FEELS

we shouldnt have to put armed guards in schools, we should just have more strict gun laws. Human lives are more important than your guns

Life is not more important than liberty.
That is my nation's first value, and I'll be damned before I let us relinquish that in the face of fear. Before I let us relinquish anything.
.
Aside from that, stricter laws will do all of jack shit for the United States. We have millions in circulation, the black markets at the borders are out of control, and criminals don't care about laws.
It's not good that these shootings happen in the first place, but paper isn't gonna do a dann thing to stop them. Step back and look at this realistically. All the laws in the world won't stop it, but there are countless records of any resistance being enough to mitigate loss of life. Why not give those willing the training and the means to better resist?

Teacher: Hey, can we get more money for books and classroom materials?
Congress: FUCK NO! We don't have the money for that expensive shit. But here's a gun and security guards.
Teacher: Wouldn't it make more sense just to.
Congress: Listen, whatever idea you have in your mind, it won't work. Criminals will break the law.
Teacher: By that logic, why bother with any laws at all? I mean, criminals are just going to break it.
Congress: I'm not getting your so called "liberal logic".

i dont think guns give you liberty... and if they do, you have a really fucked up world view
in britain, after the 1996 shooting, they invoked two new gun laws to make it harder to get your hands on them, and they havent had a school shooting yet.
also, not to mention that if a 19 year old who had been reported to the fbi twice can get his hands on a semi automatic assault, i think our gun laws arent strong enough. The second amendment was written when guns were actually needed by the common citizens of society and they took 10 minutes to load. I dont think the founding fathers would want to keep that amendment with the types of guns and purposes of them of today.

American Revolution
.
Slave Revolts throughout history
.
Polish, French, Italian, Soviet, and other resistance groups
.
Mujahideen resistance of Soviet scorched earth operation
.
Six Day and Yom Kippur wars
.
Millions upon millions of Self-defense cases throughout history.
.
Pray tell, how the hell is a person supposed to preserve their liberty without arms?
.
@felman87
Congress is not supposed to fund schools. That is the responsibility of the states and cities. A distinction that is rather important for federalism and checks and balances.
.
And laws don't exist to stop criminals, they exist as a deterrence and so that there are prescribed ways to deal with those who act to harm others and society short of lynch mobs.

Guys please don't make this about the guns/people. It's a dog, and it's a 15/10

If we leave the states and cities to fund their own schools, a good number of them are going to be severely underfunded for their population. We have an education budget in the federal government for a reason, even if most of that money ends up going to the military instead. We need smarter workers to take the increasingly high number of technical job positions that are opening up, and we can't have that if our schools have no money.

@famousone all cases where normal citizens do not need guns, and there have been more crimes done with guns than crimes saved by guns. are you honestly saying the death of the hundreds, possibly thousands of children and teachers, it's okay they're dead because of your messed up view of liberty?
a person who posted pictures of dead animals, was reported to the fbi TWICE, had been expelled from multiple schools for violence, and had mental problems was able to get a semi automatic assault rifle legally, and if thats not a problem to you, then you are blind and ignorant

Don't make me into a straw-man, I never said anything about this is okay.
Liberty is more valuable than life, but that is no excuse to be stupid. Someone fucked up if he was able to get a gun with a violent record, but I will not sacrifice my culture, liberty, and autonomy to fear.
.
If you are willing to sacrifice any liberty for the illusion of security, then you are willfully blind and ignorant to both human nature and history.

And this is why I argue we don't need stricter gun laws, we need to enforce the ones we already have.

And get rid of soft targets.

Oh don't use that damn straw man excuse, that's not what I'm doing
What happens when there's no lives left? There is no such thing as liberty without life, and life should be held above the guns that most have solely for the purpose of wanting guns because it's 'murica
Your culture, liberty, and autonomy should not revolve around guns, that's just retarded

Strawmanning is exactly what you're doing.
Also, it's a pretty dick move to change the content of your comment AFTER it's been responded to. By your logic, the first amendment should be restricted to the printing press.
It's not about the guns. It's about what they represent. A means to provide for and defend oneself.
Without liberty, there is no life. I will gladly sentence the world to constant strife before I even consider a comfortable subjugation.

Not to mention, the entire point of the second amendment was so that people could defend themselves from foreign and domestic threats. The founders would think that the laws are far too tight as it is.

I didn't change my comment?
And I'm not trying to take away your guns, I'm trying to make it clear that it should be harder to get them so shit like the Florida shooting doesn't happen again.
And nothing represents anything, it represents what you want it to represent
And with your logic, Meth should be legal too since America is "free" and it represents liberty, life, and freedom for them.

And that was also hundreds of years ago when they had muskets and gun powder instead of assault rifles that shoot 88 times a minute

It's more than hard enough already if they'd just enforce the laws already in the books.
And I know for a fact that the edit didn't happen until after my response, because my response would've addressed that point too.
And there you go trying to straw man me again. I advocate for constitutional liberty, not anarchy.
The founders had puckle guns and cannons, watched weapons evolve in their own lifetimes. They wanted the people to have the means to resist conquerors and oppressors alike, foreign and domestic. Should freedom of speech be restricted to a printing press? Why not?

Okay but where's the edited sign at tho?????
I'm honestly just done arguing? All I'm hearing from you is "me me me" instead of holding up an actual logical discussion. Have fun telling people they should die before you have your precious gun privilege reduced

If that's all you're hearing, it's a big sign you aren't listening.
I gave you my logic, and you haven't even acknowledged it to dismiss it.
Way to straw-man me one last time too.
Goodbye, and good riddance.

A student can't afford guns illegally, a machine gun is over $30,000 USD in Australia. No guns - no mass shootings, very few regular shootings, reduced overall crime, reduced gang crime and reduced suicide.

Machine guns are about $30,000 here in the US too.

And that's assuming you jump through the right hoops and find someone willing to sell.