Best
132 Comments
Post
  • #6
    !
    No, it doesn't offend me. Those women put their lives on the line for those children
    I have no doubt, and that is far above admirable, they were courageous angels.
    That said, men are usually bigger and stronger than women, and they may have
    been able to do more to take him down, he wasn't very big...there are times when
    I will trust a man to protect me much better than another woman. Maybe more males at the scene could have offered more protection. However, those women
    were heroes and gave all they could, their lives..we will never know for sure. Sad.
  • R Load more replies

  • #49
    !
    The Conservative"s leading publication The Nation Review certainly knows how to offend women. I'm sure the women of America love being told they are perceived to be low performing passive twits at times of stress by the conservatives. This insensitive blithering idiot of an author apparently failed to read of the multiple heroic life saving and life sacrificing acts that were committed by women during this massacre.
    Some great GOP vote getting strategy and idea have emerged from on this site after the massacre.
    Attract Latino voters by joining the anti gun lobby.
    Offend women voters by calling them passive and helpless in a crisis.
    What next Conservatives??? A middle class tax hike to keep your donors happy?. take SS away? Cut Medicare and Medicaid? Defund "Meal on Wheels" Stave the poor? Any other attack on those who are not Corporations, we all know "corporations are people."
    What a winning combo for the next election!
  • #75
    !
    I think it's offensive as well as a stupid assertion. Same as when people make the claim that this wouldn't have happened if we hadn't taken God out of our schools. Though we no longer FORCE religion on children in public schools we certainly haven't banned it considering the number of religious clubs in public schools that get equal treatment like any other extra curricular activity.
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    Offend? Not in the least. Some men probably would have had to die, but one of us could have got him, and ripped his sick little head off.
    Still though without a gun to defend with, it would have been a real roll of the dice as to who got shot.
  • #16
    !
    @Thunderchicken that is a consideration and calculated risk in my plan, however I am to damn dumb not to go for it. Been in a situation or 2 before, scared, but totally amped up to eliminate the threat too. I tell my wife and sons, fear us a hell of a motivator.

    F. E. A. R= False Evidence Appearing Real
  • #26
    !
    @Thegrif

    Yeah me to. In one situation, afterward I was glad I resisted the impulse to act. It would have made things worse. It's funny the things that go through you mind in times of severe stress.
  • #18
    !
    Men are not bullet proof.... But Men, as in non feminized, not afraid of spiders Men ... Might place themselves in the line of fire and put fear into the attacker that Men may drop his Game Play score before he gets to the next Level.... Because that is what this last kid and others were doing... They were playing a 3d video game... they had practiced the Game over and over... In one case a young kid had never fired a real gun in his life.... He stole a gun and shot 8 of his school mates..... He fired 8 rounds in 45 seconds ... He hit 8 targets.... All head shots or upper torso.... Ask any cop what the average number of shots to hits when firing at a person by a well trained police officer... It is about 2 hits in 10 rounds...... How did a kid that had never fired a real gun do this... He Practiced for years playing games like Delta Force, Battlefield, US Combat, Americas Soldier ect....... When he walked into that school his targets were just Game targets .... This last Idiot had spent years becoming accustomed to dead bodies bleeding on the screen in front of them... He had become accustomed to dressing in combat gear and clearing a room full of people by quick shooting moving targets....

  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #37
    !
    @Quantummist EXACTLY right!! Our kids train most of their lives on first person shooters games for just such a thing!!! Then we get all surprised when one of them goes out and does what they have been trained to do??? Get a clue people!!! Killing someone in a video game is the same as killing someone in real life to certain parts of your brain!! We have our kids killing things over and over and over again while their brains are still developing!!!
  • #39
    !
    @woodtick57 There are studies bearing what he says out...it is really interesting...even the military knows this and has taken to using video games/simulators to train the troops to shoot better...
  • R Load more replies

  • #79
    !
    Judging by the killers photo, I believe a male presence might have intimidated the killer. I say might. I certainly think an armed police officer would have.
  • #80
    !
    He didn't single out Kindergartners because they posed a threat. I think had there been a pre-K daycare between his house and the school he would likely have gone there.
  • #52
    !
    YEP!! Liberals have turned America into the sissy society.
    Everyone wins, If little Jimmy does good, He gets a trophy, But little Bobby and little Henry, didnt do so well, But also get a trophy, Because in a liberal welfare non self reliant society, No one is a loser.
    These todays young people have gotten a major dose of Liberal indoctrination.
    Obama gave guns to Mexican drug cartels who kill Americans and rape and mame and kill their own people, and thats just fine. But he intends to take guns away from legal American citizens. Its called Liberal hypocrissy, Hillary got 4 Americans killed in Libya and lied about it, and Liberals ran out in droves and voted for these corrupted democrats. That is the fundemantal change they promissed in 2008.
    Its here now!!!!!!
  • #44
    !
    Not Offensive, nor POLITICALLY CORRECT which is the actual issue.

    The Assertion isn't totally correct either.... I know several women who have faced REAL fire and a commensurate number of men who crumbled in the same situation so it's not correctly about sex.

    It is however a somewhat valid point that the masculine mindset of stand up and fight MAY be part of the solution to these situations. Females are generally more tolerant and passive in the face of aggression. Males USED TO learn to fight as they grew up and generally put up with a lot less before their "fight" switch is tripped.

    I think the author's poorly presented point as also from the wrong direction.... As we "sissify" the world with zero tolerance for fighting and sensitivity training we're losing something very important.

    MEN are the defenders in the human race, much as the sissifiers want to change it, that's the way it is. There are occasional female warriors but they are the exception.

    The Wackos are behaving like predators and the possibility exists that they select target rich environments much like lions choose the weaker members of a herd as prey.

    It's a bad presentation of an interesting question we SHOULD BE asking rather than appointing a clown to head a kangaroo panel to invent more useless laws.
  • #30
    !
    "In general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm" - Clearly, Charlotte did not attend Catholic grade schools. ;)
  • #14
    !
    ARMED men...or women, for that matter. Time to stop having people be sitting ducks in 'gun-free zones.' Criminals clearly don't care about signs telling them that guns are not allowed.
  • #12
    !
    The theater in Colorado was filled with men when the mass shooting happened there. Some of the men shielded the women they were with and died protecting them, but they did not stop the shooter. Even a man who is expertly trained in unarmed combat is at an extreme disadvantage against another man who is firing a semi-automatic rifle. He would need a whole lot of luck to stop him.
  • #21
    !
    But that was a dark theater and many thought he was a 'prop', in other words an
    'actor' to go down the aisles to scare people, kind of like interaction in a Play, etc.
    Also, he came through the Exit, I think.. so he was facing the audience, and I don't
    know if at anytime his back was turned away from them. Not sure, as I wasn't there. But in broad daylight,he came through the doors, shot through, granted, but
    at some point he would have had his back open, if nothing else maybe to re-load.
    I don't know, but ,I do agree that it may have been possible for him to be taken down at some point. The episode lasted for over twenty minutes.
  • #33
    !
    @mimi57 My personal decision would be to go for them, because I never liked the idea of being shot in the back and there is no telling what a determined man can do. Have you ever heard the story about why General MacArthur convinced the Army to start carrying .45 automatics instead of .38 caliber sidearms?
  • #62
    !
    @mimi57 I could not easily find a link to the story on the internet, so I will tell you what I heard from memory. Sorry if some of the details are off:

    Douglas MacArthur served in the Philippines as a young officer. At the time, there was a violent rebellion by the native Moros who wanted to form their own Islamic country on the southern island of Mindanao (they still do, by the way). One day one of them rushed at an officer near MacArthur with a machete. The officer drew his .38 revolver and emptied all six shots into the man, but he lived long enough to kill the officer with his machete. After that, MacArthur adopted the .45 caliber Colt Model 1911 for its additional stopping power.
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    All men are? I've known some pretty huge cowards in my time that were male. I guess if they pass the hero test you have invented then they should work there.
  • #121
    !
    How does more men equal less murder in anyone's head we only have a couple options ban assault rifles and high capacity mags or prevent young white males from owning any type of gun or we can just do nothing and keep having mass murder shooting sprees either way corporations will make a profit and capitalism will be strong I don't care either way
  • #118
    !
    Here's an idea.
    We should complete the switch to electronic schools.
    It's going to happen at some point, and the sooner the better.
    We have the technology. There's no excuse for dilly-dallying. Had we implemented this sooner this massacre and others like it would never have happened.
    No excuses. The more technologically advanced society is the better off everybody is. Technological advancement projects are a wise investment and a good use of tax dollars that would actually pay tax payers back in the end through the increased wealth that comes from technological advancement.
    Not only would that have prevented the massacre, students would no longer have to live in the same geographic area in order to take a class. If there are only 20 kids interested in a class living in different parts of the country, the class can still be held.
    For things requiring more hands on activity we could still have classes where you actually attend in person, but we wouldn't need an actual building for that sole purpose. It would be enough for example, for a chemistry teacher to rent a room in an office building or even just use his house.
  • #117
    !
    Doesn't offend me, but they've been working for years to eradicate men. They're so hard to come by these days. Last man I saw in a school was my 80-something yr old gym teacher in 1989.
  • #113
    !
    I happen to agree. Look at United Airlines Flight 93 ... those weren't women that rushed the cockpit and fought with the hijackers to keep them from reaching their target! Not saying all men are capable of this as we all know some women are more manly than some of these sissy men these days ... lol!
  • #45
    !
    People, the problem was not what was at the school. The problem was what came to the school, a demented young man bent on doing evil. The same for what happened in the San Ysidro, California McDonald's & the Springfield, Oregon high school & Columbine High School & The movie theater in Aroura, Colorado & the shopping mall in the Northwest & the family restaurant in Kileen, Texas & the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. I mean if you think having men being there would have made the difference, what about armed men? Then ask yourself why that theory didn't work at the Marine Barracks in Beruit?
  • #43
    !
    It doesn't matter what the gender is, it's the knowledge about how best to deal with the situation. These ladies were absolutely well trained in how to protect the kids, but not all of them actually had training about taking on a gunman when forced to do so. I think, if I understand correctly, instinct told some of them to attack him as a last resort. But, none of us actually know the last minute situation they were in. I call it extreme bravery to protect the kids.
  • R Load more comments...
Post