2Cdo 2Cdo:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
It doesn't seem to matter that much either way. There was that yahoo that snapped at a military base--in Texas, no less-and that didn't stop the guy from killing twelve people or so.
You do realise that military bases exercise some of the strictest gun control found anywhere. We don't all just walk around with fully loaded weapons all day. In fact I would say that a military base would be ideal for a gunman bent on killing. Weapons all locked up in one building, ammo locked up in another which is usually as far away as possible from the buildings with the weapons!

Indeed. When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor there were repeated stories of supply sargents refusing to issue arms and ammunition unless authorized. Most of them were brushed aside by the troops who then busted into the arms lockers to get weapons.
In the aftermath of the attack not a one of them was sanctioned for the act.
And with the sheriff I agree with what he ran into...
$1:
“I made the whole case, based in provable facts. The teacher said, and I quote, ‘I don’t care about the facts.’ She only cared about her emotional response,” Alderden said.
He's dead right. Gun control fanatics do not care about the facts. They are afraid of guns and they want them banned no matter the fact that every jurisdiction in the USA with a gun ban in place is one of the most dangerous places in the USA. While the places with the least gun control - notably Vermont - are the safest.