And it’s also due to the lack of clarity coming from officials in Uvalde. Perhaps some day we’ll how long it really took for the shooter to be taken out of action. In the meantime, I have learned what it takes to remove the hinges from a steel door. I hope I. never have to use that information.

One final thought: speaking from personal experience, I can say it takes uncommon courage to rush into a shooting situation. If you have not been in that situation, I would caution against judging others who are in it.

https://redstate.com/jeffc/2020/11/04/republican-mark-robinson-wins-election-and-makes-history-n275011

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/02/north_carolinas_lt_governor_shows_how_to_fight_back_against_a_corrupt_media.html

https://redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2021/04/22/ncs-first-black-lt-gov-mark-robinson-triggers-democrats-during-house-hearing-on-election-laws-n366903

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/lt_gov_mark_robinson_refuses_to_back_down_before_the_lgbtq_crowd.html

He released another video last August that was picked up again a few months ago, which is sure to cement his position on the Left’s hate list – but they are apparently having trouble cancelling him.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/mark-robinson-transgender-speech-viral-video
“Here’s something I’m not supposed to say: Ain’t but two genders,” Robinson proclaimed as he raised two fingers to the church crowd and then reiterated, “Two genders. Ain’t nothing but men and women.”

I love the audience reaction.
The Left is losing black voters with their focus on White Liberal Guilt boutique causes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuNm_ovC9Js

My compliments on your fisking of Dave’s screed.
It would be funny, for the typos and circular logic alone, if it weren’t representative of the arguments (loosely speaking) advanced by the gun-grabbers (sadly including some of my own relatives).

I do want to point out an additional rebuttal of his charge regarding “the lack of actions from conservatives or republicans to prevent school shooting,” which has two points:
(1) When Republicans do propose practical and feasible actions, in Congress or elsewhere, the Democrat National Media somehow never seems interested in reporting them;
(2) When they do get reported, it’s usually to note that the Democrats have refused to engage on enacting them.

To wit:

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/we-do-not-need-more-gun-control-we-need-more-idiot-control-gop-sen-kennedy-says

https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2022/05/31/existing-federal-gun-control-laws-arent-being-fully-enforced-n58905

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/05/31/joe-biden-just-turned-down-the-one-thing-that-could-help-stop-school-shootings-n572906

To paraphrase Glenn Reynolds’ well-known maxim about climate change*: “I’ll believe that gun control is a crisis when the people who tell me we need more gun control actually try to control the criminals with guns.”

And for some more perspective on gun violence per se, rather than concentrating on the regrettable but still highly infrequent school tragedies:

https://instapundit.com/523112/
48 SHOT, NINE DEAD IN CHICAGO OVER THE WEEKEND BUT JOHN LEGEND SAYS IT MIGHT BE RACIST TO TALK ABOUT IT:

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2022/05/31/ten-guns-fired-themselves-and-injured-10-people-in-one-day-in-portland-n1602139

A bracing reminder of WHOSE guns the Democrats want to control: just yours.
https://notthebee.com/article/lets-revisit-this–speech-from-a-pro-gun-law-abiding-citizen

* * *
https://instapundit.com/271760/
“I’LL BELIEVE IT’S A CRISIS WHEN THE PEOPLE WHO KEEP TELLING ME IT’S A CRISIS START ACTING LIKE IT’S A CRISIS”

Also, what Dave wrote is dumb. Less than a week later, an armed mom stopped an attempt of a mass armed shooting. The mom had a handgun and the dead shooter had an AR-15. New red flag laws wouldn’t have mattered in Uvalde, as the shooter was already wanted in a BOLO for murder. Dave would have to explain how an arrest warrant is somehow less action than a “red flag” regulation. Don’t tell me the parents with a criminal record wanted the police to come and confiscate the guns they probably weren’t allowed to have already due to their criminal history. When it is this easy to show how “new laws” wouldn’t have worked, then your new laws suck.

Dear God, there’s so much wrong with this it isn’t even funny. So sit down, because Turtler’s Remedial History and Statistics is now in session.

The cowardly inaction angle is just a distraction came up by conservative gun advocates to distract blames away from the ar-15 and second amendment.

Last I checked, malicious, violent mass murderers need neither an AR-15 or the Second Amendment to carry out their actions. As can be borne out time and time again by examining massacres throughout history, including now. Indeed, the sad thing is that Uvalde SHOULD- by logic- have been one of the safest places in the US from this. And it probably was, at least going by a lot of factors like population.

So trying to blame the Second Amendment, the AR-15, and Right Wingers for this is like trying to blame Cordite for bombing campaigns. Stupid, immature, illogical, and immoral.

Mass school shooting will always happen given our lax gun laws,

What utter fucking horseshit.

For most of America’s history, gun laws were EXPONENTIALLY laxer than they are today, and this holds true for most human societies throughout recorded history. Extremely rigid, legalistic disarmament like that done by the Tokugawa Shogunate and by many supposedly free societies in the West were the exception, not the norm. And yet, “school shootings” and other school massacres proved to be the exception rather than the norm, usually echoed in legend for centuries such as the burning of Shaolin Temple*, the massacre of Gnadenhutten, and so forth.

Now, you might be able to argue that this is mostly due to the fact that schools were so much rarer than they are now. And that is part of the issue…EXCEPT for the fact that the number of schools exploded exponentially throughout the last few centuries- especially in the US, where a system of education was outlined as far back as the Northwest Ordinances, without a corresponding explosion in violence as your theory SHOULD indicate when the new schools met lax gun laws.

You might ALSO be able to argue that firearm lethality was so much lower per shot until recently, and that’d make sense…. except

A: Few dedicated mass murderers have relied entirely on firearms. The Warbands-cum-Deathsquads of American Colonial history on both sides carried muskets and axes to do their work, and Andy Kehoe and the Columbine Duo used explosives as their main arm of decision.

B: This doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Early America WAS quite a violent place per capita- especially on the frontier- but what you see is that civic violence of the kind we see with school massacres actually goes like a U, starting out high early in our history and then dropping vastly- with periodic wobbling due to the ebbs and flows of frontier warfare- before coming to a very low resting point early in the 20th century, and then SHOOTING UP MASSIVELY AGAIN in the second half of the 20th century.

In contrast, weapon and ESPECIALLY firearm lethality goes more like a “perfect stock market” climbing up and up and up- with occasional wobbles and whatnot on how high it is- before more or less stabilizing to where it is now.

Taken together, these indicate that no, “Lax Gun Laws” are not what cause mass school shootings, Which really shouldn’t be much of a surprise to anybody who has studied these things. Indeed, it’s telling that in the turn of the century before last the two large scale mass casualty events at American schools involving gunfire were the 1898 Charleston massacre and the seminal, nightmarish Bath massacre of 1927, and after that no more mass casualty events would happen at an American school until 1959, 29 years later…from a suicide bombing.

Which brings us back to a few important means.

Firstly: Bombs remain the most lethal pound for pound weapon by violent assailants of a school, especially on American soil, for a whole host of reasons (starting with the fact that as bad as shootings are, bombs can do a lot worse by devastating the structure, sending shrapnel everywhere, and so on).

Secondly: “Lax Gun Laws” as an explanatory reason for mass casualty attacks on American schools are horseshit. Indeed, it’s worth noting that in the first half of the 20th century, the Silver Medalist that was dethroned from its place as top casualty peacetime school massacre was the Bremen Massacre of 1913, in Imperial Germany, a country that- while relatively far from as “cucked” or disarmed as Germany today- had far more repressive and intentionally limited gun rights than the US.

And in any case, peacetime mass casualty events at schools skyrocketed in the second half of the 20th century, in the wake of staggering abridgements of the freedom to keep and bear firearms.

If we were ACTUALLY observing the evidence, this should be an indication that “gun culture” isn’t where we should be looking, but at the perpetrators and other dysfunctions in cultures like that of the US.

But you’re apparently not doing that.

* Shaolin is notable because it has gotten so mythologized that responsibility for the act was basically flipped almost 180 degrees from the anti-Ming Chinese rebels that actually torched the place to the incoming Jurchen Qing who stomped the rebels and helped rebuild the temple and teaching facilities.

you can argue that it is a small price to pay to protect America from tyranny

Except I’m going to argue that you have not proven any such thing. Your core premise is flatly wrong. Manmade casualty attacks on schools are not caused by permissive gun laws.

Speaking of which: Even giving this much focus to “School Shootings” as opposed to violent attacks on schools as a whole is wrongheaded and points to a deep seated failure in analysis. It’s akin to looking for deaths by laser shot in early 18th century Europe, not finding any, and concluding that Napoleonic Europe was vastly more peaceful than today.

Guns are, remain, and should be seen as, tools. Highly efficient tools, it is true. Tools specifically meant to maim and kill living things, it is true. But still ultimately tools in the hands of the malcontent, whose behavior (both in terms of motive and in the weaknesses they exploited to launch the attack) should be the real locus of attack.

Especially when you realize that while guns are tools specialized to maim and kill, bombs are tools specialized to DESTROY. And on the grand scale of lethality, the latter will always have more lethal potential pound for pound than guns, precisely because something capable of blasting a dent in the floor will be capable of blasting you apart.

but until the conservatives are willing to take substantial measures to prevent school shooting democrats will always use the death of children to ban guns, and they should as they are the party who plays to win so why would they not use such a big advantage.

This is stupidity on stilts.

We’ve been taking “substantial measures” to prevent gun violence for most of the 20th century, hence the massive abridgement in civilian ownership of weapons- ESPECIALLY the kind of military peer weapons that the Second Amendment was meant to cover (had the Second been interpreted in the sense it was written, the famous Pepsi Harriet Jet could have been entirely legal and ownership of large armed ships on par with the likes of early 20th century Commerce Raiders would be quite mundane).

And what have we gotten for our troubles?

Steady increases in shooting deaths, both at schools and elsewhere, as our culture and society degenerate into violence and lawlessness.

Insanity isn’t doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results, but it is a pretty damn good symptom of delusion and disconnection from reality.

Texas is red so you can’t blame the lack of school security on the dems

Yeah, we can. And if you don’t understand why, please peruse the history of school shooting clubs in the 19th and early 20th century in the US and the assorted laws that quashed them. Again, in spite of occurring at a time when school violence in the US was rare and overwhelmingly small scale.

The point isn’t ar-15 or mental health

You were the one who tried to make this about the AR-15. Own it.

but the lack of actions from conservatives or republicans to prevent school shooting

Ah yes, “DO SOMETHING” Syndrome. The urge to have the government or other political actors do something- Literally Anything- in order to deal with X, even if there is no clear evidence that a given course of action would actually help with X.

If I have to explain what a freaking blight this kind of “logic” has been to political cultures in general and American political culture in particular, you must not have been paying attention to such wonders of Bipartisan attempts at security such as the TSA, who I must concede may have more successes than we assume due to the nature of classified counter-terror operations and the desire to maintain operative intelligence, but who probably do not have much.

You start from a premise and then demand action, apparently never stopping to do enough research to realize that your premise is not only wrong, but BLINDINGLY so.

which is something conservatives have an incentive to to prevent democratic from using school shootings to ban guns.

Sure, we have incentive to prevent school shootings for obvious reasons, and on more fundamental levels than Leftist gun grabbing. After all, a lot of attacks on schools never feature guns but still claim too many lives.

But I am the son of a nurse, and one of the medical maxims I learned is this:

PROPER TREATMENT REQUIRES PROPER DIAGNOSIS.

And it’s PARTICULARLY ironic in your case, where you are blaming School Attacks on “Lax Gun Laws” and demanding the GOP spring to action under the threat of…the left banning guns.

Yeah, really convincing appeal there. We must ban guns in order to pre-empt the Left banning guns even harder. In spite of how this problem has been gestating over the course of more than half a century and how increasingly strict gun grabbing has not actually helped much.

Lazy Conservatives sit on their asses doing nothing to prevent the country from being taken by the democrats is the problem and just hope for the best. They would complain about voter fraud after an election is over but nothing proactively to prevent voter fraud from happening in the first place before the election. They would bring up “we should better secure our schools” to counter the call for gun ban in the event of school shootings then just don’t do nothing when the heat has cool off until the next horrific shooting happening again….

This is as rich as it is enraging.

YOU HAVE NO JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER to call others “Lazy Conservatives” when you will not do SUCH BASIC issues as HISTORICAL OR LEGAL RESEARCH on this issue.

What’s stopping republicans from arming robb elementary to the teeth if that was the way republicans believed schools should be secured?

At present? Leftist laws on gun management and so on.

And frankly schools WERE more secure at times when they were more heavily armed. I don’t want to go too hard onto say “School Massacres were less common earlier because schools were more heavily armed” (though I think that is clearly A Cause, even if not the only or most important one) but the correlation alone should tell us that “Lax Gun Laws” aren’t the heart of this problem and never have been.

Moreover, let’s “Psirkale Back” to your “distraction.” As if Law Enforcement inaction, incompetence, or cowardice was only important for school shootings (which it clearly is, as the Cowards of Broward County PD showed) rather than an important problem that runs through society, much as can be seen from things like the Ferguson Effect.

I agree. Heck, I suppose those “officials” might not even exist.

I am not expecting the straight skinny from PBS, The Hill and NBCNews.

Thanks for the link.

“NBC News” doesn’t inspire confidence in and of itself. And “two senior federal law enforcement officials” says almost nothing. Two anonymous sources who not only are not identified by name (why?) but are only identified only in the most general of ways. They are federal and not state and not local. Are they investigators? Did they do interviews? Were they on the scene? From whom did they get the report? Someone who was on the scene? Someone who spoke to someone who spoke to someone who spoke to someone? Were these feds in Texas or in DC or somewhere else? Did they hear a rumor? In other words, we know very little about the source of the information and we cannot evaluate its validity. That often happens when the sources are not particularly impressive in terms of having access to the most reliable information.

You wrote “we’ve heard assertions that Border Patrol officers had equipment to breach the door and were told to hold back. I remember reading it myself. And yet just now, in a fairly lengthy search, I can’t find the source. Was it Border Patrol agents themselves? Someone else? I’d like to know, if anyone can locate it.”

FWIW, NBC News said it was ” two senior federal law enforcement officials.” https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-agents-entered-uvalde-school-kill-gunman-local-police-initiall-rcna30941

I posted this link early on Saturday AM. https://www.thenewneo.com/2022/05/27/more-information-emerges-on-the-uvalde-school-mass-murder-and-the-police-response-or-lack-thereof/#comment-2625413