Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'In the News' started by NTA, Nov 5, 2017.
Has there been one that hasn't stopped? No!
I guess there are several places I could post this, but since the story is mostly in Texas as a result of this shooting, I'll put it here.
US Pastors Welcome Gun-Toting Parishioners
More at the link.
Ok, one more.
In addition to spreading the carriers around in the service, they need to inform everyone should an attack happen, please duck so they will have a clear shot at the perp.
If they wanted to be bold, they could add it to the back of every bulletin at every function, near the end at the bottom as well. Let everyone know the church was protected, and what they should do if something should ever happen. I reality, most non-shooters would naturally fall to the ground probably, if not try to run away. As long as not everyone tries to run away, it shouldn't be a problem. Only problem is its impossible to control what people do in a situation like that. They may do the exact opposite of what you've asked them.
Observe How the Media Describes Stephen Willeford’s Firearm vs. Devin Kelley
Posted at 10:55 pm on November 8, 2017 by Carl Arbogast
Fair and balanced, right? Unbiased. Unfortunately, most people won't notice what's in front of them.
Gun laws do not stop evil individuals
by: Erick Pratt
Poll at the link!
Thank you for voting!
Strongly agree 71.5% (2,448 votes)
Agree 8.29% (284 votes)
Don't know 1.17% (40 votes)
Disagree 2.28% (78 votes)
Strongly disagree 16.76% (574 votes)
Total Votes: 3,424
Joe Biden in denial. So, I guess Joe wanted more people to die so they could have more blood to dance in.
I'm not sure the reference was to Kelley, the question was about Willeford when Joe said that. MSM giving Joe some help.
No Joe, that's not what you did. You banned certain weapons for a period of time that was proven to not help. It's pathetic how the gun grabbers claim lives saved, but refuse to recognize when licensed carriers really do save lives.
Everybody should ask their church to have a meeting about church security, specifically about how to prevent or react to a mass-shooting there. I'd suggest that this be its own separate topic for discussion that day, setting aside other issues related to security like child molestation, fire drills, tornado drills, missing / abducted kids, etc.
Churches can choose to allow GWL-holding members of the congregation to go armed, or churches can hire in-house employees to provide security, or they can add "security" the duties of existing church staff members, or they can hire licensed armed guards from private security agencies, or they can hire off-duty cops.
I think any and every church should do at least one of those options above.
Most churches will do what most people do with regard to being prepared for crime. Nothing. They will bury their heads in the sand and believe it will happen to someone else.
Yep. Most churches, especially small ones with no budget for security, have been using and will continue to use hope as a method.
While this is probably true, more churches have been getting taking a more proactive approach to security lately. In Henry County, Sheriff Keith McBrayer recently held another seminar for church leaders on security issues. He had a full house for that seminar & will likely have more coming up.
It's sad that it takes these acts for churches to begin to take it seriously, but isn't that the way most of the population is? But church leaders are seeing that they need to do more.
Why is anybody seriously leaving the burden of personal responsibility up to a church board, pastor, priest, rabbi, whatever? It's my life and my responsibility. No one else's. If/when the shooting starts and you're able to effectively return fire, do you really think anyone's going to care if you had "permission" to have that gun on you? Carry it, STFU about it and be ready to use it.
Protests at Ruger HQ...
She was "horrified!"
Poor horrified woman makes it sound like Ruger produces snuff films.
I wonder why they didn't invite the Pink Pistols to join their little gay protest? Oh, wait....
why is there even such a group as "gays against guns" ???
Don't gays think they'd be welcomed at a regular mainstream gun-banning group, under the umbrella of the Brady Center or some such national organization? (I can see why they won't want to join Moms for Action or whatever they're called).
All those gun-grabbing groups are made up of hard left progressive-thinking Democrats.
Now pro-carry gays, sure, they have a reason to form their own group like Pink Pistols, because in America today gun-rights activists tend to be older, conservative, and Christian (more so as to ALL gun rights' groups' members, rather than than just the most visible ones who champion the cause on the internet and through social media). Although they're welcome to join the NRA, SAF, and local groups like GCO, some would want to self-segregate and have their own little group just to feel more comfortable.