“To protect and serve...but only when the odds are in my favor, and it won’t interrupt my planned retirement.”

Too fucking bad. “To serve and protect.” He knew there were kids getting killed in there. He also knew he was likely the only armed person in the area. He signed up for this. Even if it was 10% he stops the killer and 90% he dies, fucking go in. He’s trained, the kids not.

True. But the policy of engaging an active shooter as quickly as possible is the new standard. The theory is that it breaks the shooters rhythm and forces him to pull focus from the people he is targeting. They have training for how to engage an active shooter without putting yourself in harms way. From what the…

That is false. Ever since Columbine, when there is an active shooter situation they go in immediately. They learned the hard way that quick action is the only to stop these things.

A 15 year old boy died in the shooting by holding the door closed while the shooter fired into the door. The young man was holding the door closed to stop the shooter from entering the room and killing a group of students who hid there. A 15 year old boy willingly gave up his own life to save others.

I think you’re missing the point. It wasn’t me. It wasn’t you. It was this dude. This dude who signed up knowing the risks of the position and knowing that if this were to happen, he’d be expected to act - because he’d be the only one who could. Instead, he collected that cushy paycheck and when the cards were down,…

I get that he’s human, and I have no idea how I would behave in his situation. But 3 unarmed teachers died protecting students.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Well, unless the good guy is close to retirement and wants to head to Cabo.”

This guy was pathetic. There’s absolutely no excuse for him to hang around outside while children are being murdered. He’s the only person there with the ability to protect those kids, and he shit the bed. He’s a coward and there’s simply no other way around it. If you’re not prepared to die at any given moment you…

An easy one that should concern everyone is how few felons attempting to buy firearms illegally get prosecuted. In 2010 there were nearly 80,000 individuals blocked from purchasing a firearm because they failed their background check. Of those 44 were prosecuted. Subsequent years have had similar numbers.

Yep. When your starting point is “Second Amendment rights are indefensible and you’re morally bankrupt if you believe anything other than ‘ban all guns now’”, there’s really nothing further to discuss. You have placed the goal posts on the Moon.

even if it does introduce the potential for bans and confiscations down the road,

It really isn’t as simple as you are talking about, partly because there is really very little practical difference between the guns being used to commit these acts and their less objectionable The guns in the photo are basically identical in capability so banning the scary looking one doesn’t save lives.

So no modern hunting rifles? I honestly can’t tell what you mean because I’ve seen about 50% of commenters clearly are talking about fully automatic weapons when they say semi-automatic. They literally don’t know.

You obviously watched something far different than I did. All I saw were immature children preening and pandering to the crowd armed with anti-gun talking points. CNN chose a forum that simply provided these kids and certain enablers a chance to wave a bloody shirt at anyone expressing law abiding gun rights…

Thanks for this Patrick, proponents of gun control really need to do research like this to see why a lot of the proposed legislation is in fact stupid. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t measures that can be taken that are smart but you have to be educated in the subject at hand first before you can make that…

The usual reason they don’t want a registry is because of what happened with the Canadian Firearms Registry. Their government used that list against their citizenry to confiscate weapons once they decided to ban certain models of rifle.

All I have been hearing from people for the past week is that they want to give up their 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights in order to “be safe”. Good to know some people have zero clue why we have the rights that we do. I for one believe in less government control over us but hey, I guess I just against a future…

As a gun owner I don’t support an ‘assault rifle’ ban for pretty much the reasons noted above. The term assault rifle is kind of an arbitrary category and we know what owners and manufacturers will do: Find the loopholes, changes just enough to get past the law, put a new model number on it, and move on. You will…

I mean, you can use words like “absolutely” if you want, but either you don’t know what the word means, or you’re trying to be petulant.