If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   After finally figuring out that cowering in a corner does very little to stop a bullet, school administrators and police in Alabama are now training teachers and students to actively fight back against a school shooter   (foxnews.com) divider line 124
    More: Interesting, teacher education, Alabama, private schools, middle schools  
•       •       •

4875 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Sep 2012 at 7:22 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



124 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-02 08:16:02 PM

gingerjet: Gyrfalcon: What needs to happen is NOT arming teachers and students, but changing the mindset of people (police, first responders and school officials alike) so that in a situation like this, the teacher on the phone to the dispatcher can give an accurate description of their location and say "You know, we can still make a break for the back hallway--tell the cops we're coming out that door."

Agreed. In a random shooter situation - those who will survive will be the ones who runs - not takes cover and stays put. And these situations happen so quickly - someone having a gun would have little chance to respond.

/saying that - banning guns on campus makes little real sense


Well, it makes sense depending on the campus. I really doubt arming elementary school teachers would have any positive outcome at all.

It will have little real EFFECT is probably more like it.
 
2012-09-02 08:16:47 PM
This isn't nearly as stupid as the title implies, and the intent is sincere, but it is somewhat of a silly hail Mary like crawling under a desk during a nuclear attack in the 50's. There is also the issue of kids throwing shiat at the SWAT team clearing the building and being legally killed because in American cop logic a thrown textbook justifies use of deadly force. People who are more or less immune to prosecution aren't going to think twice about shooting anything that scares them in a fire fight.

Flight 93 is not a valid analogy ... a plane fuselage is one large room where it is easy to see everything, and the passengers planned a coordinated attack on terrorists who were holding them hostage and believed they had the scene secure while focusing on getting the plane to the White House, and who did not have distance weapons. Reacting split second against someone with a machine gun is a wholly different situation.
 
2012-09-02 08:17:07 PM
In Ohio, "School Safety Zones" are considered "Gun Free Zones", which means no one (execpt for the police) can have a firearm on their person or vehicle, if the vehicle is parked inside the School Safety Zone.

Remove the "School Safety Zone" restriction and allow those who have a valid Ohio concealed handgun license to carry on school property. By virtue of having the CHL, they are over 21, not a felon and have undertaken firearms training (usually the NRA's Basic Pistol).

Colleges in Ohio are also, by law, no carry zones. They are not as restrictive as schools as the gun can be in the vehicle, but can't be on the person. Again, the no carry restriction needs to be removed for CHL holders. Criminals know that anyone on a college campus is an easy target as they know that anyone on a college campus cannot, by law, be armed.

It is completely asinine for the state to say "You have completed the guidelines set forth under state law to carry a concealed handgun in public, but you can't carry it here." Criminals, by definition, don't obey the law. All these "No carry zone" laws do is hamstring law-abiding citizens.
 
2012-09-02 08:18:54 PM

FormatSlacker: (1) Guns have to be reloaded.


A Beretta 92FS can be reloaded in a second or two.
 
2012-09-02 08:19:29 PM
That's right, the cowering does not stop the bullet.

The corner stops the bullet.

This has been a Public Service Announcement for the Citizens Concerned About People Who Get Shot Too Easily.
 
2012-09-02 08:20:59 PM

2wolves: This will not end well.


Because someone will get hurt?
 
2012-09-02 08:23:50 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: GAT_00: Republican logic. Oh no, people are getting shot due to incredibly lax gun laws! How do we fix this? MORE GUNS! That'll fix everything! It's the exact same argument as deregulation.

Where in the article did anyone suggest "more guns" as a solution? Or did you just use some "democrat logic" and make shiat up to conform to your presumptive biases?


That dude must buy his derp by the case the way he sloshes it about on these threads.

Btw... an extremely effective, non-lethal item that serves a dual purpose and fits right into a classroom is a high pressure chemical fire extinguisher. Much more effective than throwing random objects in close quarters like they tend to teach these days. Every teacher should have one in their desk.
 
2012-09-02 08:26:38 PM

bojon: This has to be taught??


obviously, in america, yes it does. to be willing to put one's self in danger in order to save others in not a natural primal response. to flee in fear is. and when americans really start to rise to levels of heroics, to be willing to risk their own lives in order to save their countrymen, that's when your own government will know fear. sending inexperienced immature foolish children that are blinded with propaganda off to kill is easy. having to stave off adults with experience, education and maturity who are willing to die for their beliefs will be true horror for law enforcement and politicians.

this also goes hand in hand with the social control that vigilantism is unacceptable. the masses think that way because their leaders wish it so. some day when the great unwashed realize finally that they have to stand up for themselves and make scumbag hoodlums pay for their crimes, then the citizenry will finally expose how very useless our system of law enforcement, the court room, the penal system and the prison system is in america.
 
2012-09-02 08:31:23 PM
Whoa, that Raw Shark dude is a farker.

I thought you died in Antarctica, dude.
 
2012-09-02 08:34:07 PM

Bucky Katt: So an unarmed child is supposed to confront a nutjob with a gun? Who the fark takes this crap seriously?


It does seem the odds are pretty slim that such training would pay off. While these shootings happen too much, they are still rare. On the other hand, why not bring it up in some way such as a phys ed class. In the case of the V Tech shooter, maybe it could work.

In the case of the Ft Hood shooter, it took armed responders to stop the shooter IIRC. If a bunch of soldiers couldn't figure out a way to stop him, perhaps a group of students couldn't either.
 
2012-09-02 08:34:44 PM
If you live in a country where school shootings are so common you need a policy on them, maybe it's time to re-access.

More guns for all, you rootin'-tootin' cowboy mutha-frkkas!
 
2012-09-02 08:34:50 PM
I think I read that in Israel, the school teachers are armed. I'm not sure if that's a standard thing or if it's just individual choice, but I do know that at least one teacher stopped a terrorist from killing kids. My point is, arming and training the teachers sounds like a really good idea. However, what the hell are unarmed children going to do? I mean, besides providing a target rich environment.
 
2012-09-02 08:37:56 PM
Well really it's all what's going on. I always told my kids just rearrange all the furniture in front of the door. Hard for him to get in and shoot you with a load of furniture blocking the door. Actually you could likely reduce school shootings simply by making all the classroom doors metal core and the visibility window out of a nice lexan. In the closet of each classroom just store a bar for the door. Drop that across the door, sit back, and dial SWAT.

Beyond that, if the guy is in the "kill everyone mode" than you definitely want to swarm him. If he's only killing those who wronged him, you personally may or may not be a big fan of "swarm him" depending on who you've been bullying during gym period.
 
2012-09-02 08:38:21 PM
The solution to violence is always more violence.
It's as American as a school shooting itself
 
2012-09-02 08:38:32 PM
Why the Hell not?



Afterall,we once taught children to "duck and cover" back during the Cold War to somehow protect against a nuclear fireball.
 
2012-09-02 08:38:49 PM

Gyrfalcon: Bit'O'Gristle: Sighs, it's what i've been saying for years, arm the teachers, school security armed, and why not arm the students if they pass a background check? At least you would be able to defend yourself and not just lay there waiting to get shot like a cowering dog. My daughter is in college, and you better believe that I bought her a glock 21 that she carries in her oversized purse to every class. She has the constitutional right to bear arms, and I want to make sure she makes it through 4 years of college without becoming a statistic. And yes..i made her take the gun safety classes. She's actually a pretty good shot.

Your daughter does understand, I hope, that the gun will do her no good at all if her purse is under her desk and buried under the 75 other items that a girl normally carries in her purse. And that if she can't put her hand on the gun immediately, rummaging around under a stack of crap to find her trusty gun will only get her shot sooner because the shooter will realize she's digging for a weapon?

This is my biggest complaint about people who CCW for protection and brag that they're really good shots. If the gun isn't where you can immediately lay your hands on it when you need it--and inside a purse on the floor in a classroom or lecture hall is not such a location--you might as well not have a weapon at all. If your child is in such a high-risk school, she should have her gun in a shoulder holster at all times. And I mean that in utmost seriousness. Otherwise, it's just a mental crutch that will only encourage her to have a complacent state of mind: "I'm safe, because I have a gun." Unless it's in your hand, no, you don't have a gun.


Those who brag they have a CCW should lose the CCW. The 'concealed' part of CCW means you DON'T tell anyone you're carrying.
 
2012-09-02 08:39:22 PM
America's Most Wanted did a show after Columbine about what to do when someone shoots up your school. It involved running into the bathroom and putting soap and water on the floor. The reenactment was priceless.
 
2012-09-02 08:43:41 PM

craigdamage: Why the Hell not?



Afterall,we once taught children to "duck and cover" back during the Cold War to somehow protect against a nuclear fireball.


Not exactly. Duck and cover prevents the windows from cutting you to ribbons when the shockwave hits. Very few people in Hiroshima were lucky enough to be killed by the fireball.
 
2012-09-02 08:44:17 PM
A few years ago, 20/20 did a bit on gun violence. They filmed a self-defense schools where several of the adult students were working with non-lethal gun for training. At one point, they brought the students into a lecture hall ostensibly for a lecture. All of them were wearing some type of body armor ( I don't remember why) and had their guns with them. Unannounced, a shooter walked in and started shooting. He managed to tag several of the students before anyone could respond. One girl just froze while he took her out. One guy, a combat veteran I believe, was so startled that fumbled his gun and was tagged. The point was that these things happen so fast that it's almost impossible for real people to react fast enough to deal with the situation without someone getting hurt.

Does this mean that you shouldn't fight back in that situation? No, you do what you have to do to survive. But I get so tired of the simplistic "if those people had been armed, everything would have been fine". No, it probably wouldn't have. Maybe arming those theater goers in Colorado would have resulted in fewer deaths, but maybe it would have resulted in more. We can't even figure out how to consistently prevent our combat troops from shooting each other, but civilians have figured it out? No, it's never as simple as people try to make it out to be. Never.
 
2012-09-02 08:45:06 PM
Yeah, it's a nice thought but really it seems like the before or this training would be "lots of dead kids" and the after would be "lots of dead kids, some of whom heroically charged the attacker or threw textbooks to minor effect."

I mean they're farking unarmed kids. But, like many public safety measures, it's primarily about making people feel safe and I'm sure it does that fine.
 
2012-09-02 08:49:31 PM
TFA: school teaches kids to work together in mutual defense in specific, dire situations.

Fark comments: LOL GUN DEBATE
 
2012-09-02 08:56:05 PM

JWideman: I think I read that in Israel, the school teachers are armed. I'm not sure if that's a standard thing or if it's just individual choice, but I do know that at least one teacher stopped a terrorist from killing kids. My point is, arming and training the teachers sounds like a really good idea. However, what the hell are unarmed children going to do? I mean, besides providing a target rich environment.


In Israel, virtually all of the adults have training due to mandatory military service, so it wouldn't exactly translate to the US well.
 
2012-09-02 09:01:58 PM
I'm back in college at 32, and they just did a drill Friday in case of a shooter. This is exactly the policy; if the person enters your room first, everyone throw stuff to disorient the shooter, then (preferably) the biggest guys in the room are supposed to tackle him and more people pile on till he can't move.

It makes sense, but it's a little disconcerting.
 
2012-09-02 09:05:47 PM
It's the real-world expansion of the game 'how many 5th graders could you fight' (Link ) to include all grades!
 
2012-09-02 09:08:25 PM

ladyfortuna: I'm back in college at 32, and they just did a drill Friday in case of a shooter. This is exactly the policy; if the person enters your room first, everyone throw stuff to disorient the shooter, then (preferably) the biggest guys in the room are supposed to tackle him and more people pile on till he can't move.

It makes sense, but it's a little disconcerting.


I actually posited that in a Terrorism course when I was getting my bachelors degree. The instructor took one of our classmates "hostage" and then asked what we would do; I was the only one who spoke up and said I would start throwing things at the instructor's head. "But that might get your classmate shot."

No, I said, because you just took an ex-Marine hostage, and while you're momentarily distracted, he's going to be able to do something more effective. Instructor (to hostage): "You were a Marine?" "Yes sir."

The shooter or hostage-taker doesn't know the things the students and teacher know; and that could make a big difference in a fast-moving situation.
 
2012-09-02 09:09:16 PM
Too lazy to look, but aren't there Fark threads with HERO tags where, during a shooting, a teacher or student sacrifices him/herself while the others escaped?
 
2012-09-02 09:12:33 PM
My mother is a retired school teacher, in her 80's now. Trying to picture her packing heat is making me giggle.
 
2012-09-02 09:12:34 PM

doglover: 2wolves: This will not end well.

Because someone will get hurt?


Because someone will think they're immune to bullets/shotgun pellets.
 
2012-09-02 09:15:21 PM

Bathia_Mapes: BarkingUnicorn: So, you two believe a woman should just lie back and go to her "happy place" while being raped?

We're not talking about a woman getting raped. We're talking about school shootings, so your comparison isn't even close to being valid.


Of course it's valid. The general question is, should people actively oppose violence or just wait for it to go away?
 
2012-09-02 09:20:01 PM
I know I'm old compare to most Farkers. That's ok.

When I was in junior high and high school I (and others) brought our long guns to the vice principal's office in the morning so we could at the end of the school day jump off the bus a couple of stops early to hunt our way home. A couple of rabbits, a pheasant, brace of squirrel, even a buck made a big difference. It wasn't a big deal. If Jimmy Smith lost a toe because he was a dumb fark everyone else took the lesson to heart and kept the safety on.

Anyone who grabbed for their firearm and not their fists was considered a loon, a loser, a wimp.
 
2012-09-02 09:42:02 PM

Bucky Katt: So an unarmed child is supposed to confront a nutjob with a gun? Who the fark takes this crap seriously?


Lets say that you train 7th graders that it is their duty to mob a gunman and that even if he kills a bunch of them their collective will will triumph, the gunman will be taken down, and the dead will live in our hearts as heroes. Meanwhile the smarter students and school staff know to hide.

This is the basic model of wars where those who are not chumps find a good excuse not to serve but encourage others to.
 
2012-09-02 09:49:09 PM

LoneWolf343: JWideman: I think I read that in Israel, the school teachers are armed. I'm not sure if that's a standard thing or if it's just individual choice, but I do know that at least one teacher stopped a terrorist from killing kids. My point is, arming and training the teachers sounds like a really good idea. However, what the hell are unarmed children going to do? I mean, besides providing a target rich environment.

In Israel, virtually all of the adults have training due to mandatory military service, so it wouldn't exactly translate to the US well.


That's why I said train the teachers, not just arm them. But they'd have to get paid a hell of a lot more and paying teachers what they're worth is socialism or something.
 
2012-09-02 10:07:45 PM
Ever hear of the Tueller Drill? Basically it was devised to see if a person can unstrap, aim, and fire their gun in the time it takes a person to run 21 feet. Most people have to be trained to even come close to getting a shot off on time.

Change that around to the time it takes someone to remove a gun from her purse against someone who has a gun ready and is already aiming, well it gets a bit tougher on her part.
 
2012-09-02 10:09:14 PM

Mentat: A few years ago, 20/20 did a bit on gun violence. They filmed a self-defense schools where several of the adult students were working with non-lethal gun for training. At one point, they brought the students into a lecture hall ostensibly for a lecture. All of them were wearing some type of body armor ( I don't remember why) and had their guns with them. Unannounced, a shooter walked in and started shooting. He managed to tag several of the students before anyone could respond. One girl just froze while he took her out. One guy, a combat veteran I believe, was so startled that fumbled his gun and was tagged. The point was that these things happen so fast that it's almost impossible for real people to react fast enough to deal with the situation without someone getting hurt.

Does this mean that you shouldn't fight back in that situation? No, you do what you have to do to survive. But I get so tired of the simplistic "if those people had been armed, everything would have been fine". No, it probably wouldn't have. Maybe arming those theater goers in Colorado would have resulted in fewer deaths, but maybe it would have resulted in more. We can't even figure out how to consistently prevent our combat troops from shooting each other, but civilians have figured it out? No, it's never as simple as people try to make it out to be. Never.


A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week.
General Geo. Patton
 
2012-09-02 10:12:48 PM
GAT_00

Republican logic. Oh no, people are getting shot due to incredibly lax gun laws! How do we fix this? MORE GUNS! That'll fix everything! It's the exact same argument as deregulation.


GAT, your slow fall from grace over the years has been painful. People, myself included, use to actually communicate with you. These days, everytime I see one of your post I immediately know, before even reading it, that the internet has been saturated with yet another opinion that could only have come from one fo the dumbest mother farkers alive and that by reading it, I will have done as much damage to my brain as a night of heavy binge drinking....but read I always do. You are like Kim Kardashian. Everytime i come across her on TV i stop for just one instant to see what dumb shiat she is going to say. I then take a few moments of silence to wheep for humanity and move on
 
2012-09-02 10:19:28 PM

kyrg: Mentat: A few years ago, 20/20 did a bit on gun violence. They filmed a self-defense schools where several of the adult students were working with non-lethal gun for training. At one point, they brought the students into a lecture hall ostensibly for a lecture. All of them were wearing some type of body armor ( I don't remember why) and had their guns with them. Unannounced, a shooter walked in and started shooting. He managed to tag several of the students before anyone could respond. One girl just froze while he took her out. One guy, a combat veteran I believe, was so startled that fumbled his gun and was tagged. The point was that these things happen so fast that it's almost impossible for real people to react fast enough to deal with the situation without someone getting hurt.

Does this mean that you shouldn't fight back in that situation? No, you do what you have to do to survive. But I get so tired of the simplistic "if those people had been armed, everything would have been fine". No, it probably wouldn't have. Maybe arming those theater goers in Colorado would have resulted in fewer deaths, but maybe it would have resulted in more. We can't even figure out how to consistently prevent our combat troops from shooting each other, but civilians have figured it out? No, it's never as simple as people try to make it out to be. Never.

A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week.
General Geo. Patton


Yeah, I saw that video. It was total bullshiat. The guy busts into the room with his weapon drawn and shoots as many people as he can as soon as possible. That's called an AMBUSH. He knew who was in there and where they were and they had all been conveniently distracted. No amount of training can save you from that. That's why it works on professional soldiers too.

Waiting to die under a desk 4 rooms away from the gun shots and screaming is completely different.
 
2012-09-02 10:30:01 PM
This is NOT new. They have been teaching this at my university for at least the past four years. They have an active shooter response training, that I had to sit through the past four years, because I teach a fall class. The campus police, and yes our campus police are a full fledge police department, are the ones who run the program. They even offer to come in and do a presenration on the program to the students, if we (the professors) wanted.
 
2012-09-02 10:30:40 PM

Random McNobody: If you live in a country where school shootings are so common you need a policy on them, maybe it's time to re-access.

More guns for all, you rootin'-tootin' cowboy mutha-frkkas!


Re-access what?
 
2012-09-02 10:35:14 PM
i199.photobucket.com

My fifth grade teacher Mrs. Berry coulda taken out a squad of Marines. She never missed.
 
2012-09-02 10:44:05 PM

2wolves: doglover: 2wolves: This will not end well.

Because someone will get hurt?

Because someone will think they're immune to bullets/shotgun pellets.


Doubt it.

Sure, people might die. But if there's a shooter that's already on the menu. But a hero's death and a coward's death are basically down to if the wound came in the front as you faced them down or the back as you ran away.

By the time someone's brought a gun into a room and pointed it at you with intent to shoot you're already dead. Might as well try to take them out first. It's the only chance at living, and if you fail you were dead anyway.
 
2012-09-02 10:44:18 PM
People have no sense of probability when exposed to media-hyped fear. Something happens to someone somewhere and it's on TV so you think it can happen to you.

School shootings are extraordinarily rare events. There are over 132,000 K-12 schools in the U.S. On Wikipedia there are about five dozen school-related attacks in the U.S. listed for the last 10 years (many of those are not "classroom shooter" scenarios but only "school-related"). Since we're talking about schools I presume someone can do the math.

Drilling for such scenarios is a total waste of time and validates a climate of fear that should be dispelled not reinforced.
 
2012-09-02 10:45:59 PM

2wolves: I know I'm old compare to most Farkers. That's ok.

When I was in junior high and high school I (and others) brought our long guns to the vice principal's office in the morning so we could at the end of the school day jump off the bus a couple of stops early to hunt our way home. A couple of rabbits, a pheasant, brace of squirrel, even a buck made a big difference. It wasn't a big deal. If Jimmy Smith lost a toe because he was a dumb fark everyone else took the lesson to heart and kept the safety on.

Anyone who grabbed for their firearm and not their fists was considered a loon, a loser, a wimp.


Well sure, but we went to school in the Olden Days, when you actually got punished by the vice-principal for misbehavior. I used to carry a Swiss Army knife on my beltloop or a box knife in my pocket, because I was in theater class and always needed a knife handy (cutting gaffers' tape, etc.). I knew guys who carried Buck knives on their belts openly in class and nobody even cared. We were all more afraid of getting hauled into the vice-principal's office than of showing off our weaponry to our classmates.
 
2012-09-02 10:47:59 PM

lewismarktwo: Yeah, I saw that video. It was total bullshiat. The guy busts into the room with his weapon drawn and shoots as many people as he can as soon as possible. That's called an AMBUSH. He knew who was in there and where they were and they had all been conveniently distracted. No amount of training can save you from that. That's why it works on professional soldiers too.


It's a good thing that never happens in real then, like say in a crowed movie theater.
 
2012-09-02 10:50:24 PM

KrispyKritter: this also goes hand in hand with the social control that vigilantism is unacceptable. the masses think that way because their leaders wish it so. some day when the great unwashed realize finally that they have to stand up for themselves and make scumbag hoodlums pay for their crimes, then the citizenry will finally expose how very useless our system of law enforcement, the court room, the penal system and the prison system is in america.


Well, there's certainly nothing incredibly stupid about this sentiment.
 
2012-09-02 10:53:46 PM

Nem Wan: People have no sense of probability when exposed to media-hyped fear. Something happens to someone somewhere and it's on TV so you think it can happen to you.

School shootings are extraordinarily rare events. There are over 132,000 K-12 schools in the U.S. On Wikipedia there are about five dozen school-related attacks in the U.S. listed for the last 10 years (many of those are not "classroom shooter" scenarios but only "school-related"). Since we're talking about schools I presume someone can do the math.

Drilling for such scenarios is a total waste of time and validates a climate of fear that should be dispelled not reinforced.


^^^
This. In spades.
 
2012-09-02 11:07:56 PM
This nationwide discussion is being fueled by security guards who think their 9mm, and their jean-claude response will save lives.

It will not.
 
2012-09-02 11:31:04 PM

Mentat: A few years ago, 20/20 did a bit on gun violence. They filmed a self-defense schools where several of the adult students were working with non-lethal gun for training. At one point, they brought the students into a lecture hall ostensibly for a lecture. All of them were wearing some type of body armor ( I don't remember why) and had their guns with them. Unannounced, a shooter walked in and started shooting. He managed to tag several of the students before anyone could respond. One girl just froze while he took her out. One guy, a combat veteran I believe, was so startled that fumbled his gun and was tagged. The point was that these things happen so fast that it's almost impossible for real people to react fast enough to deal with the situation without someone getting hurt.

Does this mean that you shouldn't fight back in that situation? No, you do what you have to do to survive. But I get so tired of the simplistic "if those people had been armed, everything would have been fine". No, it probably wouldn't have. Maybe arming those theater goers in Colorado would have resulted in fewer deaths, but maybe it would have resulted in more. We can't even figure out how to consistently prevent our combat troops from shooting each other, but civilians have figured it out? No, it's never as simple as people try to make it out to be. Never.


The tragic situation I foresee is where we have a campus shooter wandering around, someone bystander draws their CC gun upon hearing shots fired and seeing people bleeding in the street, and shoots the person holding the gun. Who is just another CC holder like him. And he himself is shot by the next person.

Hypothetically speaking, you could have a gun battle erupt between a LOT of people, each assuming the other is a spree killer and shooting on site. They could be taking cover, exchanging fire, killing one another. The original shooter could potentially just walk away from the scene and not be missed. If arrested, it may be difficult to establish that he was actually the INITIAL shooter if his lawyers pushed a strategy of "no, he was shooting to protect against a killer walking around". 

It almost happened at the 2011 Tucson shooting (Gabrielle Giffords). A CC holder was across the street, heard shooting, saw people falling. Next thing he saw was a guy holding a gun with a bunch of bleeding people in front of him. He hesitated instead of shooting him, which turned out to be a good thing, because Loughner was already on the ground tackled and the one he was looking at the person who had wrestled Loughner's gun away from him.
 
2012-09-02 11:45:56 PM

August11: This nationwide discussion is being fueled by security guards who think their 9mm, and their jean-claude response will save lives.

It will not.


imagemacros.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-09-02 11:46:41 PM

gingerjet: Its always good to be prepared to defend yourselves and understand basic emergency protocols. Its also good to remember that you will most likely be killed by a car walking across the road after you purchased a six pack texting some babe who will never give you the time of day let alone a blow job than a school shooter.


I dunno. I mean that girl *did* text me back and told me too meet her before study hall. I think what she gave me is called a "School shooter"

/not really, I just thought it would be funny to say
//I will now go wash my mind out with soap.
 
2012-09-02 11:47:25 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Bathia_Mapes: BarkingUnicorn: So, you two believe a woman should just lie back and go to her "happy place" while being raped?

We're not talking about a woman getting raped. We're talking about school shootings, so your comparison isn't even close to being valid.

Of course it's valid. The general question is, should people actively oppose violence or just wait for it to go away?


You're actually putting forward that all forms of violence are equivalent and people must believe in responding to all forms in the same way? No, he's right. Whatever little point you have is idiotic.

Here's a mindblower, different forms of violence are different. It is actually possible and not intellectually disingenuous to believe in fighting, fleeing, cowering, or other forms of response depending on the nature of the violence.
 
Displayed 50 of 124 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report