In a column that I read this morning:

 

Are mass shootings a mental health issue?

Are mass shootings a school security issue?

Are mass shootings a gun issue?

 

Only narrow-minded ideologues would ever consider any answer other than "Yes" to ALL of the above.

 

GUEST COMMENTARY: 'It's complicated' not enough in response to mass shootings

 

Thanks for sharing

 

That article perfectly sums up my feelings in a way I couldn't.

Follow the money. What the NRA wants is to protect gun manufactures. Simple as that. They are lobbyist group paid to be the voice of their biggest contributors. Any anti-gun discussion equals less dollars to these companies, period. Don't be fooled that they are standing up for your rights as a gun owner they are standing up for almighty $$$.

 

I actually agree. NRA has become just as much of a gun control group as a gun advocate group. Wayne Lapierre talks a big game but when it comes down to it, NRA tends to compromise gun rights for money.

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue b/c until recently I never thought much of it. I have a question for gun owners and hunters though. Would you never hunt again and give up all your hunting rifles if it meant no school would ever be attacked by a gun man again? I know it's completely hypothetical and not realistic. Just wondering if people are willing to make that sacrifice for the possibility of a safer nation?

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue b/c until recently I never thought much of it. I have a question for gun owners and hunters though. Would you never hunt again and give up all your hunting rifles if it meant no school would ever be attacked by a gun man again? I know it's completely hypothetical and not realistic. Just wondering if people are willing to make that sacrifice for the possibility of a safer nation?

 

"Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither."

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue b/c until recently I never thought much of it. I have a question for gun owners and hunters though. Would you never hunt again and give up all your hunting rifles if it meant no school would ever be attacked by a gun man again? I know it's completely hypothetical and not realistic. Just wondering if people are willing to make that sacrifice for the possibility of a safer nation?

In a "perfect world"? Yes. But, you just mentioned schools would never be attacked again, but one would still have to worry about home invasions, car jacking's, muggings and other things.

Follow the money. What the NRA wants is to protect gun manufactures. Simple as that. They are lobbyist group paid to be the voice of their biggest contributors. Any anti-gun discussion equals less dollars to these companies, period. Don't be fooled that they are standing up for your rights as a gun owner they are standing up for almighty $$$.

You show hatred for and lack of knowledge of the NRA. They do much more than just protect gun manufacturers.

I actually agree. NRA has become just as much of a gun control group as a gun advocate group. Wayne Lapierre talks a big game but when it comes down to it, NRA tends to compromise gun rights for money.

Disagree, marvel. But we all are entitled to our opinion and therefore respect yours and Zulu's opinion.

In a column that I read this morning:

 

Are mass shootings a mental health issue?

Are mass shootings a school security issue?

Are mass shootings a gun issue?

 

Only narrow-minded ideologues would ever consider any answer other than "Yes" to ALL of the above.

 

GUEST COMMENTARY: 'It's complicated' not enough in response to mass shootings

The author forgot a few.

 

Are mass shootings a gun free zone issue?

Are mass shootings a criminal issue?

Have mass shootings occurred during a gun ban?

Do less killings occur when someone with a CCL is there to confront the shooter?

Are the vast majority of these shooters on Zoloft or some serotonin inhibitor through their formative years?

 

Only narrow-minded ideologues would ever consider any answer other than "Yes" to ALL of the above.

I cannot state how vehemently I am opposed to an armed presence in every school, whether it be police or teachers or administrators. There are some situations where I know that is already happening, along with metal detectors and physical searches, etc. That is not the reality we should be accepting. It's harder to do, but ultimately more culturally beneficial to find was to address the underlying community, social, and mental health issues. I don't have any "plan", bit I do know it starts with the community.

Rockmom, I don't know if you've read the article that TB&G posted in this thread she started, but I highly recommend it.

The author forgot a few.

 

Are mass shootings a gun free zone issue?

Are mass shootings a criminal issue?

Have mass shootings occurred during a gun ban?

Do less killings occur when someone with a CCL is there to confront the shooter?

Are the vast majority of these shooters on Zoloft or some serotonin inhibitor through their formative years?

 

Only narrow-minded ideologues would ever consider any answer other than "Yes" to ALL of the above.

 

All worthy of discussion.

 

And in my humble opinion; all fall under the umbrella(s) of the author's "big three".

Rockmom' date=' I don't know if you've read the article that TB&G posted in this thread she started, but I highly recommend it.

 

I read it. It doesn't change my opinion. I could write as equally lengthy, detailed and fact-based post about my position. But it wouldn't change YOUR opinion. I do not agree at all. I also do not pretend I can post anything that any of you who disagree with me would read with an open mind or with the intention of considering another view. It would be attacked and belittled and frankly, I am just not in a "battling" state of mind these days.

That might be one of the most ludicrous ideas I've ever heard of....

 

You can't be serious. You think the problem is security of their dues paying members? Talk about out touch of reality. It's the students that need it, not the teachers.

My point would be that by extension of protecting teachers the students would also be protected. You said NRA should pay for protecting schools instead of lobbying, I was just pointing out that teachers unions spend as much or more lobbying and that money too could be used to protect schools.

 

Ludicrous? You don't think the NEA and other Teacher Unions should or could help with protecting schools? Or should all of their money be used for lobbying only?

OK, I know this will go over like a fart in church, but it has crossed my mind, and not something I'd advocate at all. But I've considered arming my 14yo as he goes to school. Yep, loony, and not something that I'd do in reality, but in my innermost and most agonizing spot in my core I suppose, I'd like my son's chances if it came push to shove. I know that's not remotely an answer to this problem. Not only is it loony, but illegal. Yet, a .38 on his ankle would make me feel better, and although he's 14, he's a fantastic marksman. (I know, I know, stupid idea that just went thru my head as a distraught father, not something I'd ever do, and probably shouldn't have even typed it here)

 

Crazy I know, but what if teachers packed? Not all, but some. What if the principal who was brave enough to take a bullet in an attempt to disarm the shooter was packing? Would the outcome have been different? Legal or not, if I was a principal in this day and time, I'd keep a piece in my desk and ask for forgiveness later.

 

As for the NRA, I don't belong anymore, not because I don't believe in some of the tenets they were founded upon, but for all of the reasons that zuzu outlined above. And it's a shame.

It's sad we have to live in an America with armed guards everywhere. I've seen the countries with armed guards as a part of everyday life. They're generally not very pleasant places to live.

 

Most countries that have armed guards as part of everyday life, have severe gun control laws.

I read it. It doesn't change my opinion. I could write as equally lengthy, detailed and fact-based post about my position. But it wouldn't change YOUR opinion. I do not agree at all. I also do not pretend I can post anything that any of you who disagree with me would read with an open mind or with the intention of considering another view. It would be attacked and belittled and frankly, I am just not in a "battling" state of mind these days.

Well, at least your honest. That's about the way it is, your side won't give credence to anything we post and vice versa. Most have their mind made up. I just feel the side I support is factual and not driven by emotion and misinformation.