It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I'm just saying: they've talked before and it didn't work. There will be other massacres and the NRA will remain untouched.
Quite. What sort of government can't make laws in the country it is supposed to be governing?
The answer is, of course, it can - but only if there's the will do to it. And even as the dead children continue to pile up they are still a million miles away from amending the amendment and saying 'You can't own as many guns as you want.'
Hahaha weren't we joking about this as a solution a couple of pages ago? Jesus Christ.
He must have read it.
In the Cold War the Yanks and Russians kept building bigger and more destructive bombs to 'protect' themselves and dissuade the other side from attacking. There was nothing else they could do as the other side weren't about to give up their bombs even if you did.
In the Cold War the superpowers had no way of forcing the other to bow to their will but in this instance America is having an arms race with itself but doesn't have to; it just needs to bite the bullet (no pun intnended) and enact some laws to cease this lunacy.
Why couldn't they just have a single officer at most schools? The manpower is there, believe me.
I can appreciate the idea of arming teachers in theory but it's just not the same (additional training, willingness, cost of weapon). Have a cop there- they've got everything they need already.
Why not a SWAT team on standby at every school?
I think a standard school uniform of body armour is somethng that Trump will also suggest
Or you could maybe seal them in impregnable compartments made of bulletproof glass?
There are solutions out there that means the population can keep their guns if people are just willing to think outside the box.
Gigantic schools and hallways with both students and faculty rolling around in giant, bulletproof hamster balls, cruising from class to class. Let's do it.
Maybe turn it into a game show as that's Don's forte?
Donalds Den
Contestants get 5 minutes to pitch ideas in the Oval Office on the best way to keep children alive at school that doesn't impinge on everyone being allowed their basic human right of walking down the street carrying that gun out of Predator.
I'm pitching that to the American Tony Hayers first thing tomorrow.
"A World That Works."
Excellent.
If their idea is shot down, they get dropped into a deep, dark pit, never to be heard from again. Televise it live on HBO with some proper sponsorship and you've struck gold.
Girls in bikinis holding massive guns flanking either side of Don that he grabs by the pussy occasionally.
This has got winner written all over it.
Or, nobody could have guns except the people who manage to get them illegally and the police could be relied on for armed response like in a civilised country but then that's blasphemy isn't it because of the second amendment.
Funny enough (possibly a glitch in the board software, your entire post after "...if everyone had a gun." was invisible to me until I clicked on "quote". But right. The European approach (or maybe even the non-US approach) is to let nobody have a gun, rather than everybody. The statistics say that this leads to a very, very considerably reduced number of casualties from gunshot wounds. There is also no indication that criminals are using illegal guns to a large extent. The least thing I would worry about if I encountered a burglar in my home is him (her?) having a gun. It just doesn't happen since the burglars don't expect their victims to use guns either.
Now the following doesn't claim to be scientific, and I haven't re-checked it right now - so feel free to argue against it. But last time I researched, the number of murders (of whatever degree) in the U.S. (by the same number of population) was three times as high as in an average European country. The number of murders using a gun was nine times as high. If you take those cases out of the equation, the murder rate in the U.S. is not significantly different from the European one.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937/
Having read that I would say the government has a duty to ban feeble handguns then and insist people only carry AR-15s. If I'm trying to 'protect' myself then I want to be carrying something that decimates the perpetrator's liver and puts him on the ground not, to quote a certain Mr Whitaker, a 'pop gun.'
Indeed that fight between Bond and Whitaker just goes to highlight why teachers and the public in general need to be packing AR-15s. Bond is just carrying a puny pistol and is very much on the ropes against Brad's machine guns until he does what? Ups the ante with a bit of C4. That's how you protect yourself you get a bigger weapon than the other guy. Banning AR-15s is utterly irresponsible it should be puny small calibre pistols they are thinking of banning.
Erm they are a gun company aren't they? Am I missing something here? That's their business isn't it? They're not filming kiddie porn they're making a legal product to be as efficient as they can make it so it is desirable to the market in which they are selling it.
I find your naïveté touching but to start calling out gun companies merely for going about their business in a perfectly legal manner is hardly the nub of the problem. If people were so disgusted at AR-15s they wouldn't be buying them and if no one was buying them they wouldn't make them.
I think you are being unecesarry creative. There is an obvious practical solution here: Get rid of all schools all together! All school shootings happen in schools, right? Eliminate schools and you eliminate the problem! (Kids might get killed elsewhere, but now they wouldn't be school shootings!)
Republicans don't want the new generations to develop knowledge of the world that would probably make them vote democratic anyway, so it is a solution with many benefits. Of course parents need somewhere to send their kids, so I suggest we have mandatory and daily gun training. This will not only help the children defend themselves, but also make them brilliant future soldiers for Americas many wars. All in the pursuit and respect of freedom!
See, this deal works out for everyone! And NRA is superhappy which is all that matters at the end of the day!
By Jove I think you've nailed it Sir!
We've been looking at the whole problem the wrong way. It's not guns that are the problem it's kids! If kids weren't out and about trying to live their lives they wouldn't keep getting shot.
The solution? I think it's obvious and the man we have to thank? Good old Josef Fritzl of course. Raped? Yes. Psychologically traumatised? Yes. Vitamin D deficiency? Yes. But one thing his daughter was never in danger of was being shot.
Just lock kids safely away in bulletproof 'child cabinets' and the problem is solved. Then people can stand in the middle of the street recklessly shooting their AR-15s in the air like a mob of Afghan villagers who have just caught a downed US airman if they want.
No dead kids and we people can all have as many guns as they want. Everyone happy.
I think we've solved this haven't we? Good work chaps. Shall we move onto the Middle East next?
Deputy Scott Peterson, who was the school resource officer at Stoneman Douglas in Parkland, Florida, resigned from the department on Thursday after being told he would be suspended, Israel said."
If you can't rely on a trained enforcement officer to help, how much better are gun carrying teachers going to perform?