USA 15 dead in Elementary school shooting at Robb elementary school

elder said:
to be fair the majority of US citizens want restrictions on gun control (no one is looking to ban all guns of course). it's very split down party lines though. have a look at the graph on this article.

www.vox.com

Polling is clear: Americans want gun control

Politicians diverge from voters when it comes to preventing gun deaths.
www.vox.com www.vox.com
Double post:


The ban on assault weapons was lifted in 2004

https://twitter.com/x/status/1529922970734542862
Click to expand...
That’s fucked, anyone with any sense can see there’s no need for automatic weapons.
Hugh Gains said:
It's funny how not being a fan of Trudeau is enough to warrant condemnation
Click to expand...
I’m gonna be annoyed, I have a rifle and a pistol. So I’m fully expecting to have to “sell” my pistol back later this year
 
Last edited:


safcforever said:
You don’t let people run into a fire fight.
Click to expand...
It was one gunman v innocent little kids and teachers. The fact that they stood by whiie he massacred those people sickens me. I'd rather be dead or maimed than a fcking coward with that on my conscience. What kind of person lets that happen? Could you see that happening with armed police in the UK? There's something very wrong with what happened that day.
 
Morse said:
It was one gunman v innocent little kids and teachers. The fact that they stood by whiie he massacred those people sickens me. I'd rather be dead or maimed than a fcking coward with that on my conscience. What kind of person lets that happen? Could you see that happening with armed police in the UK? There's something very wrong with what happened that day.
Click to expand...
No, I’ve never defended the police about how long they took or how they handled that side of it.

All I said was they were 100% correct by stopping others running into the line of fire.
 
safcforever said:
No, I’ve never defended the police about how long they took or how they handled that side of it.

All I said was they were 100% correct by stopping others running into the line of fire.
Click to expand...
If the police were in there doing their job, then I might understand that. Any parent would have been incensed by the lack of police action and would have wanted to go in there themselves. Being tasered and cuffed for trying to save your kids when no one else would is just perverse and gut wrenching.
 
Morse said:
If the police were in there doing their job, then I might understand that. Any parent would have been incensed by the lack of police action and would have wanted to go in there themselves. Being tasered and cuffed for trying to save your kids when no one else would is just perverse and gut wrenching.
Click to expand...
What else should they have done to prevent others going into the line of fire?
 
SYB_DC said:
Gone in and eliminated the threat themselves, which is all the parents wanted them do to in the first place. If they had done that, the parents wouldn't have wanted to go in themselves. In other words, resolved the conflict ("Please do your job!") by...doing their jobs.
Click to expand...
Not what I asked. I asked what are they meant to do to stop people running into the line of fire?

I’ll help you out.

The correct thing to do is

Clear
Cordon
Control

Regardless of the incident happening
 
Frijj said:
I’d love to know what it is you lot hate about Trudeau.

You all sing from the same hymn sheet so you’re all being manipulated by the same right wing media sources.
Click to expand...

He lost the right to be taken seriously when he started locking up his own people for honking horns on trucks, shutting down bank accounts of people donating to a legitimate cause, vilifying people who showed concern for taking new medication and created division within his own country.

He's a globalist technocrat.
 
Hugh Gains said:
He lost the right to be taken seriously when he started locking up his own people for honking horns on trucks, shutting down bank accounts of people donating to a legitimate cause, vilifying people who showed concern for taking new medication and created division within his own country.

He's a globalist technocrat.
Click to expand...

That's just plain wrong. I don't expect you'll reply, I've called you out on your views on a range of topics and you never reply. You like to post your spin and call people out but you avoid any actual debate. Anyways:

1. It wasn't just honking horns on trucks. It was a coordinated blockade of Ottawa, that was causing significant disruption to the lives of people living in the city.

2. It doesn't matter if the 'cause' is legitimate, if the means are not. This is just spin to make him sound worse than he is, and you know this. For instance, Insulate Britain is a completely legitimate cause, but if they blockaded London with lorries, and this blockade was being enabled by people transferring them money, then stopping that funding would be a necessary step to ending the blockade.

3. Trudeau didn't vilify anyone. He put in place a policy which was designed to protect the health of the people of Canada. If that's divisive, well that's a price worth paying to save lives.

I've said it before and I've said it again, 90% of the people who back the Ottawa blockade, wouldn't back it for another cause. If there was a blockade of Washington, D.C. by Black Lives Matter, using the exact same methods, then you would back Trump for breaking the blockade if he used the same tactics as Trudeau.

I didn't back Insulate Britain's methods blocking roads in this country. I don't agree with people blockading cities and disrupting people's lives. Neither do a majority of Canadians, and neither do many Conservative voices in Canada. I've posted all of this before in my discussions with @safcforever.

It was a blockade designed to cause significant disruption to Canada's capital city. Trump wouldn't have tolerated one in DC and Boris wouldn't tolerate one in London.

I appreciate that you back the truckers and their cause, which is 110% your right to do so, but you have deliberately and grossly misrepresented the facts to suit your argument.
 
Last edited:
Frijj said:
That's just plain wrong. I don't expect you'll reply, I've called you out on your views on a range of topics and you never reply. You like to post your spin and call people out but you avoid any actual debate. Anyways:

1. It wasn't just honking horns on trucks. It was a coordinated blockade of Ottawa, that was causing significant disruption to the lives of people living in the city.

2. It doesn't matter if the 'cause' is legitimate, if the means are not. This is just spin to make him sound worse than he is, and you know this. For instance, Insulate Britain is a completely legitimate cause, but if they blockaded London with lorries, and this blockade was being enabled by people transferring them money, then stopping that funding would be a necessary step to ending the blockade.

3. Trudeau didn't vilify anyone. He put in place a policy which was designed to protect the health of the people of Canada. If that's divisive, well that's a price worth paying to save lives.

I've said it before and I've said it again, 90% of the people who back the Ottawa blockade, wouldn't back it for another cause. If there was a blockade of Washington, D.C. by Black Lives Matter, using the exact same methods, then you would back Trump for breaking the blockade if he used the same tactics as Trudeau.

I didn't back Insulate Britain's methods blocking roads in this country. I don't agree with people blockading cities and disrupting people's lives. Neither do a majority of Canadians, and neither do many Conservative voices in Canada. I've posted all of this before in my discussions with @safcforever.

It was a blockade designed to cause significant disruption to Canada's capital city. Trump wouldn't have tolerated one in DC and Boris wouldn't tolerate one in London.

I appreciate that you back the truckers and their cause, which is 110% your right to do so, but you have deliberately and grossly misrepresented the facts to suit your argument.
Click to expand...
Was gonna post similar.
 
safcforever said:
Not what I asked. I asked what are they meant to do to stop people running into the line of fire?

I’ll help you out.

The correct thing to do is

Clear
Cordon
Control

Regardless of the incident happening
Click to expand...
I don't care what you asked. There was one correct answer. You're sitting here reflexively excusing spewing cop dogma to excuse a use of force against innocent people that only became even a potential need after they refused to use force against a mass murderer. The cops were the entire cause of the problem they then sought to solve in an almost unimaginably ironic manner. They weren't managing a bad situation; they were badly managing a bad situation that they caused by their own incompetence. Again, your dogma apparently dictates that they should "clear, cordon, and control" people outside a building while children are being shot inside the building. That's just mind-numbing. They shouldn't have been wasting a second on any of the shit they were doing.

Honestly, at the point at which they were sitting there doing nothing, they probably should have let the parents handle it themselves. Fewer kids would have died. Indeed, the guy who took down the shooter was an off-duty Border Patrol officer using a borrowed shotgun from his barber, not one of the morons standing there cuffing parents while their children got shot.
 
Last edited:
Frijj said:
That's just plain wrong. I don't expect you'll reply, I've called you out on your views on a range of topics and you never reply. You like to post your spin and call people out but you avoid any actual debate. Anyways:

1. It wasn't just honking horns on trucks. It was a coordinated blockade of Ottawa, that was causing significant disruption to the lives of people living in the city.

2. It doesn't matter if the 'cause' is legitimate, if the means are not. This is just spin to make him sound worse than he is, and you know this. For instance, Insulate Britain is a completely legitimate cause, but if they blockaded London with lorries, and this blockade was being enabled by people transferring them money, then stopping that funding would be a necessary step to ending the blockade.

3. Trudeau didn't vilify anyone. He put in place a policy which was designed to protect the health of the people of Canada. If that's divisive, well that's a price worth paying to save lives.

I've said it before and I've said it again, 90% of the people who back the Ottawa blockade, wouldn't back it for another cause. If there was a blockade of Washington, D.C. by Black Lives Matter, using the exact same methods, then you would back Trump for breaking the blockade if he used the same tactics as Trudeau.

I didn't back Insulate Britain's methods blocking roads in this country. I don't agree with people blockading cities and disrupting people's lives. Neither do a majority of Canadians, and neither do many Conservative voices in Canada. I've posted all of this before in my discussions with @safcforever.

It was a blockade designed to cause significant disruption to Canada's capital city. Trump wouldn't have tolerated one in DC and Boris wouldn't tolerate one in London.

I appreciate that you back the truckers and their cause, which is 110% your right to do so, but you have deliberately and grossly misrepresented the facts to suit your argument.
Click to expand...
I don’t wanna get into it right now because I’m mad about the football.

But I just wanna say, my dislike for Trudeau was long before the trucker rally. I have a few issues, he’s the one who can make big decisions and shows this when he wants to flex, but his little effort of turning up to places and taking a knee, then nothing. It’s pathetic. My big one is the clean water issue in reserves, talks a good game about it but then nothing happens. It’s disgusting that a developed nation has so many people without safe water.

I’m not right wing either. I voted NDP, i just have a (maybe irrational) major dislike for Trudeau and if it wasn’t him I’d probably vote liberal
SYB_DC said:
I don't care what you asked. There was one correct answer. You're sitting here reflexively excusing spewing cop dogma to excuse a use of force against innocent people that only became even a potential need after they refused to use force against a mass murderer. The cops were the entire cause of the problem they then sought to solve in an almost unimaginably ironic manner. They weren't managing a bad situation; they were badly managing a bad situation that they caused by their own incompetence. Again, your dogma apparently dictates that they should "clear, cordon, and control" people outside a building while children are being shot inside the building. That's just mind-numbing. They shouldn't have been wasting a second on any of the shit they were doing.

Honestly, at the point at which they were sitting there doing nothing, they probably should have let the parents handle it themselves. Fewer kids would have died. Indeed, the guy who took down the shooter was an off-duty Border Patrol officer using a borrowed shotgun from his barber, not one of the morons standing there cuffing parents while their children got shot.
Click to expand...
Fewer would have died? That’s some crystal ball you have.
I’m certain the headline would have been more deaths. As someone who’s been in a fire fight charging in when emotions are high never ever ends well.

I’ve never once defended the polices actions on how the handled the actual incident. I’ve defended the fact they wouldn’t let parents in to take bullets etc. yes it’s an emotional time and I get they want to do something, but butting into an area where there’s an armed, clearly mad man isn’t the answer
Running*
 
Last edited:
Frijj said:
That's just plain wrong. I don't expect you'll reply, I've called you out on your views on a range of topics and you never reply. You like to post your spin and call people out but you avoid any actual debate. Anyways:

1. It wasn't just honking horns on trucks. It was a coordinated blockade of Ottawa, that was causing significant disruption to the lives of people living in the city.

2. It doesn't matter if the 'cause' is legitimate, if the means are not. This is just spin to make him sound worse than he is, and you know this. For instance, Insulate Britain is a completely legitimate cause, but if they blockaded London with lorries, and this blockade was being enabled by people transferring them money, then stopping that funding would be a necessary step to ending the blockade.

3. Trudeau didn't vilify anyone. He put in place a policy which was designed to protect the health of the people of Canada. If that's divisive, well that's a price worth paying to save lives.

I've said it before and I've said it again, 90% of the people who back the Ottawa blockade, wouldn't back it for another cause. If there was a blockade of Washington, D.C. by Black Lives Matter, using the exact same methods, then you would back Trump for breaking the blockade if he used the same tactics as Trudeau.

I didn't back Insulate Britain's methods blocking roads in this country. I don't agree with people blockading cities and disrupting people's lives. Neither do a majority of Canadians, and neither do many Conservative voices in Canada. I've posted all of this before in my discussions with @safcforever.

It was a blockade designed to cause significant disruption to Canada's capital city. Trump wouldn't have tolerated one in DC and Boris wouldn't tolerate one in London.

I appreciate that you back the truckers and their cause, which is 110% your right to do so, but you have deliberately and grossly misrepresented the facts to suit your argument.
Click to expand...
?
 
Morse said:
Gone in and done what is not just their jobs, but what anyone with morals and courage would have done, badge or no badge.
Click to expand...
That wasn’t the question. Again, they stopped others running into the line of fire, that was the correct thing to do with that specific situation
 

Back
Top