So the kid in the Colorado school stopped shooting after only two minutes. Why? Because there was an armed guard in the school who backed him in a corner. Imagine that. When good guys have guns, they stop bad guys.
And why isn't this news worthy? Because he wasn't carrying a semiautomatic weapon. And try as you may you can't deny that the kid was a socialist.
Can neither agree nor deny that the kid was a socialist as you provide absolutely no evidence either way.
Except at Columbine where there was armed security and it didn't stop anything.
Oh you mean the policeman who wasn't wearing his glasses and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn?
Your assertion is that "good guy" + "gun" = safe school.
I am showing that this formula is inadequate.
I understand what you are trying to say, however the idea that a gun free zone is safer than any other place is ludicrous. In fact it's exactly the opposite.
Using the most extreme situation to illustrate your point negates the fact that in most cases school shootings are not well thought out and elaborate schemes to commit mass murder like that of the Columbine massacre.
In the grand scheme Harris and Klebold really had more terrible designs than what they ultimately carried out. Their grander plan was to detonate propane bombs to blow up the entire school and drive the body count into the hundreds.
The data shows that these kids were planning this as early as 1997, and despite the overwhelming evidence Jefferson county officials possessed in the months previous to the attack, they still did nothing. And no shooting since has been comparable to the planning and organizing that went into that incident.
It's like comparing the shoe bomber to the 9/11 attacks.
The report says the shooter went into the school to shoot a particular person who had earlier kicked the shooter off the debate team. That person escaped unharmed, but the shooter somehow accidentally shot someone else before pulling the gun on himself.
What's interesting is that the Denver Post originally reported that the kid was a "very opinionated socialist" according to classmates, and later erased the word socialist. Their reason?
"We decided not to have another student apply a label to the shooter -- a label the student likely didn't even understand"
Plus it didn't fit the mainstream medias narrative of crazy violent people being typically right wing.
He was a socialist and very vocal about it:
Quite a few of the shooters have been on the far left...the Tucson shooter, the Virginia Tech shooter, the Aurora shooter, and now this guy. The Columbine shooters both came from very liberal families.
Is there anyone that really believes insanity runs along political party lines?
Well liberalism isn't a party - it is a disease http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YiR9idbw5c
Some liberals say that these tragedies are often caused by extremist gun nuts who are conservative, so yeah, I think some people believe that insanity does run along political lines. I believe, though I might be wrong, that these examples illustrate a greater reality, that murderers reside in all ends of the political spectrum.
While most "extremist gun nuts" probably do classify themselves as conservative, I would take great exception to the idea that they are the ones losing it and becoming common killers.
The typical "gun nut", seems to me, is far more likely to be a quiet collector that would not harm anyone for anything. Of course, I don't see that owning a gun or two makes one an "extremist gun nut" in the first place; that is a liberal label from someone with an agenda, an axe to grind, and that is more interested in raising emotions than in providing information.
And if I was polite or PC I wouldn't but I'm not (always) polite and never PC. :-)
“'The Anarchist Cookbook' was written by William Powell, another liberal. Bill Ayers, a far left Marxist, is an unabashed and unapologetic terrorist to this day.
Sounds like they have healthy minds. I expect every father hopes their kids can aspire to such goals!
I heard Ayers actually teaches at a school these days.
I'm curious, why when a crazy Christian goes on a shooting spree in Norway, he wasn't a real Christian... yet a crazy socialist is now representative of every socialist ever?
Well you see, although I must point out that nobody has made that accusation today, I would say that it is clearly against Christian doctrine to go on murdering sprees. Where as with socialism it is part of the curriculum to rid society of undesirables.
But don't take it from me. Let's have a listen to what world renowned Fabian Socialist George Barnard Shaw had to say about it...
Exactly, authentic Christianity does not espouse such heinous and immoral acts! If you were really curious there is the answer which you could have easily found if you were really curious! If someone were not just really curious why would they want to equate the two?
Yep, there are no Christians Socialists, of course.
The Bible isn’t an economics textbook, but I and many other Christians believe its underlying principles are most consistent with the free economy, not socialism and certainly not with Marxist socialism so throwing around labels is meaningless unless you define the labels. Even so called Christian Socialists don't ascribe to the philosophy of secular socialists.
Yes, because Jesus never ever said to give up all your worldly possessions, free yourself from material desires and concerns, feed the poor, and obey the laws of the land no matter what they are.
That would just be silly.
You never fail to impress us with your total ignorance - Jesus never told everyone to give up all their worldly possessions and if you had studied scripture you'd know he said that to one person because Jesus knew he was so attached to his worldly possessions they were more important to him than following his savior. Jesus never said to free yourself from material desires either, he just said not to put the material above the spiritual. What he said was "Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”
All people like Zelkiiro know how to do is twist anything that is said to try and fit it into their sick view without any intellectual honesty. That's what happens when you fry your mind with Wikipedia speak and propaganda Youtube videos instead of actually studying to be approved. Jesus certainly never said to give your rights and your freedom over to the state which is what Z thinks is utopia but has been proven throughout history to be evil and a total failure. His idea of feeding the poor is to make everyone poor and equally miserable.
Did you just excuse a claim of a shooter being representative of all Socialists by linking a clip of another person you claim is also representative of all Socialists?
I mean if that's how you think, that's on you. Just pointing it out.
No, the kid was a crazy homicidal kid, and nothing more. He had no status in the socialist arena, therefore does not represent socialists. Which is why I pointed out a prominent socialist monster, to illustrate the fact that followers like Karl Pierson get their cues from their heroes. Namely left wing lunatics like William Powell, Saul Alynski, George Shaw, Bill Ayers, etc...
Christians also, adjust their behavior according to the influence of their leaders. However they are typically nonviolent people like Joel Olstene, Billy Graham, The Pope, Pat Robertson, etc...
You forgot Jesus. Because frankly, If I had to adjust my behavior to that of Joel Olstene, Billy Graham and particularly Pat Robertson, I'd become violent fairly rapidly.
I kinda like this Pope Francis though.
But yeah, still think Christians should be led by Christ. Maybe that's where our misunderstandings lie?
Ah yes, the pretended violent rhetoric of modern day Christians versus the actual violent rhetoric of the left. liberal logic never ceases to amaze me. Because listening to Joel Osteen really gets people to want to strap bombs to their chests.
By the way following Jesus of course, is a given for any Christian.
Actually, it might not make me want to blow others up, but it would likely make me want to blow myself up... especially if I thought I was following his leadership. But hey, if you want to believe that financial success is a reward from God for living a good life, once again... have at it.
If following Jesus was what any Christian did, then I don't think we'd be having this conversation. I think Jesus would be more concerned about the dead and the families than advancing a political viewpoint using coffins as soap-boxes. But that's just my understanding of him.
Well I don't think we will ever stop seeing liberals standing on coffins when the opportunity comes for the power grab.
So if you can't beat 'em, join 'em?
What's the difference again?
If you dislike their behavior so much, why are you emulating it?
So according to you, applauding a school for allowing armed security personnel to protect innocents from crazies is standing on graves.
Lets think about this for a moment. What they did actually saved lives, and protected the rights of law abiding citizens from power grabbing liberals. Again you are comparing apples to oranges.
When you brought Columbine into the conversation we began to delve into the subject of dead children. You went straight to Columbine when the subject of guns in schools came up. Therefore you are the one who is dancing on their graves not me.
I never said anything about Columbine.
And you never answered my question... Unless "I know you are but what am I." is your answer. I was just curious that if you abhor the tactics of the left, why you are so eager to use them?
It's a simple question really. But if you don't want to answer it, just say so. Please don't keep repeating "Well they're doing it." That's just a cop-out.
My mistake it wasn't you. But I believe you are projecting just a tad. I never said, "Well they're doing it." I'm not even sure what specifically you are talking about.
If you think that applauding a school for stopping a murder spree in under 80 seconds is anything near what the liberals do to push anti gun legislation then let me be the first to tell you that this is a grave mischaracterization. The two aren't even in the same ball park.
However it is a common liberal tactic to relentlessly hold the enemy to their own book of standards according to the rules for radicals. Of course when the radical liberal has no standards it is very easy to point out the faults of others.
That's nice dear.
However, I said that you were standing on a coffin to make a political point, that Jesus wouldn't do it... and then you said something about liberals doing it.
So then I asked if it was fine to do it, since you think they are.
You never really answered that.
I'm actually a moderate. If it makes you feel better to label me a liberal so that you can dismiss my opinion, have at it. But all the cartoons in the world won't stop the fact that you are using a kid's death to try to further a political agenda. If you are OK with that, cool. But rationalizing that liberals do it so it's cool for you to is just a way to make yourself OK with it.
Liberal, moderate, conservative, Christian, atheist, Socialist, whatever... there should be a moral compass. In my opinion, using a dead teenager to prove a point is reprehensible. The fact that someone else is doing it means nothing to me. Just because they wallow in shit doesn't mean I have to.
Well that is all fine and dandy but you completely missed my point. I am not standing on any dead kids grave. And last time I checked Jesus didn't exonerate murderers. And once again you put words in my mouth. I never called you a liberal.
You do realize that radical Muslims occupy the far right, right?
You have to keep your crazies straight. The left wing has anarchists and communists at the far end, and the right wing has fascists and religious fundamentalists on their far end.
A straw man. No one made any such argument.
by IzzyM4 years ago
Dear God, what is the matter with America?Another school shooting. High death toll. Few days before Christmas. Connecticut.http://abcnews.go.com/US/27-people-dead … Mtxy2_tRGY
by Jimbo'daNimbo4 years ago
ABC is having to apologize for stating Colorado shooter was a Tea Party member.Wonderful generalization with no evidence from the mainstream press once again.You would think they would have learned from the past that a...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.