The article proves people like teachers don't want guns in their schools despite what gun crazy conservatives are saying. Not only that but the article proved you wrong from what you said in the other thread. You said guns make society safer, but the article clearly shows that is not the case at all. Only 1.6% of mass shootings were successfully stopped due to civilian action, proving more guns is not the solution at all, it will just make things worse. Maybe banning guns ain't the answer but encouraging mass consumption of guns isn't good either. As a person may carry a gun for "protection" but they are actually more likely to get killed with it. That is just common sense. 

what i find ironic is, many of the type of people who are mocking the NRA for blaiming media (news media, movies, videogames) are the same people who blamed some obscure youtube video for the bangazi consolute attacks. such hypocrites.

the only person to blame is the evil monster that killed innocent children. not gun, not media,only him.

Culturally Europeans more often blame  causality in actions on society, while the more individualistic society of America is more likely to blame individuals for their own actions. It is very evident when reading European and American contrasting views on many issues.

I actually find the suggestion that armed guards in schools are a necessity, quite saddening. It is so far removed from the reality in most other western countries it's not even funny. The suggestion that we need more guns to fix the situation is even less funny.

I agree that trying to ban guns is not the solution but lawmakers in the US really do look into better gun control through legislation i.e. make it harder for people to own/get high powered, automatics etc. The line that people are the problem, not guns, is old hat and has thus far only served to paralyse people into inaction. It may be true, but it might be that tighter gun regulation is necessary until such time as the US can sort out the social issues that are leading people going on shooting sprees. As hard as it would be, it is easier to regulate guns than social change.

And what's to stop the good guy with a gun turning into the bad guy with a gun?

I don't really care as I don't live there but it looks like in the end you'll all end up killing each other until there is just two people left, both with guns like a western shoot out!

If we want to have a well-regulated militia for civilian peace-keeping, then how about we actually regulate these people

Let's try:
1: Training requirements similar to the level of police or national guard
2: A strict limit of one of each type of gun per household (handgun, semiautomatic, shotgun) except in cases of antiquities (which it would be illegal to have ammunition for)
3: Recurring background checks on gun owners, every three or five years or so.

You know, I really don't think this cartoon is helping your argument. Also, you should stop attacking people in your replies. Keep it civil if you want to be taken seriously.

thanks, but its hard to respond to people seriously when they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. (this isnt directed at you)

Guns aren't the problem. Just look at marijuana. Just because that is illegal, it doesn't mean people can't get their hands on it. Banning guns would mean only criminals would have access to guns...that is bad.

What we need is better mental health services so people don't have that urge to kill in the first place.

Maybe it's time that we point our guns to the right people as the 2nd amendment's true intention suggests...... :P