Alternatives to arming teachers

And yet more mass shooters have been disarmed by unarmed bystanders than by armed bystanders

 

Okay, and......?

 

What if there were no guns in the first place?

 

Is it necessary to arm people just in case?

 

Not sure how anybody can be attacked from 20 feet away. But if they come within 20 feet, they are tased They can also have a cell phone.

 

What if they only had a taser too?

 

What if there were no pickpockets in the first place?

 

You are using a gun to stop a pick pocket?

 

What? You don't know of any weapons that have more than a 20ft range? Have you heard of firearms?

 

Nope. Go back and re-read.

 

Oh... I see. So you want to put your daughter in a gunfight with an assailant while carrying 3 children and in a place where the assailant can retreat but she can't.

I'm an advocate of nobody having guns. But if she does have a gun, I don't see any advantage in her having one that shoots exploding bullets, or any like that. Which was the matter discussed.

 

Hollow point bullets are better at stopping an attacker.

 

Why would your daughter want to stop the assailant "better"? She just wants to stop him. Period.

 

By using the most effective means possible. Some means are better, and some are worse.

 

But worse at creating victims

Why are you assuming only the good guys will have these weapons?

 

Funny how all of your so called "Solutions" or just gun control it's almost like you have an agenda.

First there is no such thing as assault weapons that is a made-up category by people who don't know what they're talking about.

All bullets are capable of killing. And since cops are people just like everyone else all bullets are capable of killing cops

Banning the sale of high capacity magazines does not stop them from existing if you want to do anything you would first have to confiscate all of them.

I could care less about bump stocks you can bump fire a gun without that again another solution that only makes sense if you're ignorant.

You can't enforce federal background checks on person-to-person sales. Someone could simply sell a gun without saying anything.

The do not fly list is arbitrary and by no means grounds to take rights away from people.

Courts shouldn't have the power to strip you of your rights without due process of law giving them search Authority would be removing several Constitutional Amendments.

Raising the age to 21 is doing nothing but furthering a gun control agenda.

It is a stupid stupid waste of money to go around buying guns from people who are likely not going to shoot anybody. And once again assault weapon is not a real thing.

Now make with the ad hominems because your proposal is more about an agenda than solving problems and you can't articulate a way to solve a problem without stripping people of their rights.

I'll be surprised if you make a response to this that isn't a personal attack.

 

that's a good thing being good at creating victims is bad

The very fact that bad guys have these weapons is the reason good guys should.

 

Well part of making up a narrative is making up bad sounding names or descriptors to describe common things.

Take for instance assault weapon that doesn't mean anything except for a weapon used in an assault.

 

So 550000 years after Hell Freezes Over? I wouldn't hold my breath.

People don't vote against their own rights that's why this sort of thing never seems to get passed.

 

We don't talk about that because that's an actual solution to the problem and it doesn't involve new gun control legislation of any kind.

That's why they make excuses for that horrible Sheriff.

 

that was all be spelled out very well in the Florida penal code.

amazingly very much a personal attack which seems to be all you are capable of doing when someone makes an argument you cannot rebut.

It's interesting you talk about life experience when this seems to be a very common fallacy you make. You seem to be deeply inexperienced in debate.

 

You are mistaken. Police carry firearms for the same reason anyone else would the ability to use lethal Force to stop a threat it's not to apprehend people.

Don't just make up nonsense and think that that is going to fly.

Now go ahead and attack me personally.

 

There are always unarmed bystanders. There are rarely armed bystanders near a mass shooting. Why is that, you think?

 

If you could magically replace every murders gun with a taser I would elect you president

 

You bet your ass I have an agenda! My agenda is to save lives. How dare I!

All categories are "made up". This one was made up by people who know just about all there is to know about making laws. So they do know what they're talking about. Which is how to make laws.

Are these supposed to be arguments? "Cop-killer bullets" is just a name. Much like Buffalo Wings are not wings cut from a Buffalo, And aren't necessarily chicken wings either. I hope I can find somewhere in this post anything a bit more profound than "semantics".

What in the world gave you the idea that the proposal is meant to stop them from existing?

Looks like this discussion may be a bit over your head. I'll check the rest of the message to see if there is any content.

Which would be a felony if the gun is used to commit a crime, and a misdemeanor otherwise.

In your mind, would gun sellers be encouraged or discouraged to sell the gun knowing it can be traced back to them? And why even bother if they can just go to the nearest "cash for guns" facility?

My proposals work as a whole.

In my opinion it's arbitrary. But, for many, it has taken away their right to travel. So as long as the list is in place, it can be made useful. If it's declared unconstitutional (and it probably will), then that's that. But in the mean time...

What the hell do you think "due process" means?

Under the same "logic" you probably also think it's a waste of money to hire TSA agents to check the bags of people who are likely not going to blow up the plane?

Oh... you'll be surprised with my response for much more than that.

Myself, I would be surprised if you answered the questions I posed. They are not rhetorical.