RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools

RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Notsweet -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 7:50:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u . I was just going to let all of this go,but as I was walking my dog(I went unarmed,but fortunately the dog,and I,made it home unmolested)and it occurred to me that patronizing you would be just as rude as slamming you with snark. And yet, you were patronizing anyway. quote: The "resisting a tyrannical government" reasoning is specious at best,intellectually dishonest at worst. To stand behind the "well regulated militia"portion of the Second than you will have to tell me what unot you belong to,how often you meet to train,to discuss tactics and such. Absent such a relationship with a resistance group you are nothing more than an armed citizen...which is still legal under the Second.....but you can not claim to be armed in order to resist tyranny. That's just a bridge too far for me. The point is that people would be able to form a militia. And I'm not sure you can really determine here who is willing to arm themselves to resist tyranny. After all, as you said, you don't know me, I don't know you.... And of course, I'm talking government tyranny. But there are other kinds. And guns are used for that on a regular basis. Battered spouses, that sort of thing. I felt it was only polite to answer, as I saw your reply in the little "Collar Turns" box, but I'm hoping just to read here and not be part of the conversation anymore, so please have the last word.

lovmuffin -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 7:53:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Notsweet In reply to SlvMike: I understand your point. I disagree. I was just going to let all of this go,but as I was walking my dog(I went unarmed,but fortunately the dog,and I,made it home unmolested)and it occurred to me that patronizing you would be just as rude as slamming you with snark. The "resisting a tyrannical government" reasoning is specious at best,intellectually dishonest at worst. To stand behind the "well regulated militia"portion of the Second than you will have to tell me what unot you belong to,how often you meet to train,to discuss tactics and such. Absent such a relationship with a resistance group you are nothing more than an armed citizen...which is still legal under the Second.....but you can not claim to be armed in order to resist tyranny. That's just a bridge too far for me. Resisting a tyrannical government is simply the reason the authors put the second amendment into the bill of rights. Too often the anti gun types are being intellectually dishonest when they get hung up on the militia clause of the amendment but its a dependent clause.

Notsweet -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 7:56:14 PM)
Oh, I'm not new. I've been reading here for years (see my sign up date). So I know how things work. My last replies have been about the snark, and though you may find it funny, I don't. And 've been polite about everything I've said. And still, the "big girl panties" tells me that this isn't where there can be honest, non-showoffy kind of discussion. And that's a shame. I'm willing to take this conversation to pm if we must. I think you'll probably follow this up with some more snarkiness here though, so I give up, and you've chased me out of the conversation. Give yourself a pat on the back.

jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:10:19 PM)
The US spends 58% of the total money spent on defense on the planet. That is $695.7 Billion dollars. Lets make it a nice even number, $600 billion even. Now that 95.7 billion dollars is free to go to hiring professionally trained armed security for schools across the nation. Some of that money can go for metal detectors and x ray machines to keep kids from bring guns to school. Baring that, and because I have grand kids and great nieces and nephews in public schools around the country, use that money to cover the cost of mobilizing the national guard of every state and put a company in every school, and a national guard tank platoon outside every school. Okay when it comes to my grand kids and family, I am a little over protective, but in this case I want to make sure that not even a water gun can get near any kid.

slvemike4u -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:18:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Notsweet Oh, I'm not new. I've been reading here for years (see my sign up date). So I know how things work. My last replies have been about the snark, and though you may find it funny, I don't. And 've been polite about everything I've said. And still, the "big girl panties" tells me that this isn't where there can be honest, non-showoffy kind of discussion. And that's a shame. I'm willing to take this conversation to pm if we must. I think you'll probably follow this up with some more snarkiness here though, so I give up, and you've chased me out of the conversation. Give yourself a pat on the back. Perhaps You are correct...perhaps you don't belong here(only you can make that call) but I assure you this was me being nice. As for the pat on the back....It's covered,I even put a little notch on my profile,didn't you see it when you dropped by ?

Yachtie -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:19:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael One of the earliest weapons coverted into an automatic was done before 1900 with an old cowboy lever action. John Moses Browning converted an 1892 Winchester and that resulted in his first production machinegun the potato digger of 1895... The Maxin gun was in production a decade before that, and I'm sure there'll be earlier designs still somebody can cite. It's Maxim. Just fyi since were so pedantic here.[;)]

tazzygirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:24:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Notsweet quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: The bigger problem goes way beyond this one shooting. Shootings that are no less troubling are a regular occurance in some areas of our country, committed by people who should never have gotten their hands on a gun, but did, thanks to a thriving black market in firepower. The obvious solution to the wider problem of guns in the wrong hands, and its consequences, is to make illegal possession and/or sale a major law enforcement target. That would requires resources, however, and our government seems to feel that it is more important to stop people from getting high than to stop them from killing each other. This has nothing to do with a black market This has nothing to do with gang bangers This has to do with a mentally ill person getting his hands on guns legally obtained and owned by someone he knows, and allows him access too. I wish there was a "like" button. Tazzygirl, you are absolutely right. When are we going to start looking at the state of mental health care here?? Forgive me, I wasnt ignoring you. I had simply not seen your post until now. Was spending time with the man and the kittens. Thank you for your response. We do no need to address the mental health issues. We also need to recognize that not everyone is mentally healthy and responsible gun owners cannot assume that all their family and friends are and always will be.

tazzygirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:27:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael An early assualt rifle could have done this just as easy as a modern one. Cowboys had access to dangerously lethal mass killing machines like the Winchester 1892 with 15 round capacity... You cant design a gun law to get rid of "bad" guns. Hell i am.more afraid of a boy scout who can ahhot his.little .22 well than a gang banger with an ak47. That is the point. We dont know everything the mother owned. Maybe she didnt have any of the "old" guns you speak of.. maybe all she had were the three.

tazzygirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:37:25 PM)
quote: I think we're supposed to have the same weapons available to us as the government has, in case the government turns against us. I'm not a Democrat, but I'll put it in these terms. Suppose Bush turned out to be the evil dictator some thought him to be? Suppose he started "rounding up" gay people, people on welfare, people who voted for John Kerry. How would you fight back? If the next guy turns out to be Hitler, Pol Pot.....how are you going to fight back? It happens. In all honesty, if it came down to civilians against the government, who do you think would win? Civilians wouldnt stand a chance. We would be mowed down without a second thought. At the time of the Constitution, with the exceptions, maybe, of cannons, we all pretty much used the same type of gun power. Now we have drones, long range missels, aircraft, ect ect ect, employed only by out military. If a coup breaks out, we, as citizens, are fucked. quote: Another thought. Every single government building has cops at the door. The cops have guns. All the government buildings except.....schools. They have a big sign that says "There are no guns here. We have no one who can shoot back." Why is it important to guard the mayor's ass, but not the asses of 600 kids? Honestly...how often do you hear about a trained law enforcement officer getting his gun taken from him? Not often. We need to stop fighting about guns and start figuring out what in the hell we're going to do for the mentally ill. I agree. I would also have to add to your post. The mentally ill.... if you call Laughner and his ilk that, are a huge problem. Treating the few when the symptoms flair wont take care of the problem by itself. The best we can do at this point is a 72 hour hold in a psych unit for evaluation, some states allow a 96 hour hold. But that alone wont stop someone intent upon a killing spree. We need more than just a one prong approach to this problem. We need to regroup and overhaul our mental health system as a whole while doing everything in our power to limit them access to weapons. And, yes, I enlarged that, not as a dig to you, Notsweet, but to anyone who is reading this... I dont think it can be stressed enough.

DomKen -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:37:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin And again, duh........if I would have thought to blow up the image and not gone off half cocked I should have seen that too but instead of telliing me what a fuck up i was on that post I was really hoping some one could tell me what that thing is halfway up the barrel of the Ruger. Top part is the front sight. The bottom is an accessory lug I think.

tazzygirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:41:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Can someone please point out to me what any of this has to do with the suggestion that we place armed 'Volunteers" in our schools ? I can actually see some validity in armed guards at local schools. The question should be, in my opinion... are we ready to make schools into modern day detention centers?

jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:53:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Can someone please point out to me what any of this has to do with the suggestion that we place armed 'Volunteers" in our schools ? I can actually see some validity in armed guards at local schools. The question should be, in my opinion... are we ready to make schools into modern day detention centers? In some school districts there are already armed police in the schools, as well as metal detectors at the doors. Officers search book bags, and the random pair of baggy pants. I read that the police chief in Newton said there were already armed police officers in the high school and middle school. There is no way to know if that played any part of the picking of the target. The security in the schools does nothing about the shootings outside the schools, there was a sniper incident at a school in 1997, two students shot in the parking lot. Modern detention centers is a good term for this.

Focus50 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 8:54:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I'm sure this kid's mother was as blind-sided as everyone else. I base that conclusion on the fact that her son shot her in the face. K. Blind-sided - by a shot to the face? [:-] This thread is like a day out at the zoo. To be up close and personal with all those dangerous exotics but with the comfort and security of not having to actually live with them. Pure entertainment...! [:D] Focus.

tazzygirl -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:01:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Notsweet Well, Mike, we're never going to be able to afford the weaponry that the government currently has. Thanks for pointing out my mistake here, which is that I neglected to say that I believe that was the intent of the Founders who wrote the Second Amendment. That being said, no, we don't have warships and bombs, but (assuming that you know the difference between automatic, semi-automatic, single action, double action) the point is that we are supposed to be able to defend ourselves from the government. That was the entire point I was making in that sentence. Please don't get personal. edited for typo The intent of the 2nd amendment was to arm a well regulated militia. At the time, citizens had to provide their own arms because the government was not paying for them. So, when they were called up, they brought their own guns with them. From an old post of mine.... Second Militia Act of 1792 The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company overseen by the state. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.[4] Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall. However.... The delegates of the Constitutional Convention (the founding fathers/framers of the United States Constitution) under Article 1; section 8, clauses 15 and 16 of the federal constitution, granted Congress the power to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia," as well as, and in distinction to, the power to raise an army and a navy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#Constitution_and_Bill_of_Rights_.281787-1789.29 To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html Seems to me the government was supposed to pay for the arming of men, yet they decided men were supposed to arm themselves instead.

jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:10:29 PM)
Okay, on the national level the National Guard replaced the state militia, kinda. State defense forces (SDF) (also known as state guards, state military reserves, or state militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are partially regulated by the National Guard Bureau but they are not a part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State defense forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. The organized militia created by the Militia Act of 1903, which split from the 1792 Uniform Militia forces, and consist of State militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia. The National Guard however, is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States, which is a federally recognized reserve military force, although the two are linked. Which may provide a solution to the problem of Assault Weapons. Make everyone that owns or buys a military style weapons, aka assault weapons join the state militia, thus making them subject to the authority of the state, and then their homes and storage procedures are subject to inspection. Or if it aint now, make it that way. Now before you go and jump my ass, think about it. Subject to random state inspections. Of course there is the problem of unregulated private militias equipped with god knows what.

slvemike4u -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:12:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I'm sure this kid's mother was as blind-sided as everyone else. I base that conclusion on the fact that her son shot her in the face. K. Blind-sided - by a shot to the face? [:-] This thread is like a day out at the zoo. To be up close and personal with all those dangerous exotics but with the comfort and security of not having to actually live with them. Pure entertainment...! [:D] Focus. Maybe for you....for me it's like a fucking nightmare....these are,sadly,my fellow citizens [&o]

SimplyMichael -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:15:54 PM)
Current scholarship is firmly behind the 2nd refering to a specific right. All the early state bill.of rights ONLY spoke of the right of the individual. Face it, you hate guns and want them.banned. Just dont make up facts to support your bigotry. And there are quite a few ex dictators who thought they could win and there was that little country that kicked our ass. Armed citizens defeat armed governments.

jlf1961 -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:16:54 PM)
Any unnecessary death of a child by unnatural causes is heart breaking, this is down right cataclysmic

SimplyMichael -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:18:44 PM)
There are about 100,000 legal.machinegins and god knows how many.more silencers in this country. Statstically close to zero crimes committed with them. I will consider gun control after the police dissarm. Till then, this liberal isnt giving up squat of my rights.

slvemike4u -> RE: Armed "volunteers" in our schools (12/17/2012 9:22:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Can someone please point out to me what any of this has to do with the suggestion that we place armed 'Volunteers" in our schools ? I can actually see some validity in armed guards at local schools. The question should be, in my opinion... are we ready to make schools into modern day detention centers? Tazzy,I'm sorry,guards at the doors of elementary schools is,as an idea,nothing more than a distraction from the conversation we need to have about guns. Have that conversation,enact some common sense federal regulations ....and ,in addition if you like,secure the damm schools....but "volunteers"? Owner was correct what group of parents is going to calmly sit back while the incredibly inept are placed at the front door of their childs school...armed to boot.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.21875