Leaderboard

Despite the fact that this is a hotly debated political issue (gun rights vs. gun control), there comes a point in which we ALL should be talking about ways to reduce the chances of this happening again. If your solution is "we're going to take your guns," you're not being reasonable. If your response is "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED," you're being unreasonable, too.

I have a pistol, FN-57, that holds 20 rounds in a standard double-stacked clip. It's very accurate...actually once used by the Secret Service. It's not an assault rifle, but I would pit myself against a guy carrying an AR-15 any day of the week. It's not the assault rifles or any rifles for that matter that is the problem. I can take a standard carbine with a 10 round clip and have just as much portability, have a duffle bag full of clips and have just as much firing capacity. Folks, we have a MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE on our hands... Btw, Timothy McVeigh was not using an assault rifle.

I can’t stand when people fall into superfluous arguments like “can you tell me what an assault rifle is” like it’s some catch-22 that’s going to help them win a debate. Can you define a school shooting? Because that’s what we’re talking about. You don’t have to know the difference between an AR15 and an AK47 to have an opinion on kids getting mowed down in class. If they ever do enact here, it will be because of gun people who sell bump stocks, scream “what part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do you not understand?” or refuse to at least admit that there are a heck of a lot of innocent people losing their lives via .223/5.56 rounds. Just because the left wants to use these shootings as an excuse to disarm law-abiding gun owners (typically conservatives) doesn’t mean that the repeated mass shootings shouldn’t be addressed in any way.

I FIND THE LACK OF BLAMING THE SHOOTER VERY DISTURBING

You will have to ask the lawmakers that. I have never brought up the shall not be infringed argument.

And that’s the problem. We sit around discussing guns and it’s obvious, to a few of us at least, that it’s not a gun problem, it’s a people problem. I could list a plethora of reasons, not the least of which is Dr. Spock’s infamous book, “The Common Book of Baby and Child Care”. This idiot turned parents into “would be psychologists”, raising children without physical discipline. The old saying, spare the Rod and spoil the child, was shelved for verbal chastisement and ‘time out’. Probably our first step into wokeism 🐂💩. Then add the decline of Christianity (morals), prayer out of school, lack of corporal punishment in schools, disintegration of the family, etc, etc, etc. Again, I go back to the weight scales. You keep taking from the good side (the side that had been working fairly good) and adding it to the bad side, it didn’t take long to create chaos. Guns the problem? Lay that rifle/pistol down and see how many people it kills. Guy wants to kill, he’ll find a way - no gun - no problem. He’ll get a knife, machete, baseball bat, whatever. No folks, it’s a people problem.

FWIW, when I purchased my last AR online the local FFL holder literally said "check them all _______ except for the last one and sign here" or something to that affect. I'm really starting to get the opinion that we need to hold retailers responsible when events like this happens. If you overserve somebody at a bar, you get charged if they drive off and kill somebody. I'm kinda getting the same feeling about gun dealers and individuals who sell/give away their guns. If that gun dealer in Uvalde knew that he faced prison time if that goth kid in the black trench coat came in wanting to buy a couple of ARs and few hundred rounds of ammo (a humongous red flag, IMO).... this whole thing might not have happened. Kinda like when I was watching the news on the morning after the shooting in Vegas and listening to the gunfire I instantly said "holy crap.... that's full auto." Then some 2A nutjob that manufactures the "bumpstocks" comes on trying to explain how it ISN'T an automatic weapon, but rather a semi-auto that fires itself and I thought to myself... "this jerk has to know that these things will only be used for one thing... spraying a crowd... and he's trying to defend it. The gun owners are losing the argument and their too stubborn to realize it. It's time to make some changes that don't involve point our fingers at the other guys.

Not sure how you come up with the ridiculous assumption that I'm ok with what happened. And I would say that putting prayer back in the schools would be a good move that could reach some of these kids that may not hear it at home. Moral degradation is a big part of what is happening. We have killed millions in the womb for convenience and many don't bat an eye. Life is cheap to many. And "shall not be infringed" should definitely apply...you have it wrong, as many have stated, this isn't a gun problem. I certainly don't see you presenting any solutions other than pointing at the gun crowd.

So you're okay if events like the one in Uvalde keep happening? There's going to come a time when law abiding gun owners are going to have to come up with a better answer than "no." If you have no suggestions of how to make it stop other than "we need to put prayer back in schools" or "shall not be infringed," you're going to lose the argument in the long run.

Thank you, this conversation should not be about guns, some just don't get that.

Not everyone is armed, many Pro 2nd amendment ppl aren't armed at all times.. I'd waiver a majority of Pro 2nd amendment ppl don't carry... that argument won't work here I don't think the solution is taking away weapons that will never happen or work, it's more of what do we do now? Wait and see where the next school is going to have kids slaughtered? I have a son in school, own weapons, and don't believe every idiot in the world should should have the right to possess a weapon... we have things in place where not everyone can enlist in the army, drive a car, etc

I'd ask the govt to ban windows - of course.

In the novel I typed previously on this thread I stated that I think raising the age to buy high capacity rifles to 21 might help. 3 extra years of maturity, and 3 years away from the angst and emotions of high school would likely stop some of these shootings. Stiffer penalties for anyone who allows a shooter access to firearms might help as well.

Ha! They will write me a ticket as quick as anyone. First met nash when Clay was at Jasper. In two years there was 11 overtimes in the four games played. Always enjoyed visiting with him

Teachers who carry go through fairly extensive training and a psych evaluation.

Good season Orangefield, you got something good going on over there with y’all’s coach. Good luck in 3A.

I’ve asked you twice for the compromise gun owners should give, no answer. I’ve given my answer, make schools hard targets by allowing teachers to carry and campus police. Rather than pointing fingers at both sides let’s hear your answer.

I believe that all rights have limitations. The problem is what do certain rights mean or what was their intent? Does freedom of religion mean that I can use cocaine because I belong to the Church of the Rock-Cocaine? Does freedom of speech mean that I can make threats against politicians who I think are traitors? But we are discussing gun control. SCOTUS has ruled that well regulated militia is the justification for being armed, not a requirement. So there is no requirement to be in a militia. “Armed” in 1776 meant handguns and long guns yet Washington DC had a city ordinance banning the possession of a handgun “in your home” without a license AND the handgun had to be disassembled. That has to be one of the most ludicrous laws ever yet The Democrats say, we will not try to take your rights away. No one is coming for your guns. So you can have a gun but you can’t even load it in your own homy for self defense? Fortunately SCOTUS tossed that and a similar law in Illinois but only 5-4. How is that even a question? Did the founding fathers intend that you could on a handgun or rifle but you could not even assemble it? That is where the left is going however. Those are actually laws on the books and not some theoretical intempt. Last anyone forget with the people on the left one. They claim that they are not for taking weapons or denying their use but all you have to do is look at the United States Capitol and their absolutely stupid law. That kind of negates the claim of, common sense gun laws.

If this guy had committed this heinous crime in LA, he would be out on bond with an ankle bracelet. A segment of society wants less police presence and defund whoever is left. Then, they are the first to question why the police did not stop this from happening. Talk about a”Catch 22”.

That's a fair question too. But until someone takes an unbiased look into that answer and ALL are willing to act on the solution, we might as well be kicking rocks. Nope, this issue will continue to be politicized to push agendas from the left & right and nothing will happen.

Wonder why other countries don't have this problem 🤔? Mind boggling

Good thing I care about both... wish more did, but their rights get in the way of that 👀

I’m tired of hearing folks claim to be concerned about kid’s lives but have no problem with abortion.

Well, if you're unhappy with something and unwilling to do anything about it, then you are in fact okay with it. That's just common sense. I hear what you're saying... but that also would mean that we should be able to own a fully automatic machine gun if we wished. There are restrictions in place on those (or at least you have to have a license to own one) and I think that the common sense of most people would point towards a consensus that the restrictions on automatic weapons are good thing... even if it "infringes" on your right to shoot up a school. When there are so many school shootings going on that we can't even keep track of them all anymore, it's getting a little late to keep sticking our heads in the sand as gun owners and saying "I don't care about those kids.... I've got my rights, you know." Because that's kinda what's happening these days.

And that is absolutely the problem with gun control and the people who are conservative who are generally against it. It is the foot in the door or the slippery slope. Oh, you have OCD, you have a mental issue? Oh, you have anxiety attacks? Oh, you have insomnia? Anytime someone says, can we all agree…. they are probably setting up a trap.

Now, this is worth debating!

You will have to ask law enforcement in Uvalde. Typically not commenting has to do with hindering an investigation and the rules of evidence. I wish that I had seen exactly what was said in the “confirmation”. Many times they will use phrases like…. the information we have at this time….. what we have been told by witnesses……

you CAN though, drown in a teaspoon of water.

Of course not everyone is armed. I agree with your post. It’s what makes this such a delicate subject. No one on here wants any more dead kids.

Wasn’t silly at all. If someone wants you dead, they will figure out a way to get it done, guns be damned.

Reading all these comments I wouldn't have guessed it was Republi"cants" led states leading the way

I know lots!! Arm teachers that want to be armed it’s there choice.

So, (I love beginning a sentence with the word “so”, if I pushed someone out a window to murder them, you’d feel better than if I used a firearm?

States with the most gun related homicides Louisiana - R Mississippi - R Alabama - R Missouri - R Maryland - R South Carolina - R Tennessee - R Illinois - D [Hidden Content]

[Hidden Content]

Cain killed Abel with a rock, THE LORD didn't get rid of all the rocks. HE blamed Cain, not the rock. We have a sin problem, not a gun problem.

Because the media and people want immediate answers and that was what had been reported at that time. Maybe a year before I retired, we had an officer involved shooting where a suspect was killed. I arrived on scene within a couple of minutes. I quickly spoke to an officer who had spoken with a witness. The information that I received was it a man approached the officer and put his hand near his back pocket like he might have been going for something. No weapon was ever displayed but the officer shot him. So I approached the chief and another commanding officer with that information. I was told practically immediately that that is not what happened. I was simply relaying the information but that information was so far from the truth. I later watched the car camera video and the officer’s body camera video and the story I was told at the actual crime scene was so far from the truth. That video was later released to the public. The point is that I was on scene within a couple of minutes and was given what appeared to be good information from an eye witness, through another officer, and it was complete nonsense. Had I spoken to the media at that time however, I might have repeated that completely bogus story. On occasion I have been the on scene spokesman and fortunately, not for officer involved incidents. That is why we do “investigations”. Remember Michael Brown and “hands up, don’t shoot”. The FBI under President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder had a year long investigation costing millions of dollars which concluded that the hands up don’t shoot, never happened. Not so strangely, the DA and local and state police came to the conclusion within a couple of days.

I can answer this one for you. To be clear, I’m pro 2A, don’t want guns banned, etc. etc. But the reason that strict gun laws work in Australia and the UK is that they’re nationwide. Guns in those countries have been greatly restricted, with many banned, confiscated, and destroyed. Chicago, NYC, and San Francisco’s laws, while stricter than the rest of the country, don’t even come close to the countries mentioned. In Australia, for instance, one must demonstrate a legitimate need for gun ownership (self defense is not considered), must be licensed, every gun is registered, and there’s a very restrictive list of who can and can’t own them. The types of guns you can own and their capacities are also greatly limited. These laws are applicable nationwide. In England one can get sporting rifles and shotguns with a license. Handguns have been almost entirely banned, and as we all know, pistols account for the overwhelming majority of our gun crimes due to being easily concealable and much easier to use in a crime. On the other hand, criminals in the US, no matter how strict the laws are in their cities, are just a short drive away from much more lenient gun laws. There are also still legal means to buy guns in those cities, and a ready supply of legal guns to acquire illegally. So while the cities you mention may have more laws on the books and harsher punishments for gun crimes, it’s impossible for them to actually keep criminals from getting them. That said, attempting to ban guns at this point is akin to shutting the barn door after the horse is already out of the stable. There are over 400M guns in circulation in the US. Removing them from law abiding citizens will only put them in more danger from the criminals who will not turn theirs in. As for your comparison, though, it’s apples and oranges, or as TVC likes to say, apples and rocks.

So you are saying that 21 should be the age to get in the army and also when men have to register for the selective service.

Can you tell me what an assault rifle is?

Game 1-DIboll- 7 Cameron Yoe- 5 Final

If you think the government that just spent two years masking, force vaccinating and threatening your children—driving up youth suicide rates and drug overdoses— If you think that government wants gun control to keep them safe, you are utterly delusional. Not one inch. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Game 1- Strake- 2 Katy- 1 Final

Still waiting Bobcat…..Chicago the first city had 800 homicides in 2021, 90% of them were gun related. Chicago has some the strictest gun laws in the country. Like I said criminals love strict gun laws. Law abiding gun owners are not the problem. [Hidden Content]

Interesting…, [Hidden Content]

Australia has strict gun laws as does the UK neither of which have a higher crime rate than the US.

no Argyle? especially if a coach has kids. Who doesn't want their kids to be in a school where they have the chance to excel. Those kids in Argyle excel in everything the UIL has to offer. community support, good athletes, facilities and location all wrapped up in one.

This is my two cents on teachers with guns. We all know that the protocol is such a situation in almost every school is a lockdown. Shelter in place behind a locked door. If a teacher is in a room with 20 students and the door is locked but the bad guy forces his way in, the incident stops right there at the door. As it is now, if a shooter forces his way into a room, the only defense is throwing books at him. I am certainly not against a teacher who sees a gunman walk by that classroom and peaks out to see the gunman’s back turned, stepping out and bringing the fight to him. Swift and aggressive force is how you can turn the tables on an ambush but I just not “expecting” teachers to take the offensive. If they wish to do so however, go for it.

If he could have won a state title probably gets him alot more

Saw them interviewing a boy in class. Had a table with a cover on it. He got his friend to crawl under with him & they hid there. Kudos to that young fellow.