High School Shooting In Florida

[coachdb18]

While a lot of what you say may be true, there's a couple of problems with it. You can't compel some one to seek help and it is very difficult these days to get someone committed involuntarily.

As tired and hackneyed as this old cliche sounds:

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. But that in no way inhibits drowning the son of a bitch.

In this case, drowning is the available response of conceal carry to bring down the immediate and violent death of anyone who becomes an active shooter. in schools, malls, theaters, churches, work places... everywhere. Give them no place where they can scheme to victimize.

 

[BobBalouski]

Dang, widdle dickless daily: reads like love blooming in the GB air!

You're just about ready to ask her if she gets off as much as you do when a guy smacks her around in public, aren't you?

Kinda surprised you and stickguy didn't work out, though; was he too big or too little for you? Or, were you just too embarrassed when you finally realized who you were springin' a woody over?

You definitely wouldn't make that type of ignorant move twice in row, right dickless? I mean, do you even know yet if "briie" is carrying (), or not?

 

[richard_daily]

Is it bar time already?

 

[silver gurl]

The husband and I went through the whys tonight. Break it down to the route cause.

Could there be better gun control, of course. But banning would not end it.

The common factor, all (exception of Eric Harris, unconfirmed) were or had been on antidepressants.

Something to look at.

Then break it down more. Why do are children need to be on antidepressants. Keep breaking that down.

 

[briie]

Lmaooo.. You always make me chuckle, eyer.
You're such a guy.
But rest assured, I'm well past the stage of such illusions, eyer. I'm too old and mediocre from that pov.

 

[Hypoxia]

Y'all say change can't and won't occur. I say change must and will occur.

I suspect y'all are wrong. I don't know if I'm right, but I'll work for it.

 

[BobBalouski]

The husband and I went through the whys tonight. Break it down to the route cause.

Could there be better gun control, of course. But banning would not end it.

The common factor, all (exception of Eric Harris, unconfirmed) were or had been on antidepressants.

Something to look at.

Then break it down more. Why do are children need to be on antidepressants. Keep breaking that down.

You mean keep breaking it all the way down to their mothers' insistence that it's every mother's "right" to intentionally kill their own innocent little baby sister/brother, simply for convenience?

Geezus christ, woman: what kid wouldn't be devastatingly depressed realizing what a cold-blooded murderer her/his own mother naturally is?

Quit insisting it's your "right" to kill innocent human life and maybe some day your kids won't naturally follow in your footsteps.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You can't lead a horse to water, if there's no water.

Even when there is water....sometimes you can't.

Just like numerous mass shooters in modern US times who had access to or were actively receiving care from HC professionals for their problems.

From Ft. Hood to Virginia Tech and Las Vegas.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Nah...I just know I am better than who I am being compared to. If that bothers you...it isn't personal. There are many I am better than. I am not better than these kids standing up leading this change. They are all better than I am.

Leading change LOL

Leading to a day off from school to go fuck off doing something other than spend more hours in that public babysitting nightmare they call "school".

They're willing to try anything as long as it means they get their way. It doesn't matter if it doesn't work, as long as they feel good about it.

They want "compromise" and "common sense" when they're not willing to do the former, and all of their arguments lack the latter.

That is the hyper polarized and in most cases partisan standard.

Also the "compromise" and "common sense" almost always manage to turn into "Fuck you I'm going to piss in your post toasties just because it gets you so bent. " when they are the ones holding the power. Then act outraged as fuck when the other guys get to go to town on them with the bull whip for a few years like they are fuckin' victims or some shit.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Calling for a School Shooter Task Force, how LUNATIC of me. It's so unreasonable! What kind of radical nutjob idea is that? Who'd want to know why they're happening and what we can do about it?!!!!

You're a babbling old fraud, and I don't mind saying it.

Of course. That's been clear, since you haven't made a coherent argument for anything but a radical stance that has no bearing in law, tradition, or society.

You're a fringe lunatic.

And I'll call you as such.




No, we need to get crazy people the help they need, and deserve.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yes, your excuses are being broadcast, loud and clear, four by four.

They're technically not "excuses", an excuse would have some sort of rationale to support their position, no matter how tenuous.

"Guns don't kill people, mental illness does" is not an excuse...it's a deflection.

Deflection and ascription are the two core components of little Queery's puerile ideology.

 

[Rightguide]

They're technically not "excuses", an excuse would have some sort of rationale to support their position, no matter how tenuous.

"Guns don't kill people, mental illness does" is not an excuse...it's a deflection.

Deflection and ascription are the two core components of little Queery's puerile ideology.

Cars kill more people than guns yet they and their users are the most regulated, licensed, and regulated thing in America in common use. All of which does nothing to control the death toll.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Cars kill more people than guns yet they and their users are the most regulated, licensed, and regulated thing in America in common use. All of which does nothing to control the death toll.

The primary purpose of cars are transportation, not killing people.

 

[Que]

The primary purpose of cars are transportation, not killing people.

Not surprising you come up with the cut and paste hackneyed rebuttal. Which happens to be stupid.

Guns are far easier to use responsibly. What difference does it make what the primary purpose of a product is If the product is misused far more often than the other product?

the primary purpose of armed guards is not to protect you from panhandlers.

 

[richard_daily]

Calling for a School Shooter Task Force, how LUNATIC of me. It's so unreasonable! What kind of radical nutjob idea is that? Who'd want to know why they're happening and what we can do about it?!!!!

You're a babbling old fraud, and I don't mind saying it.

I quoted why you're a fringe lunatic.

The fact that you ignored that, and pretended I quoted something else you said just goes to strengthen my claim.

Here what you said:

Of course, I want most if not all guns banned

Mental illness means nothing. That is a false flag, except insofar as we need to keep the crazies away from guns.

 

[Rightguide]

The primary purpose of cars are transportation, not killing people.

See how that works?

You don't have a constitutional right to drive on the public highways either. If we start putting licenses on your constitutional rights you'll have another privilege instead of a right. Since you constantly use your right of free speech to misrepresent the truth and libel others maybe you should be singled out for licensing in order to post, eh?

 

[richard_daily]

The husband and I went through the whys tonight. Break it down to the route cause.

Could there be better gun control, of course. But banning would not end it.

The common factor, all (exception of Eric Harris, unconfirmed) were or had been on antidepressants.

Something to look at.

Then break it down more. Why do are children need to be on antidepressants. Keep breaking that down.

A lot of the people involved in massacres haven't been on anti-depressants. Jared Lee Loughner comes to mind, as someone who was likely an undiagnosed schizophrenic.

That said, I do think we have a problem with over-prescribing medication, which is a huge reason why we have an opioid crisis.

 

[richard_daily]

Even when there is water....sometimes you can't.

Just like numerous mass shooters in modern US times who had access to or were actively receiving care from HC professionals for their problems.

From Ft. Hood to Virginia Tech and Las Vegas.

Just because they were getting care, doesn't mean it was adequate care.

 

[ChinoMoreno]

See how that works?

You don't have a constitutional right to drive on the public highways either. If we start putting licenses on your constitutional rights you'll have another privilege instead of a right. Since you constantly use your right of free speech to misrepresent the truth and libel others maybe you should be singled out for licensing in order to post, eh?

man why would they build the roads if they didn't expect people to drive on them and thats not relevant to guns at all.

 

[Pookie]

Not surprising you come up with the cut and paste hackneyed rebuttal. Which happens to be stupid.

Guns are far easier to use responsibly. What difference does it make what the primary purpose of a product is If the product is misused far more often than the other product?

the primary purpose of armed guards is not to protect you from panhandlers.

Compared to cars, guns are far easier to use irresponsibly as well.

 

[Rightguide]

man why would they build the roads if they didn't expect people to drive on them and thats not relevant to guns at all.

That's right, driving can be licensed because it isn't a constitutional right. The licensing and regulation of the use of guns, turns a constitutional right into a privilege.

We know that licensing and regulation of vehicles has little effect on their negligent use so why should we believe a different effect on deaths that result from the criminal misuse of guns will have a different effect?

Oh, and we all know that if you had to have a high school diploma to post on Lit, you wouldn't be allowed your First Amendment rights to post here. That's the point.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

It all comes down to extreme vetting of the person seeking to exercise their well regulated constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

It is already the law to revoke the right of gun ownership under the 1968 Gun Control Act and subsequent amendments had which prohibits anyone convicted of a felony and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.

Prudently extending this to the mentally ill, extending for other criminal behaviors (ie. not just domestic abuse of a spouse but also children or partner), fixing the process so the background checking is fully conducted for all firearms transaction and giving it teeth by also directing law enforcement to confiscate guns from those already in possession of firearms prior to the conviction of a felony, when they become subject to a domestic violence protective order or are deemed mentally ill.

I am watching Wayne LaPierre say something similar right now in front of the Alt-Right Action Conference.

 

[Que]

Compared to cars, guns are far easier to use irresponsibly as well.

. . .and yet the vast majority of the 350,000,000+ guns in the US have never harmed anyone due to malice or irresponsible actions of the owner.

For the small minority of guns that are misused I will accept societal responsibility for my point of view on the 2nd Amendment for about one-third of those incidents two-thirds of those incidents are from suicides which frankly I don't see as meaningful or criminals killing other criminals which I care even less about.

I also enthusiastically claim credit for each and every time the presence of a gun or the suspected presence of the gun stop someone from being victimized.

You can go ahead and step up and take full responsibility for every incident involving a gun that occurs in a "gun-free" zone. Deal?

 

[bellisarius]

It all comes down to extreme vetting of the person seeking to exercise their well regulated constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

It is already the law to revoke the right of gun ownership under the 1968 Gun Control Act and subsequent amendments had which prohibits anyone convicted of a felony and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.

Prudently extending this to the mentally ill, extending for other criminal behaviors (ie. not just domestic abuse of a spouse but also children or partner), fixing the process so the background checking is fully conducted for all firearms transaction and giving it teeth by also directing law enforcement to confiscate guns from those already in possession of firearms prior to the conviction of a felony, when they become subject to a domestic violence protective order or are deemed mentally ill.

I am watching Wayne LaPierre say something similar right now in front of the Alt-Right Action Conference.

You're a broken record repeating the same discredited, unconstitutional, poorly thought out, bull shit over and over again.

 

[Que]

Just because they were getting care, doesn't mean it was adequate care.

Since you keep claiming expertise in this field why don't you go ahead and explain what course of treatment you would have recommended instead and how that course of treatment is more likely to be offered in countries with socialized medicine.