Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

JEB! On Oregon Mass Shootings - "Stuff Happens"

LurkerPoster
LurkerPoster
Oct 9, 2015
2:25am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote
Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99I know I'd feel a helluva lot safer with an trained and armed guard in my school than without one.


And why is that? Because we need them! There's too many guns in this country and too many lunatics who get their hands on guns very easily. Does the UK need armed guards at schools? Do European countries need armed guards at school? No they don't but we remain to call ourselves the "land of the free". Don't you see the irony?


Guess Lurker has never experienced a race riot at his school. We have one back in the '70's and had armed officers for about 3 years as there were threats of armed violence against students.

Lurker also forgets how many bombings Europe has had over the years compared to the US.

FYI, while the campus allows guns, several buildings are a gun free zone. Guess that sign didn't protect the students. Maybe they should get a bigger sign or rip it down.


Talking about being uninformed!! Want to compare the number of innocent victims because of that "large number of bombings in Europe" during the last 10 years with the number of innocent victims of random gun violence in the USA? Want to make a bet? I'll give you an idea.......those numbers aren't even in the same ball park.
LurkerPoster
LurkerPoster
Oct 9, 2015
2:33am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme We live in a violent world.


Small correction here. We live in a violent country. And at least part of our population is unwilling to change that because they are too in love with their guns. In Japan, 5 year old children can ride the subway without guidance and without risk of something horrible happening. There are numerous countries around the world where the posession of guns is illegal with far lower crime rates than ours. Our logic: we need more guns to protect ourselves from gun violence........duhhhh

jatki
jatki
Oct 9, 2015
2:36am
Block User
It's official, Marcis and Lurker are the same. I haven't the faintest what marcis poster is trying to say here, let alone the point.
LurkerPoster
LurkerPoster
Oct 9, 2015
2:37am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: CowboyKell
Quote
Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99I know I'd feel a helluva lot safer with an trained and armed guard in my school than without one.


And why is that? Because we need them! There's too many guns in this country and too many lunatics who get their hands on guns very easily. Does the UK need armed guards at schools? Do European countries need armed guards at school? No they don't but we remain to call ourselves the "land of the free". Don't you see the irony?


Uh...you wanna revise this statement with some real facts? As a former part time resident of Paris and Geneva I can tell you that almost every public school in Europe and all of the private schools have fully armed police or private security presence.


That's absolutely not true! Not even close. So no, I will not revise that statement because you are telling complete and utter BS here.


LurkerPoster
LurkerPoster
Oct 9, 2015
3:00am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99
It's official, Marcis and Lurker are the same. I haven't the faintest what marcis poster is trying to say here, let alone the point.


If you want to believe we're the same go right ahead. How does it feel to be a parrot? This post just shows you have a lower IQ than a goldfish.

alanleroyII
alanleroyII
Oct 9, 2015
3:17am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99
... however it wouldn't bother tremendously to see a few of the costumes be ,uh, umm, not be allowed? Did I just say that?

You know on the surface it seems benign....they ban some people in costumes and it helps downtown Vegas. That's how it starts. We lose our rights a tiny bit at a time...they keep chipping away until eventually someone in power doesn't like the way you look or dress or what you're saying and you're tossed in jail. I'd rather go in the other direction where the Government has less control over what I say or how I dress.

And I am especially offended by people who take their obnoxious stinky little brats to the Fremont street party at night.
Don
Don
Oct 9, 2015
3:18am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
This post just shows you have a lower IQ than a goldfish.

Ahh, . . .LurkerPoster said something nice about someone: Goldfish
Boilerman
Boilerman
Oct 9, 2015
4:57am
Block User
Our founding fathers certainly never allowed folks to walk around naked, so they believed that those wishing to be naked in public, and those not wishing to see folks naked in public both had rights. The rights of the sane supersede the nuts.


Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99
... however it wouldn't bother tremendously to see a few of the costumes be ,uh, umm, not be allowed? Did I just say that?

You know on the surface it seems benign....they ban some people in costumes and it helps downtown Vegas. That's how it starts. We lose our rights a tiny bit at a time...they keep chipping away until eventually someone in power doesn't like the way you look or dress or what you're saying and you're tossed in jail. I'd rather go in the other direction where the Government has less control over what I say or how I dress.

And I am especially offended by people who take their obnoxious stinky little brats to the Fremont street party at night.


alanleroyII
alanleroyII
Oct 9, 2015
5:08am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Our founding fathers certainly never allowed folks to walk around naked, so they believed that those wishing to be naked in public, and those not wishing to see folks naked in public both had rights. The rights of the sane supersede the nuts.

Just another completely irrelevant point. You can't go around naked on Fremont street either. None of the Fremont street performers that Boiler would ban or jail are 'going around naked'. So what's your point? Change the subject much?

However I am a firm supporter in Women being allowed to go topless in public. It's only fair. Men are allowed. This is blatant gender discrimination.

Boilerman
Boilerman
Oct 9, 2015
5:28am
Block User
My comment is very relevant. Speech is limited, and the sane should set the limits, not the nuts.


Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Our founding fathers certainly never allowed folks to walk around naked, so they believed that those wishing to be naked in public, and those not wishing to see folks naked in public both had rights. The rights of the sane supersede the nuts.

Just another completely irrelevant point. You can't go around naked on Fremont street either. None of the Fremont street performers that Boiler would ban or jail are 'going around naked'. So what's your point? Change the subject much?

However I am a firm supporter in Women being allowed to go topless in public. It's only fair. Men are allowed. This is blatant gender discrimination.


Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now