Rattler

No disrespect meant, but that's what the job requires. It's different if you are risking your life without any purpose, but kids are being shot. You have to try, even if you die. If somebody isn't willing to put their life on the line to save others, they best not become a cop or firefighter. Stick to the sanitation department.

If you take the pay, you better be able to play. Dereliction of duty is supposed to be a crime. Not to mention the shooter is a kid with no training, experience or survival skills.

I can recall only one active shooter scene where a police officer went in right away. In most every mass shooting I can recall, the police didn't enter the area until they had massed outside and had SWAT with them. That takes time and people die. The police are mainly concerned with protecting their own. All the more reason to be able to protect yourself if you need to.

Israel has done this and it works. If they can do it, so can we. To say we leave the schools defenseless, or not allow teachers to defend themselves and their kids, is the height of denial. No amount of gun bans is going to stop this from happening. The shooter must fear his prey. https://www.westernjournal.com/israel-2-school-attacks-44-years-heres-make-sure-kids-safe/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2018-02-21&utm_campaign=manualpost

Teachers won't be forced to be armed, but they will no longer be prevented from being armed! When SWAT eventually arrives, (if the shooter is still alive), the teachers can stand down with their hands up. Cops run into Concealed Carry Permit holders pointing guns at perps all the time. They are trained how to handle that and must know they may run into that scenario in any place it might happen. Professional armed security at the entrances is still the most effective option. Do what they do in Israel. They have completely shut down school shootings for decades now.

That video had to have been made by anti-gun idiots as a propaganda tool, because the guy obviously doesn't know jack sheet about that rifle, the laws that regulate it, or how to destroy it. I don't believe he is what he claims to be in that video, but the anti-gun snowflakes will commend his ignorance.

Firearm owners have been giving up a lot since the Gun Control Act of 1968 and with each decade incidences of firearm tragedies have gotten progressively worse. Maybe that's what they mean when they call themselves "Progressives". With each further encroachment on 2nd Amendment rights, gun owners are forced to give up more and more. If people can't see the end goal is total disarmament, they are not looking for the truth to the anti's agenda. Just look at the way these things came to pass in Australia and you will see each step is never enough. The anti's always want more. I just wonder how much American gun owners are willing to give up before they come to realize they have been robbed of an inalienable right that they willingly gave up. Rights taken by force can always be regained. Rights given away voluntarily can never be regained. Better think long and hard before you agree to do it.

Gun control is a moral crusade against a benighted, barbaric citizenry. This is demonstrated not only by the ineffectualness of gun control in preventing crime, and by the fact that it focuses on restricting the behavior of the law-abiding rather than apprehending and punishing the guilty, but also by the execration that gun control proponents heap on gun owners and their evil instrumentality, the NRA. http://www.rkba.org/comment/cowards.html

Medical Professionals do not have any Constitutional authority to remove anyone's rights. Perhaps they could be encouraged to take their findings to the authorities and have a court review their opinions through legal due process, but that is about all that would be Constitutional. This is a perfect example of why the NICS system could be used to abuse people's rights. That's why anti-gun people want to make it required for ANY gun transfer. Once they achieve that objective, they will begin to add all sorts of criteria that will justify a denial, none of which will allow for due process prior to removing your rights.

You don't have to be of any particular ideology at all, but it helps to be an analytical thinker that doesn't advocate giving up your rights and freedoms with the misguided hope things will be solved. You have to expect criticism and rebuttal when your beliefs are really far to the left of the Constitution, adversely affecting freedom and liberty. It might help to start thinking why it is common for the government to demand we sacrifice our rights and liberties every time some crisis occurs, especially when the problem is not solved and the government's purposes are beneficent. The Constitution was written to restrict the power of the government. It has every motive to undermine that document as much as it can get away with. People who are lulled into a sense of security by the siren song of government, need to be warned. It would not surprise me if much of the anarchy we see today is intentionally caused by the government. I feel one must respond to calls requesting we give up freedoms and rights, especially when the chances of solving the problem are zero. I also welcome an intelligent debate on any subject if the other side can stick to facts supporting their case and do it while remaining civil. Sometimes I find it hard to do myself, but that should be the goal. It is reasonable for Americans to be wary of policy proposals that would likely be ineffective, yet would negate our most precious individual rights.

Oh but they have done something. They have furthered their goal of total disarmament with a little more encroachment. That's the end goal and they will not admit it.

Where did I say that? I point out where his opinions are wrong. That's called refuting his opinions. Hyperbole much?

There ARE solutions! Stupid people just refuse to listen to them.

People who do not understand rights, or the US Constitution, need to be educated about the evils of taking them away. Too bad they would rather listen to the people who are trying to take them away. "The government may not descend to the evil of preventive law. The government cannot treat men as guilty until they have proven themselves to be, for the moment, innocent. No law can require the individual to prove that he won't violate another's rights, in the absence of evidence that he is going to. But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime. They say to the rational, responsible gun owner: you may not have or carry a gun because others have used them irrationally or irresponsibly. Thus, preventive law sacrifices the rational and responsible to the irrational and irresponsible. This is unjust and intolerable. The government may coercively intervene only when there is an objective threat that someone is going to use force." Harvey Binswanger

Leftists hate your rights.

You are completely clueless regarding the anti-gun agenda in the world buddy. Try being open minded and accepting the fact they ARE trying to take all of our firearms away. Unbelievable.

Where the heck did this guy come from? He's on a hunting site spewing all of the leftist talking points aimed at taking away his rights. Not just 2nd Amendment and hunting rights, ALL of his rights. He seems to be OK with "giving up" his rights though. He is a prime example of the kids I mentioned who have been indoctrinated, rather than educated, and lack the ability to think for themselves. If he's older than 30, he's a fool that needs to grow up. I'm not even going into a point by point rebuttal of all of these leftist talking points because it's obvious his mind is closed and his emotions rule his brain.

He was not a member of, nor trained by any white group, period. That's propaganda meant to take advantage of a crises. C'mon people, let's try to stick to facts in this debate, lest it devolve into the realm of the ridiculous.

Having the students chant "NO MORE GUNS" is merely more applied indoctrination from anti-gun leftists and politicians. It's another example of telling kids what to think, rather than teaching them how to think.

No true. Conservatives are not the one's who changed the mental health laws in the past that made it difficult to have people committed. They are interested in cutting waste and ineffective spending in mental health environs. The means to fix the problem conservatives provide is vehemently opposed by the left, that being providing armed protection in the schools for the kids. (See my post about how Israel did it effectively) As far as what the left "thinks" will solve the issue, we all know gun control won't, and that's why it's opposed.

Gary Bauer: "To me an obvious thing is for schools to have armed and trained security guards. It is not unusual to see armed security guards at banks because we don't want someone taking our money. Aren't our children more valuable? Instead, we 'protect' them with 'Gun-Free Zone' signs. It makes absolutely no sense for our children's safety to depend entirely on whether or not a maniac wakes up in the morning and decides to kill children in a 'gun free zone.' Guess what? Once the killer steps onto the campus of that school, it is no longer a 'gun-free zone,' and the only armed individual is the criminal. Why is this so controversial to the Left? Sadly, it is easier for a murderer to walk into a school with a gun than it is for a student to walk in with a Bible and attempt to give it away. The default position of progressives is to attack the Second Amendment and the availability of guns. Yet the percentage of households with guns has been declining for decades. Fewer Americans hunt today than did several decades ago. In fact, many schools used to have gun clubs on campus. Yet school shootings were rare. Logic suggests that something else explains this shocking trend."

And then there is the medication problem. I'll just leave this here...... http://mobile.wnd.com/2018/02/media-ignoring-1-crucial-factor-in-florida-school-shooting/

This man's words are the solution to this issue. It can be done if the country stops being stupid. "Conservative commentator Lawrence Meyers, writing for Townhall, noted that after a rash of school shootings in the 1970s, Israel implemented security features and active shooter protocols at schools, which ended the problem. “Guards don’t just stand around,” he wrote. “They check everyone entering, and engage threats.” “And yeah, they’ve got guns.The lawful purposes for carrying guns are very clear: protect school personnel and students, create a sense of security, deter the ill-intentioned, and provide self-defense,” Meyers added."

One motive not mentioned yet is the attraction to military arms for various reasons. Even when I was young, many people preferred Garands, Springfields, Mausers and M1 Carbines over any type of commercial, or even sporterized firearms. I know some deer hunters who hunt deer with nothing but military rifles. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone pursues happiness in their own way.

Although I hate the SAFE Act and want it repealed, I don't see it happening unless the SCOTUS finds these stupid laws to be unconstitutional regarding the 2nd Amendment, mainly because AR's are in common use already. That being said, I wouldn't consider investing money in an AR at this time because the work arounds that make them compliant in NY today could very easily be criminalized tomorrow the same way the SAFE Act was passed in the first place. If you don't think they are already planning to do that, you're deluding yourself. Nothing angers me more then legally buying and owning something, only to have the government decide it's illegal years later. That being said, I have a Remington 700 SPS with a Leupold VXII 4-12x40mm AO with a Mil Dot reticle that takes predators very nicely. It shoots minute of angle and is fast enough for follow up shots at any predator, if needed, which is rare. I don't think an AR would be a better predator rifle, but it does have dual purpose capability in a SHTF situation, if all the compliant mods can be reversed that is.