WR Meme thread V13

[DragRacer]

 

[Contra-dictator]

Lol this kid has climbed inside your head and made himself nice a comfy

Says the guy making a fool of himself by innapropriately haunting, heckling and fact checking the meme thread ffs. Do you not see yourself?

 

[Contra-dictator]

 

[ObamaPhoneLady]

 

[Hans Gercmiov]

 

[irish_thug]

You clearly have never encountered a Moose In real life. Terrifying.

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I told you I'd reply back, didn't mean for the 30 hour delay.

I think we should invest in education, healthcare, mental health care, rehabilitation programs for addicts and felons.

I actually agree with this, but that is a separate issue.

Education systems within Prisons for low-level felons (under 15 years)?

*Thumbs Up*

More guns isn't a solution in my book. It's just more complication.

What do you mean by 'complication?'

The anti-Gun Free Zone thing is cute so I'll touch on that. It doesn't mean guns can't exist in the zone. It just means that the penalties for having a gun in the area are more severe.

Open carry states still enforce no-gun-zones (schools).

What we're specifically discussing is lowering mass shootings at schools. If someone comes in armed and ready to paint the walls red with as many dead kids as possible, the shooter probably couldn't care less about the 'severe penalties.'

What no-gun-zones do, is prevent school personnel from being able to protect themselves and the students from an armed shooter.

Many schools already have armed guards. Many gun free zones have elevated security already.

Yes, many do.

And just like the Denver Theater Shooter, who specifically picked a theater that was labeled a gun-free-zone, potential shooters will simpily pick a school without any armed guards.

While many schools do have have armed gaurds, most don't. Even still, the shooters would first target the one armed guard per school and then it's a shooting gallery for all the kids being targets.

So, allowing any school personnel the choice to be armed, whether it is a teachers, jannitors, or principles and it being publicly known that every school employee throughout the nation could be armed would be an effective deterent.

Do you think you support lowering the penalty for bringing or using firearms at a school? That's what getting rid of Gun Free Zones means.

No, but I do recognise the potential for confusion with non-school-personnel (parents & other visitors) being allowed to carry firearms into schools.

1 - If a shooting happens, the police would have trouble determining a potential good-samairatan parent with a gun, from the shooter.

2 - For open-carry states, a soon-to-be shooter with a handgun or rifle could walk into a school, legally.

My proposal would be - Keep schools being 'Gun Free Zones' for everyone BUT school personnel.

Rather than type a page and a half of how this would be an effective solution to problems each of us would bring up, are you open to this idea?

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[Sir Galahad]