FYI: There are 129,817 Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers in USA. By comparison, Gas Stations 143,839, Mc Donalds 14, 098. How about grocery stores?? 36, 569. NICE
NRA's Announcement of Gun Violence in Schools
- Thread starter ZeeOSix
- Start date
- Status
Are those ones with O1 FFL's (true dealers), or those with 03 Curios and Relic licenses thrown in?
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
FYI: There are 129,817 Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers in USA. By comparison, Gas Stations 143,839, Mc Donalds 14, 098. How about grocery stores?? 36, 569. NICE
And your point is?
All of these dealers are background checked,and open to inspection by the BATF at any time. Anyone buying a firearm through a FFL is likewise background checked.
FYI: There are 129,817 Federally Licensed Firearms Dealers in USA. By comparison, Gas Stations 143,839, Mc Donalds 14, 098. How about grocery stores?? 36, 569. NICE
And your point is?
All of these dealers are background checked,and open to inspection by the BATF at any time. Anyone buying a firearm through a FFL is likewise background checked.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
I think the lawsuit is against the state and not against the gun manufacturer for failure to protect children in a public school, etc.
Guess they better reconsider the NRA's suggestion ... or come up with something better. Fact is, if you don't make schools more secure they will continue to be easy targets for manics with guns or any other kind of weapon they deem adequate.
And by all means, start with the root of the problem ... clamping down much harder on anyone not allowed to have a gun, and also clamp down on owner's being totally responsible for controlling access of their guns to anyone else (ie, crazy kid can't take his parent's legal gun and go on a rampage like in CT).
I think the lawsuit is against the state and not against the gun manufacturer for failure to protect children in a public school, etc.
Guess they better reconsider the NRA's suggestion ... or come up with something better. Fact is, if you don't make schools more secure they will continue to be easy targets for manics with guns or any other kind of weapon they deem adequate.
And by all means, start with the root of the problem ... clamping down much harder on anyone not allowed to have a gun, and also clamp down on owner's being totally responsible for controlling access of their guns to anyone else (ie, crazy kid can't take his parent's legal gun and go on a rampage like in CT).
Yes, I agree with that. After all, maybe all of this could have been avoided if Nancy Lanza had locked up those guns. It would have helped a lot also if she could have been able to more easily have her son committed to a mental facility.
One thing I did not think about at the start of this was the potential cost from lawsuits. This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
And I can't see how politicians can argue against school security if their own children attend private schools with armed security. Someone needs to point that out when some politician starts talking about gun control and no armed guards in schools but his/her own children attend a school where there is armed security. I am very tired of double standards-one for the social elite and another for everybody else. Some of the biggest supporters of gun control are politicians and mainstream news media bigshots who have ARMED SECURITY for themselves. But the children of the poor and middle class attend schools where there are violence, drugs, weapons and murder.
One thing I did not think about at the start of this was the potential cost from lawsuits. This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
And I can't see how politicians can argue against school security if their own children attend private schools with armed security. Someone needs to point that out when some politician starts talking about gun control and no armed guards in schools but his/her own children attend a school where there is armed security. I am very tired of double standards-one for the social elite and another for everybody else. Some of the biggest supporters of gun control are politicians and mainstream news media bigshots who have ARMED SECURITY for themselves. But the children of the poor and middle class attend schools where there are violence, drugs, weapons and murder.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
THIS lawsuit is for 1 trillion dollars:
http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Sean John P Diddy Combs TROu.pdf
Last I checked, the defendant didn't even lift a finger in the face of that kind of "potential cost." I guess he's an even bigger idiot than the folks who run our schools.
This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
THIS lawsuit is for 1 trillion dollars:
http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Sean John P Diddy Combs TROu.pdf
Last I checked, the defendant didn't even lift a finger in the face of that kind of "potential cost." I guess he's an even bigger idiot than the folks who run our schools.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Mystic
This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
THIS lawsuit is for 1 trillion dollars:
http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Sean John P Diddy Combs TROu.pdf
Last I checked, the defendant didn't even lift a finger in the face of that kind of "potential cost." I guess he's an even bigger idiot than the folks who run our schools.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/20...pse-demands-100
According to Turks, the 41-year-old, along with his ex-girlfriend Kim Porter and LAPD brutality victim Rodney King, is responsible for the collapse of the World Trade Center amongst other outrageous alleged atrocities.
She alleges that she has been subjected to abuse from 2001 – 2010 and that: "[Diddy] went through Kim Porter and Rodney King and knocked down the WTC and then they all came and knocked my children down. Set me up to be on disability and disabled my baby. he put my baby in a wheelchair."
Valerie then goes on to say in her statement that is riddled with spelling and punctuation errors: "He date raped me 24 years ago and knocked me down him and Kim Porter and Wallace Wright, then Sean Combs and Kim and Wallace Wright came back 18 years later and raped and sexually abused my children and knocked my children down and crushed me and my children daily.
Don't think Diddy needs to lift a finger.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
This one lawsuit is for 100 million dollars. And there will probably be more lawsuits. Just avoiding the potential cost of all of those lawsuits would justify more school security.
THIS lawsuit is for 1 trillion dollars:
http://www.radaronline.com/sites/radaronline.com/files/Sean John P Diddy Combs TROu.pdf
Last I checked, the defendant didn't even lift a finger in the face of that kind of "potential cost." I guess he's an even bigger idiot than the folks who run our schools.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/20...pse-demands-100
According to Turks, the 41-year-old, along with his ex-girlfriend Kim Porter and LAPD brutality victim Rodney King, is responsible for the collapse of the World Trade Center amongst other outrageous alleged atrocities.
She alleges that she has been subjected to abuse from 2001 – 2010 and that: "[Diddy] went through Kim Porter and Rodney King and knocked down the WTC and then they all came and knocked my children down. Set me up to be on disability and disabled my baby. he put my baby in a wheelchair."
Valerie then goes on to say in her statement that is riddled with spelling and punctuation errors: "He date raped me 24 years ago and knocked me down him and Kim Porter and Wallace Wright, then Sean Combs and Kim and Wallace Wright came back 18 years later and raped and sexually abused my children and knocked my children down and crushed me and my children daily.
Don't think Diddy needs to lift a finger.
Last edited:
I don't know what all of this has to do with the Sandy Hook School shooting. I was talking about a lawsuit involving that school shooting. There will probably be more lawsuits.
All of this other stuff has nothing to do with the Sandy Hook School shooting and does not in any way change the fact that the government does a very poor job in educating and protecting out children in schools.
We know who knocked down the World Trade Center.
All of this other stuff has nothing to do with the Sandy Hook School shooting and does not in any way change the fact that the government does a very poor job in educating and protecting out children in schools.
We know who knocked down the World Trade Center.
Well, I think you like to attack people personally if you don't like what somebody says in a post and if you can't argue readily with what somebody says in a post. I don't know where somebody even finds all of that strange stuff about some trillion dollar lawsuit (that has nothing to do with the Sandy Hook school shooting) and weird claims about somebody being responsible for the 9-11 destruction of the World Trade Center. We know who destroyed the World Trade Center. Heck, the people who did that even admitted eventually to what they had done.
I will defend myself here at this website if I have to but I am going to try very hard to not engage in personal attacks on anybody, no matter how much I might disagree with somebody. Attack what a person says that you don't agree with-don't attack the person.
If you engage in personal attacks on me it will reflect poorly on you-not me. I am not even going to try to find the irony in that strange stuff you presented. There is no way I will waste my time trying to wade through all of that mumbo jumbo. It has nothing to do with the Sandy Hook school shooting anyway.
I have tried to offer some ideas on how we might go about defending children in the schools of this country. What are your ideas on defending our children?
I will defend myself here at this website if I have to but I am going to try very hard to not engage in personal attacks on anybody, no matter how much I might disagree with somebody. Attack what a person says that you don't agree with-don't attack the person.
If you engage in personal attacks on me it will reflect poorly on you-not me. I am not even going to try to find the irony in that strange stuff you presented. There is no way I will waste my time trying to wade through all of that mumbo jumbo. It has nothing to do with the Sandy Hook school shooting anyway.
I have tried to offer some ideas on how we might go about defending children in the schools of this country. What are your ideas on defending our children?
Last edited:
This thread descended into the absurd a long time ago, and you and I have a pretty substantial track record of not being able to communicate. All I see left is to have a little cheap fun.
My last post wasn't a personal attack, by the way. It was a way of saying you seemed to miss my point.
You seem to be a lot more interested in using this thread for serious discussion than I am. Don't let me get in your way.
My last post wasn't a personal attack, by the way. It was a way of saying you seemed to miss my point.
You seem to be a lot more interested in using this thread for serious discussion than I am. Don't let me get in your way.
IMHO, Some of these threads show us the importance of background checks.
And for some people's thoughts on the second amendment, it is a scathing indictment of the American education system's poor teaching of this country's own history.
Excuse me? I think this post was about serious discussion. And you seem to have a problem being able to understand what people are posting about, at least if it does not agree with your point of view. I think my posts are written well enough. What else am I supposed to do-write in very simple sentences?
All you see left to do is have some cheap fun? Other people here are posting in a serious manner. I don't think protection of children in schools is a laughing manner.
If somebody is not interested in what is being discussed in a post and are not interested in serious discussion why do they even get involved in a post and bring in strange material that has nothing to do with what is being discussed?
All you see left to do is have some cheap fun? Other people here are posting in a serious manner. I don't think protection of children in schools is a laughing manner.
If somebody is not interested in what is being discussed in a post and are not interested in serious discussion why do they even get involved in a post and bring in strange material that has nothing to do with what is being discussed?
Originally Posted By: Mystic
If somebody is not interested in what is being discussed in a post and are not interested in serious discussion why do they even get involved in a post and bring in strange material that has nothing to do with what is being discussed?
I agree ... let's not derail too far from the issues with these crazy mass school shootings. Some people have given good suggestions on how we might mitigate school shootings. Others just shoot down these ideas and make it sound like nothing will work except take the guns away from all the good people and leave the criminals with the guns.
From all the discussion I've seen, there's definitely a need for better security around schools. You just can't leave the doors wide open for any maniac to walk into. What's really the best solution at the schools? Of course, we have to clamp down on not letting guns get into the hands of people who shouldn't have them. But what should really be done AT the schools?
If somebody is not interested in what is being discussed in a post and are not interested in serious discussion why do they even get involved in a post and bring in strange material that has nothing to do with what is being discussed?
I agree ... let's not derail too far from the issues with these crazy mass school shootings. Some people have given good suggestions on how we might mitigate school shootings. Others just shoot down these ideas and make it sound like nothing will work except take the guns away from all the good people and leave the criminals with the guns.
From all the discussion I've seen, there's definitely a need for better security around schools. You just can't leave the doors wide open for any maniac to walk into. What's really the best solution at the schools? Of course, we have to clamp down on not letting guns get into the hands of people who shouldn't have them. But what should really be done AT the schools?
Well, if we can't afford to have policemen and sheriff deputies in schools then maybe at least have some school administrators and teachers who are allowed concealed carry. And somehow we need to have better mental health available in this country. I don't know how because we have no money but we need somehow to do a better job. I personally liked when we had the so-called DARE program in local schools with a police officer or sheriff's deputy in the schools.
Maybe there could be a redesign of school buildings so that intruders could not get in as easily. But an intruder could come in with the students.
Maybe there could be special classes for the students. Not just classes about what to do in various situations (fire, school shooting, etc.) but awareness training of some sort where the students would learn to report something that was not right.
We need to have some sort of mental health workers in schools who are trained to spot problems with students. And if a student does have obvious issues we need to be able to do something about those issues. Freedom to be weird is okay but when somebody's weird does start to interfere with the safety of other people those people have rights also. Adam Lanza had obvious problems and it should have been possible to get him some help. Maybe they tried, but apparently they did not try hard enough.
Just a few ideas. Others can probably come up with a lot more.
Maybe there could be a redesign of school buildings so that intruders could not get in as easily. But an intruder could come in with the students.
Maybe there could be special classes for the students. Not just classes about what to do in various situations (fire, school shooting, etc.) but awareness training of some sort where the students would learn to report something that was not right.
We need to have some sort of mental health workers in schools who are trained to spot problems with students. And if a student does have obvious issues we need to be able to do something about those issues. Freedom to be weird is okay but when somebody's weird does start to interfere with the safety of other people those people have rights also. Adam Lanza had obvious problems and it should have been possible to get him some help. Maybe they tried, but apparently they did not try hard enough.
Just a few ideas. Others can probably come up with a lot more.
- Status