More Leftist Ignorance...

"Advantage" means nothing in this situation. It's either do or die.

Sure. TOugh choices abound but there really isn't a lot of choice. It's either kill or die.

Precisely the teacher's motivation. Remorse or PTSD is better than leaving a widow and children.

Precisely. As are a bunch of otherwise dead children.

But the infestation seems to be particularly dominant near large expanses of water.

But not a problem. Cursitor Doom and Jim Thompson are the problem, not beca use of their sexual orientation, nor actually because of their intolerance of sexual orientations that they don't like, but because they are too ignor ant to realise that their intolerance is irrational and mistaken. Happily t hey will die off soon and be replaced by an new generation making different kinds of mistakes.

The Right doesn't care about teachers per se.

The Right simply knows that teachers unions are the backbone of the Democratic Party.

The teachers themselves are collateral damage.

Just to be boring about it - school systems are run pretty locally and the funding from the Federal government to do this would be inordinately complex.

It's just a gas-operated, magazine-fed semi-auto. The body shape doesn't matter. Functionally, other than the number of rounds between reloads ( which is a function of magazine size ) it's just like any other similar weapon.

There are already 300 million.

Sure. But bigger boxes cut the transaction costs.

Re: "who needs *two* handguns" - multiple people, especially people who meet Nature frequently. If someone needs a concealed-carry that has different profile than a snake gun or something bigger to deal with coyotes or the like.

I actually think a /massive/ tax on ammunition, outside of gun

Gun deaths come from outside the Pale, so to speak. it's either people who live somewhat outside the law, or people who lose it.

It's a "toy". The standard home defense weapon is a 5-shot pump 12 gauge. Much nastier than an AR15, especially with .00 buck and slug rounds interleaved.

People *like guns*; as mechanism, as symbol, as a skill. There's nothing wrong with that.

I've known a lot of cops, and only two that fired their weapons. Both cases, they emptied whatever magazine they had.

If you have a gun without having gone through significant

This.

It wouldn't fix anything. And the more you make them the target of a ban or whatever the more they increase in value...

The principle use of a handgun is to be seen, not fired.

No, they're relatively densely populated and they're symbolic targets.

I think this sort of thing works in say, Israel because... well, it's Israel. We'd have a lot of cultural catching-up to do.

When the shooting starts, they beat a spork.

Where they can kill a lot of people (surprisingly not even more than they do) without/before being killed themselves. It does matter that they're soft targets.

It would work here, too.

From here on it is crap and the first 2 things are dubious in the extreme. Police do not use the most lethal available ammunition even though they are only supposed to draw when life is in danger. Whoever is authorized to carry a gun at school will have the same restrictions.

The guy with the AR-15 is under no obligation to use abide by the Haige convention on ammunition. And in fact you can easily buy 5.56 rimless NATO (compatible) rounds in hollow point, soft point, poly-point and with especially thin copper to ensure explosive fragmentation (spitzer).

Why you would rabbit on about an extended version of the Mozambique drill is beyond me and beyond this thread

Possibly the bad role model of a violent society insanely obsessed with owning weapons.

Are you German?

What I mean is that the USA has no plan for reducing the barbaric levels of weapons in their society, the vast numbers of gun deaths and injuries (compared to other western countries), and the levels of fear people have for each other.

I live in a civilised part of the world. I don't need a gun for personal defence.

Now you've made two mistakes. First, you had a brain fart in your arithmetic - that's entirely forgiveable. But secondly, you have admitted to being incorrect in s.e.d. - that's just an outrageous breach of protocol!

Ah, well, who can dispute that carefully reasoned argument?

So I presume the reason the Florida shooter went to his own school rather than a church, or a different school, is that he carefully researched multiple possible "soft targets" and concluded that this was where he could kill most people with the least risk to himself?

Blame it on advertising. The schools have signs posted declaring they are gun free zones.

Dan

That is an equally idiotic argument.

Listen carefully...

The guy hated his school, or the people in it. He was mentally unstable. He wanted to harm the /school/ and the people in it. Not just some random "soft target" - he targeted the school /specifically/.

Your brainless, fanatic, massively outdated laws says this homicidal maniac's right to shot your democratically elected authorities outranks your children's right to life and to a safe school. So they let him have a weapon designed for killing or maiming lots of people.

Folks like this guy, that your society seems to create in a way that no other society on earth manages except on /very/ rare occasions, and that your society is eager to arm to the teeth, pick targets based on who they want to harm. Signs about being gun-free are irrelevant in that context.

They don't have those in Catholic schools?

I think it might be the schooling. Out-of-control classrooms where kids learn to indulge their emotions, that victimhood (related to martyrdom) is noble, and stuff like that.

NEA stuff, not NRA.

Boys are born savages, and need to be civilized while young. (Thomas Sowell, paraphrased)

Cheers, James Arthur

There aren't a lot of Catholoc schools, and not a lot of mass shootings, so the statistics are weak. But I would suspect better parenting and such in paid-for private schools. And more expulsion of dangerous kids.

Of course not. David Brown believes the "semi-automatic" ones will up and jump at you and bite you in the ass >:-} ...Jim Thompson

Nevertheless, it's a factual statement.

Only in the sense that states an imagined fact.

Krw treats the contents of his - inadequate - brain as totally reliable "facts".

It's a comical error, but he can't possibly recognise it.

Not a point that krw could process, let alone answer.