Shooting at Florida high school

He called himself amazing on CNN, him at Trump could go on a Nation wide ego tour .

He's the boss. Buck stops with him. He needs to resign in an effort to show he's sorry for his departments complicity in those 17 murders

And the coward Peterson relaesed a statement thru his attorney that he thought shots were coming from outside WHILE A STUDENT ran past him into the building to save his girlfriend .Fuck him.

Absurd. Another case of Trump not knowing when to stop.

Reads as if someone is terrified that he'll be found out to be a Bathroom Republican.

I don't blame the sheriff - he literally can't be everywhere at once. But if a cop with boots on the ground watches a kid run toward the shooting and he doesn't? Houston we have a problem. 90 percent of the motherfuckers (including females) I served with in the military would have the intestinal fortitude to run toward danger because that's what you do when you wear a uniform. If you aren't willing to do that, find another profession.

I think we're all agreed, except the on the sheriff. He's not manager at walmart, and even those guys are accountable for ethical lapses on the part of their employees. The sheriff threw his employee under the bus and said, "not my problem."

You're downright savage. Colonialism taught us that!

Why do you hate the First? Why do you hate Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? Why do you think your right to own a gun supercedes my right not to get fucking shot?

These stupid absolutist questions were brought to you by yours, number 2, and the letters G, F, and Y.

disagree - unless the head honcho fosters & encourages an environment of shirking responsibility, or acting in an unprofessional manner said head honcho can be held responsible, but is not responsible in reality. It used to piss me off when officers or NCO's in the military were in the hot-seat for some joker living off-post or stationed hours away fucked up and the military blames the officer. Sorry we aren't all chained together or living in a big fucking tent or building together like in the Revolutionary War or WWII. A leader's "span of control" is huge in today's world.

I don't think so. President Trump is the type of person who puts the lives of others over his own personal safety.

I always hated the expression "it happened on his watch" often regarding a president.

A bird crapped on my Rolex once.

And I felt especially bad since it all happened on my watch.

HA! Well played.....

Don't want to be held accountable when the Kitchens Administration wrecks the country, hey?

Seriously, Trump apologists -- at what point does Cheeto Jesus' fantasy-peddling reach critical mass?

Hopefully we reach the "ive accomplished everything I wanted and now I'm stepping down/not seeking reelection" point before some crazy leftist tries to martyr him

He won't step down voluntarily. His entire silver-spoon-fed life has taught him one thing: he can do and say whatever he wants, and the good times will just keep on rollin'.

It's 60 degrees here today. I'm just gonna disengage from the internet til this nonsense blows over...

He is the oldest elected president of the U.S. in history and doesn't look all that healthy. The second best thing for the U.S. would be for him to die of natural causes in office. The best would be if he chose to step down.

Assassination would be an unmitigated disaster.

But think of the ratings!!

Many people have loved to bring up the implementation of gun control laws in Australia after the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 when a man used various firearms (mainly) to murder some 35 people.

Reading about the gun buy back programs on Wikipedia yields this information

Under federal government co-ordination, all states and territories of Australia restricted the legal ownership and use of self-loading rifles, self-loading shotguns, and tightened controls on their legal use by recreational shooters. The government initiated a mandatory "buy-back" scheme with the owners paid according to a table of valuations. Some 643,000 firearms were handed in at a cost of $350 million which was funded by a temporary increase in the Medicare levy which raised $500 million.[23] Media, activists, politicians and some family members of victims, notably Walter Mikac (who lost his wife and two children), spoke out in favour of the changes.

Notice the numbers, 643,000 firearms bought back at a cost of 350 million dollars.

Now, scale that up to something in the U.S. to make a reasonable dent in American firearms availability you would have to expand it ONE HUNDRED TIMES OVER!!!

100 times 643,000 would mean buying back 64,300,000 firearms in the United States. Which about 20% of the estimated number of firearms in civilian hands in the United States currently.

100 times 350 million would be a whopping 35 BILLION dollars!!!

All that to leave nearly a quarter a BILLION firearms in the hands of civilians in America.

Think about that when someone sings the praises of Australian gun control measures.

But think of the boost to the economy

By giving people who like owning guns more money? If I were a gambler I would say that the majority of weapons that end up being "bought back" would be old, poorly maintained firearms that no one has taken a second look at in years or even decades.

damn Dayton with some liberal bubble-busting MATH for your asses bitches! 35 billion dollars for mostly cheap ass obsolete weapons. And I have ZERO FUCKING DOUBT by the time it's over a good percentage of those weapons will end up "missing" from the inventory and get "bought back" more than once. It would end up being fucking FUBAR unless our government (no matter who is in charge) suddenly gets their shit together.

Florida officer Scot Peterson defends response to Parkland shooting

False dichotomy. The vast, vast majority of gun owners don't violate anyone's rights. Hell, no one owning a gun violates your right not to get shot. Only the firing of those guns in your direction does. Shockingly, that's already banned.

Since hardly anyone in this country advocates a total gun ban, and no such proposals have ever gotten anywhere in any legislature, your false equivalency has no basis in fact. The discussion tends to go more like this:

The left: "Maybe we should prevent people from owning automatic weapons. Surely shotguns, rifles and handguns are enough."

The right: "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!"

The left: "Or maybe we could register weapons so that it's easier to identify guns that are used in committing a crime."

The right: "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!"

The left: "Well, what about training and licensing, so that before you can own a gun, you have to have at least a minimum amount of competence?"

The right: "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!"

The left: "Or maybe we could just study gun violence in the hopes of finding a solution?"

The right: "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!"​

... and so on.

We don’t believe the left.

Alex Jones and Breitbart though, THOSE guys know the truth!

I have heard enough leftists talk out both sides of their mouth in this issue, watches California’s incremental assault on gun rights, and observed the UK sand Australian disasters closely enough since my youth to see what the left wants.