TexasCHLforum.com

(Note: cannot embed from my phone - someone else please do)

Which Newtown anniversary ad is best?

This one came out first
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then this one
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Must have volume on! Watched them first with no sound on and couldn't figure out why there were two of the same videos. Then turned sound on. The second one (NRA? version), however, was exactly what I was thinking that rational people should take away from Newtown. Why are some people so opposed to responsible people defending themselves and helping to prevent tragedies??

Sport Coach wrote:Why are some people so opposed to responsible people defending themselves and helping to prevent tragedies??

I believe that it due to the brainwashing of the people for so many years.

Don't get me wrong: 911 is a great idea.
How many people have been conditioned to "Call 911" when faced with an assault or attack?
How many have been conditioned to "draw your pistol" and call 911 when you are able to do it safely?

The first, antigun one:
[youtube][/youtube]

The second, progun one:
[youtube][/youtube]

My brother in law said today on facebook that people who believe that more guns are the answer to Sandy Hook are ignorant, unAmerican and selfish.

I think he was writing about me.

Who is calling for "more guns"? Just take the existing pool of 300 million guns and millions of law-abiding gun owners and allow them to position themselves and their guns to be effective deterrents. "More guns" is not nearly as important as less restriction on law-abiding citizens and especially fewer (preferably zero) "gun-free zones".

The shooting in Colorado this week is perfect example. Entire incident lasted less than 90 seconds and only the deranged gunman is dead because a GOOD GUY with a gun was there in the school to stop him. Now just imagine if the targeted teacher had been allowed to carry and had done so. Perhaps the whole incident lasts less than 30 seconds and the innocent female student doesn't need reconstructive facial surgery because the teacher stops the threat before the SRO can run toward the sound if gun fire.

The second ad would be better if, after saying it's time to stop being silent, we hear one loud BANG and they cut to a stereotypical schoolmarm holding a smoking six gun standing over the bad guy collapsed on the floor.

"It's nice to see how well the system worked. It's a remarkable improvement from before. This could have been much, much worse," Hickenlooper said.

After the Aurora, Colo., theater shootings and the Newtown, Conn., school shootings, Colorado's Democrat-led legislature this year implemented gun control measures that limited the size of ammunition magazines and instituted universal background checks. Colorado also appropriated more than $20 million for mental health hotlines and local crisis centers.

The measures were intended to address violence associated with so-called assault rifles, not shotguns that are widely owned for hunting and sport.
(my emphasis)
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/12/cl ... 98147.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hickenlooper acknowledged the latest shooting raised again questions about guns and violence. (my emphasis) But he noted that Pierson "didn't seem to exhibit any signs of mental illness," and he cautioned that the investigation was in its early stages.

Someone explain to me the reasoning behind the “lockdown”. Has anyone in authority thought this thing through? So you “lockdown” the school with the shooter inside and the shooter can’t get away. Neither can the students. It seems to me the only way this would do any good is if all interior doors were solid doors with no glass and able to stop a 30.06 FMJ.

VoiceofReason wrote: Someone explain to me the reasoning behind the “lockdown”. Has anyone in authority thought this thing through? So you “lockdown” the school with the shooter inside and the shooter can’t get away. Neither can the students. It seems to me the only way this would do any good is if all interior doors were solid doors with no glass and able to stop a 30.06 FMJ.

Thank you.

I thought it was just me that had difficulty with this logic.

Inasmuch as I've been asked, I find both ads to be in poor taste.

VoiceofReason wrote:Someone explain to me the reasoning behind the “lockdown”. Has anyone in authority thought this thing through? So you “lockdown” the school with the shooter inside and the shooter can’t get away. Neither can the students. It seems to me the only way this would do any good is if all interior doors were solid doors with no glass and able to stop a 30.06 FMJ.

The purpose of a lockdown: 1) Demonstrate authority over the sheeple --a smaller version of Boston; 2) condition the sheeple to be obedient; 3) dramatize and exaggerate the event to increase the propaganda value; and 4) keep the sheeple in fear while waiting to be "rescued" by their benevolent government.

AndyC wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:Think like a member of an entry-team - is your job easier if there are hundreds of students running around chaotically or if the doors are all closed and corridors empty?

It's even easier, and safer for everyone, if the students can evac same as a fire.

Tic Tac wrote:

AndyC wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:Think like a member of an entry-team - is your job easier if there are hundreds of students running around chaotically or if the doors are all closed and corridors empty?

It's even easier, and safer for everyone, if the students can evac same as a fire.

I don’t know how I feel about it.

Andy have the schools updated with solid doors that can be locked from inside the school room?

Without that it seems to me they would just be providing bunches of captive targets for the shooter. On the other hand if they tried to evacuate, the halls would be so full, the shooter couldn’t miss.

Does anyone know if, during “lockdown”, someone is stationed at each door to allow only law enforcement in?

I don’t think I am going to be able to arrive at any sensible opinion on this.