Yeah, that’ll do it

January 3rd, 2013

In an attempt to improve school safety in the wake of the Newtown school killings, Homestead High School in Mequon is telling students not to open exterior doors for anyone during school hours.

Because a man with a gun is no match for a glass door.

Entry Filed under: Gun Control

13 Comments Add your own

  • 1. John Foust  |  January 7th, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    Not very stealthy to announce yourself with gunfire.

  • 2. TerryN  |  January 8th, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    Who needs stealth when your the guy who shoots the door out of a gun free building?

  • 3. Debunked  |  January 8th, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    How dare they try something so utterly inane in a futile attempt to prevent this sort of travesty occurring to them in the future.

    We all know the only solution to all these mass shootings is to lower taxes.

  • 4. Debunked  |  January 8th, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    — Edit functionality needs to come back, and I absolutely despise auto-correct some days.

    How dare they try something so utterly inane in a futile attempt to prevent this sort of tragedy occurring to them in the future.

    We all know the only solution to all these mass shootings is to lower taxes.

  • 5. Dan  |  January 10th, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    “We all know the only solution to all these mass shootings is to lower taxes.”
    Neither is raising taxes.
    The truth is no matter what anybody tries to do, it will not stop someone who is hell bent on killing someone or massacre a large group of people.
    If it isn’t guns, then suicide bombers or some other type of madness.

  • 6. Debunked  |  January 11th, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    So your solution is – “The world sucks. Nothing we can do about it.”

    Convenient, that stance is. If you claim a problem to be irreparable, you never need actually attempt to fix it.

  • 7. Dan  |  January 14th, 2013 at 3:58 pm

    Ok, debunked, what your solution? What will gurantee that something like Columbine, Sandy Hook or all the murders in Chicago, Milwaukee and other places won’t happen?
    What will you suggest that won’t hurt law abiding citizens but still get illegal guns off the street.
    You come up that and I’lll buy you dinner at Culvers.
    Otherwise, you can buy me dinner.

  • 8. Debunked  |  January 14th, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    I never claimed to have a solution.

    My original post was merely a satirical remark in response to Elliot criticizing the school for attempting to push forward a policy in the hopes of avoiding a similarly tragic scenario occurring for them. Granted, this policy is quite simplistic and perhaps naive in some ways. However, he offered no other solutions that were just as simple to implement that he felt could actually work.

    Obviously you can’t guarantee it will never happen. The point is to try and reduce the frequency of these sorts of shootings and mitigate any damage caused by one if it does actually happen to you. Why would anybody criticize anybody else attempting to do this?

  • 9. John Foust  |  January 22nd, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    Here’s a great five-part read from an avowed gun-nut.

  • 10. Elliot  |  January 23rd, 2013 at 10:25 am

    Went and read it and didn’t see a single thing that would have prevented any of the mass shootings we’ve had.

    If you don’t have any ideas that might actually work, I’m not interested in anything you have to say.

    What’s my suggestion for stopping the mass shootings? I’ve said it before, remove the incentive.

    The incentive for these nuts (except in the domestic violence cases) is to become famous…to make their mark…to prove their point.

    We remove their incentive by doing the opposite.

    If you commit a mass shooting, your name vanishes. It never appears in any news report. We send ‘bots to scour your name from the internet. You don’t get a grave or a death certificate. We reassign your Social Security number. We find your birth certificate and burn it.

    You and the memory of you is wiped from the face of the Earth for all time. It’s as if you never existed.

    That will stop 90% of these assholes.

    But it will never happen, because it might actually work.

  • 11. John Foust  |  January 23rd, 2013 at 11:16 am

    Me? I’m the opposite. I side with openness. Your method sounds like a mad descent into memory holes and disappeared enemies of the state. Oh, and government control of your web site? Really, Elliot?

    I’m wary of the suggestions that suggest deeper governmental monitoring or restriction of those accused of mental illness, too. Maybe I read too much Thomas Szasz once upon a time. Want to take away someone’s gun? Get them declared sufficiently mentally ill, under the newer, lower bar.

    I liked the essay’s rapid disassembly of common pro-gun talking points. (Tell me again how you’re going to rise up against the future tyrannical government.) I liked that he knows what he’s talking about when it comes to firearms. There are plenty of people out there eager to talk who don’t know what they’re talking about, or who are content to work with superfluid and inaccurate terminology. I think he’s right to say there are plenty of gun nuts who are trouble waiting to happen. I think he’s correct when it comes to the violent nature of the society we have created.

    I’ve longed maintained that Columbine wouldn’t have happened if those two young men had girlfriends.

  • 12. Roland Melnick  |  January 28th, 2013 at 10:14 am

    I actually side with liberals on this issue. We need to procure a magic wand kissed by a unicorn, wave it and instantly make all guns owned by private citizens vanish from existence. Do that and no one will ever die at the hands of another ever again…ever.

    When the intruder is in your home, curl up in a ball under your bed, call 9-1-1 and pray the intruder has no intent to maim, rape or kill you. You have no right to defend yourself and Sheriff Clark’s suggestion that you do so is just sooooo wrong. How dare he stimulate a discussion on the issue by offering a different view than the liberal elite who knows what is best for us.

  • 13. John Foust  |  January 30th, 2013 at 9:54 am

    While we’re fantasizing, which is more probable? Home invasion? Or someone in the home using the gun against themselves or against another family member? Why are you fantasizing about the unicorn’s perfect turn of events in the former but not in the latter?

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.