Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It sounds like your refusal to consider lives being saved by having armed teachers and security means you'd rather not even try it, and just let these shootings continue. That's not much of a solution.
So you think teachers should be paid the combined salary of police and teacher? You're willing to pay teachers 2x their salary or more? And you'll sign off on the increased spending required to train and equip them? It means buying guns, hiring more people, and developing and overseeing training standards.
Yes, i dont want to try a solution thats almost certain to cause more harm than good.
So you think that drugs being illegal has more people addicted than if they were widely available? That's what you're going with?
Now it sounds like you're blaming people who own guns for the acts of a few criminals.
So how is it that police stop a school shooter, if not by using their own guns in some way?
Legislation prevents fires? What legislation would prevent someone from shooting people?
Sense teachers would not be required to undergo training as part of the teaching job (firearm training I mean then a teacher wishing to carry at school would simply take the classes on their own time with their own personal gun.
Banning guns was already tried, and it failed. That's why the bans were expired, and it's why gun bans aren't being so readily called for by politicians anymore.
If more guns were the solution, then countries with very strict gun regulations would have more crime. Which is noot the case.
Building codes. These are adopted by legislation, and they have a huge effect on how fires start, spread, and are suppressed.
If the war on drugs worked then explain why it is that we have more people than ever incarcerated on drug charges after DECADES if the drug war. If banning things were effective there would be fewer drugs now than there ever have been oh and alcohol may still be illegal. As it stands drugs are everywhere in and out of prison and alcohol has been legal for about ninty-two years after being banned for less than a score.
It hasnt been tried. An isolated ban hare and there is not a ban. People move about, you know.
Well, we'd have to get into what those building codes are and then apply them to a "firearms code" that prevents someone who wants to kill people from doing so. The 20,000 or more gun laws already on the books certainly haven't coded mass shootings out of existence. But some people think another law or two would do the trick.
I did not say more guns, but at this point banning guns when there are MILLIONS of them out there (even of the guns people tend to want to ban is likely going to be very hard and if anything lead to more violence.
Minneapolis as a city and Minnesota as a state are completely controlled by the democrats. I'm sure they would be able to come up with something legislatively if there was something legislative they could do. But Minneapolis is also where the Floyd riots got started, and they couldn't even do anything about that violence either, and it spread nationwide. So don't count on those same people to do anything effective about the current issue either.
The shooting happened during an eucharist, when people are praying. Could you say how effective these prayers were at preventing an even worse outcome?
It was a yes or no question. Don't you think saving a few lives is better than saving none?
"Would be"? We were talking about whether bans that have been enacted really mean anything.
What quality of life would the person have there are times when saving people is frankly selfish.
