wat0n wrote:It doesn't matter. Teachers shouldn't need to worry about the possibility, period.
You are manufacturing a fear where there is not. It's irrational.
wat0n wrote:So now we go from "Canada" to "Edmonton". Jeez.
I made an analogy. I said that to clarify it.
Edmonton is IN Canada. Canada is a VERY large country. It's the second largest in the world and it is
7,821 km from coast to coast. The problems of Vancouver, aren't the problems of the country at large.
You cherry-picked, in an attempt to make a valid argument. It isn't.
wat0n wrote:Closing schools to strangers isn't particularly expensive.
If it's a problem, then they will address it. It doesn't appear to BE a problem, so why do they need to address
YOUR unreasonable and irrational fears???
They do not need to waste thought on it, let alone money.
wat0n wrote:And it's not just the US which does that, from what I can tell the UK does too.
So what? Have we been talking about the UK? If it was an issue then they likely dealt with it in an appropriate way.
Scamp wrote:Here in America, free men will not give up their guns because of criminal acts by others.
Obviously criminals have guns. Look at the news. We have a 6% demographic here that commits half the gun crimes.
Taking guns from law abiding citizens would leave only the criminals with guns.
Every shooter is a "law abiding citizen" until they are not.
Guns don't make you free. They do not protect you and in fact contribute to the very problem discussed in this thread.
If there are no guns, then the criminals cannot get them, either. Gun control WORKS. You can go back and read the link I gave earlier showing this.
Scamp wrote:How stupid is that?
The reasoning you are using is stupid.
“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson