Trump's Ideas on Stopping School Shootings

[1959_60]

Donald Trumps thoughts on ending mass shootings in schools.

1/. Arm teachers. (Would they become potential targets to be overcome and their weapon taken?)

2/. More background checks on peoples mental health (This begs the question, why did he repeal Obama's law which did precisely this?)

Trump received $31 million in election funding from the NRA, so there is no way he will suggest anything that would upset them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43149694

[oldcolner]

Arming teachers would be a great move, even more guns sold for the NRA and in schools for kids to get their hands on if a teacher annoys them. Why not arm the students too. Then they could shoot the President.
The man is always coming up with his solutions in knee jerk fashion. I suppose you could say he shoots from the hip. He also does regular U turns as he realises his first effort doesn’t make sense and as he makes everything wonderful. Just look at Syria since he pulled out.

[sinkov]

We do things much better over here, after hundreds of our young men and women have gone abroad to fight for ISIS, we allow these fully trained up jihadist traitors back into the country. But no worries, unlike the Donald we have the answer, we put armed police on the streets.

[1959_60]

Totally different subject Sinkov.

USA 11,000 gun deaths per annum.

UK 26 gun deaths per annum.

We do gun control much better over here.

[The Bedlington Terrier]

He is so fcuking stupid and lacking in empathy that he had to carry crib notes into a face to face meeting with grieving parents and students...

Attachment 8648

[oldcolner]

BT
So he has to be reminded he has heard them. LOL

[The Bedlington Terrier]

BT
So he has to be reminded he has heard them. LOL

Not funny though is it OC? Pathetic really.

[sinkov]

Totally different subject Sinkov.

USA 11,000 gun deaths per annum.

UK 26 gun deaths per annum.

We do gun control much better over here.

The subject I was commenting 59/60 on was the arrogant assumption that we do things better than the Yanks in this country. The situation regarding gun control is totally different over here, there is no history of gun ownership in the UK, no one believes he has a right to own one, or the need to own one. Any comparison between the two countries is fatuous.

And on the subject of Jihadist traitors, do you seriously think Trump, fool that he may be, would have them back in the good old US of A ? Of course not, he's not that stupid, how they must laugh at us in America.

[1959_60]

The subject I was commenting 59/60 on was the arrogant assumption that we do things better than the Yanks in this country. The situation regarding gun control is totally different over here, there is no history of gun ownership in the UK, no one believes he has a right to own one, or the need to own one. Any comparison between the two countries is fatuous.

And on the subject of Jihadist traitors, do you seriously think Trump, fool that he may be, would have them back in the good old US of A ? Of course not, he's not that stupid, how they must laugh at us in America.

Sinkov, until around 100 years ago the gun laws in the US and UK were very similar.

We chose to introduce legislation to limit ownership - America chose to allow the masses to continue to own them.

The link is a long but interesting read.

https://misesuk.org/2014/12/22/the-b...s-for-defence/

[sinkov]

It doesn't negate my basic point though 59/60, that in this country the vast majority of citizens do not feel the need to be armed, nor do they insist on the right to be armed, thus legislating to control gun ownership is not problematical. I've no idea on the actual numbers, but in the USA there are millions who insist upon retaining their legal right to be armed, so the problem any US government faces bears no comparison to the situation in this country. And as the problem in the USA stretches back to at least the previous century, anyone trying to pin the blame on Trump for the situation is manifestly as many sandwiches short of a picnic as the Donald himself.

This is also interesting from your link,

"In 2008, the United States Supreme Court heard District of Columbia v Heller. This case came about because Washington DC had banned handguns to virtually all its residents, except of course cops and robbers, and the few people who did have permission [sic] to keep a gun at home had to keep it dismantled and unserviceable, in which case it could not be used in the event of a home invasion or police raid. This turned DC into the murder capital of the United States: statistically the most dangerous place on Earth outside of some war zones. Mr Heller sought to overturn DC’s handgun ban and succeeded because the Supreme Court held that the city’s law infringed Heller’s Second-Amendment rights. The court recognized the right to keep and bear arms as an individual one. DC’s problem was that while the Constitution did not prevent them setting qualifications or taxes on the right, their law prevented the exercise of it altogether, and that was unconstitutional. The outcome was that DC had to revise its laws and create a carry permit law—thus following many other states in the past twenty years—so that its citizens could be armed for their defence as necessary. The increase in armed citizens, real or imagined, is certainly reflected in the downward trend of crime statistics in America."