NRA bans guns at their forum attended by Mike Pence

[BoyNextDoor]

Hmmmm, kind of like all the gun grabbing liberals with armed security details?

Name one.

 

[KeithD]

Name one.

Yeah, I didn't think loveupskirt could/would name one either. Who do these clods think they're fooling--other than themselves? And since Trump fools them, that can't be all that hard to do.

 

[Blue]

Since 2009 the US has had 57 times as many school shootings as the other major industrialized nations combined.
Here's a chart for the literary impaired.

I've heard they're blaming Ritalin now.

 

[KarissaTsevi]

Mike Pence takes it up the ass.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Mike Pence takes it up the ass.

That does not make him a bad guy. But you'd think he'd feel better if he would just admit it.

 

[KarissaTsevi]

Gun-loving republicans are mad as a hatter...

 

[KeithD]

Has loveupskirt named one yet? (No, I didn't think so).

 

[Blue]

I was listening to a video describing the standard shooter drill that US schools go through every now and then (side note: Remember that the US is the only country in the modern world to have those drills) and apparently the practice for teachers who have fortified doors to their classroom is to lock them immediately and not allow any students in corridors to enter.

I understand their reasoning since the hypothetical shooter could just pose as an average terrified student. But that logic also necessarily follows that students in corridors who are not the shooter have their chances of being killed skyrocket compared to students inside those classrooms. That logic being:
"Yeah, our schools are going to get shot up. Obviously we gotta let some kids die to better protect the majority of students."

Do any Republicans who support the status quo on US weapon regulation ever stop to think about the fact that it's just casually accepted that kids in the US will be shot in their schools at some point and instead of addressing that issue your country just builds a framework around it?

Rhetorical question, obviously not.

 

[Blue]

You don't suppose the Secret Service had some input here do you?

You don't suppose Trump has some input into the secret service?
If they truly believed more guns = more safety they would have altered the standard security protocols for the SS. But they don't believe it, they just espouse that logic because the NRA, the primary lobbying group for gun manufacturers who have a strong financial interest in selling as many guns as possible, bribed trump to the tune of >120 million dollars during his election campaign.

 

[BotanyBoy]

If they truly believed more guns = more safety they would have altered the standard security protocols for the SS. But they don't believe it, .

Of course they do, that's why the SS still has theirs.

IF (D)'s believed their bullshit they wouldn't use the SS and would go everywhere without being totally surrounded by guns.

But instead they are hypocrites, like most anti-gun politicians, and enjoy the security of armed security. Only the poor, unimportant, small people should be disarmed and without any means of self defense.

Call a cop and wait!!! Nobody needs that kind of firepower....said every lefty calling for gun control as they stand behind a bunch of guys with guns.

they just espouse that logic because the NRA, the primary lobbying group for gun manufacturers who have a strong financial interest in selling as many guns as possible, bribed trump to the tune of >120 million dollars during his election campaign.

But mostly gun owners who don't think they are better off disarmed.