Teachers & Guns? Seriously?

Sirthinksalot said:
It is not accurate at all. The mass shooters most definitely are willing to violate the rule.
Click to expand...

So if mass shooters can easily violate the term and police and hired guns and guards, can violate the term, then the term doesn't mean very much, now does it.
Would a food described as being "sugar free" still be considered "sugar free" if the processing allowed many grams of sugar, just because the manufacturer labeled it "sugar free"?

Call it what you want. The Parkland campus was not "gun free".
 
Leonthecat said:
So if mass shooters can easily violate the term and police and hired guns and guards, can violate the term, then the term doesn't mean very much, now does it.
Would a food described as being "sugar free" still be considered "sugar free" if the processing allowed many grams of sugar, just because the manufacturer labeled it "sugar free"?

Call it what you want. The Parkland campus was not "gun free".
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point in nit picking me personally about a generally understood term is, but... hopefully this well help you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990

The*Gun-Free School Zones Act*(GFSZA) is an act of the*U.S. Congress*prohibiting any unauthorized individual from knowingly possessing a loaded or unsecured firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone as defined by*18 U.S.C.*§*921(a)(25). The law applies to public, private, and parochial elementary schools and high schools, and to non-private property within 1000 feet of them
Click to expand...

I hope that helps. That being said, I am someone who understands that people who are willing to break the law that forbids shooting school kids are also willing to violate the GFSZA. But do continue your word parsing if it makes you feel smart.
 
Mr.Badguy said:
But if your gun is truly concealed in a gun free zone, who would know? It's basically the honor system.
Click to expand...

Apparently the honor system worked, they obeyed the law. That asshole killed 17 kids and there was no one there with a gun to stop him, was there?
 
Sirthinksalot said:
Not sure what your point in nit picking me personally about a generally understood term is, but... hopefully this well help you.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990



I hope that helps. That being said, I am someone who understands that people who are willing to break the law that forbids shooting school kids are also willing to violate the GFSZA. But do continue your word parsing if it makes you feel smart.
Click to expand...

Those who complain that the school was "a gun free zone" speculate that had it not been a "gun free zone" the shooting would never have happened.
I am simply pointing out that what is commonly called a "gun free zone", in this case at least, was not gun free. So the premise, as promoted by the President as well as the gun lobby and many on the right, is completely false.
 
Leonthecat said:
Those who complain that the school was "a gun free zone" speculate that had it not been a "gun free zone" the shooting would never have happened.
I am simply pointing out that what is commonly called a "gun free zone", in this case at least, was not gun free. So the premise, as promoted by the President as well as the gun lobby and many on the right, is completely false.
Click to expand...

Take it up with the Congressmen who named the bill in 1990.
 
RB 60 said:
Apparently the honor system worked, they obeyed the law. That asshole killed 17 kids and there was no one there with a gun to stop him, was there?
Click to expand...

There was someone there who was hired specifically to carry a gun and stop a shooter from killing the kids.
The NRA plan, followed there, that "a good guy with a gun is all that will stop a bad guy with a gun" is in fact a demonstrable failure.
 
Last edited:
Irish said:
What kind of idiotic point are you trying to make?
Click to expand...

Actually my point was supporting what you said, doofus. Allow me to recap.

Post# 373
Irish said:
Gun Free zones don't work.
Click to expand...

Post# 374
Leonthecat said:
Parkland was not a gun free zone.
Click to expand...

Post# 375
Sirthinksalot said:
The term "gun free zone" doesn't mean police can't carry guns.
Click to expand...

^^Then you asked me (who was agreeing with you) in response to that:

Irish said:
What kind of idiotic point are you trying to make?
Click to expand...

The point I was successfully making is that Leon the twat and Sear were word parsing, and generally being douchebags. So I called them out for it. You'd have to read the exchange between posts 378 through 393. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Then you finally got around to responding to Leon the twat with this, in post# 394:

Irish said:
Sure it was. Teachers and Staff couldn't carry. The one guy who did, doesn't make it a non-gun free zone.
Click to expand...

Which is in agreement with what I said in post# 375. You're welcome.
 
Sirthinksalot said:
Actually my point was supporting what you said, doofus. Allow me to recap.

Post# 373

Post# 374

Post# 375

^^Then you asked me (who was agreeing with you) in response to that:



The point I was successfully making is that Leon the twat and Sear were word parsing, and generally being douchebags. So I called them out for it. You'd have to read the exchange between posts 378 through 393. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Then you finally got around to responding to Leon the twat with this, in post# 394:



Which is in agreement with what I said in post# 375. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Well then I apologize for my knee jerk reaction. And immediately regret drinking while posting.

I miss read you quote as a support for those morons. Now that you neatly reposted them in order I get what you were saying. Again, my heartfelt apology and am glad you see logic for what it is. Unlike LeontheFAG who's logic seems to escape them on a daily basis.
 
Irish said:
Well then I apologize for my knee jerk reaction. And immediately regret drinking while posting.

I miss read you quote as a support for those morons. Now that you neatly reposted them in order I get what you were saying. Again, my heartfelt apology and am glad you see logic for what it is. Unlike LeontheFAG who's logic seems to escape them on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

No worries. I've made a few drunk posts myself. And it's almost St Paddy's day! :clink:
 
SmarterthanYou said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Or you can just google "teachers physically assaulting students" and take it from there.....then add guns to the mix. See the potential for worse case scenarios?
Click to expand...


why aren't you out there demanding that cops be disarmed then?????
Click to expand...

Why is it when you can't disprove what I say factually and logically, you spew forth stupidity instead of just conceding a point? Here's how I answered the other dope:

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...hers-amp-Guns-Seriously&p=2253706#post2253706
 
Sirthinksalot said:
Actually my point was supporting what you said, doofus. Allow me to recap.

Post# 373

Post# 374

Post# 375

^^Then you asked me (who was agreeing with you) in response to that:



The point I was successfully making is that Leon the twat and Sear were word parsing, and generally being douchebags. So I called them out for it. You'd have to read the exchange between posts 378 through 393. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Then you finally got around to responding to Leon the twat with this, in post# 394:



Which is in agreement with what I said in post# 375. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

There was a gun present. The zone was not "gun free".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top