Given the ONLY option ALLOWED by Republicans to protect our children, arming folks!!!

I eagerly await the answer

 

BOY do I have a doozy OP planned. You guys are gonna go ape.

 

Most of my details for the Right Wing acting against, come from the Federalist.

 

I hope its short and to the point

But I wont bet the rent money on it

 

I read an article on JUST THAT. Yesterday. A guy is developing it.

 

FROM your own LINK.

Now tell me where this law says they cant research it.

 

What other ballistics are you referring to. Range, velocity, trajectory?

 

I am in no way an expert, nor do I play one on the internets. We NEED good folks like yourself, soes we idiots don't make fools of ourselves. We ask for your help, but none is coming.

WE need responsibility, and an assumption, that any gunplay will get you found. THAT, will stop all but the ones willing to die by cop.
That category I am still rolling around.

 

What the right wing calls, advocate, or ....... is in fact, allowing certain subjects to be BREACHED. I am writing an OP in depth, using the Federalist, to forward my research.

 

What's to know and if you don't know what you want then why are you even engaging in the arena of reform? Take a moment and try and be a little more specific, but if it's going to be the usual nonsense of punishing everyone for the rare actions of few then in all fairness it's not going to fly!

 

The ACTUAL REASON why I ask for good gun owners HELP, is soes we affect the FEWEST possible gun owners. That is the goal of ME, DEMS, AMERICANS and right wingers. WE have a common goal.

 

No, most mass shootings are not with assault rifles. They are with handguns.

It is well understood that once any shot is fired at a mass shooter, 90+% of the time the shooter will flee or commit suicide to not be caught alive.

There are over 750,000 violent assaults of children in k-12 public schools each year, higher than the general population. Children are forcibly there under compulsory attendance laws. Children are the most defenseless of all. They can not escape but are trapped in some of the highest violent crime zones in the USA without protection. And your plan to do anything to try to reduce this? NOTHING.

It would cost less than 15 cents per day per student to have a fully trained, licensed and certified police officer in every school, less than 30 cents to have 2.

Your view that mass shooters are Delta Force assailants with precise assault plans and are precision marksmen for which their .223 AR15 is such vast firepower no police officer with a 9mm could stop him is nonsensical crap. Not particularly expensive safeguards such as a fence and doors that are locked combined with on-site full time regular police would eliminate most mass shootings in schools and minimize the deaths otherwise. BUT MORE IMPORTANT, police at schools could reduce the extreme level of bullying, harassment, violent assaults and rapes at schools, address the extreme level of illegal drugs and contraband in schools, and add another safeguard with expertise to spot injuries on a child that indicate abuse or assault away from school or at home.

Everyone knows NOTHING is going to eliminate the hundreds of millions of firearms or the billion+ high capacity magazines. Just ask the French about that. No amount of new prison cells and mental institutions will eliminate people going murderously wacko or eliminate all sadists, sociopaths and violent psychotics - though no reason not to try. The MOST obvious way to protect children in schools is to literally protect children in schools.

We KNOW it is NOT about the gun. Until 1936, ANYONE could buy any fully automatic military weapon - new or used - from 50 round 45acp Tommy Guns, high capacity 30.06 military full auto rifles and even 50 cal and 20mm full automatic cannons - and ammo - without so much as giving a name and doing so by mail order, on the street or in a store. Americans used to be armed to the teeth back to the days of pocket and boot flintlock small flintlock pistols. Any building - government, church, school, store - it was a certainty there were armed men and women were everywhere. I have a collection of cap and ball "muff" pistols women would hold one in each hand while wearing winter hand muffles, and a "lady of the night" single action 5 shot 32 caliber black powder cartridge pistol - small and sleek so to not snag up, women would wear in thigh holsters. A woman's seeming powder puff tin might well actually be a .22 single shot pistol.

With all those guns everywhere, and with anyone being able to buy far MORE deadly machine guns literally without a name by mail - cheaply if military surplus - and all the ammo they want - why wasn't there a rash of mass shootings and school shootings in the past?

To the contrary, I believe a timeline of anti-gun laws interposed over a timeline of mass shootings would show that mass shooting increased and gun rights were taken away. Anti-gun laws only disarm the good guys and good people, only disarm potential victims. Gun laws never disarm bad guys. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns" is a reality.

Had ONE person fired ANY shot back during the police shooting, the 19 year old murderer would have fled. But government laws singularly exist to protect the murderer from harm - not the children or school staff. Nor does government give much of a damn against the hundreds of thousands of kids who will be assaulted - nor the millions of kids terrified to go to school for the bullies, thugs and gangs - which then make education also virtually impossible. Merely to survive, many kids will have no choice but to join a gang for mutual defense since most schools are lawless violent crime zones - particularly inner city schools.

Why don't Chicago schools have high levels of gun violence, while gun violence among young people is extremely high in the communities? There are armed police in Chicago schools.

 

The FBI's fault is not contacting local authorities. The local sheriff also is responsible for not taking action.

With him declaring online and publicly saying he was going to be a school shooter, even calling himself that, he could have immediately been arrested by any federal, state or local law enforcement office in that jurisdiction under terroristic threats, as a danger to others and himself, and numerous other federal and state laws. Nor just that he could be taken in for a day for a fast look over. He could have been prosecuted and imprisoned, during which psychiatrist examination could be forced upon him.

In this, it also could be determined as mentally disturbed in a formal finding that he would NOT clear any background check when and if he is finally released from jail or prison. His firearms forcibly taken from him. He would not clear any gun background check. However, this would still leave the black market for guns.

YES. the FBI is to blame. So is local law enforcement. I also blame local law enforcement because they could have had a deputy sheriff at that school and opted not to. It solely is the Sheriff's decision as how to allocate his resources, just like the FBI appears to have misallocated its resources for highly illegal political activism to try to control and corrupt the election and government process.

 

You MUST know that MOST schools already have an ONGROUNDS officer. AN officer will not stop anything but WHERE he is physically at. Relatively speaking.

I am old, and WE had an officer. Course, he held parties and mass drinking, but still.

 

The FBI could NOT notify ANYONE, as they didn't know which JURISDICTION to notify.

 

I told you MY way to address violence against children in schools, which also included mass shooting. Fully professional sworn police officers in school - for that and for the other hundreds of thousands of violent assaults that happen in schools each year.

There certainly are other actions to be taken. To instruct teachers how to spot a troubled kid in school - and a network of professionals then to involve would be another action that should be taken. I SERIOUSLY believe if a troubled kid getting those crazy thoughts was interviewed by both a qualified counselor and police, the level of danger probably could be determined and in most instances it would bring the kid back into reality.

Again, this is not JUST about mass shooters. If some kid is bullying other kids, POLICE should get involved as threatening anyone - even one kid threatening, shoving etc another kid is a crime, it is illegal. if a bully shoves another smaller kid against a locker, if a teenage boy shoves a girl against a locker grabbing her breasts and forcing a kiss on her, if a bully trips a gay kid - the school police officer would investigate and if probable cause exists to decide that happened, take that kid to juvenile detention in handcuffs - and thru the juvenile court system if serious enough or a repeat offender who thinks a trip to juvenile detention is a badge of honor.

SCHOOLS MUST BE SAFE FOR CHILDREN. There can be no education without it. Children have a right to be literally protected. An absolute right since they are in school involuntarily and by government force.

 

The days of making that argument has passed by. While technically you are correct, the term "assault rifle" to the public now means any rifle that can hold a high capacity magazine. Words in ordinary usage mean whatever most people think it means. It also doesn't add up to anything.
Even the Marines in combat now do not use full auto (except for 1 in a squad for suppression fire) and the Marines in combat I've spoken to said the never used select fire as shot 2 and 3 are in the air.

 

That STILL doesnt change the FACT that there is no LAW that says the CDC cant study GUN violence. I dont KNOW why the violent ALT left continues to SPOUT this lie.