Does anybody else think Obama...

[Elbow]

So what do you propose?

Plan for the worst, hope for the best, and get sick people off the streets.

Chinese teachers were unable to save quite a few children from knife attacks. More than at Sandy Hook. Even if you remove guns completely from society, you haven't solved the real problem. That's a fact.

I never said getting guns out would solve a problem. I have no idea how teachers couldn't take down someone with a knife though.

It's not exactly easy to kill 100 people with a gun either. You are trying to make it sound like it is just simple and anyone can easily do it, but if you look at reality, none of these people that tried to do it managed to succeed.

Is it easier with a knife or gun? Why does that question matter at all? The question should be, how do we stop people from wanting to kill in the first place.

Point is it IS easier to kill more people with a gun, that's a fact, simple as that. I'm just saying, not saying we should ban guns, but I don't see why some people don't see why people consider the gun the top of the weapon chart for killers.

Easier, faster, less hand to hand.

100 people may be a little intense yes, but if I ran into a room and wanted 5 people dead, I could probably kill those 5 people much easier with a gun than a knife.

The point I'm making? None. Simply a gun is a better tool than a knife. lol

[Sinfix_15]

Plan for the worst, hope for the best, and get sick people off the streets.

this IS the plan for the worst.

[Elbow]

this IS the plan for the worst.

So little kids carrying rifles is the plan for the worst?

Quit your gun slinging comments, they don't even make sense with most conversations.

[Sinfix_15]

So little kids carrying rifles is the plan for the worst?

Quit your gun slinging comments, they don't even make sense with most conversations.

The never ending quarrel between the peace lover and the peace maker.


Any real proposal outside of generic hippy rhetoric like "hope for the best" ?


btw, ever find your shotgun?

[Aeroscout977]

btw, ever find your shotgun?

Not if Obama finds it first.

[Elbow]

Not if Obama finds it first.

Oh I wasn't aware he banned shotguns.

[Sinfix_15]

Oh I wasn't aware he banned shotguns.

He should..... a shotgun would do a number on a classroom. right?

[Sinfix_15]

Speaking of shotguns..... spent the day shooting clay.......... hell of a way to spend a sunday while all of those other people are wasting their day at church.

[Aeroscout977]

Oh I wasn't aware he banned shotguns.

Are you saying he wouldn't?

[David88vert]

Plan for the worst, hope for the best, and get sick people off the streets.
I never said getting guns out would solve a problem. I have no idea how teachers couldn't take down someone with a knife though.
Point is it IS easier to kill more people with a gun, that's a fact, simple as that. I'm just saying, not saying we should ban guns, but I don't see why some people don't see why people consider the gun the top of the weapon chart for killers.
Easier, faster, less hand to hand.
100 people may be a little intense yes, but if I ran into a room and wanted 5 people dead, I could probably kill those 5 people much easier with a gun than a knife.
The point I'm making? None. Simply a gun is a better tool than a knife. lol

As I mentioned earlier, location and situation determines which tool is best of the job. In your situation of 5 people above, the size of the room and placement of the individuals, along with their skills levels, as welll as your own skill level, would determine which is a better tool for that task.
A 10x10 room, with them spread out evenly all around, and you charging into the middle, does not mean you want a gun. Actually, if you have any combat skill, you would be more inclinded to choose a good long blade instead.
A gynasium or large lunch room (more in line with the Columbine situation), would call for a gun more.
Guns have a longer reach, but in tight quarters, then the knife has the advantage, due to its flexibility in use.

You have to use the right tool for the right situation. And to be clear, guns do have more situations where they are the better tool to use, but a blanket statement is not correct.
Your note of getting sick people off the streets is the part of a real approach to the problem. Planning for the worst involves placing armed individuals at schools to protect the students. The issue with that is it costs a LOT of money, and there is not a lot of extra money these days.

Let me make this clear to everyone. There is no problem with gun-free zones IF you address them correctly. Our courts are gun-free zones, yet we have armed baliffs to protect innocent people. Our planes are gun-free zones, yet we have sky marshalls. If you want to have a gun-free zone, then you have to provide adequate security for that venue. It's that simple. If you do not provide armed security on-site, then it should not be a gun-free zone.