Active shooter thread

[Fondren & Main 6713]

7 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

Take this to the "I'm a giant annoying asshole" thread

It's a joke, you over-sensitive cunt.

[Junior Miller 1502]

9 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

It's a joke, you over-sensitive cunt.

It's a joke, you dense no personality obtuse should have been aborted piece of shit 

Edited May 10, 2019 by Junior Miller

[Gladeite 375]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

Yeah that line about a mass shooter won’t act if they will end up dead is laughable.

They may very well end up dead.  Many of them commit suicide.  I would rather them do it at home, in the woods by themselves, and not after shooting innocent children.

My point remains that the typical predator would not engage if he thought he would get shot/killed before he could complete his action.

Columbine- psychopath and his suicidal/depressed sidekick.  Entered school during lunch hour when they knew officer left campus.  Resource officer coming back from lunch does not have his glasses and misses gunman.  Understandable since he had 20/300 vision.  Committed suicide.

Virginia Tech-  No armed guards near shooter.  Shooter had free reign for almost 2 hours.  Committed suicide.

Sandy Hook- Elementary school.  No resistance.  Committed suicide.

Parkland- One resource officer paralyzed with fear.  Shooter ran out with other students.

Sutherland Springs- No resistance.  Resident across the street shoots him as he leaves church.

Santa Fe- Captured by resource officers after failing to commit suicide.  

Highlands Ranch -  Private security guard captured 2 individuals.

[bad_teammate 13195]

12 minutes ago, Gladeite said:

My point remains that the typical predator would not engage if he thought he would get shot/killed before he could complete his action.

On what do you base this conclusion?

[Gladeite 375]

45 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the gymnastics (not to mention the cost) involved in bending in such a way to invent these jobs so people can be posted somewhere near a school (or at the school?), considering there are what, 150,000 schools you would need to monitor?  nbd.

and arming teachers, training school security, etc.  so what happens when someone tries to execute a school shooting, and before he gets a shot off, he is killed by one of these sentries?  will that mark the end of school shootings as we know it?  does foiling a shoe bomb at an airport make it more or less likely that there will ever be another terrorist attack involving air travel?

and what happens when one of these sentries/armed math teachers is slightly out of position when the shooter arrives?  if duck hunt has taught me anything, it's that i can probably get a number of shots off at innocent 5th graders before they get to me.  and once they do, what are the odds that this "trained" newly armed stopgap shoots me without endangering the dozens of children that are near me? 

if my kid was killed in a "friendly fire" incident like that i would lose my fucking mind.  i'm also guessing insurance for these sentries is all baked into the cost?  since someone is going to have to back up a brinks truck to my house the day after it happens.

all this so that people feel safe on the off chance of a home invasion or really really like to shoot [overpopulated] animals.  seems reasonable.

I do not have all of the answers to keeping kids safe.  I do know that school districts across the U.S. are becoming much more safety conscious.  From Denver:

"Here in the Denver suburbs, the district has built what is likely the most sophisticated school security system in the country: installing locks that can be remotely controlled and cameras that track suspicious people; setting up a 24-hour dispatch center and a team of armed patrol officers; monitoring troubled students and their social media; getting training from world-renowned psychologists and former SWAT commanders; researching and investing, practicing and re-practicing, all to ensure that when the next significant threat comes, it is stopped before the worst happens again."

$3 million annual budget, 127 people and 85,000 students.  

 I also think schools should adopt apps that allow students to report suspicious activity to administration/security officials.  The Denver area schools use Safe2Tell and I have used CrisisGo.  They are pretty simple to use.  

[bad_teammate 13195]

We have been militarizing and policing schools heavily since Columbine in 1999. How well has 20 years of school "hardening" worked?

Quote

$3 million annual budget, 127 people and 85,000 students.  

America is so broken that we have made a profitable security industry to protect our children from the profitable weapons industry that's killing them.

And some of you guys think it's great.

[henrygandorf 29189]

4 minutes ago, Gladeite said:

I do not have all of the answers to keeping kids safe.  I do know that school districts across the U.S. are becoming much more safety conscious.  From Denver:

"Here in the Denver suburbs, the district has built what is likely the most sophisticated school security system in the country: installing locks that can be remotely controlled and cameras that track suspicious people; setting up a 24-hour dispatch center and a team of armed patrol officers; monitoring troubled students and their social media; getting training from world-renowned psychologists and former SWAT commanders; researching and investing, practicing and re-practicing, all to ensure that when the next significant threat comes, it is stopped before the worst happens again."

$3 million annual budget, 127 people and 85,000 students.  

 I also think schools should adopt apps that allow students to report suspicious activity to administration/security officials.  The Denver area schools use Safe2Tell and I have used CrisisGo.  They are pretty simple to use.  

i think it's great they're taking steps, and shitty and sad that they're forced to in the first place.  if it helps identify and address mental health in young people, maybe that part could be a positive takeaway.

the main issue i think many are having with these measures (or at least i am) is that there's really two reasons to do it (according to you):

1. to stop the shooter once it starts

2. to make the shooter think twice about even trying it in the first place

i think there are plenty of obvious concerns about #1, but i think you're drastically overestimating the power of #2.  sure, maybe the shooter is required to plan a little bit more, but if this is something he's become obsessed with and fixated on for months/years, then he'll likely take that into account.  he's likely not a criminal mastermind, but he's also likely mentally unstable, and not prone to have his actions dictated by logic.

robbing an old lady on the street is much easier than robbing a bank, but people still rob banks.

[henrygandorf 29189]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We have been militarizing and policing schools heavily since Columbine in 1999. How well has 20 years of school "hardening" worked?

America is so broken that we have made a profitable security industry to protect our children from the profitable weapons industry that's killing them.

And some of you guys think it's great.

create the disease, sell the cure?  arsonist and fireman?  there are plenty of metaphors that apply i'm sure.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Zepol87 9185]

Yep only a matter of time

[fattyflattie 4639]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

 

the gymnastics (not to mention the cost) involved in bending in such a way to invent these jobs so people can be posted somewhere near a school (or at the school?), considering there are what, 150,000 schools you would need to monitor?  nbd.

and arming teachers, training school security, etc.  so what happens when someone tries to execute a school shooting, and before he gets a shot off, he is killed by one of these sentries?  will that mark the end of school shootings as we know it?  does foiling a shoe bomb at an airport make it more or less likely that there will ever be another terrorist attack involving air travel?

 

Nbd, like finding and confiscating hundreds (?) of millions of firearms across the nation, from 10’s of millions of people, many who don’t believe in the cause.  That sure sounds simple.  The fact it cannot be done is probably a big factor in why it hasn’t been tried. 

I understand the kids want the guns gone. What I haven’t heard then discuss is why are their peers are wanting to kill them. Guns or no guns, some of these kids want to kill their peers. Maybe quit calling the kid in a trench coat a fheg. 

[ChickenSandwich 9834]

Having a radicalized media that only makes money off of division, hate and outrage only adds fuel to the fire. 

 

[Gladeite 375]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

i think it's great they're taking steps, and shitty and sad that they're forced to in the first place.  if it helps identify and address mental health in young people, maybe that part could be a positive takeaway.

the main issue i think many are having with these measures (or at least i am) is that there's really two reasons to do it (according to you):

1. to stop the shooter once it starts

2. to make the shooter think twice about even trying it in the first place

i think there are plenty of obvious concerns about #1, but i think you're drastically overestimating the power of #2.  sure, maybe the shooter is required to plan a little bit more, but if this is something he's become obsessed with and fixated on for months/years, then he'll likely take that into account.  he's likely not a criminal mastermind, but he's also likely mentally unstable, and not prone to have his actions dictated by logic.

robbing an old lady on the street is much easier than robbing a bank, but people still rob banks.

Surprisingly, banks are not very well defended.  There were abut 3000 bank robberies last year.  Only about 150 of these banks had guards.  About a 5% chance of there being any resistance.  

[henrygandorf 29189]

4 minutes ago, Gladeite said:

Surprisingly, banks are not very well defended.  There were abut 3000 bank robberies last year.  Only about 150 of these banks had guards.  About a 5% chance of there being any resistance.  

is it true that over 2800 of them took place in one square block outside of boston?

[Fondren & Main 6713]

2 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

It's a joke, you dense no personality obtuse should have been aborted piece of shit 

You’re a little bitch aren’t you? 🤣🤣🤣

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Maybe quit calling the kid in a trench coat a fheg. 

School shooters aren't the bullied kids. That's a stupid piece of urban legend 20 years past its expiration date.

[Junior Miller 1502]

49 minutes ago, Fondren & Main said:

You’re a little bitch aren’t you? 🤣🤣🤣

That's definitely not what your wife says

[fattyflattie 4639]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

School shooters aren't the bullied kids. That's a stupid piece of urban legend 20 years past its expiration date.

Really?  So what’s the profile these days?  Straight A QB with the scholarship to state?  Prom queen and her clique?   Or fucking weirdo incel who can’t get laid and thinks 4chan are his only friends.  You saw the pic of the latest pos, right? 

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

Really?  So what’s the profile these days?

- White male

- Feels outcast (doesn't mean he is, just that he feels that way)

- Socially isolated (again, can be self-imposed)

- Dysfunctional home

- Access to guns

If you're actually interested, you really should read Columbine by Dave Cullen. It's an amazingly well-researched and well-written exploration of this topic.

[fattyflattie 4639]

Feels bullied - (doesn’t mean he is, just feels that way)

jenniferlawrenceok.gif

[henrygandorf 29189]

"bullied" in itself might be a kind of outdated word.  i think the modern world of social media/cell phones/internet creates more kids that are "isolated", and impressionable, which leads them to find community online.  unfortunately, the anonymity of the online world allows so much hate to be cultivated and spewed (and trump isn't setting a great example either) which all leads to a lot of pent up general anger and hostility.

maybe in the old days, getting picked on and isolated at school led to specific revenge attacks targeting people who "wronged them" instead of the more general lashing out at authority/the system/the non-isolated.

i don't think there's a right or wrong answer.  i don't think there's a clear-cut template.  i don't think the whole "we need to try harder to identify these kids before it happens" is going to be particularly effective.  as denzel said, "most murderers i know weren't murderers until they killed somebody."  i think it's naive to think we can label kids and later claim it was obvious or inevitable*.

 

*clearly, some cases more so than others.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

School just needed more armed security guards firing at first responders and students. And better guns. Maybe a tank or two. “Hardened perimeter”

[bad_teammate 13195]

58 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Feels bullied - (doesn’t mean he is, just feels that way)

jenniferlawrenceok.gif

It would be more interesting if you had the ability to make an argument.

[Helobious 9448]

8 hours ago, Gladeite said:

They may very well end up dead.  Many of them commit suicide.  I would rather them do it at home, in the woods by themselves, and not after shooting innocent children.

My point remains that the typical predator would not engage if he thought he would get shot/killed before he could complete his action.

Columbine- psychopath and his suicidal/depressed sidekick.  Entered school during lunch hour when they knew officer left campus.  Resource officer coming back from lunch does not have his glasses and misses gunman.  Understandable since he had 20/300 vision.  Committed suicide.

Virginia Tech-  No armed guards near shooter.  Shooter had free reign for almost 2 hours.  Committed suicide.

Sandy Hook- Elementary school.  No resistance.  Committed suicide.

Parkland- One resource officer paralyzed with fear.  Shooter ran out with other students.

Sutherland Springs- No resistance.  Resident across the street shoots him as he leaves church.

Santa Fe- Captured by resource officers after failing to commit suicide.  

Highlands Ranch -  Private security guard captured 2 individuals.

It is worth noting that the columbine shooters planned to die in a shootout with police, and they did briefly exchange gunfire with cops. Santa Fe shooter may have too. The California bar shooter killed a cop before committing suicide. Then you have the Dallas police shooter, only guy I can think of that actively sought armed targets. 

I do agree with you though that most people who do mass shootings are giant pussies who will surrender or commit suicide at the first sign of resistance. Guys like Charles Whitman & the Dallas shooter are exceptions, not the rules.

[Helobious 9448]

On 5/9/2019 at 8:50 PM, Johnny Sack said:

The murder rate in the state of Texas is less than half what it was when the law allowing CHL was passed.  So were you like twice as scared back in the early 90s was when your odds of getting murdered in this state were double?  

Murder rates everywhere have fallen off since the crack days of the 80s/90s though (even in Chicago). NYC used to have absurdly high murder rates and now it has one of the lower homicide rates of the major cities. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Helobious said:

Murder rates everywhere have fallen off since the crack days of the 80s/90s though (even in Chicago). NYC used to have absurdly high murder rates and now it has one of the lower homicide rates of the major cities. 

Yeah, but not all murders are created equal. In the bad days, just as now, "don't start shit, won't be no shit" always applied.  Most murders are perpetrated by someone the victim knows.  Gang violence was terrible in the 80s and 90s but it was directed.  A random Joe Schmoe could have walked through the worst neighborhoods in America at night in the 80s and he would have probably gotten robbed but not killed.  The random unexpected murders that fall outside the known have always been the ones we fear. They seem to be going up while all other murders and violent crime in general are going down. Even domestic violence murders are down which is seemingly an uncontrollable statistic. 

[Helobious 9448]

8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Yeah, but not all murders are created equal. In the bad days, just as now, "don't start shit, won't be no shit" always applied.  Most murders are perpetrated by someone the victim knows.  Gang violence was terrible in the 80s and 90s but it was directed. 

I don’t know that I would fully agree. There are scores of dead non-gang member black/hispanic teens back then that were killed for no reason. If someone randomly walked up to you and asked “where you from?” you were done for no matter the answer. I had a cousin that was killed in a drive-by in San Antonio in 1995. 14 years old, non-gang member. But he lived in a poor neighborhood, was a young male, and was standing in front of his own house at 8pm when gang members happened to pass by. That was enough to get you killed back then, and cases like his were far from unique. 

Random killings like that have gone down, even in the worst cities, but random mass killings of non-poor people seemingly have gone up. Hence the media attention & panic. You’re more likely to be a victim of a mass shooting nowadays, but still overall less likely to be randomly murdered than you were in the 80s & 90s.

[Bookman 4639]

On 5/10/2019 at 7:23 AM, Johnny Sack said:

The link I posted.  Not the graphs.  Is an article.  Don’t be a dumbass. 

https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/02/26/schools-are-still-one-of-the-safest-places-for-children-researcher-says/

Well that's interesting.

[fattyflattie 4639]

On 5/10/2019 at 9:20 PM, bad_teammate said:

It would be more interesting if you had the ability to make an argument.

My argument is clear.  10’s of millions of law abiding citizens in the country somehow make it thru their lives without shooting up the place. You don’t punish the rest for the 10 deranged fucksticks.  

Remember upthread when you couldn’t even come up with a witty quip when someone asked to defend alcohol?  I wouldn’t be so quick to accuse others of not being able to make an argument. 

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

You don’t punish the rest for the 10 deranged fucksticks.

What punishment do I advocate?

Such emotional language. Sounds like you need a safe space.

Quote

Remember upthread when you couldn’t even come up with a witty quip when someone asked to defend alcohol?  I wouldn’t be so quick to accuse others of not being able to make an argument. 

Mr. Shapiro, I know you think bringing up off-topic issues is a good way to deflect from your garbage positions, but it's not. I'm happy to talk about alcohol all day long, start a thread for it and we'll have the conversation there.

[fattyflattie 4639]

Punishment - to take away ones privelages and/or rights because of the actions of 1 in every 3.5 million citizens.  (I used 100 school shootings, so probably more like 1 in 7-10 million people)   Gtfo with shooings between drug dealers and gangbangers in school zones, we are discussing mass shootings here.  Feeling of punishment exaggerated when decisions to take away rights/privileges are based on the feels, and even further exaggerated when being pushed by the type of people who believe a fucking AR15 is used to hunt waterfowl (ie:ignorant in what they want to remove in first place)

The fact that you have a Citori doesn’t tell me shit (the proverbial “I have a black friend”). So while you portray to have the solutions, what I see is someone who doesn’t know shit about guns, or how to stop mass shootings at school.   In conclusion, stick to income inequality and Bernie Bro-ism. You’ll find it easier to debate, as no one gives a fuck about either of those with enough passion to put up a half hearted debate. 

[wildcat09 29352]

On 5/10/2019 at 5:51 PM, ChickenSandwich said:

Having a radicalized media that only makes money off of division, hate and outrage only adds fuel to the fire. 

 

School shooters aren’t radicalized by CNN, they’re radicalized by the internet.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

School shooters aren’t radicalized by CNN, they’re radicalized by the internet.

Radicalization happens because of a lack of something, people can be radicalized without the media or the internet.  In fact that’s how most extremist groups used to operate, off the grid in some sort of underground network.  The internet has made radicalization easier, much more accessible, and seductive.  The platforms are mainstreaming extremism by not stepping in shutting it down fast enough in the name of “neutrality”.  

The platforms need to take ownership of the space they’re creating for these borderline domestic terrorist networks.  Would you allow Nazis and White Supremacists in your house?  

[Enchubben 5510]

On 5/10/2019 at 6:43 AM, bad_teammate said:

"I can't make an argument, so... let me bring up something completely unrelated!"

Start an alcohol thread, I'll jump in happily.

Is there a reasonable use for a gun that requires semi-automatic capabilities or a length less than 26"?

My comment is the argument and it’s 100% applicable. 

If the sole test is it’s dangerous, why are we starting with guns that are at a minimum, protected by the bill of rights for a reason. 

Hell, vending machines kill 2 people a year (without accounting for what’s actually in there) and roller coasters kill another 3 or so. Those don’t serve any public good and certainly aren’t protected by an amendment. 

Fatty foods, alcohol, and soda kill far more and aren’t protected by amendments maybe we should get rid of those to. Avocado toast and $11 coffee milkshakes for every meal.

[DDD Dad 14335]

My comment is the argument and it’s 100% applicable. 
If the sole test is it’s dangerous, why are we starting with guns that are at a minimum, protected by the bill of rights for a reason. 
Hell, vending machines kill 2 people a year (without accounting for what’s actually in there) and roller coasters kill another 3 or so. Those don’t serve any public good and certainly aren’t protected by an amendment. 
Fatty foods, alcohol, and soda kill far more and aren’t protected by amendments maybe we should get rid of those to. Avocado toast and $11 coffee milkshakes for every meal.

But are they really? I mean i get that the recent Supreme Court opinions finding the second amendment to be a private right versus a public right is currently the law but should it be?

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Punishment - to take away ones privelages and/or rights because of the actions of 1 in every 3.5 million citizens.

That's not what punishment is. Words have meanings. Laws are not punishment. Taxes aren't punishment. You use the word "punishment" because you're too emotionally invested in the idea of gun ownership, not because it actually fits. You're seeking sympathy, not reason. And few things are less sympathetic than white men crying about their guns.

"Punishing" gun owners would involve fining them or imprisoning them. Gun ownership, purchasing, and manufacturing restrictions are nothing more than product regulation. Is it "punishing" developers to not allow asbestos products? Is it "punishing" homeowners to not allow tiger pits on their front lawns? Is it "punishing" farmers to disallow certain pesticides? Is it "punishing" manufacturers to not allow them to put toxic chemicals in their products?

Quote

Gtfo with shooings between drug dealers and gangbangers in school zones, we are discussing mass shootings here.

Gun violence is an epidemic problem outside of school shootings/mass shootings. Gun suicides are a huge problem. Domestic gun violence is a huge problem.

Quote

The fact that you have a Citori doesn’t tell me shit (the proverbial “I have a black friend”). So while you portray to have the solutions, what I see is someone who doesn’t know shit about guns, or how to stop mass shootings at school.

20 years of militarizing schools has not stopped or even slowed mass shootings. 40 years of militarizing police has not ended gun crime. Thoughts and prayers haven't ended gun suicide.

54 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

If the sole test is it’s dangerous, why are we starting with guns that are at a minimum, protected by the bill of rights for a reason. 

Start a thread and we can talk about it, Mr. Shapiro.

[Guest]

Wait...besides age army, which schools have we militarized?

 

 Some of y’all talk about this like it’s fact,  and you’re full of shit. 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 minutes ago, slorch said:

Wait...besides age army, which schools have we militarized?

 

 Some of y’all talk about this like it’s fact,  and you’re full of shit. 

You seem lost. How can we help?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

You seem lost. How can we help?

 Read the post above mine Something something 20 years and militarizing schools

[fattyflattie 4639]

10 minutes ago, slorch said:

Wait...besides age army, which schools have we militarized?

 

 Some of y’all talk about this like it’s fact,  and you’re full of shit. 

About a week after Parkland or Santa Fe (I can't remember which), they started to buzz you into the lobby at my kid's school.  So up until 18 months ago, anyone could walk into the lobby, shoot the secretary, and walk 50'  into the first class room.  They also started to release them to the pickup line from inside the school, instead of having a mass congregation outside.    Militarized af if you ask me.   I'd have to agree, sounds like more bullshit from B_T; this is my surprised face.

[fattyflattie 4639]

29 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Gun violence is an epidemic problem outside of school shootings/mass shootings. Gun suicides are a huge problem. Domestic gun violence is a huge problem.

Speaking of changing the narrative. 

B_T:We have a problem with school shootings rah rah.  

Sack: No we don't, here is a graph. Sorry about your feels.
B_T:  We have a problem with suicide.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The problem is with gun violence, including suicides. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

35 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The problem is with gun violence, including suicides. 

Ok, so back to mental health.  Because people who don't gaf about a gun still need rope, medicine/drugs, and knives/sharp objects - can't ban them, I use those things.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

49 minutes ago, slorch said:

 Read the post above mine Something something 20 years and militarizing schools

You’re right, “hardened perimeters, better trained armed guards, armed teachers, metal detectors and secured entrances”...maybe a prison metaphor works better? If I remember correctly, those were just some of the suggestions made by our resident security expert and AR waterfowl hunter.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Ok, so back to mental health.  Because people who don't gaf about a gun still need rope, medicine/drugs, and knives/sharp objects - can't ban them, I use those things.

You know there are many developed countries with much better access to mental healthcare and less access to firearms. 

Surprisingly, unlike the United States, they don’t have the worst gun violence problem in the world. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

51 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The problem is with gun violence, including suicides. 

I’m not trying to be an asshole, but I don’t think guns contribute to suicides. 

Finland, Japan, Korea and Hungary have the four highest suicide rates in the world.  None are big gun countries.  

Why should I care if someone shoots themselves as opposed to a noose or jumping off a bridge. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

And again, it sucks our kids are so scared.  Maybe it would help if we pointed out to them the tiny, tiny tiny chance they have of being killed by a gun.  And how that rate is less than what it was when we were kids. I have a nephew who was afraid of flying.   I showed him the odds of him crashing in an American commercial airplane and a map showing the thousands of planes in the air at one time   It helped him a lot   Reassure kids.   And stop pushing a false narrative   

A big problem is there is a perception that schools are unsafe due to guns.  It’s bullshit.  The most unsafe thing about schools is walking, biking or commuting there in a vehicle.  Yet no one is afraid of that. Some politicians are using that false perception for political gains. Similar to how MS13 is going to get you.  

[bad_teammate 13195]

8 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Speaking of changing the narrative. 

B_T:We have a problem with school shootings rah rah.  

Sack: No we don't, here is a graph. Sorry about your feels.
B_T:  We have a problem with suicide.

Any school shooting numbers above 0 mean we have a problem with school shootings.

We also have a lot of other gun violence problems.

[bad_teammate 13195]

double postin' like it's 2008

Edited May 13, 2019 by bad_teammate

[Johnny Sack 8397]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Any school shooting numbers above 0 mean we have a problem with school shootings.

We also have a lot of other gun violence problems.

Any shootings by illegals above 0 mean we have a problem with illegals.