way of curbing these shootings. Not perfect of course but it would help. www.washingtonexaminer.com...
udeo-christian-roots

a reply to: Jaellma


Did clinton remove the means for all American schools to stop a shooter?

Did Clinton advocate for and sign a law that put signs on every school entrance to inform everyone that nobody on school property has the means to stop a shooter?


He deserves part of the blame for the current situation, a good deal of the blame, because he thought politics was more more important than protecting children at schools.

Squabble squabble squabble, and nothing will change, because the loudest voices in this debate are petulant children who never learned how to compromise.

Ironic, really, when you think about it.

a reply to: Spacespider

Why don't you blame leftists ideals when most mass murderers have been far left?... Many of them often wrote about "worrying about Climate Change and there being too many humans on Earth" a sentiment most leftists in this website also believe...

Why don't you blame the people who have dehumanized human beings? First dehumanizing Blacks, Hispanics, and not just the unborn, but i have seen a lot of leftists dehumanizing adults for having a different view.

The large majority of mass shooters are far left. The large majority of shootings occur in democrat cities/states or because of democrat policies like open borders and "sanctuary cities" hiding criminals for being illegals...

Why don't you blame democrat policies/laws which have been implemented in democrat cities and/or states?

In many democrat hell holes criminals can steal up to $900 and they won't be even detained...

In New Murder York now if a criminal attempts to rob a store he won't be pursued by police. If the criminal points a gun at a person's head, that no longer is a crime.

Literally thousands of criminals who have committed previous crimes have been let go by Soro's Attorney Generals, and other Soro's stooges.

There was a recent case of a rapper who writes songs about killing police officers, he shot a police officer and was released...

Cases like the one above are not an exception but are the rule these days.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u
a reply to: Jaellma


Did clinton remove the means for all American schools to stop a shooter?

Did Clinton advocate for and sign a law that put signs on every school entrance to inform everyone that nobody on school property has the means to stop a shooter?


He deserves part of the blame for the current situation, a good deal of the blame, because he thought politics was more more important than protecting children at schools.

Bill Clinton also banned military personnel in military bases on U.S. soil from having our firearms handy. What happened after this was mass murderers who were able to murder many of our brothers and sisters and police officers had to come from outside a military base to stop the assassins...

originally posted by: NoMoreFools
Squabble squabble squabble, and nothing will change, because the loudest voices in this debate are petulant children who never learned how to compromise.

Ironic, really, when you think about it.

Spoken, or rather written, like a Soros' puppet.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: NoMoreFools
Squabble squabble squabble, and nothing will change, because the loudest voices in this debate are petulant children who never learned how to compromise.

Ironic, really, when you think about it.

Spoken, or rather written, like a Soros' puppet.

awww, that’s cute. You proved my point without even meaning to.

originally posted by: bluemooone2
If this has been posted before I have not seen it. Here is a short statement by Mark Levin on a very good web site. Thanks to ATS for leading me here. Chris Russo's response hit home for me also. I like Massachusetts policy and wonder if it could be adopted nationally ? It seems like a pretty good way of curbing these shootings. Not perfect of course but it would help. www.washingtonexaminer.com...
udeo-christian-roots

Criminals are criminals because...

A. They are vegetarians.

B. They don't follow laws.

C. They watch too much tv.

Hint, the answer is B. Criminals will NEVER follow laws. That's why they are... CRIMINALS.

There are literally over 20,000 state and Federal gun control laws in existence in the U.S.... You think one or two more laws will change CRIMINALS?...

Democrats and RINOs don't care about regular Americans. They want to disarm law abiding Americans meanwhile they themselves have firearms, or have bodyguards with firearms.

Democrats/RINOs that are in favor of gun control are the same type of aholes like the nazis, and the communists, and the English.

In Cuba fidel castro did sent military personnel and some police officers and took away the firearms of regular people, or anyone that would not give an oath to fidel castro...

Hitler and the nazis introduced first a registration of firearms, and then used those registrations to disarm minorities, and political opponents. When the nazis took over countries like France, they disarmed the populace, and anyone who didn't turn in their firearms was executed in the streets...

Dictators are the only people who want to disarm law abiding people meanwhile giving more rights to criminals and releasing hard core criminals.

These elitists want to dissolve all sovereign nations and to implement a One World Government where regular people will have no access to firearms so they can't revolt against the elitists.

These same elitists need to destroy all western nations, and more so the U.S. to be able to implement their global dictatorship. To do so they are working with other elitists like Soros, like Zuckerberg, like the Gates, The Rockefellers, etc and these super rich elitists are paying for the campaigns of attorney generals, judges, and lawyers that don't want to follow U.S. law, but want to allow criminals to keep destroying, looting, murdering people meanwhile they go after law abiding Americans for protecting themselves and their property.

You think that these elitists will pay the "fair share" corrupt democrat leaders claim "the rich must pay"?... No... democrat leaders work for these rich elitists and they all are following the same agenda. To disarm all law abiding people, cause chaos, the destruction of economies and overall violence to exist everywhere to then present a solution by claiming a One World Government will solve all problems.

originally posted by: NoMoreFools


awww, that’s cute. You proved my point without even meaning to.

Pfft... You need to stop projecting your flaws.

I lived in a country in which regular people were disarmed and are not allowed to have firearms. I have studied history, something you leftists don't do, and seen what happens to every nation in which regular civilians were disarmed...

Even Ghandi knew the power of an armed populace. A lot of leftists claim Ghandi was pro-gun only before he became a pacifist, but in his autobiography he mentions the views he had in the past that he no longer held as a pacifist. But his stance on firearms was not one of those views he regretted.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn."

After regular people are disarmed, what came/comes next were/are the worse dictatorships the world has ever known.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: bluemooone2
If this has been posted before I have not seen it. Here is a short statement by Mark Levin on a very good web site. Thanks to ATS for leading me here. Chris Russo's response hit home for me also. I like Massachusetts policy and wonder if it could be adopted nationally ? It seems like a pretty good way of curbing these shootings. Not perfect of course but it would help. www.washingtonexaminer.com...
udeo-christian-roots

Criminals are criminals because...

A. They are vegetarians.

B. They don't follow laws.

C. They watch too much tv.

Hint, the answer is B. Criminals will NEVER follow laws. That's why they are... CRIMINALS.

There are literally over 20,000 state and Federal gun control laws in existence in the U.S.... You think one or two more laws will change CRIMINALS?...

Democrats and RINOs don't care about regular Americans. They want to disarm law abiding Americans meanwhile they themselves have firearms, or have bodyguards with firearms.

Democrats/RINOs that are in favor of gun control are the same type of aholes like the nazis, and the communists, and the English.

In Cuba fidel castro did sent military personnel and some police officers and took away the firearms of regular people, or anyone that would not give an oath to fidel castro...

Hitler and the nazis introduced first a registration of firearms, and then used those registrations to disarm minorities, and political opponents. When the nazis took over countries like France, they disarmed the populace, and anyone who didn't turn in their firearms was executed in the streets...

Dictators are the only people who want to disarm law abiding people meanwhile giving more rights to criminals and releasing hard core criminals.

These elitists want to dissolve all sovereign nations and to implement a One World Government where regular people will have no access to firearms so they can't revolt against the elitists.

These same elitists need to destroy all western nations, and more so the U.S. to be able to implement their global dictatorship. To do so they are working with other elitists like Soros, like Zuckerberg, like the Gates, The Rockefellers, etc and these super rich elitists are paying for the campaigns of attorney generals, judges, and lawyers that don't want to follow U.S. law, but want to allow criminals to keep destroying, looting, murdering people meanwhile they go after law abiding Americans for protecting themselves and their property.

You think that these elitists will pay the "fair share" corrupt democrat leaders claim "the rich must pay"?... No... democrat leaders work for these rich elitists and they all are following the same agenda. To disarm all law abiding people, cause chaos, the destruction of economies and overall violence to exist everywhere to then present a solution by claiming a One World Government will solve all problems.

watched a bit of the davos conf, gates, shwab, Soros. wow!

don't worry beto to the rescue.

what was most horrible was the nut job locked him and his victims in their class room and started killing them all, one by one.

reminds of the armish school killings. perp took over he school house lined up the girls and blew them away with a shotgun.

www.pennlive.com...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: NoMoreFools


awww, that’s cute. You proved my point without even meaning to.

Pfft... You need to stop projecting your flaws.

I lived in a country in which regular people were disarmed and are not allowed to have firearms. I have studied history, something you leftists don't do, and seen what happens to every nation in which regular civilians were disarmed...

Even Ghandi knew the power of an armed populace. A lot of leftists claim Ghandi was pro-gun only before he became a pacifist, but in his autobiography he mentions the views he had in the past that he no longer held as a pacifist. But his stance on firearms was not one of those views he regretted.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn."

After regular people are disarmed, what came/comes next were/are the worse dictatorships the world has ever known.

Another post full of nothing but silly assumptions and flying off the handle. You seem like a very rational and reasonable person .

At no point did I suggest that the populace shouldn’t be armed. You might want to go re read my post and try again.

Your entire post has absolutely zero relevance to the statement I made, or to my beliefs on gun ownership.

You’re simply ranting to no one and nothing in particular. Like petulant children do.

Again, proving my point, without even realizing it.

You and Beto. My prime examples.

the loudest voices in this debate are petulant children who never learned how to compromise.

I thought bashing the democrat party's 'policy' insanity wasn't really allowed here anymore?

But yes, many long term issues could easily be resolved when that behavior finally stops or is removed from power.

I predict that will happen in November.

In unprecedented historical fashion.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u

the loudest voices in this debate are petulant children who never learned how to compromise.

I thought bashing the democrat party's 'policy' insanity wasn't really allowed here anymore?

But yes, many long term issues could easily be resolved when that behavior finally stops or is removed from power.

I predict that will happen in November.

In unprecedented historical fashion.

Allowed or not, I’ll bash both sides. They all suck

a reply to: NoMoreFools



I don't have any problem with that, as long as your targeting is more accurate.



Or did you miss the By Any Means Party's Summer Of Love And Peace?

Along with the 5 years prior?




Best example of petulant behavior by American politicians since the same By Any Means Party started a civil war to keep something.

originally posted by: PatriotGames4u
a reply to: NoMoreFools



I don't have any problem with that, as long as your targeting is more accurate.



Or did you miss the By Any Means Party's Summer Of Love And Peace?

Along with the 5 years prior?




Best example of petulant behavior by American politicians since the same By Any Means Party started a civil war to keep something.

I think you may have misunderstood my post. It was not directed at either side, specifically. It was directed at the people, on both sides, who refuse ANY compromise or understanding.

One side is drown out by the people living in a fantasy land where guns will just disappear if their outlawed. The other refuses to even consider simple things like mandatory competency classes for certain weapons.

Time for those folks, on both sides, to sit down and let the grownups talk.

a reply to: NoMoreFools


While I appreciate your further explanation (I really do), your targeting still appears way off.

One side (other than a handful of kooks) has always been interested in and advocating for realistic changes, while the other has been lying 24x7 about that problem with penchulant demands for absolutely absurd and unconstitutional changes and refusing to even consider or discuss anything else.


If that side actually wants to rejoin the civilized conversation about our gun problems, they can start by letting police back into schools and taking down those stoopid gun free school zone signs that only serve as a flashing neon sign to bad actors that nobody on school property has the means to stop a shooter.

If they want my attention though, that side will also have to start enforcing existing gun laws for the first time in half a century.

a reply to: musicismagic

I've been looking at your pics on Discord.

I really do not want to go to Japan until after my dogs die. It's too much of a hassle in my opinion to jump through all of the hoops to bring them with us.

another shooting and as usual all the same responses to it. What a surprise.

something something insanity and doing same things and expecting different results or something.

pretty sad people put their 'rights' to own firearms over the rights of others to live.

Honestly, like owning a car, owning a gun should be a privilege not a right. As many seem to like comparing vehicular deaths to mass shootings. If you're unfit to drive you do not get a license. If you're unfit to firearm you still get to 'drive'.
You don't have to ban your precious guns but will you at least tighten up your gun laws to protect your precious young lives?

I'm Australian, I can still own a gun as long as I pass the checks. Not had what is defined as a mass shooting here since 1996. Not a single school ever shot up.

But please do tell me "yOu AuSsies GaVe Up YoUr GuNs" and how tighter gun laws do not work and how it's a people problem not a firearm one.

But sure if you owning a gun without restrictions is more important than 20 kids dying every other day because 'mah god given rights' and hundreds of years old pieces of papers written for a different time then I'll just say see you next mass shooting champ.

All these GOP talking points about mental health have a point. But guns are a part of the problem they don't want to acknowledge also, I bet you a dime to a dollar when bills in congress come up to increase mental health aid or research they'll all vote against it claiming budget considerations.

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo


How about enforcing existing laws and letting police back into schools?

We've had guns for a very long time, the school shootings are new.

Not enforcing gun laws and not policing schools is a fairly new development, roughly the same age as the insane political decisions to stop enforcing gun laws and advertise that nobody on school property has the means to stop a shooter.