Response to Paladin (Reply #6)Fri Aug 23, 2013, 04:48 PM
0rganism (17,007 posts)
37. kinda what i thought -- a true psychopath might just read that as a challenge
...and there will be one less psychopath.
Why does that trouble you, helmet-child?
Jeezus!
Quote
Response to kpete (Original post)Fri Aug 23, 2013, 10:47 AM
Jackpine Radical (37,551 posts)
2. Idiocy compounded.
First, the idea of arming teachers is totally nuts, as the insurance cos. have made fully clear.
But to cap it off with these warning signs? Any potential nutcase is warned: Shoot the teachers first.
Any YOU have a PROBLEM with that?! What a complete piece of shit you must be!
KC
It doesn't matter to these idiots. The policy could stop three shootings a day for a year, and their dilapidated mindset would not change. They are psychopaths.
Response to winter is coming (Reply #9)Fri Aug 23, 2013, 03:59 PM
Bazinga (142 posts)
30. It can't be any less effective than a sign that says " this school is a gun-free zone."
I think it's a fallacy that shooters only choose gun-free zones. They typically choose targets that have some personal meaning to them, a school where they were bullied, a political target, etc. But there is no indication that this sign will attract a shooter anymore than a gun-free sign will repel one.
Close, but.......

you missed it by that much.
No one...NO ONE says that shooters only choose Gun Free Zones.