bullets13

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.

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.

Saw a news report that this is where he bought the guns.

This story hurt me to hear about. I teach at an elementary, and the idea of what those kids went through makes me sick to my stomach. I’m staunchly pro-2A, but also want our kids to be safe in a place where they absolutely should be safe always. So many of our students go to school and get to feel safe from domestic violence and abuse that they have to live with at home. They should never have to worry about violence following them there. I read through this whole thread, and there are a lot of things I agree with, some that I don’t. I wholeheartedly support arming (willing) teachers, and also finding a way to have an officer at every school. While it would not be a 100% preventative, it would greatly reduce the odds of someone choosing a school as a target, and if they still did, it would greatly reduce the odds that they pull off an effective attack. Secure doors would also help. There’s a video of this guy going into the school circulating online, and he literally just opened the door and walked in. Our school is very serious about keeping doors locked, but they’re all glass and would be easily breached. I would like to see that changed. While I don’t like to see a lot of gun legislation added, one law that I think would help to some degree is changing the laws to restrict the purchase of long guns, or at least long guns that can hold high capacity magazines to the age of 21. We already do this with handguns. If some of these kids get a few years to separate themselves from the angst, bullying, and hormone fueled stupidity of high school they might very well not make a decision to take innocent lives out of anger. It will also provide 3 extra years for them to possibly get some help. A lot of the symptoms of mental illness that families might hide or ignore will manifest when these kids graduate and have to start doing adult things, meaning others outside of the family might be able to do something. And yes, I understand that someone can do a lot of damage with a shotgun, but I’d rather a potential killer have to painstakingly hand load 5 shells every few seconds rather than dropping a mag and reloading 30 rounds almost instantaneously. One thing that nearly every school shooter has in common is that they’re under the age of 21. Which leads me to my next point: any parents who allow a child access to guns who then subsequently shoots up a school should be punished severely, especially if there were any warning signs whatsoever that the shooter had issues. My kids hunt with me, and as they get a little older I’ll teach them how to handle and shoot firearms. But all of my guns stay in a safe behind an oak door that they’ll never have a key to, minus my daily carry, which they also can’t get to. There’s no excuse for a parent to allow a kid access to firearms if they know they’re unstable, and I’ve yet to see one of these shootings perpetrated by someone who hadn’t exhibited obvious warning signs. Anyone who purchases a gun for a kid (an older friend, family member, etc.) should also have the book thrown at them if they use them in an attack. I do believe that kids who hunt should be allowed access to them, including high capacity rifles, but better laws on the books putting the responsibility of the kids’ action with those guns would likely help parents take an honest look at their kids’ mental states before letting them use them. As for social media monitoring, I agree it’s a slippery slope. I do believe if given that power then liberals would use any such law to disarm law abiding citizens. That said, if someone actually makes direct threats, by all means put them on a list and prevent them from buying guns. Anyone receiving psychiatric treatment and diagnosed with certain mental illnesses should not be allowed to purchase guns. I also wouldn’t be opposed to some sort of law punishing anyone who knows about a direct threat in advance that doesn’t come forward. It seems to be a pretty common theme that someone pops up after a shooting saying something like “he told me he was going to do it, but I didn’t actually think he was serious.” I sincerely hope that we can figure out something as a society to stop these shootings. Better mental health awareness, consequences for those who allow access to guns to mentally Ill people, and better school security is a great place to start. I’m thankful to work for a district that allows teachers to carry, but there are still things I would like to see done to make us even safer. There are nearly 140,000 schools in the US, and the idea that any law or policy can prevent something that occurs randomly at 1 or 2 of them every year or two is nonsensical. But we can certainly do more to help people with mental illness and prepare schools to better handle and possibly stop a shooting if and when they happen.

Saw that game as well. He couldn’t miss!

Seems like a dumb mistake to make, or to choose to make.

yes. But Toby gets 9, because he's Toby.

Has it been confirmed that Anahuac is his destination?

This district will be very competitive next year. EC only lost one senior. Anahuac only graduated two. OF moves down and only graduated one. Kountze was young and will improve. Buna brings back their all-region point guard, but loses 6 seniors. I'll say: 1. Kountze 2. EC 3. OF 4. Buna 5. Anahuac

He's a wonderful coach. That said, them not bringing a state championship home during Angel Bullock's four years there is up there with HJ girls not winning a state championship with Ashlyn Jackson.

It's hard to do, and I don't expect it, or require it to consider him a good coach. As I've said multiple times, I take exception to his opinion of himself and a couple of his close friends and family that come on here and try to inflate his reputation, not to what he's done in Lumberton. That said, two wins over mediocre teams and then a 35-point loss to the first good team you meet is not a "playoff run."

According to people on here they were until they had a lot of injuries, which is the only reason they didn't get in. So at the beginning of the year they should've been decent. That said, if we're giving him credit for beating 2A and 3A teams, then we have to give him credit for losing by 60 to silsbee and 40 to Nederland and 30 to HF and only winning 4 district games and losing 10 games by 10+ on the year, right? Again, I'm not saying this guy is a bad coach, but there's a whole network of connected posters on here who give him all of the credit for everything good that happens, and excuse all of the bad. This is what I take exception to.

I don't like him because he keeps making new screen names and coming on here and talking about how great he is, and how bad other coaches are. As for coaching, I don't have any issue with him as a coach, but he's been very fortunate at Lumberton with them dropping classifications and having a D1 player drop in his lap. That in itself is just part of coaching, and I don't fault him for it. I just take exception to the folks (including "not him") that have declared him an elite coach, one of the best in the area, etc. etc., when he's won a couple of playoff games against .500 and below teams and had one really good regular season, despite dropping from an exceptional 5A district to 4A, and despite having the services of the best L-town player in the program's history for 4 years. The fact that he won 1 district game in 5A, and then missed the playoffs the first year McClure is gone, has me curious to see what happens the next couple of years over there.

I mean, he's not wrong. And with the whole weird Aggie network situation there's never going to be a shortage of people willing to help pay for them. I really don't like the direction the sport is going. They need to put a cap on what a player can make or you're just going to have bidding wars for every player.

Joubert and Foster are great coaches, but you're also talking about 2A and 3A schools. while both have good teams, neither is near what they were 7-8 years ago. There was a time when those schools could beat highly ranked teams in divisions above them (and were even expected to), but they're both at a point right now where a decent 4A team SHOULD beat them most of the time. Beating those teams isn't meaningless, but it's hardly a feather in your cap these days for bigger schools like it used to be.

I know you're being sarcastic, but he definitely was carried some by mcclure. How much is yet to be seen. next season should tell us a lot. that said, he's obviously not terrible.

I get what you’re saying. But the actions of the board over the years make it pretty obvious to me, even if they’re not naming it “Suck It, Getz” stadium.

Agreed. He’s done some good things over there, but he’s benefited from some very fortuitous circumstances. I’m curious to see what he does over the next year or two without McClure. This year they struggled, but they had some injuries.

Sure. Or obvious, if you lived and worked through it like I did.

I know some of y'all think I'm a "hater", but there are several accounts on here that suspiciously show up in certain situations and throw Mitchell's name into conversations, and they generally give him too much credit. I'll preface this by saying I think he's done fine over at Lumberton. Their record has improved under him, and I do think he has something to do with that. That said, he also gets a lot of credit for a couple of things that he had nothing to do with. The first key to Lumberton's newfound success is that year after he took over Lumberton they dropped to 4A after previously having to play in one of the best 5A districts in the state with PAM, Nederland, Central, and Ozen. His record his first year in which he coached in that district was no better than the guy that came before him (9-17, 1-11). The second lucky break for him was Brock McClure. He's coached at Lumberton 5 years. The year in 5A he went 1-11 in district. The year in 4A without McClure he had basically a .500 team, and 4-8 in district. The three years in 4A with McClure he made the playoffs 3 times, had one really good season, and won three total playoff games against sub-.500 or .500 teams. How much is mitchell and how much is McClure and the drop to 4A? I'm really curious to see what he does next year. I don't think it's realistic to expect much more than what Lumberton did this year, but if they return to what they should be without a D1 player (.500ish, fighting for fourth most years) then you have to stop crowning Mitchell as rehabilitation mastermind as well, and just say he does a pretty good job out in Lumberton. All of the talk of him being an elite coach and whatnot is premature, especially with only one truly good season under his belt at Lumberton in 5 years (a season where he beat two mediocre teams in the playoffs before getting doubled up by Huffman in the 3rd round).

Come on, man. there is no two sides to this. If they were arguing about spending money to change it to something like Alex Durley Stadium then there would be two sides. This is nothing but a spiteful move to shove Thomas back in the face of the people who vocally opposed the school board and Thomas and that brought to light all of the corruption that got the district taken over to begin with.

Like a leaked internal memo or something? Of course there's nothing like that. But one only has to ask themselves why the board has (soon to be twice now) elected to name the stadium after a disgraced superintendent under whom the entire district was run into the ground. The answer is obvious. There are several obvious choices of people of color to name the stadium after who are much more deserving and would elicit a supportive response from the community. Instead they're once again going with a crook, and there's only one reason to do that.

Hey look, Butler just did once what Luka does 5 games out of 6!

without a doubt. that was a tongue in cheek remark directed at a certain poster who's determined that any coach who doesn't win a state championship within 7 years is an abject failure for all time.

Calling Men ‘Bald’ Counts as Sexual Harassment, UK Tribunal Rules (msn.com)