Cute, nevertheless you DO admit you agree with the adage, that it's people who do the killing, not the guns they wield.People say "Guns don't kill people; people kill people". While true, guns make it a heck of a lot easier to kill people.
A pre-teen that is intent upon killing other pre-teens ... ???An armed police officer who is ready to kill a pre-teen is not necessarily someone that I’d want on campus.
Exactly, it’s going to come up once a decade.A pre-teen that is intent upon killing other pre-teens ... ???
You’ll notice that the OP’s shooter was taken alive. You’d rather them be dead?
The life of no man, no child can come before the inalienable right to bear arms?
Exactly, it’s going to come up once a decade.
But we need a police officer at every school, ready to kill our homicidal 12 year-old?
I think the larger question is “why does our country breed children who are willing to kill others”?Why do you only think of the 12 year old who is killing other INNOCENT kids? Why is the killer’s life so much more important than the innocent kid’s lives?
I think the larger question is “why does our country breed children who are willing to kill others”?
Treating the symptoms rather than identifying and fixing the “problems” is how we got here.
Maybe it’s the guns?
I don’t know anyone who has said this. Can you quote their post please? Or is this just an exaggeration of the truth?
The life of no man, no child can come before the inalienable right to bear arms?
I said it. It is a rhetorical question.
I will rephrase:
Can the inalienable right to bear arms come before the life of any man or child?
I think that the guns lobby have an answer. They put their rights before human life.
Children shooting children is, yes, a “Big Picture” item.This is not a gun issue - it's a cultural issue, a conflict of visions, of world views.
But let's be honest, isn't that a rather trite, specious argument?Children shooting children is, yes, a “Big Picture” item.
But if guns weren’t so readily available (largely due to the gun culture that pins all its freedoms and fears onto their right to own a gun), maybe some kids wouldn’t get, you know, shot?
Right, this issue isn’t about “the guns”.But let's be honest, isn't that a rather trite, specious argument?
And if condoms weren't readily available to all the boys her age, she'd most likely get pregnant. Same exact faulty, specious reasoning, albeit in reverse.
Did it ever occur to anyone to ask WHY she did what she did?
The left is so gun-phobic, so myopic about their very existence it can't see the real issue - an 11-year old girl went on a rampage trying to kill classmates and teachers in her school. Frankly, I'd like to know why.
...instead, this seems like just another opportunity for the left to forward their anti-gun agenda. To heck with the girl and her patently obvious issues.
Apparently, her issues wouldn't even BE an issue, "if guns weren't so readily available."
I mean, c'mon.
You know what was going on in schools when I was 11 years old? We were having target practice with them; optional classes to learn how to use them safely. You want to know WHERE those target ranges were? IN THE SCHOOL BASEMENT.
You tell me - what changed? Having more guns in society, or society itself?
Absolutely - when obesity becomes about "the forks."But is there ever an issue that’ll make it about “the guns”?
Yes that’s exactly what I suspected. No one actually said that, it’s just an exaggeration designed to make gun lobbyists appear worse than they actually are. It’s a deception is what it is.
Or armed teachers.The only thing that's going to stop a bad 12-year-old with a gun is a good 12-year-old with a gun.
Absolutely true. Makes it so easy to kill people that a 100lb college girl can defend herself against a 200lb rapist.People say "Guns don't kill people; people kill people". While true, guns make it a heck of a lot easier to kill people.