Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter- "However, the gun rights organization said "the American press is downplaying his heroism because it proves that armed students can stop campus gunmen." -
...is silence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58323
I think if you need armed students on campus to stop campus gunmen, you have a larger problem on your hands than just a weapon's issue. Don't you?
Originally posted by shavixmirLike moths to the flame, crazed gunmen are drawn to victim disarmament zones.
- "However, the gun rights organization said "the American press is downplaying his heroism because it proves that armed students can stop campus gunmen." -
I think if you need armed students on campus to stop campus gunmen, you have a larger problem on your hands than just a weapon's issue. Don't you?
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIs it really a weapon? or just limited perspective? If 'the media' doesn't tell you what you want to hear, that's no reason to think that 'the media' is intentionally suppressing information. Perhaps the problem has more to do with competing definitions of what 'news' is.
...is silence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58323
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWhat polarization! Do you really think that the only two legitimate answers to the problem is:
...is silence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58323
1) Nobody should have any guns no matter what (Rabid Liberal Democrat); or
2) Guns should be allowed everywhere by everyone (Rabid Conservative Republican).
I'm both in favor of personal responsibility and the regulation of things that can be potentially
dangerous to other people. I fall somewhere between 1 and 2.
So, where's the fair compromise? Where's the fair solution? Arming everyone is just as stupid
as disarming everyone.
Instead of pointing out how stupid one extreme is (the one associated with individuals you
clearly have a gripe with), why don't you offer a solution or two (or at the very least point out
the stupidity of the other extreme)?
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioTemper, temper -- just like O.J., that temper of yours is going to get the better of you one day.
What polarization! Do you really think that the only two legitimate answers to the problem is:
1) Nobody should have any guns no matter what (Rabid Liberal Democrat); or
2) Guns should be allowed everywhere by everyone (Rabid Conservative Republican).
I'm both in favor of personal responsibility and the regulation of things that can be potentially ...[text shortened]... tion or two (or at the very least point out
the stupidity of the other extreme)?
Nemesio
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI particularly liked this bit...."so unlike incidents here in the United States where the press was able to completely ignore the actions of armed students or teachers, the truth about this incident will not be suppressed."
...is silence:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58323
Say what? Where are all these suppressed examples?
Oh yeah I forgot, they were suppressed!