Gun free zones
1. The White House
2. The Republican National Convention
3. Mar-a-Lago
4. The U.S. Capitol Building
5. Republican Town Halls
1. The White House
2. The Republican National Convention
3. Mar-a-Lago
4. The U.S. Capitol Building
5. Republican Town Halls
All of these have security guards, probably armed.
Lakeland High School had an armed security guard. I know – he was a coward. But let’s get real – a pistol versus a military assault weapon?! Trump talks a brave game but when he had the opportunity to serve his country in an actual war (Vietnam) he whine about knee problems. So he has no clue.
Calcaneo Navicular Bars [Heel Spurs]. Though he never had the operation to exise them.
Almost as if he had never had them in the first place [he wouldn’t be able to walk 18 holes of golf with bone spurs, believe me]
Disclosure: I had mine removed @ 12. Very painful [bone chiselled out of your feet], was in hospital for a fortnight [1966]
Maybe CoRev did not get the point so let’s cite the key paragraph in the link:
“It’s a bad-faith proposition. A party that truly believes guns are the way out of this thing, and that an even more heavily armed populace will ensure American safety, would make different personal choices. In fact, we can gauge GOP disingenuousness on the gun issue just by noting all the places Republican politicians frequent where weapons are banned. Pointing out their hypocrisy has never helped to shame the GOP into decency, but it’s worth a review nonetheless.”
To use the NRA meme, the title should be “Free Fire Zones.”
Pgl, “But let’s get real – a pistol versus a military assault weapon?!”
Yup! For reality’s sake: “ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A lone gunman who was said to be distraught over President Trump’s election opened fire on members of the Republican congressional baseball team at a practice field in this Washington suburb on Wednesday, using A RIFLE to shower the field with bullets that struck four people, including Steve Scalise, the majority whip of the House of Representatives….” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/us/steve-scalise-congress-shot-alexandria-virginia.html
And even more reality: ““If not for the detail who stepped up with BASIC REVOLVERS, we would’ve all been dead,” Representative Bishop said.
At a second news conference on Wednesday, Mr. Slater, the F.B.I. official, said the gunman was shot multiple times in the torso….”
Even if they missed the attacker, they forced him to take cover while additional aid arrived.
Sometimes the ignorance just amazes.
Also for the gun hating ignorant.
” The only person to have been killed so far is Hodgkinson, who was shot by police during the attack.
Hodgkinson used an SKS rifle and a 9mm handgun during the attack. If that rifle sounds familiar, it’s the one used by Micah Johnson, who murdered five Dallas police officers in July of 2016 during an organized protest.
Now, let’s get a few things straight. ABC News REPORTED that the SKS IS an assault rifle. IT IS NOT. It’s semiautomatic, it generally carries a ten-round magazine, and it was not included in the 1994 ban under the Clinton administration. The rifle is over 70 years old; therefore, it’s not a variant of the AK-47. To remind those not familiar with firearms, semi-automatic means one shot per trigger pull. The VAST MAJORITY of firearms owned in the U.S. are SEMIAUTOMATIC. The 9mm handgun is a semiautomatic firing system….”
BTW, 9MM is one of the more popular calibers, and is available in all types of guns.
CoRev:
We already know civilian life is less important than a police officer’s life. If you are a black civilian, you are at the bottom of the pecking order of whose life is important. Bullet-spewing-weapons are dangerous whether muzzle loading, semi-automatic, or automatic. Spare me the history of make and type of weapon. I do not care.
The officer had a duty to perform which was to protect the lives of the students in the building. He hesitated and the rest is history. He is the one who will have to live with himself. And bone-spur Trump claiming Peterson was coward is laughable.
If the shooter was hunting the officer, we would see a different person emerge as it was his life to forfeit based upon his actions. Kids being shot when you could do something in close quarters is unthinkable. Unarmed adults did what they had to do to protect them. A good guy with a gun hesitated and the rest is another chapter in the ongoing dialogue on bullet-spewing-weapon with corporation opponents to anything. Good guy with a guy is a myth.
sigh!
Run, “Bullet-spewing-weapons are dangerous whether muzzle loading, semi-automatic, or automatic. Spare me the history of make and type of weapon. I do not care.” If you cared, what you do?
On other blogs I’ve challenged gun haters to write/propose a law that was passable, enforceable, and didn’t start the next revolution.
Can anyone here?
“passable, enforceable, and didn’t start the next revolution.”
How brave of you for issuing this challenge. Of course, you have created models to show that none of the above can happen, right?
What are the chances that this “guard” had ever been trained to fire a weapon? Or had ever actually fired a weapon?
If this guard had ever served in the US military, he would have trained to use a weapon; if he had been an Commissioned Officer, he would have been trained with a handgun, probably a ’38 caliber’, as I was trained.
Here is a simple illustration of the issue:
https://legalinsurrection.com/tag/a-f-branco/
Dan asks: “What are the chances that this “guard” had ever been trained to fire a weapon?” Very high! He was a police officer. Later reports are that 3-4 other police officers took defensive positions along with the guard assigned to the school.
In my area the local police assign resource officers who act as deterrents as well as guards and do in-school police duties as needed. The as needed duties are often assault and drug related.
Sammy, loved the cartoons. Some were especially pertinent.
EM, “Of course, you have created models to show that none of the above can happen, right?” Models? Don’t need them we have real life US experience in nearly all of them.
My state still limits the purchase of Assault Weapons by describing features. Those features are now readily available as add-ons, and bought separately.
Defining an assault weapon’s feature is one of the big problems. Except for a few they are ubiquitous to most guns. Limiting magazine capacity applies to a large number of long and short guns. A huge percentage of guns sold for decades are semi-automatic. Pistol grips don’t change the weapon’s capabilities, just make them easier to handle.
If you define it by model, then model nomenclature changes without changing the weapon.
If you limit it to barrel length or overall length, the the newest designs are not eliminated.
What non-shooters do not understand is the features of an assault rifle are just as desirable for sporting weapons. They are valid improvements to existing designs.
Its just not as easy as you think.
“ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A lone gunman who was said to be distraught over President Trump’s election opened fire on members of the Republican congressional baseball team at a practice field”
CoRev is confused here. It was a baseball field not a high school. And he accuses others of being ignorant???
“On other blogs I’ve challenged gun haters”
CoRev has no clue what this debate is about. I don’t hate guns. I do want sensible registration (remember Sarah Brady) and I would suggest NO ONE needs a military assault weapon.
But I guess we will get more of this dishonest nonsense from CoRev. It is what he do.
Sammy’s cartoon was drawn by someone who has no clue who these terrorists are. They are not doing rational calculations – they are mad men. And BTW – there was a guard at Lakeland High and this kid still attacked.
Lord – the NRA has trained some angry and very stupid people who do not have a clue what this discussion is about. Like Trump.
“What non-shooters do not understand is the features of an assault rifle are just as desirable for sporting weapons.”
If you need a military assault weapon to hunt Bambi – you suck as a hunter. A real marks person could take down a deer with a single shot. So you are making the point that a lot of people who have no real training in hunting are carrying guns.
“wouldn’t be able to walk 18 holes of golf with bone spurs, believe me]”
Yes, he lied about it, but also he doesn’t walk 18 holes of golf. He drives a cart, at times even on greens.
JDM:
Welcome to AB. First comments go to moderation to weed out spammers and advertising.
Number of gun control measures passed from 2009-2011 when the Democrats had control of both CONgress and the White House: 0.
Karl – way to make this highly tribal and partisan. Those that care about the safety of our kids argue this partisan yelling is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing but WTF do they know. The NRA needs to sell more guns – profits over people! So I trust they are compensating you handsomely!
Karl NRA enjoys bi-partisan support as does US’ immoral and highly dangerous bombing for busting nations foreign policy.
This thread emphasizes the usefulness of a school shooting every so often to draw attention away from US troops staying in Syria to help bust it up.
Ans the huge death toll there is from CIA and Pentagon (now Israel, too) arming any one who wants to kill to get rid of Assad.
The correctionfor the problem is much deeper and wider than ‘who can buy an assault rifle’!
La Pierre and the NRA are tools.
In a vast punch and judy show……..
pgl, my point was to counter yours. Let me repeat your point: Pgl, “But let’s get real – a pistol versus a military assault weapon?!”, and when I showed recent history where pistols were used against military rifles, you changed the subject.
On other sites I have seen you call others liars for less. I won’t be so crass, but will point out your being disingenuous.
The rest of you comments build off this same mistake.
CoRev:
Spare myself and others here your analysis of rifle versus pistol. It was indoors and not a hundred yards away. It was close range where a pistol would be an effective tool in a fight. The fact remains
a supposed NRA classified good guy with a pistol,
a police officer did not engage a shooter indoors and innocent , unarmed people died because a shooter who should not have had a weapon was allowed to do as he pleased.
Who the F are you? You are not my equal. You are not even Ilsm’s equal. You do not know what you are talking about.
Yet, they want guns in schools?!?
pgl,
“And BTW – there was a guard at Lakeland High and this kid still attacked.”
And now comes out that there were multiple armed county deputies at the scene that did nothing. After the kid was reported to multiple levels of law enforcement as an imminent threat, that did nothing.
Obviously, unless I am missing something, the state failed at every level. That’s why the people need to take over responsibility for their own safety.
Run,
You answered your own question.
He is a total disgrace of a human being. Now that climate change has been proven to be real beyond even his doubts, he has moved into this area.
Just a total ah.
“Run75441
February 24, 2018 5:35 pm
JDM:
Welcome to AB. First comments go to moderation to weed out spammers and advertising.”
and comments which don’t fit our political dogma
bill:
We also include people who just do not fit at AB and are insistent. You have a choice to make as we are not a fit for every commenter which happens to come to AB.
“the state failed at every level. That’s why the people need to take over responsibility for their own safety.”
I just hope that people like Sammy do not move to my city. The New York City police do a great job and we do not need guns on our subways.
BTW CoRev – when I call someone a liar, that is because they lied. Just to be clear here. At no point on this thread did I lie and you know it.. But do rant on.
I have seen Bill Billson’s sentiment that AB bans conservative thought over at Econbrowser from some clown name Peak Trader. Bill – that is a false allegation. Now if you wish to make a fool out of yourself and join Peak Trader over at Econospeak, Menzie Chinn will welcome you. But get ready for some serious push back.
Peak may be Billson. He was here also. There are some commenters who just do not fit.
Run this is totally incoherent
“Spare myself and others here your analysis of rifle versus pistol. It was indoors and not a hundred yards away. It was close range where a pistol would be an effective tool in a fight. The fact remains
a supposed NRA classified good guy with a pistol,
a police officer did not engage a shooter indoors and innocent , unarmed people died because a shooter who should not have had a weapon was allowed to do as he pleased.
Who the F are you? You are not my equal. You are not even Ilsm’s equal. You do not know what you are talking about.”
I do know that I do not what you are talking about! :”?It? was indoors and not a hundred yards away.” If IT was the Lakeland shooting then as you suggested the pistol is the better weapon inside the building to stop the shooter from continuing. If IT is the attack in VA on the Republican baseball team, the pistol WAS the weapon to caused the shooter to take cover and at least slowed his shooting. Or to add a 3rd example, the Las Vegas shooter killed himself when he thought armed guards with pistols were about to crash his shooting spree.
You also said: “a police officer did not engage a shooter indoors and innocent , unarmed people died..” But you forget several brave adults died trying to shield those kids, and if they had a pistol, “a supposed NRA classified good guy with a pistol” and the armed guard knowing there was support inside then they MAY have taken down the shooter before finishing his shooting spree.
And we both agree: ” a shooter who should not have had a weapon was allowed to do as he pleased.” especially go on a shooting spree in a school. The government at all levels failed in this situation.
All the above copies of your comment was illogical, but the most incoherent portion was: “Spare myself and others here your analysis of rifle versus pistol.” As I showed examples of their successful use above.
and
“Who the F are you? You are not my equal. You are not even Ilsm’s equal. You do not know what you are talking about.”
Other than pure emotion what has this last statement have to do with anything? Your equal?, ILSM?, and I clearly know more than you do about the recent shootings?
This is a complex subject, and many solutions simple and not have been tried and failed, been unenforceable or abandoned. So I repeat my challenge:
“On other blogs I’ve challenged gun haters to write/propose a law that was passable, enforceable, and didn’t start the next revolution.
Can anyone here?”
CoRev:
You are a incessant babbler of excessive nonsense.
I was clear and coherent. As usual, you just refuse to listen.
For once, there was a person who could step in and counter a shooter murdering children. The NRA logic has always been an armed citizenry will counter the rampage of those who are killing others. Trump says if shooters know there is a gun in the school, they will not enter. NRA’s LaPierre, a good guy with a gun will counter a bad guy with a gun.
Guess what, a good guy, an experienced police officer of many years and with a gun failed to engage the shooter. Several officers with weapons failed to engage the shooter. 4-6 minutes passed . . . and more young people died.
If our trained police officers will not engage unless you are unarmed and running away; an armed citizenry is not going to engage other than shoot someone else similar to what a bunch of NYC officers did when confronting a cornered against a stone building with a knife. Those bullets ricocheted everywhere wounding others. So much for target practice and Glocks.
If our police officers will not engage unless they have armored carriers and much larger weapons when a pistol is the weapon of choice in a crowded school, then there is one solution left. You reemploy the ban on assault weapons and include bullets/ammo made to enhance injury, magazines designed to carry more than 10 rounds, and permanently affix those magazines to the rifles so there is no interchanging. What has happened and what has been an argument by the NRA opposing restrictions of any type, the good guy with a gun confronting a bad guy with a gun is does not work. The arguments put forth by the NRA on good guys with a gun have failed the test.
It is not a complex problem to solve. It is incredibly simple to solve. It remains that the NRA and the simple minds supporting it resist doing anything. I will repeat; you are an incessant babbler who purports having a incredible amount of knowledge on topics brought up by those knowing far more than you. On this topic of bullet-spewing-weapons, I will include myself as the authority.
I do not care what you do on other blogs. Take note, MSN and other sites have taken down their comment sections because of the trolls inhabiting them, many of which did not have facebook accounts, and were uncontrollable. AB does not intend to do so; but, there is a force a foot over the last decade to control the discussion with fake intellect and facts. Our chief draft-dodger wanting weaponry in schools fits right in with his innuendo, supposition, conjecture and downright lies to the façade of intellect espoused today. AB will not allow such commentary to go unanswered the same as Econospeak monitors the commentary. In the end, we may not fit with your beliefs; but, there are places like National Review, Breitbart, etc.
“That’s why the people need to take over responsibility for their own safety.”
. . . and elect representatives at the state and national level who will stand up to the NRA and their ammosexual sheeple and pass real gun control.
“It’s possible for mass public shootings to be both a gun problem and a mental health problem.” But too often we see comments like this:
“Repeat after me: Mass shooters are not disproportionately mentally ill.”
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-duwe-rocque-mass-shootings-mental-illness-20180223-story.html
Recent research shows well over 1/2, 59-61%, of the mass shooting since the early 20rh century were carried out by those suffering from mental disorders. It is here where government intervention would be effective.
CoRev:
Yes, simply speaking supply and demand does plays a role in the readily accessible bullet-spewing-weapons. We should not allow those with psychological issues be allowed to have access. A waiting period should be in place. Access to magazines greater than 10 rounds denied, bullets designed for maximum injury denied to the public, assault weapons denied, etc. Go and convince your masters at the NRA, Republican party, and elsewhere.
@CoRev
“BTW, 9MM is one of the more popular calibers, and is available in all types of guns.”
And, you might want to point out, it is not a particularly large caliber, being .354″ in diameter. Smaller than a .38 and much smaller than a .45 caliber. Police dramas on television always speak of it as if it was some sort of major cannon.
Pgl, this: “I have seen Bill Billson’s sentiment that AB bans conservative thought over at Econbrowser from some clown name Peak Trader. Bill – that is a false allegation.” from someone who has been banned multiple times, not for his views but his attitude.
I, OTH, also have been banned multiple times for conservative views and being insistent about them, because my views are just as valid as anyone elses’s. Of course it’s possible I am banned as I write this, and I wouldn’t know.
There was a short time when nearly all conservatives were banned almost in mass. Most have not returned.
So Peak is far more correct than pgl.
rather ban the bomb
ban assault weapons then only
terrorists supplied by the
DoJ, CIA and pentagon have them.
there is no debate!
fighting with the NRA is a huge red herring!
gun control has no ort
to fix the moral
morass which is
“Merka”!
opponents are insane or enemy
morals in this country!
what does it say
about tearing
up whole countries
with no remorse?
I sense a change in the shootings politics which may result in some meaningful legislation, both nationally and locally. That legislation will not include Banning weapons, but appears oriented to hardening schools and other soft targets, making it easier to identify possible problem children/adults as shooters, strengthening the “No Gun” background procedures to includes these and others as they are identified.
So, i have at this time answered my own challenge, while identifying what sensible gun laws might be, passable, enforceable, and not causing the next revolution.
Australia has in effect banned all semi-automatic weapons (farmers can own semiauto shotguns limited to five shots and semiauto .22s limited to 10 shots; apart from that only professional shooters who can prove that they are earning an income through shooting can own semiautos). It passed, it works. CoRev is in denial about it.
When i say harden the soft targets, this is a low cost and effective approach: “https://www.wthr.com/article/students-invention-protects-his-school
Buying time is the major issue to allow for response to a shooting incident. Hardening can both keeps the weapons out of the building and this example out of the classroom and away from the students.
@pgl, “BTW CoRev – when I call someone a liar, that is because they lied. Just to be clear here. At no point on this thread did I lie and you know it.. But do rant on.” I was kind by saying Peak was more correct, but yes you lied.
@run: no, your comment was not coherent nor well written. Starting a premise with a pronoun ill defines the point being made. Your later response: “What has happened and what has been an argument by the NRA opposing restrictions of any type, (the good guy with a gun confronting a bad guy with a gun is does not work.”
Was refuted by my recent examples where even a pistol was effective against scary rifles.
Your example of the police not entering the school is a good example of how not to react. Even a 4th example of how to react to potential mass shooting occurred recently on a train in Europe, where unarmed men took down a shooter in the act attempting a mass shooting.
Bravery was evident in the school in both adults and students, but not outside with the police officers.
Shooting a weapon is inherently dangerous even in controlled environments. Your example of the police ricochets hitting others exemplifies this. It happens even in controlled situations. I was hit by one of my own ricocheting shot gun pellets while shooting skeet at a range.
@Bob Michaelson, “Australia …. It passed, it works. CoRev is in denial about it.” The Australia example might work if you could get it passed.
Remember my challenge is for legislation to be passable, enforceable and not cause the next revolution. Australia’s solution would require a constitutional amendment and then further legislation. I won’t belabor the issues related to those steps, but collecting nearly 3/4 of the firearms currently out there would be tempestuous at best if not down right dangerous.
Who and how?
Run thinks his partial solution is simple, the Australia solution is probably not workable here at this time.
Not in denial but rational and practical.
CoRev:
My previous suggestion of weapon control is rational and it is simple. The only irrationality existing in this discussion comes from the gun lobby, those who believe their rights are being impinged, and those practicing their rights as a minority thereby causing harm to the majority. Even then no one has banned your practice of bullet-spewing-weapon worship. We only wish to confine it to a lesser deity physically and to worship the other in your “thoughts and prayers” leaving the majority unharmed by your practices and beliefs with the latter.
Those who deny they are causing harm to the majority always claim it is “never the right time” to implement any control or discuss what is necessary to minimize the danger. It is a false claim and one which is meant to forestall any progress while others suffer the consequences.
Some of the people posting this list see it as a sign of being hypocritical. I think it is more a sign of being clueless.
The decision (according to my 5 minutes of google research) is often made by the venue rather than the organization renting the venue. Some people just don’t know that schools are far from the only gun free zone.
“Run thinks his partial solution is simple, the Australia solution is probably not workable here at this time.”
Gee – it worked in the UK quite well. I guess CoRev thinks Americans are that different from the Aussie’s and the Brits? Maybe we are given the extreme wild wild west hostility we get from the likes of CoRev whenever sensible gun control legislation is brought.
Memo to the local cops where CoRev lives. Visit his house now before he gets really mad and does serious damage.
Pgl,why did you overlook all of this explaining why? “Remember my challenge is for legislation to be passable, enforceable and not cause the next revolution. Australia’s solution would require a constitutional amendment and then further legislation. I won’t belabor the issues related to those steps, but collecting nearly 3/4 of the firearms currently out there would be tempestuous at best if not down right dangerous.
Who and how? ”
Instead of trolling, try a real discussion of the issues.
You seldom add value to a discussion. Why is that? I’m serious, Peak and I would like to know.
Run, you started another comment with a pronoun: “It is rational and it is simple.” What is IT???
I’m sure this means something to you: ” Even then no one has banned your practice of bullet-spewing-weapon worship. “, but again it is poorly framed.
I think you are saying, my pointing out the irrationality of the several mass shooting solutions proposed here means I am a gun worshiper. No! A gun is a tool. I doubt either of us worships tools;
Again this phrasing is incoherent: “We only wish to confine it to a lesser deity physically and to worship the other in your thoughts and prayers leaving the majority unharmed by your practices and beliefs with the latter. ”
Your final paragraph is barely coherent if I interpret your goal as (unstated gun) “control” as the subject, then (unstated again failing to pass gun control legislation) is what is causing ?damage? to the ?majority?. What/how is the majority damaged?
If I am close to correctly interpreting you comment then I would call it a personal victory. When trying to make a point define the point (not it) and if there are impacts define them.
CoRev:
Go away. You are cluttering up AB with your inane remarks.