all 24 comments

[–]Vigte 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Fire extinguishers can also be used to COMMIT SUICIDE... AND to KILL people! (Sure it's a tiny fraction of all extinguisher owners, but who cares, amiright?)

These should be banned and the professional extinguisher users should be trusted without question.

[–]Gearrion 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Same answer as why do we need knives. Food , sport and defense.

[–]sodasplash 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You don’t need knives if you eat Beyond Meat, fascist. /s

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You don’t need knives if you eat Beyond Meat

Sawboss is going to need a gun if they start serving Beyond Meat in schools.

[–]Zombi 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

Except you can't use a fire extinguisher to start a fire. I agree that guns are necessary for protection in certain situations, but we shouldn't be loading up our teachers with guns; I think that's just a recipe for disaster.

There's also the fact that there are plenty of other countries with much less guns while also having much less mass shootings (or none at all) so I don't think the issue has much to do with guns. I think mass shootings are a very complex issue and I think guns are just a single piece that enables them to happen. If guns weren't here there'd be mass stabbings instead, or bombings, or some other horrible thing to fill that gap.

All in all, less guns probably won't solve the issue just like how more guns won't solve the issue. Actually understanding the root cause of the issue will solve it. Arguing over gun laws and distribution just stalls the progress being made.

[–]sawboss[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

we shouldn't be loading up our teachers with guns

Then you'd better keep armed police on site 24/7, because waiting for them to arrive costs lives.

countries with much less guns while also having much less mass shootings

fuck them

think mass shootings are a very complex issue and I think guns are just a single piece that enables them to happen.

I think moral authoritarians who want to micromanage the affairs of others are the biggest cause of violence in our time.

Actually understanding the root cause of the issue will solve it.

You can't have that because the mainstream media insists on framing it as a Second Amendment issue. Gee, wonder why they'd do that?

[–]Zombi 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

Then you'd better keep armed police on site 24/7, because waiting for them to arrive costs lives.

I completely agree and I personally grew up with an armed officer at my school throughout every year. My main issue with arming teachers is that teaching is their job, not protection (though they should try to protect the kids if they can). I'd feel better with someone who's trained and professional being in charge of protecting our kids rather than Ms. Brown who's never held a damn gun in her life.

fuck them

I mean, it kinda directly contradicts the idea you're supposing, which is that more gun prevalence would bring about less gun violence... but yeah just ignore that part and carry on I guess.

I think moral authoritarians who want to micromanage the affairs of others are the biggest cause of violence in our time.

Yes, that is a very huge issue as well and I agree with you on this. I don't think denying teachers the right to bring a loaded firearm to school is being authoritarian, though.

You can't have that because the mainstream media insists on framing it as a Second Amendment issue. Gee, wonder why they'd do that?

Cause that's what gets people angry and tuned in. Who wants that boring old "No more dead children" stuff when we can keep that juicy news flowing! Just think about how much money you can make off of exploiting dead children, man! You don't wanna give all that up do you?

[–]sawboss[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I've got a better idea. Let's just close all the public schools.

[–]HeyImSancho 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed, they're not for knowledge, only indoctrination.

[–]Broken-needles350 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I mean, it kinda directly contradicts the idea you're supposing, which is that more gun prevalence would bring about less gun violence... but yeah just ignore that part and carry on I guess.

lol, it would tho, look at all the legit information, the mass shootings are happening in gun free zones, rofl. you an anti 2nd shill?

[–]Zombi 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I'm all for the 2nd amendment, but I'm just using a real world example of the contrary being proven. I'm talking about other countries, not the US. Gun free zones don't really stop shootings, if someone wants to shoot people they can do it pretty easily with how many guns are out there on the street. I'm suggesting that gun laws are FINE as they are and that we should be concentrating on solving the actual problem. I'm saying arguing over it is a waste of time as the issue isn't about guns at all, so please reread my post because you've missed a lot of what I was saying. I support the gun industry, I just don't think they're the solution to this problem because they are a part of the problem. They aren't the problem.

[–]Broken-needles350 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

i didnt miss anything, you missed my post entirely, your the one who needs to reread, rofl.

my entire post is on how gun free zones are prime targets of mass shooting ops. and your not using any examples rly, your words on teachers having guns. you say teachers should try to protect the kids at school, but you dont want them to have the tool they can use to properly protect them? shame on the mess.

[–]Zombi 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

my entire post is on how gun free zones are prime targets of mass shooting ops.

I feel we should stop the threat of massing shootings entirely, rather than mitigate the damage from it happening. You're suggesting a band-aid for an infection while I'm suggesting antibiotics, do you get it now?

you say teachers should try to protect the kids at school, but you dont want them to have the tool they can use to properly protect them?

Because I feel that housing 100+ guns within a school with thousands of kids knowing there is a gun within every 10 ft will just lead to more shootings rather than less. I don't trust kids or teachers to handle them properly without training which is both costly and time consuming. I think it's a completely nonsensical idea from a logistical standpoint and a I think it doesn't solve the ACTUAL problem.

You are extremely condescending, yet you have no clue of what you're talking about.

[–]Broken-needles350 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

i know what im talkin about, you dont.

training is neither costly or time consuming, its about the family. if the family they come from is experienced and supports guns, that experience is passed to the next generation.

being able to protect ourselves is not the bandiad, the constitutional violations they call gun laws are the real bandaids, lol.

I am not condescending, i speak the maul of truth, lol.

labels are for sjw sheeple, dont be one

[–]Zombi 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

training is neither costly or time consuming, its about the family. if the family they come from is experienced and supports guns, that experience is passed to the next generation.

So we should only employ teachers that have generations of gun owners that have taught/trained them? You know that's completely unrealistic and asinine right?

If you look at the reality, there are FAR more teachers that don't use guns than do, I'd say probably millions. So you need to train MILLIONS of teachers, distribute (meaning PAY FOR) millions of guns, and then take the TIME to train those teachers... It will cost time and money.

being able to protect ourselves is not the bandiad, the constitutional violations they call gun laws are the real bandaids, lol.

I'm saying you SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PROTECT YOURSELF. Again, you aren't solving the issue of mass shootings at all. You aren't looking for a way to stop mass shootings, you are looking for protection for when they happen.

[–]Broken-needles350 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

way to take things out of context and try to put words into my mouth rofl.

your an anti 2nd shill, this line of covert attack has been exposed.

your backout, cause your using classic anti 2nd sjw sheeple flawed logic and out of context attacks

[–]Gearrion 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Who claims more guns won't solve the issue? It would solve the issue and is already a proven fact in Isreal.

[–]Zombi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm claiming guns won't solve the issue as in my example there are plenty of countries with stricter gun laws yet less mass shootings which kinda contradicts that point. If guns deterred violence then you'd expect the places with the most guns would be the least violent, but there are countries that have much stricter guns laws that have either zero or very few mass shootings.

[–]Gearrion 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am claiming your claim as false, due to the fact that terrorism is in fact higher in those places.

[–]Zombi 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

First of all: I am speaking of mass shootings, not terrorism, but whatever potayto-potahtoh.

Second: I'm claiming that gun laws seem to be very ineffective at deterring attacks. Whether there are guns or aren't, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference.

So, with that out of the way, you're still incorrect. If anything, terrorism is on the RISE within the U.S. Europe had a rough time pre-2000's, but since the new millenia they've been a surprisingly safe area of the world with very few, if any, terrorist attacks besides that spike in 2015 due to the Paris attacks.

So, again, ARGUING ABOUT GUN LAWS SOLVES NOTHING. THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF GUNS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MASS SHOOTINGS OR TERRORIST ATTACKS. THAT IS THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE:

Western Europe:

https://www.datagraver.com/case/people-killed-by-terrorism-per-year-in-western-europe-1970-2015

USA:

https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Nov2017.pdf

[–]Liberal_One 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How dare you be a voice of reason.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

NICCCEE metaphor, you Saidit with the picture, or are you sarcatic meaning you like to have the oppertunity yo do it yourself insted of waiting for help and get burned/killed?!, I think its a USA thing people got scared-mostly by media-and thinking a gun will protect them, i became to reilize this is a discussion like religion, people who support guns will stick to their opinion, some said the other day, "what i f some terrorist is attacking people on the street e.g.or other shootings", WELL there was 1 the other week in USA 12 people died and NO1 with a gun who could "protected" themself or Killed the shooter, but i can understand the otherside to protect yourself out of fear or just be sure/incase what if?, i also think its source/roots are at the begining of the existence of the USA when people got property for free. mostly very Large landscapes and the vulnerability of some1 walking/sneaking at your land with no Law/police close and you get rubbed or killed, like in the cowboy days-or have i been watching to much tv? i can understand both sides, but i think and seen mostly done MORE bad/wrong by guns then GOOD, and thinking i would be alowed to own/carry a gun, i prob. would be in jail/on the run or dead. i can flip 180 when some1 starts to be a dick or anoying me on the street or in the shop-so im prob. mental instable-and thinking i had a gun with me at that point Oh nonono

[–]sawboss[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

block of nonsense

uh huh