Rather than vowing to make sure Sandy Hook wouldn't happen again....

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gardens35

Well-known member
I watched the video, censored out the children screaming. The way the responding officers reacted is indefensible. The know they’re in an elementary school, they have to act right away. And the most despicable thing is the officer who takes time to use hand sanitizer while the issue is still at hand. How mental are you to think about using hand sanitizer at a time like that?

Watch Officer HAND SANITIZER for the entirety of the video. It gets "better", in a bad way.
 

MyNameIsDoug?

Well-known member
The police response to the Texas child killer is another reason why the 2nd amendment may be the most important amendment of the Constitution. It clearly shows that individuals, family's and communities are responsible for their own protection. The police can not be relied upon.

Back the blue! Blue lives matter! Thin blue line!
 

lotr10

Well-known member
Back the blue! Blue lives matter! Thin blue line!
I suspect that all across the US police officers are disgusted at how law enforcement behaved in Texas on that terrible day. But it's wrong to negatively paint all law enforcement because of the actions of those in Uvalde.
 

MyNameIsDoug?

Well-known member
I suspect that all across the US police officers are disgusted at how law enforcement behaved in Texas on that terrible day. But it's wrong to negatively paint all law enforcement because of the actions of those in Uvalde.
You said the police can't be relied upon. Seems like a broad sweep of a statement.
 

lotr10

Well-known member
You said the police can't be relied upon. Seems like a broad sweep of a statement.
It is a broad statement and is based on the fact that the SCOTUS has ruled that the police are not required to protect American citizens.


That translates to the simple fact that Americans can't rely on the police to protect them in the event of a crime. So thank goodness the 2nd amendment provides us with a constitutional guarantee that we can arm ourselves for protection.

I was responding to what I assumed was you being sarcastic about the police. IMO most police officers are brave and committed professionals who would "serve & protect" if the situation warranted. However, they are not required to do this (which is baffling to me but that's another discussion) by order of the highest court in the land.
 

MyNameIsDoug?

Well-known member
It is a broad statement and is based on the fact that the SCOTUS has ruled that the police are not required to protect American citizens.


That translates to the simple fact that Americans can't rely on the police to protect them in the event of a crime. So thank goodness the 2nd amendment provides us with a constitutional guarantee that we can arm ourselves for protection.

I was responding to what I assumed was you being sarcastic about the police. IMO most police officers are brave and committed professionals who would "serve & protect" if the situation warranted. However, they are not required to do this (which is baffling to me but that's another discussion) by order of the highest court in the land.
Shouldn't make assumptions
 

Mean Machine

Well-known member
Well yeah, they stood around in the hall way, seemingly too afraid to risk their own lives to save some kids. Plus, pretty much common these days that all doors to a school are locked. The only way in is to get buzzed in from the office.
So the whole "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" is BS! A bunch of cowards with guns apparently can't stop the bad guy. ?‍♂️
 

Hammerdrill

Well-known member
So the whole "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" is BS! A bunch of cowards with guns apparently can't stop the bad guy. ?‍♂️
In this instance, locked doors would have stopped him. But yeah, the idea of relying on the police to protect you has never made sense.
 

Mean Machine

Well-known member
If a bad guy kicks in your door right now, will the police respond in time to save you?
No, I better have 100 guns to protect myself. And yet here I am just short of 60 years old and nobody has kicked in my door yet. Perhaps you gun freaks just use fear to justify the need to have 100 guns? How many times has a bad guy kicked in your door?
 

frecriss

Well-known member
No, I better have 100 guns to protect myself. And yet here I am just short of 60 years old and nobody has kicked in my door yet. Perhaps you gun freaks just use fear to justify the need to have 100 guns? How many times has a bad guy kicked in your door?
The same amount of times I have used my car insurance or as many times I have collected a social security check that I have been paying into since 1984...
 

Mean Machine

Well-known member
The same amount of times I have used my car insurance or as many times I have collected a social security check that I have been paying into since 1984...
OK. Maybe some day that bad guy will come along. In the meantime make sure you keep those guns nice and shiny. I assume you sleep with them in bed?
 

Hammerdrill

Well-known member
No, I better have 100 guns to protect myself. And yet here I am just short of 60 years old and nobody has kicked in my door yet. Perhaps you gun freaks just use fear to justify the need to have 100 guns? How many times has a bad guy kicked in your door?
You have that backwards. It is those who don’t have guns who should have fear, not those of us who have guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
.
Top