|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On March 01 2018 06:44 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 06:26 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO. I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing? Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. Schools are not safe environments for guns, regardless of teacher training. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. You have educators in this thread and in public forums speaking out against this plan. Our schools have existed in much more violent times than without the need for armed teachers. We do not need this and it is a foolish attempt to prove that more guns means more safety. Personally, I not meet a single gun owner that believes it is a good idea and I question the responsibility of any gun owner advocating for it.
You say “educators have told you it isn’t” but you don’t want polling. Ok, bro. I’m just supposed to trust you as a representative of all teachers, regardless of policy suggestion. I can’t wait until Trump’s gone and people recover their rationality. I already pointed out two examples contradicting your privileged position, unmentioned here by you.
I question whether people really mean “do something” and not “I need a way to soothe my conscience, make me feel good.” It just doesn’t jive with behavior at all.
|
On March 01 2018 07:27 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 06:44 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:26 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO. I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing? Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. Schools are not safe environments for guns, regardless of teacher training. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. You have educators in this thread and in public forums speaking out against this plan. Our schools have existed in much more violent times than without the need for armed teachers. We do not need this and it is a foolish attempt to prove that more guns means more safety. Personally, I not meet a single gun owner that believes it is a good idea and I question the responsibility of any gun owner advocating for it. You say “educators have told you it isn’t” but you don’t want polling. Ok, bro. I’m just supposed to trust you as a representative of all teachers, regardless of policy suggestion. I can’t wait until Trump’s gone and people recover their rationality. I already pointed out two examples contradicting your privileged position, unmentioned here by you. I question whether people really mean “do something” and not “I need a way to soothe my conscience, make me feel good.” It just doesn’t jive with behavior at all.
We shouldn’t settle all public policy based on polling data and what makes people feel good at the time. Just like we don’t punish criminals based on polling. Or go to war based on polling. And we do not run our schools based on public polling and any place that does is doing a disservice to its students.
And this debate won’t be settled by polling either. You said you wanted non-gun owners to respect your experience and expertise. At the same time you refuse to acknowledge the expertise educators both in this thread and outside of it. Why do you consider that to be acceptable?
|
On March 01 2018 07:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 07:27 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:44 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:26 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO. I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing? Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. Schools are not safe environments for guns, regardless of teacher training. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. You have educators in this thread and in public forums speaking out against this plan. Our schools have existed in much more violent times than without the need for armed teachers. We do not need this and it is a foolish attempt to prove that more guns means more safety. Personally, I not meet a single gun owner that believes it is a good idea and I question the responsibility of any gun owner advocating for it. You say “educators have told you it isn’t” but you don’t want polling. Ok, bro. I’m just supposed to trust you as a representative of all teachers, regardless of policy suggestion. I can’t wait until Trump’s gone and people recover their rationality. I already pointed out two examples contradicting your privileged position, unmentioned here by you. I question whether people really mean “do something” and not “I need a way to soothe my conscience, make me feel good.” It just doesn’t jive with behavior at all. We shouldn’t settle all public policy based on polling data and what makes people feel good at the time. Just like we don’t punish criminals based on polling. Or go to war based on polling. And we do not run our schools based on public polling and any place that does is doing a disservice to its students. And this debate won’t be settled by polling either. You said you wanted non-gun owners to respect your experience and expertise. At the same time you refuse to acknowledge the expertise educators both in this thread and outside of it. Why do you consider that to be acceptable?
I’m not going to settle what teachers believe based on one ex-teacher telling me. I’m especially not going to yield ground on what’s up for debate because some yahoo thinks we shouldn’t even consider the family of policy suggestions to be up for debate.
And I never said that, please quote.
|
On March 01 2018 07:42 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 07:37 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 07:27 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:44 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:26 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 06:14 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 06:03 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 05:27 Plansix wrote:On March 01 2018 05:16 Danglars wrote:On March 01 2018 04:30 Plansix wrote:
Shitty state police and sheriff’s departments should surprise no one, TBH. Especially in states where they are chronically underfunded. This is why communities and citizens need several options to report people that they think will commit violent acts. More people need to know that the stupid rules they want enacted are going to be enforced/filtered down by the same failures that could’ve used last years gun laws to stop recent mass shooting events. Millions of gun owners wonder why the mob is coming for their rifles. Frankly, the GTFO response is becoming saner and saner with every new iteration ... the CNN town hall with a howling arena shouting at Rubio to ban all semiautomatic rifles as a perfect example. As former educator, right back at you. Gun owners should stay in their lane and not talk about arming teachers or other things they have no idea about. It makes ya’ll look stupid And from someone who is licensed to own a gun, I am not frustrated at all by the debates on CNN or anyplace else. This issue has been left festering for 20+ years and both gun owners and gun control advocates are feed up with the inaction. If you’re fed up with inaction, make sure you’re clear that you’re really fed up with lack of action that qualifies according to your definitions. Hardening up the soft targets of gun-free zones are absolutely part of the discussion. If this is sheriff/police or volunteer teachers ... concealed carry or gun lockers ... or simply training for existing SRO’s ... that is action. My guy, stay in your lane. You don’t know anything about schools and if it is safe to have a gun there. Educators have told you it isn’t. So if you want your expertise as gun owner respected, you need to respect the expertise of professional educators. If you can’t do that, you need to follow your own advice and GTFO. I wasn’t aware we had any deep polls and hearings on this very recent topic. Let things settle and fund polls from a couple reputable organizations on everything from light-touch to heavy ask. Are you opposed to volunteer training for willing teachers? Are you opposed to accessible gun lockers for trained personnel? Do you support or oppose teachers with concealed carry permits from carrying on campus (in shifts or in combination with school security) if they are willing? Life isn’t Trump or another radical saying they should force educators to do this thing. And it’s stupid to lie about not doing anything while setting the rules for what constitutes something. That’s one of the things that poisons the debate. One school district has already moved in favor of the issue. At least one more had heavy participation in gun training classes put on by a local law enforcement office. Respect gun rights and respect debate. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. Schools are not safe environments for guns, regardless of teacher training. Do not lean on a need for polling for public hearings before we can settle this argument. You have educators in this thread and in public forums speaking out against this plan. Our schools have existed in much more violent times than without the need for armed teachers. We do not need this and it is a foolish attempt to prove that more guns means more safety. Personally, I not meet a single gun owner that believes it is a good idea and I question the responsibility of any gun owner advocating for it. You say “educators have told you it isn’t” but you don’t want polling. Ok, bro. I’m just supposed to trust you as a representative of all teachers, regardless of policy suggestion. I can’t wait until Trump’s gone and people recover their rationality. I already pointed out two examples contradicting your privileged position, unmentioned here by you. I question whether people really mean “do something” and not “I need a way to soothe my conscience, make me feel good.” It just doesn’t jive with behavior at all. We shouldn’t settle all public policy based on polling data and what makes people feel good at the time. Just like we don’t punish criminals based on polling. Or go to war based on polling. And we do not run our schools based on public polling and any place that does is doing a disservice to its students. And this debate won’t be settled by polling either. You said you wanted non-gun owners to respect your experience and expertise. At the same time you refuse to acknowledge the expertise educators both in this thread and outside of it. Why do you consider that to be acceptable? I’m not going to settle what teachers believe based on one ex-teacher telling me. I’m especially not going to yield ground on what’s up for debate because some yahoo thinks we shouldn’t even consider the family of policy suggestions to be up for debate. And I never said that, please quote.
DPB is a teacher as well. There are only a few folks in this thread. And you have said over and over that gun control advocates need to listen to gun owners, while not extending the same to teachers or people who have worked in schools. If you won’t respect the opinions of the people in front of you, why should anyone bother listening your demands to listen to gun owners?
|
On March 01 2018 07:15 Plansix wrote:
Just one church in the US, but it gives you an idea of how guns are viewed in some sections of our country. Not a culture up for healthy debate on restrictions to firearms access.
Bullet crowns, that's some prime "are we the baddies?" material. But why do these guys even need guns? It's clear the ones in the top right picture can protect their town with fireballs if needed.
|
United States24769 Posts
As a former teacher I will add that guns have no place in the classroom. Not even concealed. Security for the campus as a whole is more nuanced.
|
I have a really hard time understanding how one can see it not as an issue if someone who is responsible for education is suddenly also in charge of life and death by being the one to carry a firearm in the very same setting.
Teachers are trained to be teachers, not trained to be a distinct unemotional entity that can shoot at one of their pupils from one second to another. I honestly don't get how one can even arrive at that conclusion and genuinely believe it's a great idea.
Prison guards might need firearms, not teachers.
|
On March 01 2018 05:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
The question was asked broadly, not specifically directed at you. I don't know what you are talking about picking a fight.
Good regulation is better than bad regulation; a hypothetical gun license contigent on gun safety and competence, is better than complex age restrictions with exemptions for training, is better than superficially driven age restrictions, is better than none at all.
Would you disagree with that?
I meant picking a political 'fight' with gun owners/the right. If you're going to try to restrict something they don't want you to restrict you better use the energy for something effective and not something superficial and ineffective like self-imposed age restrictions.
|
Restricting gun sales to people 21 and older is just the beginning, it was always the bare minimum, and it's insane to me that there's an age range where someone's able to buy an AR-15, but not a fucking beer. Businesses taking it upon themselves to read the current political climate and bend with the wind is just the tiniest of baby steps. People would be fools to take this and just be happy with it, and I really don't see much reason why they would.
|
On March 01 2018 11:53 NewSunshine wrote:
Restricting gun sales to people 21 and older is just the beginning, it was always the bare minimum, and it's insane to me that there's an age range where someone's able to buy an AR-15, but not a fucking beer. Businesses taking it upon themselves to read the current political climate and bend with the wind is just the tiniest of baby steps. People would be fools to take this and just be happy with it, and I really don't see much reason why they would.
Because after they get these crumbs they'll be back into sniffing for farts out of Mueller's ass for one. What something like this does is take the wind out of the "we have to do something" sails because, while basically meaningless, "something" got done.
|
On March 01 2018 11:56 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 11:53 NewSunshine wrote:
Restricting gun sales to people 21 and older is just the beginning, it was always the bare minimum, and it's insane to me that there's an age range where someone's able to buy an AR-15, but not a fucking beer. Businesses taking it upon themselves to read the current political climate and bend with the wind is just the tiniest of baby steps. People would be fools to take this and just be happy with it, and I really don't see much reason why they would. Because after they get these crumbs they'll be back into sniffing for farts out of Mueller's ass for one. What something like this does is take the wind out of the "we have to do something" sails because, while basically meaningless, "something" got done.
Well when this wave runs its course and it becomes more of a standard for gun sales to start at 21, and it doesn't stop someone from walking into a campus and shooting people up, and it happens again, because this is America, it's going to happen again, I don't think people are going to be satisfied.
|
On March 01 2018 11:59 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 11:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 01 2018 11:53 NewSunshine wrote:
Restricting gun sales to people 21 and older is just the beginning, it was always the bare minimum, and it's insane to me that there's an age range where someone's able to buy an AR-15, but not a fucking beer. Businesses taking it upon themselves to read the current political climate and bend with the wind is just the tiniest of baby steps. People would be fools to take this and just be happy with it, and I really don't see much reason why they would. Because after they get these crumbs they'll be back into sniffing for farts out of Mueller's ass for one. What something like this does is take the wind out of the "we have to do something" sails because, while basically meaningless, "something" got done. Well when this wave runs its course and it becomes more of a standard for gun sales to start at 21, and it doesn't stop someone from walking into a campus and shooting people up, and it happens again, because this is America, it's going to happen again, I don't think people are going to be satisfied.
Yeah, silly me for wanting the energy to be channeled toward something effective at saving lives now.
|
What are you talking about? You think I don't want that? You think the people who lived 15 miles from me who were at one of the schools that got shot up the other week don't want that? I seriously have no idea what you're on about. You're doing that thing you always do, where you rail against people that are doing something positive, because there's something more positive people could hypothetically be doing. It's exhausting, and I'm not running that gauntlet again. People are campaigning for change, they're making their voices heard, and then come November they'll put it to a vote. And in the meantime businesses are listening. Would you rather they don't put age limits on gun purchases?
|
On March 01 2018 12:07 NewSunshine wrote:
What are you talking about? You think I don't want that? You think the people who lived 15 miles from me who were at one of the schools that got shot up the other week don't want that? I seriously have no idea what you're on about. You're doing that thing you always do, where you rail against people that are doing something positive, because there's something more positive people could hypothetically be doing. It's exhausting, and I'm not running that gauntlet again. People are campaigning for change, they're making their voices heard, and then come November they'll put it to a vote. And in the meantime businesses are listening. Would you rather they don't put age limits on gun purchases?
Yeah, I would rather they not satiate the desire for change with basically meaningless reforms they can go back on whenever they want.
If you really want what I'm talking about, tell corporations like Walmart to shove their policy where the sun don't shine and get behind real reform that will save lives.
|
Whatever dude. I explained rather succinctly why this won't satiate any desire for change, because the problems we've faced are problems we'll continue to face, and unless people are fucking blind, they're going to notice that nothing major's changed. You somehow expect people who have their own shit to do on a day-to-day basis, like run a company, to make meaningful gun reform happen in a country where people wear fucking bullet crowns? There's these things called baby steps, and they still matter.
|
On March 01 2018 13:34 NewSunshine wrote:
Whatever dude. I explained rather succinctly why this won't satiate any desire for change, because the problems we've faced are problems we'll continue to face, and unless people are fucking blind, they're going to notice that nothing major's changed. You somehow expect people who have their own shit to do on a day-to-day basis, like run a company, to make meaningful gun reform happen in a country where people wear fucking bullet crowns? There's these things called baby steps, and they still matter.
Considering Walmart's gun sales are a very small part of the suffering they inflict on this country I'm hardly going to credit them for essentially doing nothing even about the guns. Let alone the poverty wages, terrible treatment, lack of medial care (especially mental health), etc... they constantly lobby for.
They are a terrible company doing jack squat and people are already getting placated and redirected into begging corporations to make similar superficial changes instead of demanding those corporations join them in pressuring congress for real reforms.
Of course they have time, they have multi-million dollar teams of people dedicated to lobbying congress? Unless the whole "own shit to do like run a company" was some sort of humble brag or something?
Not to mention you're trying to take baby steps, when there's a perfectly good big boy step right in front of you.
|
Okay broseph, you can go away now. Take the win, or whatever it is you wanted out of this, because I'm not doing this. I've no reason to brag about anything, especially when it isn't germane to the conversation, and I damn sure don't have kind words for Walmart in general, but I'm surely not in the mood to argue with someone so eager to put words in my mouth. It's not worth it.
|
On March 01 2018 13:48 NewSunshine wrote:
Okay broseph, you can go away now. Take the win, or whatever it is you wanted out of this, because I'm not doing this. I've no reason to brag about anything, especially when it isn't germane to the conversation, and I damn sure don't have kind words for Walmart in general, but I'm surely not in the mood to argue with someone so eager to put words in my mouth. It's not worth it.
I presumed it wasn't, but I didn't really understand the idea that corporations like walmart didn't have time to lobby congress?
It's not about winning, I just want effective gun reform that means less people die from them. Some ideas are better than others, it's nothing personal broseph.
|
Last week I saw some dude in an old chevy pickup with a submachine gun on his gun rack. Umm isn't that gun rack for hunting in the boonies? Da fuuuuk...
|
On March 01 2018 13:51 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2018 13:48 NewSunshine wrote:
Okay broseph, you can go away now. Take the win, or whatever it is you wanted out of this, because I'm not doing this. I've no reason to brag about anything, especially when it isn't germane to the conversation, and I damn sure don't have kind words for Walmart in general, but I'm surely not in the mood to argue with someone so eager to put words in my mouth. It's not worth it. It's not about winning, I just want effective gun reform that means less people die from them. Some ideas are better than others, it's nothing personal broseph.
"I want effective reform" is a very easy way of dismissing each and every individual solution that needs to be enacted over time to form a proper complex way of dealing with this issue.
In the end school shootings in the US are a complex problem which will require a complex solution. However, "complex solutions" usually aren't easily enacted because you need to a) gather data (something gun lobbies in the US actively prevent) and b) enact a lot of small solutions that work together.
Norway, Canada, France, Austria, Germany, Finland. Know what these countries have in common? 1/3rd of guns per capita compared to the US. None of them have even remotely close to 1/3rd of school shootings per capita, all of them have way way less. Compared to Germany for example in the 21st century the US had ~40 times as many, which leaves us with a factor of ~10x as many once we adjust for population.
Reducing gun supply in the US would not make school shootings go away, neither would enacting age limits, neither would banning specific guns, neither would forced registering of guns, neither would a higher focus on mental health, neither would beefing up law enforcement so it actually enforces existing legislation and neither would getting rid of a culture that glorifies guns and makes both perpetrators and victims media stars.
Each and every single one of those can be (correctly) argued away by saying: "That's not going to change anything, I want an effective reform!" - Yet all of the above are for example something we have over here and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if similar things are true for other countries on the above list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
