an incredible new challenge - and we all gotta step up!!

[sneaky one]

Still no excuse for anyone to consider murder. We were all kids, we got pushed around, we , well I did- find a way to punch back.

Never planned an attack , never lost sleep over a small issue, . It's just insane lately- what would the fix include.... if a fix is possible.?

Get all the relatives involved with problematic children, young adults. Evaluate them . Yes, judge them! Take action! Help save some lives.

Do not keep a kid in the basement as a Troll! Good grief...

[montana]

What speed limit on the road is fair when the majority of road users are good drivers?

Confiscating firearms from law abiding gun owners to prevent mass shootings, is like confiscating automobiles from sober drivers to prevent drunk driving.

[biodsl]

There's a growing school of thought that sensationalized and never-ending news coverage is a great incentive to mass shooters. Kids who feel disconnected and invisible to the world understand that a way to become visible is through a body count. The media will run the story until they extract every last piece of emotion, income and political advantage. The shooter becomes a household name. A couple of psychologists say that the desire of fame or infamy is a common bond of these murderers and they've labeled the behavior of the news as Media Contagion. You can read a brief article here. https://www.apa.org/news/press/relea...contagion.aspx

The Newtown shooter took this to new heights. From the book The War on Guns by Dr. John Lott (pg 125): ...the Newtown killer, spent two-and-one-half putting together a report on mass public shootings. Law enforcement described "A sickeningly thorough 7-foor long, 4-foot wide spreadsheet with names, body counts, and weapons from previous mass murders and even attempted killings. 'I sounded like a doctoral thesis, that was the quality of the research,' an anonymous law enforcement veteran said." Lanza also collected information on media coverage for each killing. He observed that attacks with more deaths received greater media coverage...Take this report from CBS Evening News:
Sources say Lanza saw himself as being in direct competition with Anders Breivik, a Norwegian man who killed in July 2011...Two officials who have been briefed on the Newtown, Conn. investigation say Lanza wanted to top Breivik's death toll...

It sounds like the 1st, not the 2nd Amendment is at work here. Perhaps we should ban showing these murderer's faces or mentioning their names. There is some precedent for this. From the Atlantic:

You might not have noticed, but the mass media rarely reports on suicides, particularly teen suicides. When it does, the coverage is careful, understated, and dampened. This is no accident: Following guidelines endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and National Institutes of Mental Health, the media carefully and voluntarily avoids sensationalizing such deaths especially among teenagers. They almost never make the news unless the person is a public figure; methods of suicide are rarely mentioned; suicide pacts are not reported upon.

This is for good reason: Suicide, especially among teens, is contagious. It's a morbidly attractive idea that offers an established path of action for a troubled youngster. And we know from research in many fields that establishing a path of action -- a complete narrative in which you can visualize your steps and their effects -- is important in enabling follow-through.

[just_john]

Bd +1 !!!!!

[Keef]

How many Hollywood movies are out there that glorify a person being pushed to the edge and then killing their way out of it? I don't have the number but I'd guess its pretty high.

[bj139]

When I was young, there were a few older kids who stopped bullying among the younger kids.
Today, they would be accused of bullying and would be suspended. The good often get punished unfairly.
All this while the teachers have learned the best thing is to turn their backs and pretend they are blind or they might be suspended.
The left has surely created a hellhole for everyone.

[grayfox]

In all that list of 1 to 10's, the one that I would rank (didn't see it there but maybe I missed it) right at the TOP is the shooter's own will and decisions.
Murder comes from the heart, rage comes from the heart. Lots of other things can amplify it or try to direct or mis-direct it, but the person himself/herself carries the accountability, no one else makes him or her do it. There was a guy a couple years ago who literally ran over students at UNC in North Carolina with an SUV... the 2 perps in Boston used nails and pressure cookers... we have to be willing as a society to recognize that it is the person who needs to be identified, countered and or taken out if need be.
Now when it comes to the weapons debate I personally don't mind if bump stocks are restricted/removed... my theory is that a gun should be held to its (reasonable) original intended design... bump stocks, no. 100-round drums... not really a worry to me if they are gone. 20-30 round mags... leave alone b/c they are part of the original design and intent. regular mags for a glock... ok even if 13, 17, 19. A 50-round mag that sticks way down out of the glock.. not so much. I know some may ask where do you draw the line but I think there is a reasonable design line that can be identified.
Again these are my positions and opinions.
Will enacting these kinds of restrictions satisfy the libs? Heck no. But it's never been my calling in life to gain their approval.
Their ideas, like any other kind of cancer, don't stop, but that does not mean that we can't have and implement some ideas of our own regardless.
O, and deputize, train and indemnify school or hired personnel to be armed and respond with deadly force to shooting threats. Just like the guards are who the libs hire for their own private schools!!!!
Kids who post about that kind of stuff, shooting up whatever, treat them like lawbreakers would be in the airport. I remember when airports didn't have any of the security stuff... I still fly even with the security, so we can live with upping the protective profiles of our schools and treating a threat of mass shooting as a crime, an adult crime.

[just_john]

I reflect back into the early and mid 1960's when I was in high school. During dove season, there was hardly a car or pick-up in the parking lot that did not have a shotgun in it. Pick-ups had 'em in the back window. The idea of bringing one into the school to do harm was totally unthinkable. I knew a guy who carried a 10" butcher knife ( on him ) because he didn't have a car and worked in a meat market in the afternoons and this was his "pet" knife. We all knew it. The teachers knew it. And we all went about our lives. If there was a beef between some folks, it was either settled across the street or the coach settled it with the "board of education".
So what has changed in the last 50 years? There are only two variables, the who or the what! Guns may look a little different but they still work the same. That just leaves the people. So how people changed? Well, the media makes heroes of the bad guys. Video games make heroes of the bad guys. The criminal justice system seems to look the other way, mostly because they get persecuted / prosecuted for doing their jobs properly. And kids are taught to take on no sense of responsibility if something horrible is done, either by fact or intent.
And now they scream for justice when their own gets out of hand. I hear a lot of talk and speeches about changing or restricting the tools but very little about restricting the sources of persuasion that says this kind of thing is OK. If they want to change things, let their economics disuade the video game creators to stop making "Grand Theft Auto", stop the media from publicizing the 15 seconds of glory for some idiot who walks into a school building with evil intent.

[montana]

I reflect back into the early and mid 1960's when I was in high school. During dove season, there was hardly a car or pick-up in the parking lot that did not have a shotgun in it. Pick-ups had 'em in the back window. The idea of bringing one into the school to do harm was totally unthinkable. I knew a guy who carried a 10" butcher knife ( on him ) because he didn't have a car and worked in a meat market in the afternoons and this was his "pet" knife. We all knew it. The teachers knew it. And we all went about our lives. If there was a beef between some folks, it was either settled across the street or the coach settled it with the "board of education".
So what has changed in the last 50 years? There are only two variables, the who or the what! Guns may look a little different but they still work the same. That just leaves the people. So how people changed? Well, the media makes heroes of the bad guys. Video games make heroes of the bad guys. The criminal justice system seems to look the other way, mostly because they get persecuted / prosecuted for doing their jobs properly. And kids are taught to take on no sense of responsibility if something horrible is done, either by fact or intent.
And now they scream for justice when their own gets out of hand. I hear a lot of talk and speeches about changing or restricting the tools but very little about restricting the sources of persuasion that says this kind of thing is OK. If they want to change things, let their economics disuade the video game creators to stop making "Grand Theft Auto", stop the media from publicizing the 15 seconds of glory for some idiot who walks into a school building with evil intent.

Well said. The outrage never seems to be directed at the source of the problem. The miscreant who did the killing, the cowardly security guard, or the enablers and supporters of the failed leftist social experiment from the 60's.

[howl]

This actually happened this week at my wife’s school.

6 th grade boy asks teacher to change seats and was told no. Teach knew she would have trouble if she allowed it. Another female student was allowed to change seats; teacher knew it would not cause a problem. The male student proclaimed he “hates” the “sexist” teacher and is “going to shoot up the school”.

Teacher consults the person in charge of discipline who tells her “to just write him up”. Teacher feels that’s not right and consults the councilor. Thank goodness she saw the seriousness of this threat. Police, fire and ambulance showed up. Parents were called and the kid was held out the next day. I hope they all learned a lesson.

The solution to that issue is to beat his butt real good and get on with your life. The inability of the adults in that situation is the problem. The boy is being failed by those who should be responsible for raising him and those who take on that responsibility professionally.

[stanc]

Now when it comes to the weapons debate I personally don't mind if bump stocks are restricted/removed... my theory is that a gun should be held to its (reasonable) original intended design... bump stocks, no. 100-round drums... not really a worry to me if they are gone. 20-30 round mags... leave alone b/c they are part of the original design and intent. regular mags for a glock... ok even if 13, 17, 19. A 50-round mag that sticks way down out of the glock.. not so much. I know some may ask where do you draw the line but I think there is a reasonable design line that can be identified.
Again these are my positions and opinions.

Anyone who takes such positions and holds such opinions is aiding the anti-gun agenda.

How can pro-gun folks expect to ever prevail, when many (if not most) of them want "reasonable" restrictions on the Second Amendment?

[stanc]

Threat? Given the story as told, it sounds more like venting. When people lose their temper, they sometimes say stuff they don't really mean and would never actually do.

Police, fire and ambulance showed up.

Jeez, talk about overreaction.

Parents were called and the kid was held out the next day. I hope they all learned a lesson.

Question is, did the teacher learn anything about dispensing fair and equal treatment? The whole brouhaha was a result of her forbidding one student to do the same thing that she allowed another student to do.

[howl]

I reflect back into the early and mid 1960's when I was in high school. During dove season, there was hardly a car or pick-up in the parking lot that did not have a shotgun in it. Pick-ups had 'em in the back window. The idea of bringing one into the school to do harm was totally unthinkable. I knew a guy who carried a 10" butcher knife ( on him ) because he didn't have a car and worked in a meat market in the afternoons and this was his "pet" knife. We all knew it. The teachers knew it. And we all went about our lives. If there was a beef between some folks, it was either settled across the street or the coach settled it with the "board of education".
So what has changed in the last 50 years? There are only two variables, the who or the what! Guns may look a little different but they still work the same. That just leaves the people. So how people changed? Well, the media makes heroes of the bad guys. Video games make heroes of the bad guys. The criminal justice system seems to look the other way, mostly because they get persecuted / prosecuted for doing their jobs properly. And kids are taught to take on no sense of responsibility if something horrible is done, either by fact or intent.
And now they scream for justice when their own gets out of hand. I hear a lot of talk and speeches about changing or restricting the tools but very little about restricting the sources of persuasion that says this kind of thing is OK. If they want to change things, let their economics disuade the video game creators to stop making "Grand Theft Auto", stop the media from publicizing the 15 seconds of glory for some idiot who walks into a school building with evil intent.

I would like to add to this. I agree and experienced the part about guns being around and no problems. I went through school later and was there about the time having guns in your truck was stopped. This was also around the time you saw 20 year olds with a record showing up in high school. Administrators cannot handle those kids. I remember one instance specifically when one of the immigrated gang wannabes started harassing some girls. Then he intimidated the teacher supervising us. A half dozen of us boys ushered him off the property. Now, we'd all have been suspended for that. If we hadn't spent most of our time in school getting in fistfights as usual things we probably wouldn't have done it.

Later generations of teachers and administrators have a progressive agenda for the most part. Those people who ran your school were different people. The new people runs high schools like prisons. Surviving high school is a demoralizing experience. The truth is if I had not been a kid who topped out their standardized testing, made them look good by performance, I probably would have had a very difficult time making it out of high school at all. I was raised to be a man. These kids now...that doesn't fly. Kids who cannot or will not conform are going to have a great deal of resentment.

Then there are the kids who when you were in school would have not finished. They would have dropped out, flunked out, whatever. Now no child is to be left behind. They become a product of the educational system. So, you have kids that ought to be separated out becoming a product of the system with deviant tendencies made worse by being forced to stay in school. Public schools are creating these monsters.

So why, as they have to know this, must guns be the problem? One is the convenience of including school violence in the disarmament agenda. The other is plain old shifting the blame. If it were about solving the problems they would want to try something else when gun control is not passed.

They want everyone disarmed and under their control. Protecting the children will never be the primary concern because they expect to be free from responsibility for doing so.

[howl]

And now that I can post what I actually scrolled down to post in response to the OP! http://www.usaclaytarget.com is a group you could work with to achieve your goal.

[grayfox]

Anyone who takes such positions and holds such opinions is aiding the anti-gun agenda.

How can pro-gun folks expect to ever prevail, when many (if not most) of them want "reasonable" restrictions on the Second Amendment?

The anti-gunners will continue to ply their agenda regardless of what we say or do; it's an ideology not affected by logic and feeds on itself.

Stan, with all due respect there are already some restrictions in place and no one seems to be suffering, nor do they feel constitutional rights have been violated (at least I haven't heard any).
1. NFA's, auto weapons must be registered.
2. No bazookas or rpg's in private hands.
3. No antiaircraft weapons in your backyard.
4. No 155 mm howitzers, or operating German 88's allowed in neighborhoods, no operating tanks allowed.
5. No chemical weapons, sarin, etc.
6. You can't buy C4 at Cabelas or anywhere else legally (that I know of).

All of these are "weapons" or "arms" in ordinary terms.

I think all of these are restricted, of course I could be wrong.

I'm told you can modify an AR to be full-auto although I haven't tried it and don't intend to.


I'm not anti-gun. I am anti-hallucinogenic drugs and anti-uncontrolling controlled substances.
I am totally pro-2A and pro-constitution.

I don't want my next door neighbor to have Rpg's or a missile bank on the back of their truck. Are these arms in the term "keep and bear arms"? Actually in colonial times I think private ownership of cannon may have been possible... although I don't have any sources to check that.

The same thing exists for other rights. There is no totally unabridged right to speech, like crying "fire" in a theater, or "bomb" in an airport.
Even in freedom of religion, you can't practice one that involves human sacrifices, and there were such religions, probably some in existence today.

So, no, I don't believe this aids an anti-gun agenda, although you are welcome to your opinion also ... like I said, they will push their stuff regardless of what we do. I do not let their hysteria control what I think and believe, haven't in the past, and don't intend to start doing so now.