This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Sure it's illegal, but without a national database that records all firearms transactions, how could anyone possibly keep track? That's why I want to have a national database, and eliminate the loophole EVERYWHERE. Only that will make it more difficult for the bad guys to get weapons.
Let's say this can happen. Never heard of it, but let's say it can. What percentage of people in each state do you think has a CCP? Let's say CT where the shooting took place. 176,446 people have a right to conceal carry. My link 3,574,097 total people in the state My link That is 20% that can carry. Less actually do. There just won't be a total shootout.
You don't need a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona.
That's a special analogy.Typical liberal viewpoint. One "special person" ####s his pants and everyones gotta wear depends.
George Zimmerman is a legal gun owner...nuff said
Totally agree but our biggest problem(as is always the case)is our politicians coming to an agreement on anything that is common sense.The Assault Weapons bill turned into one big joke when it finally passed after both sides negotiated back and forth until finally nothing was really accomplished.Will this time be any different?I highly doubt it.
Worse, people who need to see a psychologist might choose not to.
This might be some of the worst logic I've ever seen.Drunk driving ban? See example of deadly accident while driving sober!Minimum driving age? See example of deadly accident where driver was 30!
So legal gun owners are more likely to use that gun violently?
Establishing laws to prohibit the sale or ownership of Assault rifles, high capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons would not likely have a huge immediate impact because there will still be an ample amount of guns remaining out there for a number of years. After the law is implemented however, it would make it not only more difficult to get the guns (as law-abiding citizens would turn them in), but it would also make it much more expensive to purchase such items due to the more limited quantities available.Prohibiting the sale and ownership of such guns/magazines is not sufficient without stiff (including mandatory) sentencing. With that combination, it would in fact have an immediate impact and the ability to get such items would decrease over time to an "acceptable" level.Brought to you by the anti-assault/semi-automatic/high-capacity magazine pervert chicken/duck.
You think it's reasonable to expect immediate results after you guys all had been stockpiling this stuff for years? No, it will take time.
One of the best criticisms, IMO, of the so-called "liberal mindset" in these situations is that there is tendency to react too quickly based on anecdotal incidents. However, in this case you as a conservative are doing the same thing- you are arguing AGAINST certain proposed measures based on anecdotal incidents. Now the argument for both of these proposals is that if enacted they will make mass shootings occur with less frequency. Not gun crime in general, but mass shootings specifically, As you know, I lean against the first idea, and am very much in favor of the second. But in neither case should we depend on anecdotal information to either confirm or argue against our thinking.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
I'm very obviously against gun restriction to stable trained civilians but I have no problem with mandating more extensive background checks and/or adding in mental health interviews to earn a "premium" license that permits "assault rifle" ownership. I think it's overkill and I disagree that it will keep weapons out of the hands of motivated criminals... But I'm also willing to compromise by making the process slightly more inconvenient and MIGHT help keep weapons out of the hands of those wish to do harm. I'm skeptical but again I'm willing to entertain certain ideas as long as they don't ifringee. High capacity mag restrictions are silly because it doesn't work (see Va Tech) and "assault weapons" bans are stupid because its poorly defined (based on looks, not function), and it doesn't work (see columbine)..... Not to mention that this is like outlawing wide mouth beer cans to cut back on Drunk Driving. That and "assault rifles" are used In a tiny fraction of crimes. It's a dumb knee jerk reaction. Make decisions based on real data not emotion.
Oh.. I was unaware these guns had expiration dates. Good to know.
I'm sure they did. But for every Sandy Hook there would be 30 deaths a year from kids breaking into desk drawers and stealing guns. Further, I would rather have a teacher spend their time shepharding the children to safety than the teacher unlocking their drawer, going to another draw for the bullets and then fumbling with inserting the bullets into the gun. Not to mention the potential for a petrified teacher shooting wildly and hitting the kids. There are so many situations with terrible outcomes which could happen in the daily course of the school day which would result in deaths associated with arming teachers.
I don't agree with it.
They do?
Gonna need you to show your work here.And who he hell is advocating just leaving guns in desk drawers?
My vote was for a small percentage of staff at each school being certified/trained and carrying concealed. An armed security officer at more schools (currently deployed at ~30% nationally right now) wouldn't hurt either. We're not talking about national guard posting up with assault rifles at the doors, or having handguns stashed all over campus within reach of kids here. Just a few well trained teachers/staff scattered throughout the campus carrying a sidearm discreetly in the event something goes down. Need I point out, yet again, the body counts in shooting sprees with civilian intervention are far lower than those that wait on police to respond into a gun-free zone? It's common sense.
What you described above would be extremely irresponsible for ANY gun owner to do. When you carry, the gun is on your person at all times. Never in a drawer or accessible to others. And we're not talking about every teacher. Just one or two maybe. Hell, it can be the janitor. Just allow concealed carry and be done with it.
Completely bizzarre. I thought people were joking at first. I just don't know how to respond to someone with a view of the world so completely different from my own. I mean really, what can you say?
30 deaths a year? please. It would be the ultimate in irresponsibility for anyone to store a gun in a drawer, much less a public building inhabited by kids. No one is proposing that.Suppose said weapons were stored in safes with biometric locks. Further, suppose this teacher attended yearly training, including tactical situations similar to what police officers go through.
I got the point he was getting at but I am rather curious as to where you stand on this whole issue that is being thrown around(very loosely I might add)?To be honest here,I have no clue.
Well, Icon said they should carry the gun on them. If you consider having them stored in a (locked) drawer irresponsible, how do you feel about carrying them on their person? As to the 30, I just threw that out there. There obviously isn't any way to accurately measure something like that (at least no way that I'm aware of). Safes with biometric locks? So while the teacher is spending time unlocking and loading the weapon, the children aren't being adequately taken care of. A teacher's time would be much better spent guiding the children out of a dangerous situation than training the teacher to become Wyatt Earp.
not really a fan of carrying one on their person. I'm envisioning something like this, but obviously something that would have to meet some fairly stringent guidelines, and installed by the school district. Again - i'm not advocating turning every teacher into john Wayne; rather I'm saying we give them the same opportunity that we give commercial airline pilots.
But you're advocating turning them into Wyatt Earp?
+1. The operative issue is children. Situation is different than planes where majority of people are adults. Keep schools gun free.
1) how long do you think it takes to unlock a biometric safe? Hint... It won't interfere w the teachers ability to "take care of" the kids. 2) explain to me how a teacher can "guide children out of a dangerous situation" when a man walks into the classroom with a shotgun. If it was my child in that room id much rather have the teacher trained and carrying a pistol to defend my child, than hiding in the closet and hoping he's not one of the 14 people killed (on average) before the police arrive.
20 years ago in the obscurity of Wyoming, my high school had a police officer tasked to our school - he was there to deal with truancy, drugs, fights, and general mayhem. Not sure if he shared time with another school or not. He was most definitely carrying at all times.Do you find this to be unacceptable as well?
It's tough for things like schools unless you're going to make kids stay inside the entire time. Also there's a cost involved in installing these kinds of things everywhere - you ready to have taxes go to something like this?
More extensive gun control? I really don't care that much. I've never seen anything that leads me to believe it would be all that effective- for every study or anecdote showing that it helped in a certain place or a certain population to reduce access to or the # of guns, there's another one showing that maybe it helps to have an armed population as a deterrent. In that sense I kind of agree with the point I think icon was trying to make, I just think he did a really bad job of making it.But at the same time I think the notion that the "right" to own a gun is incredibly important and something people need in their lives for protection is kind of silly, and I don't understand why we perpetuate it. The idea of effective self-defense is ridiculous. The chances that a gun owner or someone in their family will be at the other end of your "self-defense" weapon when it goes off are higher than the chances that it'll stop a home intruder or a school shooter or whatever fantasy they've got in their head. And the idea that we need private gun ownership to protect against the tyranny of government is even more foolish.
Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.
Argument: Most have been by tackling the gunner, not by shooting him. The main reason why the gunner is being tackled is because most mass shootings occur in "Gun Free Zones". If people are properly trained and armed more people will act.
You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.
Fair enough and thanks for the reply.Your replies here are consistent with that totally so my conclusion is you just love to debate.Next step after we get accurate findings is finding politicians willing to go along with it........................................................................Now that is a dream
Link?
You lump bad teachers and good teachers together and think he wants to put a gun into each one's hands?You put a lot more faith in teachers than I do. There are many that are not even good at their first profession teaching.Ah yes so lets turn schools into prisons with metal detectors and double locking doors with security checkpoints. That's a much less intimidating environment than a couple welll trained teachers with a pistol hidden on their person.
at the "could care less" in the opening argument.
I don't think so. A police officer doesn't bother me. In terms of training and experience, big difference between a police officer and a security guard.
1. You're forcing the teacher to choose what options he/she must take and I don't think it is reasonable to expect a teacher who may be facing an armed gunman to control both aspects.2. Explain to me how a teacher can walk over to a safe, load a gun and shoot a man who walks into a classroom with a shotgun. Does he ask the gunman to wait? I believe the discussion we were having was centered around the gunman being in the school and not necessarily standing at the door ready to open it.I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Lighten up Francis.
