So this reminds you of the strawman you've constructed.
So kids that simmer and stew overnight about conflicts kill other students 1st class of the day. But then thoughts concerning retribution build up enough so last class of the day also has a high mortality rate.
So this reminds you of the strawman you've constructed.
You didn't answer the question: Did you want the students to have guns?
Vintage Chump: A question somehow is supposed to override glaring realities.
The glaring reality is you're terrified to answer simple questions.
Right off the bat, you've tried to detract from the fact that it's rocks vs. bullets. Ignoring the glaring crux of the matter; par.
Did you want the students to have guns?
You still didn't answer the question.
now you're changing quotes again.
More desperation. Protesting immaterial matters.
Now you're declaring victory again.
Rocks vs. guns. This "victory" was there from the start. I'm just pointing out your typical loser tactics.
Declaring victory after running away from a simple yes or no question.
Cheap come-ons. Par.
Guns vs. rocks, bro. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and advocate bringing rocks to a gun fight?
You're still running away. Par. Did you dream of growing up being a loser and running away from simple yes or no questions on an anonymous message board?
Seriously; did you dream of being a loser and being on the side of bringing rocks to a gun fight? Would the twenty-year-old version of you want to kick your ass, or have you always been that big of a loser?
unhinged
As indicated by my calm response.
So, the twenty-year-old version of you would have advocated for bringing rocks to a gun fight? You always been that big a loser? I can see why you'd want to "run" from this question.
This is supposed to be calm?
You keep on being obsessed with me after running from a simple yes or no question about the topic you started. It's a good look on you, tough guy.
Pavlov hates guns, but he owns one and keeps it in a safe in his second home.
I never said I hated guns.
white Chris' biographical skills are lacking.
Or overcooked ramen. It's sticky and be thrown at the shooters face to blind him. Or better yet every kid gets a can of silly string...
once the shooter is covered in silly string the children could scurry to safety.
Plus teachers could then be trained on how to takedown a silly string covered shooter and restrain them until police arrive. Of course that would be voluntary training, perhaps a small bonus for teachers that can show proficiency at taking down the shooter without themselves becoming entangled in the silly string.
how so?
I'm actually one of the few here that supports the 2nd amendment as means of personal protection (including guns), but one of the worst arguments made here plenty of times is that confiscation starts the wheels of an authoritarian government, and that somehow having an armed population can fight back against such en y... obviously, obviating that such government would necessarily need the support of the military to succeed. Which makes it an absolutely re ed argument. There's way more convincing arguments for the 2nd Amendment, that ain't one.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)