(February 22, 2018 at 11:32 am)notimportant1234 Wrote:(February 22, 2018 at 11:29 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Lol. An armed guard protecting the school from some psycho killing kids isn't "violence with violence". It's self defence. Would you rather let the gunman finish his job? Might as well not call the cops then. What an odd thing to say.The fact that you have many other options at hand that you didn't even try to aproach makes it "violence with violence" , why reduce guns when you can yhrow some more in ?
This is the annoying thing about some of you people. You can't seem to grasp that your thinking doesn't have to be mutually exclussive. I say it may be a good idea to have an armed guard or 2 for added security in public schools, and you automatically assume I'm pro guns or pro violence.
Do I think we need stricter gun laws? Absolutely! Let me make that clear: WE NEED STRICTER GUN LAWS.
...But that doesn't mean having an armed security guard as an added protection for our kids isn't a good idea. We can support both, you know.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
