School Shootings: The 'Elephant in the Room'

[Trinnity]

London has just demonstrated its not guns, or knives, that make us dangerous. Its people.

Again...the preponderance of evidence shows that by a ridiculously large margin, law abiding gun owners ARE safe.

Here's this man standing in the street after he hacked a man to death in broad daylight and not one person could do anything but stare. I would have stopped him cold, without hesitation. Because I can.

 

[xMathFanx]

It seems the public school culture is based on bullying. Teachers bully students into thinking a certain way. Students bully wayward students who don't toe the line. What's ironic, to remedy bullying, the bullied student is supposed to go to the teacher (the lead bullier) to remedy the bullying. The teacher will only suggest the student toe the line and renounce their feelings and upbringings, if necessary, to remedy the bullying.

@Cabse

I couldn't agree more--which is exactly why this problem has went unaddressed (and continues to) for so long. That is, the authority figures (overwhelmingly) have no intention whatsoever of changing the dynamics in the social environment.

Also, for instance, in my HS, the football coaches (and other sports) encouraged the players/kids to engage in party culture and such. Then, some kids died from drug overdoses, joy-riding, etc.--and the narrative became "this is just one of those unexplainable 'Acts of God'--everything has a plan, and we should trust it"-kind of talk; instead of them looking in the mirror at the role they (and others) played in logically contributing to this tragedy. Shameful, really.

 

[VanceMack]

Here's this man standing in the street after he hacked a man to death in broad daylight and not one person could do anything but stare. I would have stopped him cold, without hesitation. Because I can.

The British police had to wait 20 minutes for armed cops to show up with to handle the situation.

On the other hand...it took them just a few minutes to snatch up an 85 year old woman for saying 'mean things'. "An 85-year-old woman has this afternoon been arrested after abuse was hurled at Muslims outside Gillingham Mosque. The pensioner was handcuffed and taken away in a van by officers attending the Canterbury Street mosque for Friday prayers. As worshippers gathered outside the venue, a woman at a nearby bus stop shouted: "go back to your own country". The arrested woman, from the Maidstone Road area of Chatham, was taken away by officers at about 1.45pm and is now in police custody. A Kent Police spokesman said: "An 85 year old woman from Chatham was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."

The UK is so ****ed.

 

[Trinnity]

The British police had to wait 20 minutes for armed cops to show up with to handle the situation.

/facepalm

 

[vegas giants]

1st amendment...

Yes we have a first amendment. Still don't get your point

 

[Slingshot Bob]

Here's this man standing in the street after he hacked a man to death in broad daylight and not one person could do anything but stare. I would have stopped him cold, without hesitation. Because I can.

The sacrifices continue on the alter of "diversity".

 

[braindrain]

Your peeps implied it. That you want to lie and dismiss that speaks only to you.

It only looks that way to you if you are a dishonest partisan hack.

 

[poweRob]

Your peeps implied it. That you want to lie and dismiss that speaks only to you.

It only looks that way to you if you are a dishonest partisan hack.

Yup... it's speaks very loudly of you.

 

[poweRob]

Here's this man standing in the street after he hacked a man to death in broad daylight and not one person could do anything but stare. I would have stopped him cold, without hesitation. Because I can.

Because if the gun laws were more loose, only you would have the gun. Not him. He'd still be using knives right? :roll:

 

[braindrain]

Yup... it's speaks very loudly of you.

Says the person who dishonestly puts words in people's mouths that they never said. Which is proven by the fact you can't quote anyone saying what you claim they say.

 

[poweRob]

Says the person who dishonestly puts words in people's mouths that they never said. Which is proceed by the fact you can't quote anyone saying what you claim they say.

I know it's two syllables but I would've thought it was far out of your range of knowledge.

imply: to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated​

Must be some extra "drain" going on today for you.

 

[Tigerace117]

I'm not trying to reason with him. His trolling, pedantic behavior, and tired old liberal tactics are a spectacle of trite entertainment. Let him wallow in it.

We can, should, and will, eliminate the bump stocks. They're useless junk anyway. The rest you want? No.

Oh yes he is. He's bitter he lost and Trump won. He hasn't been secretive about his jealousy and hatred for a fellow Republican and head of the Party.

Pay attention: the commies loved it.



I find it particularly delicious and ironic he's dying of Glioblastoma, an intractable tentacle-like cancer that's so invasive to the tissue, it can't be removed, and the very same cancer that killed Ted Kennedy. I'm shocked he's still breathing.

Yes, we all know despicable individuals are delighted a man with more courage and principle in his little finger than they are in their entire bodies are happy McCain is dying. And no, there are no "commies".

 

[Tigerace117]

Blah, blah blah, you still have not backed your claim, you can go in attack mode as much as you want, but it does change that you made a claim you clearly cant back.

Yep, I get that you blank out when you have to engage your brain and you translate everything to "blah blah blah".

Perhaps if you had basic reading comprehension you wouldn't have that problem.

 

[braindrain]

I know it's two syllables but I would've thought it was far out of your range of knowledge.

imply: to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated​

Must be some extra "drain" going on today for you.

Thats why you can't even quote them doing that. Maybe you should actually read what people write instead of what you wish they wrote

The fact that you can provide zero evidence for your claim that anyone said he was mentally OK is proof of how dishonest you are.

 

[Slingshot Bob]

Yep, I get that you blank out when you have to engage your brain and you translate everything to "blah blah blah".

Perhaps if you had basic reading comprehension you wouldn't have that problem.

Still waiting on you to quote the OP to back your claim. Try to remember that yours truly is not the topic. You see, when a person makes a claim on a forum, especially about the OP personally, they are kinda expected to back it up, not just repeatedly insult the other posters (who predictably enough) ask you to prove it.

Just admit the truth, you cant and wont, because you cant support your dishonest claim that he was blaming the kids by pointing out the shooter was bullied for years.

 

[Trinnity]

Because if the gun laws were more loose, only you would have the gun. Not him. He'd still be using knives right? :roll:

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[PleasantValley]

Considering that multiple people (including the guy that started the thread) went on to blame the Parkland survivors and victims for bullying Cruz, yes, I'd say it was a rather accurate observation.



Thanks, but if you truly believe that, then maybe I'm accurate here as well (if not necessarily enjoyable).



I'm a bit confused by that statement, seeing as the post you quoted doesn't mention Trump.



Good for Trump (I guess?). However, the thread was based on the false premise that Cruz was bullied, when evidence strongly suggests that it was Cruz who was the problem. And based on multiple responses peppered throughout the thread, the reason for this premise was to vilify the Parkland survivors for holding gun control opinions.

View attachment 67231108

Point taken....a valid point too.

 

[cabse5]

Yes we have a first amendment. Still don't get your point

Before Berkley came along, before many college campuses came along, one was forced to hear others speak whether they agreed with the speech or not because of the first amendment.

 

[HowardBThiname]

The new right wing narrative is that the 17 murdered kids were bullies and Cruz is the real victim here.

I'm amazed that I still have the capacity to be surprised by how low Republicans will continue to lower the bar. You'd think I would have learned by now.

Yes, you should have learned by now, but you obviously have not. Had you learned, you'd know that anti-bullying programs and zero-tolerance policies were implemented initially by liberals, and while some are misguided, they at least tried.

Given that 100% of school shooters were "outcasts" or bullied by others, it seems you would care enough about the situation to want to resolve it, rather than blaming the right for the programs started by the Left, to which the Right is now conceding are most likely a catalyst in these shootings.

Obviously the 17 dead are victims here, that does not mean that Cruz was not formerly a victim. Does it? Are you so narrow minded not to understand that?

Public schools create a caste system that most often revolves around sports and the groups that form, in one way or another, to support those sports, which gives the best athletes popularity and recognition and shoves the weakest students behind.

Being concerned about guns is all well and fine, but if you exclude the causes for these shootings, you can't really be interested in protecting children. When that happens, you just come across as wanting to protect your own partisan agenda.

How sad.

 

[poweRob]

What the hell are you talking about?

May bad...

Here's this man standing in the street after he hacked a man to death in broad daylight and not one person could do anything but stare. I would have stopped him cold, without hesitation. Because I can.

What would you do?

 

[Acadia]

Yes, you should have learned by now, but you obviously have not. Had you learned, you'd know that anti-bullying programs and zero-tolerance policies were implemented initially by liberals, and while some are misguided, they at least tried.

Given that 100% of school shooters were "outcasts" or bullied by others, it seems you would care enough about the situation to want to resolve it, rather than blaming the right for the programs started by the Left, to which the Right is now conceding are most likely a catalyst in these shootings.

Obviously the 17 dead are victims here, that does not mean that Cruz was not formerly a victim. Does it? Are you so narrow minded not to understand that?

Public schools create a caste system that most often revolves around sports and the groups that form, in one way or another, to support those sports, which gives the best athletes popularity and recognition and shoves the weakest students behind.

Being concerned about guns is all well and fine, but if you exclude the causes for these shootings, you can't really be interested in protecting children. When that happens, you just come across as wanting to protect your own partisan agenda.

How sad.

Thanks for bottom-lining it! Anyone who refuses to examine the underlying events which led to the Parkland shooting is far more interested in infringing rights and advancing a political agenda than they are in kids being safe in school.
I'm looking forward to the results of the investigation into the catastrophic failures in Florida.

 

[Trinnity]

May bad...



What would you do?

I made it pretty plain I'd have shot him dead straight up w/o hesitation. I'm an experienced hunter/marksman. Dude, don't act like a troll, mkay?

 

[Cardinal]

Yes, you should have learned by now, but you obviously have not. Had you learned, you'd know that anti-bullying programs and zero-tolerance policies were implemented initially by liberals, and while some are misguided, they at least tried.

Given that 100% of school shooters were "outcasts" or bullied by others, it seems you would care enough about the situation to want to resolve it, rather than blaming the right for the programs started by the Left, to which the Right is now conceding are most likely a catalyst in these shootings.

Obviously the 17 dead are victims here, that does not mean that Cruz was not formerly a victim. Does it? Are you so narrow minded not to understand that?

Public schools create a caste system that most often revolves around sports and the groups that form, in one way or another, to support those sports, which gives the best athletes popularity and recognition and shoves the weakest students behind.

Being concerned about guns is all well and fine, but if you exclude the causes for these shootings, you can't really be interested in protecting children. When that happens, you just come across as wanting to protect your own partisan agenda.

How sad.

When you remove all the padding and finger wagging from your post, it's reduced to the false premise that the Parkland survivors and victims were bullies, and all just because the survivors want gun control so they too won't be shot. Other people have already tried to prove that they were bullies by citing an edited youtube clip. Can you fare better?

 

[HowardBThiname]

When you remove all the padding and finger wagging from your post, it's reduced to the false premise that the Parkland survivors and victims were bullies, and all just because the survivors want gun control so they too won't be shot. Other people have already tried to prove that they were bullies by citing an edited youtube clip. Can you fare better?

Very short-sighted, and frankly, a dangerous, lack of depth perception.

The victims of the shooting, and the survivors, are not necessarily the ones who bullied Cruz -- but that doesn't negate the fact that he WAS bullied, just as the rest of the shooters were bullied. As I was saying a couple of months ago, just being in a PUBLIC school is a risk factor. If you want to close your eyes and continue to breed a new generation of shooters -- go right ahead -- that's your prerogative. But, don't pretend that you care about stopping the shootings. Your blinders-on approach is nothing but partisanship.

 

[Cardinal]

but that doesn't negate the fact that he WAS bullied,

After eliminating all your padding and finger wagging, we were left with the only meat in your post, which was the above. So again: Other people have already tried to prove that they were bullies by citing an edited youtube clip. Can you fare better?