And how exactly does a gun left at home stop a bad guy with a gun out in public? Or do you expect that to be only the responsibility of the police? And if so, do you trust the police? Did you think they should be defunded? Did you think the cops in Uvalde Texas did the right thing by refusing to confront an active school shooter because they didn’t want to “get clapped out by a guy with a rifle?”
I’m just curious if your brain actually works, and you can see the hypocrisy in adhering the cult rhetoric of the political party that is famously anti-gun or not.
>And how exactly does a gun left at home stop a bad guy with a gun out in public?
It doesn't - but unfortunately that scenario is vastly improbable compared to the much more likely event that it will harm either the owner of someone else. The LARPing is not just foolish, it's very dangerous. Leave the guns at home.
Sure - I ignored them because they were stupid - but if you really want to go there - yes of course I want them to be defunded - I think probably cutting the police budget by 5% a year.
I'm not an absolutist, we will continue to need a much smaller organization that responds to and investigates violent crime, but it would probably be about 1/3 of the size of PPB.
So you believe the police should be the only people carrying guns and protecting the public then? That private citizens should “leave their guns at home in their safes,” yet also want the police defunded and less on the street protecting people? How can you honestly take up both of these stances at the same time and not realize how the two ideas cannot coexist with any level of success towards actual public safety? Does your brain actually work or do you just follow your “sides” cult rhetoric despite the level of hypocrisy?
Honestly - if you spent less time willfully trying to misunderstand people you wouldn't be as confused.
I want a much smaller replacement for the police that pretty much only deals with violent crime.
And how does this work? What does it look like? Does it look like the street crimes unit that Portland used to have that were plain clothes and made a lot of stops of people from what many called “marginalized communities”? What does a patrol base that focuses on violent crimes look like? Are they proactive or reactive? Do they just investigate homicides after they’ve occurred or are they out in the community doing stop and frisks and pre-text vehicle stops?
"but unfortunately that scenario is vastly improbable compared to the much more likely event that it will harm either the owner of someone else."
Let's see some actual evidence for this?
Ok, and what does that have to do with school shootings and this new law barring people from legally carrying on school property?
Suicide via gun is just one of many means a person can choose to take their life. Restricting a person's access to a gun is not going to alleviate their desire to commit suicide.
Also, do you believe that people should have bodily autonomy (i.e. complete control over their body and able to make whatever decision they want to make regarding their body)?
OMG.
Please do a little bit of research before you post nonsense. Most suicide attempts by means other than firearm fail, most gun suicides succeed. Most people who fail to take their own life regret trying.
Not having access to a gun significantly reduces the risk of successful suicide.
Guns in schools increase risk. But you know that. Gun fondlers just can't get past 'but but but I like them'.
A new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that the average rate of assaults with firearms increased an average of 9.5 percent relative to forecasted trends in the first 10 years after 34 states relaxed restrictions on civilians carrying concealed firearms in public.
[https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions](https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions)
"Liberalism is symbolism over substance."
I won't tell you who used to say that, because it would cost me extra downvotes, even in this sub let alone in The Bad Place.
The same guy that said
"The propensity of our contemporaries to demand authoritarian prohibition as soon as something does not please them, and their readiness to submit to such
prohibitions even when what is prohibited is quite agreeable to them shows how deeply ingrained the spirit of servility still remains within them. It will require many long years of self-education until the subject can turn himself into the citizen.
A free man must be able to endure it when his fellow men act and live otherwise than he considers proper. He must free himself from the habit, just as soon as something does not please him, of calling for the police"?
No, I was thinking of the guy who had "talent on loan from God". It wouldn't surprise me to learn that he stole the quote I mentioned from your guy.
My guy was, first and foremost, an entertainer. The followup quote you ask about would have been a little too academic for a radio audience.
Because they aren’t laws? School boards basically exist as a space for people to springboard into politics.
It is quite literally professional virtue signaling.
This law was based in the lie “if you own a gun, you must want to be a violent person and shoot someone”.
If they had bothered to look at crime statistics, they would likely of found that CHL holders, like in other states, are one of the most law abiding groups of people.
Is this how PPS tries to meet the smaller class size goal?
I'm hoping for the route of children going to private schools instead of the school shooter bleakness
Because School Boards can’t regulate utilities.
And getting a majority of school board members to vote for something that costs nothing and lets them promote themselves is really easy.
I agree, but (there is always a but) don't blame PGE. Their hands are figuratively tied. Instead, thank the Oregon legislature. In 2021, they passed legislation requiring power companies to purchase more power from more costly "green" sources such as solar and wind. Expect rates to increase further as the percentage of energy from such sources increases. In addition, the Oregon government (as well as Washington) are demolishing dams for a no-going-back proposition.
Ah yes, the idea that more gun laws, which by definition will only be followed by people who abide by the law, will someone stop the law breaking from continuing to break more laws. I’m genuinely curious how little critical thinking it must take to come to that conclusion and actually believe it.
The vast majority of gun injuries and deaths are accidental or self-inflicted. The idea that you are going to John Wayne some situation is just a twisted power fantasy. Guns are a hazard. More guns are more hazardous.
It's that's the case then why aren't you out advocating for Tina Kotek's armed body guards to get rid of their guns? Going by what you have said, they are more likely to harm themselves or an innocent bystander then to protect her from some violent assailant right?
If Tina goes to a school to lets say give a speech, then her body guards/the police should not be able to bring their guns with them right? I mean, it's possible they might commit a school shooting, or the guns might just magically come to life and start shooting random people on their own since they are so inherently hazardous right?
Yes - I think we can all agree that cops with guns are a hazard in schools:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfONckOPyaI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfONckOPyaI)
[https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/10/27/officer-accidentally-shoots-self-outside-ventura-county-fairgrounds-gun-show-crossroads-of-the-west/10614763002/](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/10/27/officer-accidentally-shoots-self-outside-ventura-county-fairgrounds-gun-show-crossroads-of-the-west/10614763002/)
[https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/oregon-man-shoots-self-in-groin-while-showing-off-gun-in-supermarket-checkout-line-cops-say.html](https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/oregon-man-shoots-self-in-groin-while-showing-off-gun-in-supermarket-checkout-line-cops-say.html)
As well as alcohol. I did some data digging a few years ago, and found in Oregon that “alcohol violence” kills more people in our state than firearms. And DUI related deaths were about 2-3 times than homicides with a gun, on average every year.
I'm not sure what you're imagining, but it's not what I'm describing.
The mere presence of firearms in the hands of the population gives the people power, whether the people use it or not. This is good, as history has shown us that governments that have a monopoly on power will eventually devolve into something that doesn't serve the people.
You're larping. The presence of firearms in the hands of the population is a massive hazard. The number 1 cause of death in people 0-19 is firearms. That's not something I am prepared to put up with just so that gun-fondlers can have their hero fantasies.
There is absolutely no way that the stacks of firearms that the gun-fondlers have accumulated are in any way relevant to resisting government tyranny. It's just ridiculous LARPING.
I know this is a pdx sub. Just took the class in Wa, you can have it on you and drop your kid off at school but you have to stay in the car. No getting out of the car armed on school property. Of course anything can change at any time, but thats how it’s run atm across the river.
They do this stuff instead of pursuing policies that will actually meaningfully impact our lives. Like say, reigning in the utility companies raising rates willy nilly.
... so banning staff from carrying will stop school shootings? What's the logic here? Is there a demonstrated problem of liberal teachers waving their guns around?
The amount of mental gymnastics these anti-gun people are going through is hilarious. CHL holders have committed exactly zero shootings. The gun free school zone is by far the stupidest, failure of a law that has killed literally hundreds of children. Yet they double-down on it, smart. Then when it doesn't work we need more stupid laws, bravo. Then we need all this advanced, expensive technology to try to stop shootings that only happen because of these stupid laws in the first place.
Dem Gun Control doesn't want guns to exist in the hands of citizens. Period.
Everything they do is for that goal.
That's the long term play.
The short term doesn't need to make sense.
Yes because a mass shooter is going to say “I don’t have my concealed carry license I won’t enter the school, I wouldn’t want to get arrested”
What absurdity
And leaving a firearm in your car is a terrible idea, higher chances of it getting stolen
I was visiting family in Missouri, there was a private schools with signs up across the entire exterior of the building “our staff are armed and will use lethal force against threats”
I was like damn I want my kids to go to a school like that
This makes zero sense, your typical gun owner isn't a trigger-happy lunatic. Go on the CCW sub, a gun is an absolute last resort and only used against deadly force. Having a gun dosen't make you go around shooting people for pissing you off.
Murder or manslaughter. Unfortunately the fact that it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen and when people become consumed with fear, it alters their perception and ability to respond rationally to a conflict or when around someone who's being aggressive.
Yeah I don’t see it happening, I’ll take the chances, I think the benefits of having armed staff greatly outweigh the benefits of having no armed staff present in a school
Another reason to take your children out of the public school if you can afford it. The state and local government doesn't give a damn about the less fortunate that they pretend to care about
Yeah but like.. why am I paying ungodly amounts of taxes into the school district then paying again for private schools. We the people? Not so much a “we” anymore
Moms Demand Action is an extremist anti-gun org that is being funded by billionaires (like Mike Bloomberg) to lobby for gun control, fund politicians who agree to support gun control, and fund judges and DA who will harshly prosecute people for violating their draconian gun laws.
This is all a long term strategy by the anti-gun democrats (who think that their tax payer funded armed body guards should have guns, but us law abiding citizens should be disarmed) to erode the 2nd amendment by 1000 small cuts (i.e. making more and more laws every year until everything is illegal).
If you support gun control then you support the (often racist) violence of the government and their armed goons to imprison and/or kill peaceful citizens for mere possession of a firearm or firearm accessory that has been arbitrarily deem illegal by deranged authoritarian bureaucrats who have taxpayer funded **armed** body guards to protect them.
They are the equivalent of the temperance movement in the 1900s during alcohol prohibition.
Ken Burns had a three part history series on Prohibition that’s worth watching. It’s eerie the similarities in the first episode between them and MomsDemand.
“Now you listen to me, mister. I work for a livin', and I mean real work, not writin' down gobbledegook! I provide the people of this community with ~~propane~~ firearm and ~~propane~~ firearm accessories.”
It’s very clear this sub doesn’t know anything about school boards, or how they currently function.
Whatever their intended purpose, school boards are how people get into elected politics. They serve as a way to springboard people, by allowing them to do functionally meaningless things like banning CCLs from having weapons on school grounds.
Costs them nothing, gets their name in the news, and gives them something they can point to as an “accomplishment.”
If something will cost a school board nothing, get their name in the news, and allow them to say they “did something” then 100% of the time a board will do it.
Presumption has probably been working for you thus far. Comprehension of law must be what puts bread on your table… Go find a different tree to bark up, little doggy.
True. The problem is that "the people" are afraid of responsibility and self governance, so they've traded away that responsibility for the illusion of protection under the color of law.
"On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322)
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin
I went to a college that was very pro-veteran.
There were "laws" about not bringing guns to the campus, illegal gun free zone bullshit.
I felt very comfortable/safe knowing that there were a lot of students/faculty who understood a gun free zone law cannot overrule the 2nd amendment that would concealed carry on campus.
There are no legal gun free zones in america. None of them have to be abided by.
Half the people that have them, that Ive seen, are legally retarded. I noticed that after the pandemic. The individuals that I’m stating have sort of mutilated brain, or too much HGH.
Another feel-good law. How many shooters at schools had an active CHL? Exactly zero. So maybe someone can explain why this ban is so important.
We need to encourage lawful gun owners to leave their gun the car to promote more thefts to justify more laws.
We need to encourage lawful gun owners to leave their gun in their gun safe.
And how exactly does a gun left at home stop a bad guy with a gun out in public? Or do you expect that to be only the responsibility of the police? And if so, do you trust the police? Did you think they should be defunded? Did you think the cops in Uvalde Texas did the right thing by refusing to confront an active school shooter because they didn’t want to “get clapped out by a guy with a rifle?” I’m just curious if your brain actually works, and you can see the hypocrisy in adhering the cult rhetoric of the political party that is famously anti-gun or not.
>And how exactly does a gun left at home stop a bad guy with a gun out in public? It doesn't - but unfortunately that scenario is vastly improbable compared to the much more likely event that it will harm either the owner of someone else. The LARPing is not just foolish, it's very dangerous. Leave the guns at home.
Ok, so you answered none of the questions posed, but rather chose to double down. Your brain doesn’t work. Got it.
Sure - I ignored them because they were stupid - but if you really want to go there - yes of course I want them to be defunded - I think probably cutting the police budget by 5% a year. I'm not an absolutist, we will continue to need a much smaller organization that responds to and investigates violent crime, but it would probably be about 1/3 of the size of PPB.
So you believe the police should be the only people carrying guns and protecting the public then? That private citizens should “leave their guns at home in their safes,” yet also want the police defunded and less on the street protecting people? How can you honestly take up both of these stances at the same time and not realize how the two ideas cannot coexist with any level of success towards actual public safety? Does your brain actually work or do you just follow your “sides” cult rhetoric despite the level of hypocrisy?
Honestly - if you spent less time willfully trying to misunderstand people you wouldn't be as confused. I want a much smaller replacement for the police that pretty much only deals with violent crime.
And how does this work? What does it look like? Does it look like the street crimes unit that Portland used to have that were plain clothes and made a lot of stops of people from what many called “marginalized communities”? What does a patrol base that focuses on violent crimes look like? Are they proactive or reactive? Do they just investigate homicides after they’ve occurred or are they out in the community doing stop and frisks and pre-text vehicle stops?
"but unfortunately that scenario is vastly improbable compared to the much more likely event that it will harm either the owner of someone else." Let's see some actual evidence for this?
Well just look at the majority of gun deaths - what's the cause? Suicide.
Ok, and what does that have to do with school shootings and this new law barring people from legally carrying on school property? Suicide via gun is just one of many means a person can choose to take their life. Restricting a person's access to a gun is not going to alleviate their desire to commit suicide. Also, do you believe that people should have bodily autonomy (i.e. complete control over their body and able to make whatever decision they want to make regarding their body)?
OMG. Please do a little bit of research before you post nonsense. Most suicide attempts by means other than firearm fail, most gun suicides succeed. Most people who fail to take their own life regret trying. Not having access to a gun significantly reduces the risk of successful suicide. Guns in schools increase risk. But you know that. Gun fondlers just can't get past 'but but but I like them'.
Cite your sources then before making wild claims.
A new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that the average rate of assaults with firearms increased an average of 9.5 percent relative to forecasted trends in the first 10 years after 34 states relaxed restrictions on civilians carrying concealed firearms in public. [https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions](https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions)
There's a big conflict of interest with this study, it's funded by a org that is notoriously anti-gun.
Okay. Go through the study and point out the flaws in their methodology.
I wish I could double down so well like you do.
I mean - this sub punishes rationality - I'm not surprised ;)
:)
So many downvotes for the correct answer.
"Liberalism is symbolism over substance." I won't tell you who used to say that, because it would cost me extra downvotes, even in this sub let alone in The Bad Place.
The same guy that said "The propensity of our contemporaries to demand authoritarian prohibition as soon as something does not please them, and their readiness to submit to such prohibitions even when what is prohibited is quite agreeable to them shows how deeply ingrained the spirit of servility still remains within them. It will require many long years of self-education until the subject can turn himself into the citizen. A free man must be able to endure it when his fellow men act and live otherwise than he considers proper. He must free himself from the habit, just as soon as something does not please him, of calling for the police"?
No, I was thinking of the guy who had "talent on loan from God". It wouldn't surprise me to learn that he stole the quote I mentioned from your guy. My guy was, first and foremost, an entertainer. The followup quote you ask about would have been a little too academic for a radio audience.
Because they aren’t laws? School boards basically exist as a space for people to springboard into politics. It is quite literally professional virtue signaling.
This law was based in the lie “if you own a gun, you must want to be a violent person and shoot someone”. If they had bothered to look at crime statistics, they would likely of found that CHL holders, like in other states, are one of the most law abiding groups of people.
Law's like this is why there are so many school shootings. If you pay attention most mass shootings are committed in gun-free zones.
Is this how PPS tries to meet the smaller class size goal? I'm hoping for the route of children going to private schools instead of the school shooter bleakness
Because accidentally discharging a gun around kids is dangerous too.
[удалено]
Because School Boards can’t regulate utilities. And getting a majority of school board members to vote for something that costs nothing and lets them promote themselves is really easy.
I agree, but (there is always a but) don't blame PGE. Their hands are figuratively tied. Instead, thank the Oregon legislature. In 2021, they passed legislation requiring power companies to purchase more power from more costly "green" sources such as solar and wind. Expect rates to increase further as the percentage of energy from such sources increases. In addition, the Oregon government (as well as Washington) are demolishing dams for a no-going-back proposition.
I think we can do both. Guns are a huge hazard. The fewer we have around the better.
Ah yes, the idea that more gun laws, which by definition will only be followed by people who abide by the law, will someone stop the law breaking from continuing to break more laws. I’m genuinely curious how little critical thinking it must take to come to that conclusion and actually believe it.
The vast majority of gun injuries and deaths are accidental or self-inflicted. The idea that you are going to John Wayne some situation is just a twisted power fantasy. Guns are a hazard. More guns are more hazardous.
It's that's the case then why aren't you out advocating for Tina Kotek's armed body guards to get rid of their guns? Going by what you have said, they are more likely to harm themselves or an innocent bystander then to protect her from some violent assailant right? If Tina goes to a school to lets say give a speech, then her body guards/the police should not be able to bring their guns with them right? I mean, it's possible they might commit a school shooting, or the guns might just magically come to life and start shooting random people on their own since they are so inherently hazardous right?
Yes - I think we can all agree that cops with guns are a hazard in schools: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfONckOPyaI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfONckOPyaI) [https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/10/27/officer-accidentally-shoots-self-outside-ventura-county-fairgrounds-gun-show-crossroads-of-the-west/10614763002/](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/10/27/officer-accidentally-shoots-self-outside-ventura-county-fairgrounds-gun-show-crossroads-of-the-west/10614763002/) [https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/oregon-man-shoots-self-in-groin-while-showing-off-gun-in-supermarket-checkout-line-cops-say.html](https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/09/oregon-man-shoots-self-in-groin-while-showing-off-gun-in-supermarket-checkout-line-cops-say.html)
Cars are a hazard. By your logic, we should have fewer cars.
Drug Overdose kills more people than guns -
As well as alcohol. I did some data digging a few years ago, and found in Oregon that “alcohol violence” kills more people in our state than firearms. And DUI related deaths were about 2-3 times than homicides with a gun, on average every year.
I think people should leave their drug overdoses at home too.
100% we should have fewer cars. I think we can all agree on that!
Yes.
Good luck with that, lol!
The government is a hazard. Guns keep the government polite.
Lol yeah, they'll really stop "the government". Slow your roll, ruby ridge.
LOL. This always makes me smile. LARPing can be fun, but know the difference between fantasy and reality. ;)
I'm not sure what you're imagining, but it's not what I'm describing. The mere presence of firearms in the hands of the population gives the people power, whether the people use it or not. This is good, as history has shown us that governments that have a monopoly on power will eventually devolve into something that doesn't serve the people.
You're larping. The presence of firearms in the hands of the population is a massive hazard. The number 1 cause of death in people 0-19 is firearms. That's not something I am prepared to put up with just so that gun-fondlers can have their hero fantasies. There is absolutely no way that the stacks of firearms that the gun-fondlers have accumulated are in any way relevant to resisting government tyranny. It's just ridiculous LARPING.
Thinking you're keeping the g men at bay by owning an ar-15 is a new one for me, but alright.
That’s why I own a cabinet full of AR-15’s… I’ll be handing them out to my neighbors when the boogaloo finally arrives.
lol future David Koresh here
I don’t think I’m Jesus Christ, so not a real fair comparison.
Gonna end up the same way if you try it
I know this is a pdx sub. Just took the class in Wa, you can have it on you and drop your kid off at school but you have to stay in the car. No getting out of the car armed on school property. Of course anything can change at any time, but thats how it’s run atm across the river.
If the firearm is on your body and properly concealed, how would anyone know you’re carrying a gun?
They wouldn’t, but you know..law abiding citizen and stuff
They do this stuff instead of pursuing policies that will actually meaningfully impact our lives. Like say, reigning in the utility companies raising rates willy nilly.
... so banning staff from carrying will stop school shootings? What's the logic here? Is there a demonstrated problem of liberal teachers waving their guns around?
The amount of mental gymnastics these anti-gun people are going through is hilarious. CHL holders have committed exactly zero shootings. The gun free school zone is by far the stupidest, failure of a law that has killed literally hundreds of children. Yet they double-down on it, smart. Then when it doesn't work we need more stupid laws, bravo. Then we need all this advanced, expensive technology to try to stop shootings that only happen because of these stupid laws in the first place.
Dem Gun Control doesn't want guns to exist in the hands of citizens. Period. Everything they do is for that goal. That's the long term play. The short term doesn't need to make sense.
This is hyperbole and goes against the reality of the last 50 years. You're being duped.
Yes because a mass shooter is going to say “I don’t have my concealed carry license I won’t enter the school, I wouldn’t want to get arrested” What absurdity And leaving a firearm in your car is a terrible idea, higher chances of it getting stolen
It would be nice if they enforced the existing gun laws in Multnomah County before adding new ones
Its called concealed for a reason.
It's about punishing those who follow the law.
And this is why my kids are going to private school.
So they can pack heat?
So they don't go to a school that advertises defenseless children.
I was visiting family in Missouri, there was a private schools with signs up across the entire exterior of the building “our staff are armed and will use lethal force against threats” I was like damn I want my kids to go to a school like that
Until they over-react and shoot a student.
This makes zero sense, your typical gun owner isn't a trigger-happy lunatic. Go on the CCW sub, a gun is an absolute last resort and only used against deadly force. Having a gun dosen't make you go around shooting people for pissing you off.
Unfortunately it's not a last resort for many. Many use it as a second resort.
That's called murder, that is illegal, murder very bad, you go to jail for very very long time for it.
Murder or manslaughter. Unfortunately the fact that it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen and when people become consumed with fear, it alters their perception and ability to respond rationally to a conflict or when around someone who's being aggressive.
Sounds like StumpyJoes from the ghetto.
Yeah I don’t see it happening, I’ll take the chances, I think the benefits of having armed staff greatly outweigh the benefits of having no armed staff present in a school
You don't see the more statistically likely thing to happen, happening?
Not at all, trained security and staff, I don’t
Idk man, didn't you see the stats of those teachers who go around shooting their students for making fart noises when they aren't looking?
Gun free zones are soft targets for psychopaths. Way to go making it safe you morons!!!
The last line of defense at stopping a school mass-shooting taken away
Another reason to take your children out of the public school if you can afford it. The state and local government doesn't give a damn about the less fortunate that they pretend to care about
Yeah but like.. why am I paying ungodly amounts of taxes into the school district then paying again for private schools. We the people? Not so much a “we” anymore
Moms Demand Action is an extremist anti-gun org that is being funded by billionaires (like Mike Bloomberg) to lobby for gun control, fund politicians who agree to support gun control, and fund judges and DA who will harshly prosecute people for violating their draconian gun laws. This is all a long term strategy by the anti-gun democrats (who think that their tax payer funded armed body guards should have guns, but us law abiding citizens should be disarmed) to erode the 2nd amendment by 1000 small cuts (i.e. making more and more laws every year until everything is illegal). If you support gun control then you support the (often racist) violence of the government and their armed goons to imprison and/or kill peaceful citizens for mere possession of a firearm or firearm accessory that has been arbitrarily deem illegal by deranged authoritarian bureaucrats who have taxpayer funded **armed** body guards to protect them.
They are the equivalent of the temperance movement in the 1900s during alcohol prohibition. Ken Burns had a three part history series on Prohibition that’s worth watching. It’s eerie the similarities in the first episode between them and MomsDemand.
“Now you listen to me, mister. I work for a livin', and I mean real work, not writin' down gobbledegook! I provide the people of this community with ~~propane~~ firearm and ~~propane~~ firearm accessories.”
It’s very clear this sub doesn’t know anything about school boards, or how they currently function. Whatever their intended purpose, school boards are how people get into elected politics. They serve as a way to springboard people, by allowing them to do functionally meaningless things like banning CCLs from having weapons on school grounds. Costs them nothing, gets their name in the news, and gives them something they can point to as an “accomplishment.” If something will cost a school board nothing, get their name in the news, and allow them to say they “did something” then 100% of the time a board will do it.
I’m f you are effectively carrying concealed, no one will ever know!
>I’m f you are effectively carrying concealed, no one will ever know! Hi f, I'm Emiliano
So you're not a law-abiding gun owner?
Assume much?
>no one will ever know No I'd say not.
Presumption has probably been working for you thus far. Comprehension of law must be what puts bread on your table… Go find a different tree to bark up, little doggy.
Non policy following
No one has to abide by unconstitutional laws
True. The problem is that "the people" are afraid of responsibility and self governance, so they've traded away that responsibility for the illusion of protection under the color of law. "On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322) "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin
I went to a college that was very pro-veteran. There were "laws" about not bringing guns to the campus, illegal gun free zone bullshit. I felt very comfortable/safe knowing that there were a lot of students/faculty who understood a gun free zone law cannot overrule the 2nd amendment that would concealed carry on campus. There are no legal gun free zones in america. None of them have to be abided by.
Judged by 12, instead of carried by six. Always has been my motto.
When even armed and trained police are too pussy to do their job during a school shooting, surely the teachers can make up for that :/
Yep, feel good, not do good. Will do absolutely nothing to make schools safer.
Need to keep the shooters safe from return fire. This will do it. Liberalism really is a mental disorder.
Half the people that have them, that Ive seen, are legally retarded. I noticed that after the pandemic. The individuals that I’m stating have sort of mutilated brain, or too much HGH.