[Leroy]

Here is the perfect reason, explained by Biden himself, as to why legislation for banning/controlling weapons as a means to prevent killings will always fail:

"
During the National Rifle Association’s meeting with Vice President Joe Biden and the White House gun violence task force, the vice president said the Obama administration does not have the time to fully enforce existing gun laws.

Jim Baker, the NRA representative present at the meeting, recalled the vice president’s words during an interview with The Daily Caller: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”
"

As you can see, the democrats are not actually interested in enforcing the law, reducing murders, they are only interested in removing guns from Citizens hands so that they can complete their fascist destruction of the USA without fearing a revolution by the citizens.

[elklindo69]

So the NRA believes that turning school "gun free zones" into "gun zones" will reduce gun violence.

I suppose that the NRA's support for buying more guns makes sense for an organization that lobbies for gun manufacturers. Fear and militarization seem to be better selling points than hope and progress for peace...

[RealJustme]

So the NRA believes that turning school "gun free zones" into "gun zones" will reduce gun violence.

So does our government leaders and the liberal elite, their children are well protected by guns while in school. The NRA just believes that our children are no less deserving of protection than our gods' children.

[Leroy]

So the NRA believes that turning school "gun free zones" into "gun zones" will reduce gun violence.

I suppose that the NRA's support for buying more guns makes sense for an organization that lobbies for gun manufacturers. Fear and militarization seem to be better selling points than hope and progress for peace...

Actually, if you check, many places/people considered of importance are already protected by armed guard, why not our most valuable asset, children?

[elklindo69]

Nobody has issues with highly trained law enforcement officials patrolling schools. They do that already.

But when the NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is "good guy" with a gun, is just pure rhetoric, hyperbole, and fear mongering on the lowest denominator. That idea scares the shit out of any rational thinking person. The police, themselves have difficulty stopping criminals, now the NRA wants to arm vigilantes? The vast majority of teachers have no law enforcement training. And even if there is a shooting at a school, and when the police arrive, how are the police going to distinguish the "good guy" from the "bad guy?"

It's absolutely mindless!!!

[RealJustme]

Obama's ideal of gun control has failed, looked at what he and other liberals did to Chicago with their gun controls, they turned it into the muder capital of the world. Only the insane continue doing the same failing thing over and over.

[justdoit]

Along that line, we havn't cured cancer either ,should we give up that fight? The problem in chicago has more to do with social economic issues than failed gun control laws. In your mind if the outcome doesn't improve in _____ years then give up on it, not tweak the system till positive results show?

[RealJustme]

Along that line, we havn't cured cancer either ,should we give up that fight?

When you try something and it only makes things worse like Obama's gun controls in Chicago, you try something else. But if your real agenda is to disarm good citizens, make them totally dependant on the Government and defenseless, you don't really care how many people are killed as a result of your gun controls. I don't think Obama is insane, I think he has the agenda I mentioned.

[Leroy]

Nobody has issues with highly trained law enforcement officials patrolling schools. They do that already.

But when the NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is "good guy" with a gun, is just pure rhetoric, hyperbole, and fear mongering on the lowest denominator. That idea scares the shit out of any rational thinking person. The police, themselves have difficulty stopping criminals, now the NRA wants to arm vigilantes? The vast majority of teachers have no law enforcement training. And even if there is a shooting at a school, and when the police arrive, how are the police going to distinguish the "good guy" from the "bad guy?"

It's absolutely mindless!!!

What is mindless is the masses thinking that a teacher, student, administrator, is going to stop a killer with a gun with nice talk, a pencil, an eraser, or by hiding or running. The fact is that we've seen how your ideas work, kids and teachers get killed, easily, and are taught to be victims, to not even consider fighting the killer.

The Hyperbole is liberals/idiots telling anyone to rely on the police and laws to protect them - it doesn't work at all and the evidence in all forms of crime is seen daily.

What isn't hyperbole is that are many incidents of people (citizens, those good people you deny) preventing crime, stopping rapes, preventing mass killings, because they had their gun and were trained and willing to use it to protect themselves and others. In some cases, this happens hundreds of time each day in the USA, but it doesn't make the news because they, like other liberals, want you to be subjugated, enslaved, oppressed, weak, victims.

So, not matter how you try and vilify the people willing to protect themselves and others, it won't change the fact that sooner or later you're going to wish that someone with a gun, that you wanted to be illegal, was there with it to protect your sorry ass.

[elklindo69]

Nobody has issues with highly trained law enforcement officials patrolling schools. They do that already.

But when the NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is "good guy" with a gun, is just pure rhetoric, hyperbole, and fear mongering on the lowest denominator. That idea scares the shit out of any rational thinking person. The police, themselves have difficulty stopping criminals, now the NRA wants to arm vigilantes? The vast majority of teachers have no law enforcement training. And even if there is a shooting at a school, and when the police arrive, how are the police going to distinguish the "good guy" from the "bad guy?"

It's absolutely mindless!!!

What is mindless is the masses thinking that a teacher, student, administrator, is going to stop a killer with a gun with nice talk, a pencil, an eraser, or by hiding or running. The fact is that we've seen how your ideas work, kids and teachers get killed, easily, and are taught to be victims, to not even consider fighting the killer.

The Hyperbole is liberals/idiots telling anyone to rely on the police and laws to protect them - it doesn't work at all and the evidence in all forms of crime is seen daily.

What isn't hyperbole is that are many incidents of people (citizens, those good people you deny) preventing crime, stopping rapes, preventing mass killings, because they had their gun and were trained and willing to use it to protect themselves and others. In some cases, this happens hundreds of time each day in the USA, but it doesn't make the news because they, like other liberals, want you to be subjugated, enslaved, oppressed, weak, victims.

So, not matter how you try and vilify the people willing to protect themselves and others, it won't change the fact that sooner or later you're going to wish that someone with a gun, that you wanted to be illegal, was there with it to protect your sorry ass.

If what you say is true, then prove it!

The NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. And if they can prove it, then we'll believe it. If they have statistics and case studies showing incidents where good guys with guns stopped bad guys with guns, we would like to see it...

[markjean59]

they can have my gun is when they pry it from my dead cold fingers. gun control and or banning WILL NOT WORK! just look at prohibition and the war on drugs.

[justdoit]

Which "machine guns" are you refering to that their going to unwrap your cold dead fingers from?
They put controls on how fast you can drive also. When are they going to unwrap your cold dead fingers from that steering wheel cause your gonna drive as fast as you want.And lets not get into that infernal seatbelt thing. Nobody's gonna tell us how fast we can drive! And if I wanna fly free in my last seconds of life through the front windshild, that "MY choice". Dam the torpedeos, full speed ahead!!!
Sounds kinda silly doesn't it.

[Leroy]

If what you say is true, then prove it!

The NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. And if they can prove it, then we'll believe it. If they have statistics and case studies showing incidents where good guys with guns stopped bad guys with guns, we would like to see it...

Can you show me one instance where a mass killer was stopped before killing anyone that wasn't prevented by a citizen (non-LEO) or where the killed numbers were less because the cops got there before a citizen did? Nope, you can't, but you can google the thousands of instances where armed good citizens stopped a criminal before a killing or stopped it before more people were killed, and at the same time, not a single cop was around to take the place of the good citizen.

So, how effective has the Gun Free Zones been at protecting our children - not at all.
How effective have total gun bans been in cities around the USA - not at all.
How effective is armed guards protecting XYZ at keeping XYZ safe in the USA - Very
Why does the president and most politicians have armed escorts when the gun laws are suppose to prevent attacks on their lives? - Because LAWS don't prevent criminals from doing bad things.

Here is a perfect example even - Unstable person shoots two home owners over their dogs, goes back outside and kills their dogs, a single cop arrives and unstable person keeps cop pinned behind his vehicle as cover while still being shot at - cop as AR-15 and can't hit the crazed person with cover behind a large tree, crazed person continues to shoot at cop with handgun - neighbor, hearing the shooting, investigates, draws handgun and kills crazed person from more than 150 yards with a single shot - cop thanks neighbor for his help.

If you took time to do a little looking, there are countless news stories for more than a decade of citizens stopping killings in schools (or preventing MORE deaths in schools). Even more common, OFF-DUTY cops just happening to be at a location prevent more deaths in mass attacks, but, almost never is an ON-DUTY cop there when it starts.

So, there you go, proof that you're an idiot if you think a law is going to prevent bag guys from killing innocent people, thinking that any WEAPON FREE ZONE is anything more than a death-trap.

[elklindo69]

If what you say is true, then prove it!

The NRA claims that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. And if they can prove it, then we'll believe it. If they have statistics and case studies showing incidents where good guys with guns stopped bad guys with guns, we would like to see it...

Can you show me one instance where a mass killer was stopped before killing anyone that wasn't prevented by a citizen (non-LEO) or where the killed numbers were less because the cops got there before a citizen did? Nope, you can't, but you can google the thousands of instances where armed good citizens stopped a criminal before a killing or stopped it before more people were killed, and at the same time, not a single cop was around to take the place of the good citizen.

So, how effective has the Gun Free Zones been at protecting our children - not at all.
How effective have total gun bans been in cities around the USA - not at all.
How effective is armed guards protecting XYZ at keeping XYZ safe in the USA - Very
Why does the president and most politicians have armed escorts when the gun laws are suppose to prevent attacks on their lives? - Because LAWS don't prevent criminals from doing bad things.

Here is a perfect example even - Unstable person shoots two home owners over their dogs, goes back outside and kills their dogs, a single cop arrives and unstable person keeps cop pinned behind his vehicle as cover while still being shot at - cop as AR-15 and can't hit the crazed person with cover behind a large tree, crazed person continues to shoot at cop with handgun - neighbor, hearing the shooting, investigates, draws handgun and kills crazed person from more than 150 yards with a single shot - cop thanks neighbor for his help.

If you took time to do a little looking, there are countless news stories for more than a decade of citizens stopping killings in schools (or preventing MORE deaths in schools). Even more common, OFF-DUTY cops just happening to be at a location prevent more deaths in mass attacks, but, almost never is an ON-DUTY cop there when it starts.

So, there you go, proof that you're an idiot if you think a law is going to prevent bag guys from killing innocent people, thinking that any WEAPON FREE ZONE is anything more than a death-trap.

The NRA framed the argument as whether the good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns. Not whether good guys with guns can stop bad guys. Meaning that, are there any instances where armed civilians prevented gunmen from killing anybody?

In the recent Colorado movie shooting the gunman had a shotgun, assault rifle, hand gun, protective gear, and tear gas. The guy killed 12 people and injured 58. Does anybody really believe that a civilian armed with a pistol would have stopped that guy?

LAPD police shooting with armed gunmen who robbed the bank. How many hours and how many cops did it take to kill the two individuals? Could a civilian with a gun stopped that????????????

The Giffords shooting, a so-called "good guy" with a gun nearly pulled the trigger and shot an innocent person who actually wrestled the gun away from the shooter!!!!

So stop making these clown comments and suggestions that untrained civilians will have the capability of stopping armed gunmen. You're not a cop so leave policing to the pros.

[Leroy]

The NRA framed the argument as whether the good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns. Not whether good guys with guns can stop bad guys. Meaning that, are there any instances where armed civilians prevented gunmen from killing anybody?

In the recent Colorado movie shooting the gunman had a shotgun, assault rifle, hand gun, protective gear, and tear gas. The guy killed 12 people and injured 58. Does anybody really believe that a civilian armed with a pistol would have stopped that guy?

LAPD police shooting with armed gunmen who robbed the bank. How many hours and how many cops did it take to kill the two individuals? Could a civilian with a gun stopped that????????????

The Giffords shooting, a so-called "good guy" with a gun nearly pulled the trigger and shot an innocent person who actually wrestled the gun away from the shooter!!!!

So stop making these clown comments and suggestions that untrained civilians will have the capability of stopping armed gunmen. You're not a cop so leave policing to the pros.

There you go, see, the movie incident could and most likely would have been far less damaging if a civilian had been permitted to have their gun - as is the case with most mass shootings. All it takes is one good citizen to fire a shot at the killer and he's distracted (at the least) and dead or wounded and unable to continue shooting/killing people - again, that's what police reports show us from all around the country.

Bank, again Citizens do protect people in banks where they are permitted entry with their guns - check out the Michigan incident of a citizen stopping a claimed bomber.

Giffords, another case where a crazed democrat wanted to kill someone that disagreed with them - and yes, a mistake did happen, but, it happens far more often with cops shooting the wrong person - in fact, cops shoot 3 times as many innocent bystanders than criminals, police, on average, only hit their target 34% of the time. Heck, in 2010 in NYC, three innocent bystanders were wounded by police, in just one incident.

Your comment that "you're not a cop...." shows just how ignorant and stupid you are about protection, law, criminals - there is almost never a cop present when a crime is happening, but there is almost always a citizen present when is happening - and armed citizens stop more crimes without even firing a shot then you care to admit, and they stop more killings by firing shots then you will admit. One other thing, most citizens that get involved with a gun for defense have a better % of hitting their target than the police do.