Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    I think it's funny that people are against gun control so the government can't take over their home are perfectly in favour of that same government placing their children under the watch of armed guards.
    Basically saying, "The government might attack my house, but they'd never take my kids hostage," and then handing them over to armed government guards. The government is too incompetent to serve lunch, but they're capable of this.

    Makes no sense on two levels.
    I actually agree with you here, or how about you are ok with the government pretty much raising your kids. If you are so against the government then why send them to their schools for 6-7 hours a day?

  2. #22


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    16,758
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by boba View Post
    I actually agree with you here, or how about you are ok with the government pretty much raising your kids. If you are so against the government then why send them to their schools for 6-7 hours a day?
    You forgot letting the government put the fear of God in them. What better way to brain wash kids than to put an armed government representative at the door. Subtle but effective.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    I think it's funny that people are against gun control so the government can't take over their home are perfectly in favour of that same government placing their children under the watch of armed guards.
    Basically saying, "The government might attack my house, but they'd never take my kids hostage," and then handing them over to armed government guards. The government is too incompetent to serve lunch, but they're capable of this.

    Makes no sense on two levels.
    i'm not asking the government to protect my child, I am asking a police officer to. not sure why that doesn't make sense.

    so you mock people who say gun control measures won't work and you mock the one option that would actually help with the issue of school shootings.
    bucket:Hidden Content

    Wants: Anything mma as well as nice texans patches

  4. #24


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    16,758
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by ensbergcollector View Post
    i'm not asking the government to protect my child, I am asking a police officer to. not sure why that doesn't make sense.
    Owning a gun to protect against government and then sending your kids to a government agent with a gun for protection makes no sense. If you think they'll attack your home, what makes you think they won't take your kids? Last I checked, most police get paid by governments.

    Quote Originally Posted by ensbergcollector View Post
    so you mock people who say gun control measures won't work and you mock the one option that would actually help with the issue of school shootings.
    I'm not mocking, I just think it's funny. Ironic, really. The government is not only hellbent on taking over your homes, and they're also too incompetent to properly feed children lunch, but you trust them to watch over your kids with guns. You're also putting your kids into a microcosmic police state. I have no problem with higher police presence in schools. I actually support it quite a bit. I don't agree with placing an armed guard(s) at the door(s) from 8am-5pm. You do that with the schools now and when the kids grow up, the idea of armed government guards on every corner. It's not far from there to have the government controlling every aspect of life.

    But you keep your guns to fight the government. They want in your kids' heads, not your house, though, so you'll never get to use your guns. You won't have time, you'll be too busy systematically handing your children off to the government for brainwashing.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    Owning a gun to protect against government and then sending your kids to a government agent with a gun for protection makes no sense. If you think they'll attack your home, what makes you think they won't take your kids? Last I checked, most police get paid by governments.


    I'm not mocking, I just think it's funny. Ironic, really. The government is not only hellbent on taking over your homes, and they're also too incompetent to properly feed children lunch, but you trust them to watch over your kids with guns. You're also putting your kids into a microcosmic police state. I have no problem with higher police presence in schools. I actually support it quite a bit. I don't agree with placing an armed guard(s) at the door(s) from 8am-5pm. You do that with the schools now and when the kids grow up, the idea of armed government guards on every corner. It's not far from there to have the government controlling every aspect of life.

    But you keep your guns to fight the government. They want in your kids' heads, not your house, though, so you'll never get to use your guns. You won't have time, you'll be too busy systematically handing your children off to the government for brainwashing.
    i guess we can agree to disagree. a police officer, from my town, who I possibly even know, might be paid for by the government, but that does not equal him being the same as "the government". Also, I never said a police officer at the door all day. Our school had a three officer rotation at our high school. they walked the halls, spent time with the kids. It didn't make us accustomed to a police state, it made us respect the job they do and trust instead of fear the police.

    And again, while all the talk is on "stopping future school shootings" all the measures being talked about wouldn't do that. The one measure that would is to increase police presence on campus.
    bucket:Hidden Content

    Wants: Anything mma as well as nice texans patches

  6. #26


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    16,758
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    Quote Originally Posted by ensbergcollector View Post
    i guess we can agree to disagree. a police officer, from my town, who I possibly even know, might be paid for by the government, but that does not equal him being the same as "the government". Also, I never said a police officer at the door all day. Our school had a three officer rotation at our high school. they walked the halls, spent time with the kids. It didn't make us accustomed to a police state, it made us respect the job they do and trust instead of fear the police.
    What you just described is what I've been saying schools need regardless of shootings.

    Quote Originally Posted by ensbergcollector View Post
    And again, while all the talk is on "stopping future school shootings" all the measures being talked about wouldn't do that. The one measure that would is to increase police presence on campus.
    You're assuming I'm only worried about school shootings. I'm not. I'm worried about gun violence over all. School shootings are an important, but very small part of it.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Wickabee View Post
    What you just described is what I've been saying schools need regardless of shootings.


    You're assuming I'm only worried about school shootings. I'm not. I'm worried about gun violence over all. School shootings are an important, but very small part of it.
    i think we are probably on the same page for the most part. in fact, most of the gun control threads have us agreeing. Most of the talk about gun control has been under the banner of "protecting our kids" so that is where my comments have been focused. Not necessarily you, but many seem to be crying out for gun control and things to protect our kids, but the one thing that would make the largest difference, they aren't ok with. That seems very strange to me.
    bucket:Hidden Content

    Wants: Anything mma as well as nice texans patches

  8. #28


    Wickabee's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    16,758
    Country
    Card Cash
    250.00
    Savings
    0.00
    Blog Entries
    2
    Transferred Feedback
    Beckett (66)

    View my Inventory New
    View my store Beta
    I'm with you there. One extreme is no better than the other. My biggest problems are people who think "gun control" literally means "gun ban" and people who look at an idea, see it doesn't fix everything all at once, and dismiss it. The first is misinformation the second is a bad attitude and both are detrimental.

    I think this issue has got to a point where neither side can be happy and compromise is impossible. There are people discussing it on these boards who don't understand what the issue even is or that multiple steps in many areas need to be taken. These people are impossible to talk to on the subject and stop any discussion dead in its tracks. Thank you for not being one of them.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •