Trump

[(o)(o)]

Arming teachers to reduce the number of firearms discharged in schools is pretty smart thinking.

Clergymen would benefit from being tooled up to prevent church shootings, also cinema attendants, concert promoters, female students... anyone who isn’t armed probably should be for safety reasons.

[Harlequin]

After reading 'Florida shooting: Firms abandon NRA amid consumer boycott' I rechecked the Norton NRA discount link. The page has now been taken down.

It appears that three other deputies were present when the police arrived, also with guns drawn but not entering the school. Is Trump now going to declare all deputies cowards?

Meanwhile, death threats are being sent to multiple survivors.

[Harlequin]

ALERT: No present threat to campus community. University Police confirmed incident occurred on North Campus involving several individuals. Gunshots fired, 2 individuals suffered non-life threatening injuries. UPD following up on all leads, incident remains under investigation.

[KlaxonCow]

Clergymen would benefit from being tooled up to prevent church shootings

Yes, we need more nuns with guns.

[Dio]

My brother's pub quiz team name for a while was "Nuns, Guns, and Gasoline" after a B-movie trailer he saw once.

[PFVA]

Florida shooting: US airlines join other firms in dropping NRA

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43181337#

Some more corporate pressure and maybe a few more weapons are bannned.

Anywhere in the world one can have weird neighbours and not even knowing one has them. I much more prefer when no one is allowed to have war weapons in their possession.

[guythp]

It's bit like a ticking bomb in the making to give guns to teachers, they may have 1000 other more serious reasons to snap than students.

Yeah. And when, eventually, it's an armed teacher who ends up killing the students - either because they themselves snap and / or make a tragic mistake in thinking a student reaching to pull a calculator or ruler from their bag is reaching for a pistol, or whatever - then you know what the NRA's message is going to be?

Arm the kids! The only way to stop bad teachers with guns is to have good kids with a gun, right?

It'd be a sure way to make sure homework's in on time though;

"It's due in on Monday, anyone who doesn't hand it in by the end of the day WILL GET THEIR F*CKING HEAD BLOWN OFF. Class dismissed."

[KlaxonCow]

Florida shooting: US airlines join other firms in dropping NRA

Some more corporate pressure and maybe a few more weapons are bannned.

Well, it won't actually ban any guns directly, but it's about time that the NRA's funding, lobbying and special privileges were put under scrutiny.

Even if you agree with their message, you should still be concerned with the massive potential that all the influence these "special favours" bring is the perfect recipe for corruption.

It wouldn't matter if the NRA promoted Barbie dolls instead of guns, if you see millions being ploughed into them by Mattel and they're lobbying the politicians, who're all singing from the same hymn sheet of "every child should have a Barbie doll" because, they propose, purchasing a Barbie doll is the solution to all of life's worries and troubles...

...well, you get the gist. You definitely should be worrying that we've got some corporate corruption going on, buying the favour of the people's representatives against the honest interests of those they are meant to represent.

And - oh, look - all these other companies, likely receiving funds from the Barbie Doll Promotion Society, are all giving special discounts to Barbie doll owners too. Which, in any other situation, would be correctly scrutinised for being anti-competitive "cartel" behaviour.

The fact that, on top of all that, it's a potential murder weapon that they're corruptly promoting just makes this all a thousand times worse. But the point is that the underlying behaviour itself is a form of insidious corruption, even if what they were pushing was just an innocent "mostly harmless" product instead.

This sort of shit should have been scrutinised and boycotted long ago. Regardless of what rights the Second Amendment may or may not give "well-regulated militia" (which, indeed, as has been rightly pointed out, does not qualify 99% of those bearing arms, in fact).


(As I touched on before, the even more massive lobby group / special privilege group, known as "religion", ought to get a damn sight more scrutiny of its practices too, for similar reasons. I mean, those folks get the even bigger privilege of legal tax dodging. Even though they are very far from being the only ones who do good work for charity. Indeed, the two largest individual donors to charity - by a country mile, as Gates and Buffet have spent many billions between them - are both atheists. Not that I'm trying to pull any "my daddy is bigger than your daddy" thing here, but rather am just trying to emphasise that religion is far from the only motivation for charity, so why do they get the special tax dodge privilege where a humanist doing the exact same thing charity-wise doesn't get the special favours? It's an "equal justice for all" thing. Either all charities universally should get a tax dodge from paying their council tax to assist their "good works" or absolutely none of them do.)

[Little stoned kiwi]

Trump says lawmakers need to buck NRA every once in a while

"You guys, half of you are so afraid of the NRA," the president said Monday at a meeting with the nation's governors. "There's nothing to be afraid of. And you know what? If they're not with you, we have to fight them every once in a while. That's OK."

I guess it's good Trump's blind arrogance cuts both ways. But it remains to be seen what Congress does.

[F-ZeroOne]

The school officer accused by Trump of being a coward is using the defence that he thought the gunshots were coming from outside the building (combined with radio reports of outside victims) and that he responded as he was trained to do, take cover.

Trump, meanwhile, says that he would have run in armed or not.

Hmm.

[tufty]

The only reason for which the Donald would have run in is if he too thought the shooting was going on outside.

[KlaxonCow]

Okay, so you're a good guy with a gun.

Heroically, you storm the building with your gun, ready to take down the bad guys.

You enter a room and there's three people, who you don't know, who're holding guns.

So, do you fire or not?

My point being, of course, is that, in the heat of the moment, how would a good guy with a gun be able to tell which ones are their fellow good guys with guns and which ones are the bad guys with guns?

Maybe all of them are good guys with guns. Or maybe all of them are bad guys.

And here's the other thing. How would they know either? I mean, you've just stormed into a room brandishing a weapon. There's a very real chance that you're going to get shot, regardless of who's good or bad here.

I guess you could quickly don your white hat and start drinking milk, then shoot anyone with a black hat who's smoking. That always works in the films, right?

[F-ZeroOne]

Theres also the thing that the "good guy gun" is presumed to be handgun of some kind (I don't think I've ever heard it stated definitely, but that seems to be the implication). Not sure I would fancy taking on someone with an assault rifle with a handgun; they certainly don't expect soldiers to. I can't see a teacher keeping a AR-15 in the classroom "just in case"...

[PFVA]

Florida shooting: US airlines join other firms in dropping NRA

Some more corporate pressure and maybe a few more weapons are bannned.

Well, it won't actually ban any guns directly, but it's about time that the NRA's funding, lobbying and special privileges were put under scrutiny.

Even if you agree with their message, you should still be concerned with the massive potential that all the influence these "special favours" bring is the perfect recipe for corruption.
.....

(As I touched on before, the even more massive lobby group / special privilege group, known as "religion", ought to get a damn sight more scrutiny of its practices too, for similar reasons. I mean, those folks get the even bigger privilege of legal tax dodging. Even though they are very far from being the only ones who do good work for charity. Indeed, the two largest individual donors to charity - by a country mile, as Gates and Buffet have spent many billions between them - are both atheists. Not that I'm trying to pull any "my daddy is bigger than your daddy" thing here, but rather am just trying to emphasise that religion is far from the only motivation for charity, so why do they get the special tax dodge privilege where a humanist doing the exact same thing charity-wise doesn't get the special favours? It's an "equal justice for all" thing. Either all charities universally should get a tax dodge from paying their council tax to assist their "good works" or absolutely none of them do.)

Not quite related but i thought of mentioning that in my 90% Catholic country the Church has been ordered to pay taxes on unused property (and they have plenty of it) just like everybody else. Even though some representatives of Church complained i didn't see any catholics in general complaining probably because they think they should.

[zip accident]

I guess you could quickly don your white hat and start drinking milk, then shoot anyone with a black hat who's smoking. That always works in the films, right?

That was in the silent era allegedly, Wikipedia says more or less;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_and ... sm_in_film

Also mentions this guy as a black hat wearing good guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopalong_Cassidy

Before my time, but it seems the show was a money maker, and I have heard the name somewhere.