It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


More guns is NOT the answer or solution.

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 28 2018 @ 03:23 PM
a reply to: olaru12

That says everything about work ethic and nothing about guards being deterrents. I'm an armed security'd be surprised how much someone who is obviously disgruntled and irritated will calm down when I step in the room...


posted on Oct, 28 2018 @ 03:56 PM

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: olaru12

That says everything about work ethic and nothing about guards being deterrents. I'm an armed security'd be surprised how much someone who is obviously disgruntled and irritated will calm down when I step in the room...


Disgruntled and irritated is a far cry from a hatefilled anti semitic, murdering nut case like Robert Bowers.
And I wouldnt expect much of a work ethic from a $12 an hr. security guard. You get what you pay for....
That's just my experience from teaching at a Junior College a few years ago. BTW, I'm all for armed guards in the
educational environment. But well trained LEOs not cop wanna be's and dropouts that just hang out in the teachers lounge
F***kin off. There were armed guards at Sandy Hook and Columbine, remember?

edit on 28-10-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 28 2018 @ 04:42 PM
I disagree. This horrific crime is why we need guns.

If this woman had a gun she may have had a fighting chance. Left without the ability to defend ourselves against these type of kunckle dragging beasts is what the left wants. The left would call these perpetrators the real victims and blame society for their transgressions. Some on the left and I would say a large majority would let these beasts off with no punishment at all.

This woman's horrific end is just one of many reasons why civilization needs to be armed. One of these animals had "PEARLS embedded in his penis which ‘make sex attacks more painful." These sadists need to be exterminated and you can't do that with some Utopian ideals..

posted on Oct, 28 2018 @ 05:30 PM
a reply to: underwerks

I’m sure that can be said about anyone who shoots up their workplace or school too.

Sure, in most cases they probably know that there wont be anyone else with a weapon there to stop them.

And its not unheard of for cops to show up and come under fire from a suspect in a defensible position either.

posted on Oct, 28 2018 @ 09:50 PM
I think theyre should be a global weapons amnesty.
Melt them all and make some contemporary furniture. Bosh 👍🏻

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 02:13 AM
Since there has never been a mass shooting at a gunshow statistically you are incorrect OP. Seems more guns are the solution.

Armed guards at events where there are crowds of people is the solution. That has been the solution for a long time. Still, despite overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of armed guards as deterrence and response some organizations do not care about their people enough to employ them.

Some organizations see an armed guard as a potential liability/cost and do not care enough about the people in their care to employ one.

That is the facts of the matter.
edit on 29-10-2018 by Strate8 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 03:32 AM
the problem with MOST "armed guards " is - the attacker knows who the guard is

the guard has no idea who the attacker MIGHT be

" shoot the guard first " is easy in this senario

who guards the guard ?

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 03:33 AM
a reply to: Agree2Disagree

burn the witch!!!

The world is so black and white for some...makes it easy to decide right from wrong. Too bad the world doesn't work in black and white...only shades of gray.

More guns is NOT the answer or solution.

That very much depends upon the question, now doesn't it??

What about the question of whether a young woman can defend herself better with a handgun and a bit of training, or her bare hands when an abusive ex-boyfriend has come calling to teach her a "lesson". Mightn't it be a solution to the problem of how she survives?? I think it might.

Or the farmer out working the fences encountering a rabid skunk? Again, a gun sounds like a fairly good solution to another problem. Me, walking out the backdoor of my uncles ranch, and seeing a rather large rattlesnake coiled by the porch where one of my young cousins might have gotten seriously hurt, even killed, since it's a good half hour drive into town. Hmm...problem, and guess what, as a solution.

There are a sufficiency of laws to cover, if not all contingencies, certainly the vast majority of them. More laws will do nothing...because after a point, they become only extraneous noise, and will be ignored. Or, they become an unjust law, and should be ignored.

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 04:47 AM
a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Do you or have you ever owned a gun?

Or even... have you ever fired a gun?

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 05:24 AM
oh this roundabout discussion again where nobody on either side is ever swayed......

I'll see you all on next thread come the next U.S shooting. Seriously it's getting hard to give a damn any more.

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 08:26 AM
Oct 28, 2018: Alabama McDonald's gunman killed by armed dad, who is injured in shootout

A brave dad armed with a pistol stopped what could have been a mass shooting Saturday inside an Alabama McDonald's when he took down a masked gunman who had stormed in and opened fire.

The unidentified father was leaving the establishment with his sons when a masked man walked into the Birmingham fast-food restaurant and started shooting, WBRC-TV reported. The father returned fire and, during the ensuing shootout, the gunman, the father and one of the man's teenage sons were struck, according to the station.

The gunman, who was not identified, later died of his injuries. The other two injuries were not considered life-threatening.

Odd, that not one other customer or innocent child was killed either by the attempted gunman or the armed citizen.

According to some right here in this thread, aren't we supposed to believe that this should be a killing field of dead customers and children if a citizen was to be armed and engage the shooter???!!!

Imagine that, an armed and trained citizen foils an attempted mass shooting before police arrive with no others hurt or killed.

This must be one of those Mandela moments.


More local reporting, WBRC-TV: Father shoots, kills masked man who opened fire at Birmingham McDonald’s

edit on 10/29/2018 by Krakatoa because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 08:36 AM
a reply to: underwerks

With the proper resources going towards mental health programs I think a lot of these shootings could be stopped before they begin.

I agree with you here, mental health care in our country is a bad joke, and the societal black mark applied to people that get help takes an already bad situation and makes it worse.

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 09:09 AM
Military Grade weapons restrictions:

Please educate me, should I not be able to own a Beretta M9 pistol (former service pistol of US Armed Forces) and instead be limited to a 92FS or an older models 92S or 92SB? Is the Glock 17 a problem because many police departments still use it? How about the Ruger Security Six or a Smith & Wesson Model 29 (Dirty Harry’s Gun)?

How about the FN FiveSeven? The diameter of the round is about the same as a .22, but the Secret Service uses them for good reason. Problem with the FN PS90, it uses the same round and only the P90 is for military/law enforcement use?

I guess the Beretta CX4 Storm is okay since it was never designed with any military in mind, but it sure looks like some sort of Buck Rogers gun. Oh, but it uses the same magazine as the M9 and is a carbine rifle. Which is a scary word that mean a shorter, lighter rifle or that it uses lower powered or pistol rounds.

edit on 29-10-2018 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 09:25 AM
More guns is the answer and will always be the answer until you find a way to take guns away from criminals and not law abiding citizens. Unfortunately, anti-gun legislation does the exact opposite. You could pass a law today banning every firearm known to man and tomorrow the bad guys will have just as many guns as they do today, if not more. The only people who will abide by that law, by definition, are the law abiding citizens. They aren't the ones running around shooting people because their drug deal went bad or someone wore the wrong color sneakers. Those are the criminals. Criminals break the law. That is why we call them criminals. it doesn't matter how many anti-gun laws you pass, the target of those laws will continue to ignore them and create violence whenever and wherever they choose. Chicago has been passing anti-gun laws for decades. You can see how well it is working. You can't continue to repeat the same acts and expect to get different results. It just doesn't work that way.

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 11:02 AM
Literally speaking, more guns is not the answer. If a bunch of pistols were air-dropped into the middle of a city for the populace to grab at will, I highly doubt that would lead to a safer city.

I fully support mandatory training in order to get a gun. Set it up exactly like getting a driver's license. No one complains about having to take that amount of classes to drive a car, why is it such a big deal to do the same for buying a gun? Do you really need a gun ASAP? Sounds a bit suspicious to me, why can't you wait? Why not plan it out, take the classes in plenty of time so you can have the gun before you "need" it. You want to purchase and use a gun, you should be required to get fully trained on it's use and safety before purchase. (This wouldn't solve the mass shooting problem, but it would dramatically lessen accidental injury/death)

Mental Health care (and health care in general) in this country is fairly abysmal, and needs to be fixed. More funds need to go to it in order to get enough help for everyone who needs it. There are so many people that try to get help, have to wait weeks for an appointment, and end up deciding that they're going to just take matters into their own hands instead. As an example, I live in the Rockies, where suicide rates are significantly higher than other parts of the country, and I personally knew 3 people who committed suicide shortly after trying to get help and being scheduled for an appointment a month out, one of whom shot her parents before she shot herself. Terrible situations, all of them. Would getting help quicker have prevented those? Maybe. I'll even say, probably.
I'm not saying it would fix the problem completely, but helping the folks who need it in a timely fashion would go a long way towards dropping the rate of shootings.

I understand that it's our right to own guns. I own several. But, rights come with responsibilities. If you aren't capable of handling the responsibilities, you forfeit the right to own the gun. Period. (That's my personal opinion)

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 11:13 AM
a reply to: Krakatoa

That's what happens when someone tries to open fire in an area that's NOT a gun-free zone. Let it be a lesson to any more would-be killers... try to kill us and we're liable to kill you back.

We'e uncivilized that way (and proud of it).


posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 01:22 PM
a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Less guns don't help people, either, because criminals will still prefer to have and use them.

I agree that we do need less rhetoric and more positive leadership though.

However, "... armed police eventually on site responsding," is not always the best thing upon which to rely. Here in Cincinnati, we recently had a guy shoot up the lobby of a bank downtown. Even though the officers responded within about 4 minutes, he was still able to kill three people and wound two others, one of whom was shot 12 times (and survived). Reports were that his gun jammed at least once during his psychotic actions, which probably was a lucky happening that may have saved another life or more.

But, had the bank not been a gun-free zone, and someone there had a pistol, it might have stopped at no deaths, or one, or less than three and two people wounded. The reality is that we should have that option in case it does help.

"Good guys with guns" positively affect far more instances of violent crime than bad guys with guns cause, so the whole rhetoric that more guns in the hands of law-abiding people isn't a solution is getting very tired to hear.

As for your question about more countries with nukes...all I know is that, with the vast amount available to the US and the USSR/Russia in the cold war, I'm pretty sure that it was the threat of complete annihilation of the first to fire one at the other that kept things "cold."

Yes, it'd be nice is nukes didn't exist, but they do, so it's good to have more in the hands of level-headed people than not.

posted on Oct, 29 2018 @ 01:29 PM

originally posted by: AtomicKangaroo

I'll see you all on next thread come the next U.S shooting. Seriously it's getting hard to give a damn any more.

Which is obvious by the caliber (pun not intended) of your comment.

That's why most of the world doesn't have gun rights--they quit giving a damn and got all apathetic and such. And yes, I've researched Australia's gun, knife, and violent crime issues since the mandatory buy-back. It's not nearly as pretty as too many anti-gun folks make it out to be.



new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in