***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (1 Viewer)

[ATC1]

I'd like to see how it would work out in Universities first where students are old enough to understand and parents may not be as concerned as a parent of an elementary school parent.

 

[adonis]

National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre blamed Hollywood, video games music, the courts and more on Friday for creating a culture of violence in the United States.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said at a Washington press event, adding, “With all the money in the federal budget can’t we afford to put a police officer in every single school?”

These guys seriously believe that?

Maybe you can teach me something here. What else stops a bad guy with a gun? Kind words and an easy smile? Or were you thinking more along the lines of nonlethal force?Speaking of which - what if we gave teachers Tasers instead of guns? Would that be a fair compromise here?

Just seems to be a myopic view of the problem.

 

[Dvorak]

National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre blamed Hollywood, video games music, the courts and more on Friday for creating a culture of violence in the United States.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said at a Washington press event, adding, “With all the money in the federal budget can’t we afford to put a police officer in every single school?”

These guys seriously believe that?

Of course not, sometimes they run out of bullets.And I really like the idea of a billionaire turning into a super-hero crime fighter. Bill Gates has really let us all down.

 

[simey]

Where are the examples of someone carrying a permit that shoots someone outside a bar in an altercation, or following someone suspicious down an alleyway, or someone shoots the wrong person when they show up at a scene trying to help? You said there was a bunch of examples of these.

I linked to a story I ran across where just this week a permit holder shot some guy in a pizza place over a petty fight.You guys who want to keep equating concealed permit holder with absolute good guy, let's let him carry his gun whereever he wants are blinded by your own personal perspective.

You don't even know what my perspective is.

 

[boofatty]

I never knew what it was like to be so scared that someone would hurt me that I felt the need to carry a gun. In the last several years with less gun control, I find myself concerned that anyone, anywhere could be holding a tool designed to kill. A gun owner will tell you that their gun could save my life some day. Aside from the extremely rare and highly unlikelyJohn Wayne scenario, I think it's much more likely that a loaded gun could accidentally discharge and hurt someone, because whether you believe it or not, that does happen more often than heroics. I don't associate with gang bangers, nor do I live in the areas they do. I do live in areas full of scared gun owners. Today I am more concerned about scared gun owners than I am of gang bangers. The nuts that do mass killings are not typically gang bangers. They are more frequently suburbanites like me that have too many guns. Gang members usually kill gang members, not kindergarten kids.Fewer guns = fewer deaths by gun. It ain't rocket science.

Accidental discharges occur while a weapon is being holstered or unholstered. It doesn't just go off on someone's hip. If there was no restrictions on where I can carry, I would never have to touch it until I am in my house to put it back in the safe. Theoretically Less weapons does = fewer deaths by those weapons. But you want our police to be armed, correct? If the weapons they carry would be the ones we get rid of, the statement would be reversed.

Tell that to the guy that two wks ago killed his own 7yo son while he climbed into his truck. Gun accidentally went off and killed the kid sitting in the truck.

 

[ATC1]

Where are the examples of someone carrying a permit that shoots someone outside a bar in an altercation, or following someone suspicious down an alleyway, or someone shoots the wrong person when they show up at a scene trying to help? You said there was a bunch of examples of these.

Here's a start:http://www.bradycamp...es-misdeeds.pdf

You didn't see the Trayvon Martin shooting in the "alleyway" example?

And I think I said almost or actually shoots the wrong person - it's actually the reason I suggested that the person who said the Giffords event was held in a gun free zone was incorrect. A guy with a CCP showed up and almost shot the kid who had disarmed Loughner, but did jam him against a wall for good measure.

I do not think the scenerio in the Trayvon Martin incident is something that is common. I also don't think that a citizen accidentally shooting the wrong person while trying to help is a common event either.

I don't think a parent with a fear of guns will find solace in your response. The answer IMO is that I think the laws in Arizona (not needing a permit to conceal carry) and Florida (need stricter requirments and to change the Stand Your Ground law) need to be much tighter for gun owners if they want parents to trust CCP holder in "Gun Free Zones".

I agree with stricter requirements in Arizona and Florida, but that wasn't what I was answering to.

opposing side does not want to hear, "Not common".

 

[Brony]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Insert "Gov't will #### this up like they do everything else like Medicare and blah blah blah" rhetoric

 

[Glass Joe]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

How about this - guns are dangerous. Having them around you introduces danger. I don't want to increase the chances of something going wrong around my kids. Holy #### are you gun nuts myopic.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Nice. You can not see other peoples sides, very rational sides, so you call names. I can see this debate is going nowhere

case in point. I'm done with this. if you have a rational point to make, I'll listen. until then, good day.

 

[Borat]

National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre blamed Hollywood, video games music, the courts and more on Friday for creating a culture of violence in the United States.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said at a Washington press event, adding, “With all the money in the federal budget can’t we afford to put a police officer in every single school?”

These guys seriously believe that?

Maybe you can teach me something here. What else stops a bad guy with a gun? Kind words and an easy smile? Or were you thinking more along the lines of nonlethal force?Speaking of which - what if we gave teachers Tasers instead of guns? Would that be a fair compromise here?

Just seems to be a myopic view of the problem.

But you otherwise agree with the statement then?

 

[tom22406]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Insert "Gov't will #### this up like they do everything else like Medicare and blah blah blah" rhetoric

Did you read the last Assault Weapons ban that was put into law?That clearly showed me that.It was a joke.

 

[Gr00vus]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

How about this - guns are dangerous. Having them around you introduces danger. I don't want to increase the chances of something going wrong around my kids. Holy #### are you gun nuts myopic.

would you agree that a gun-free zone, in a world where guns exist, can also dangerous?

 

[ATC1]

I never knew what it was like to be so scared that someone would hurt me that I felt the need to carry a gun. In the last several years with less gun control, I find myself concerned that anyone, anywhere could be holding a tool designed to kill. A gun owner will tell you that their gun could save my life some day. Aside from the extremely rare and highly unlikelyJohn Wayne scenario, I think it's much more likely that a loaded gun could accidentally discharge and hurt someone, because whether you believe it or not, that does happen more often than heroics. I don't associate with gang bangers, nor do I live in the areas they do. I do live in areas full of scared gun owners. Today I am more concerned about scared gun owners than I am of gang bangers. The nuts that do mass killings are not typically gang bangers. They are more frequently suburbanites like me that have too many guns. Gang members usually kill gang members, not kindergarten kids.Fewer guns = fewer deaths by gun. It ain't rocket science.

Accidental discharges occur while a weapon is being holstered or unholstered. It doesn't just go off on someone's hip. If there was no restrictions on where I can carry, I would never have to touch it until I am in my house to put it back in the safe. Theoretically Less weapons does = fewer deaths by those weapons. But you want our police to be armed, correct? If the weapons they carry would be the ones we get rid of, the statement would be reversed.

Tell that to the guy that two wks ago killed his own 7yo son while he climbed into his truck. Gun accidentally went off and killed the kid sitting in the truck.

The gun was not on his person and he admits that. He was trying to sell the gun and did not realize it was loaded, so he was wreckless with it placing it on the consul. Brings up another point that gun people will disown me on. Making carry weapons have either a manual safety or a grip safety. I prefer grip safety.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Insert "Gov't will #### this up like they do everything else like Medicare and blah blah blah" rhetoric

and who invented a "gun free zone"?

 

[Apes with Guns]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

School officials meaning teachers/principals/counselors?What are the rules, and liability restrictions for these people? If they kill someone, what happens?

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

I don't want some school administrator deciding on the fly what situations warrant them pulling and discharging their weapon around a bunch of kids. Not every case is going to be as clear cut as this school shooting and mistakes will be made.I would also worry that a situation which could be resolved without violence being escalated into a shoot out by an over zealous armed administrator.I want law enforcement professionals making these types of decisions. No matter how much training these school officials will receive, it won't be as much as a police officer.Just my two cents.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

there's plenty of irrational behavior on both sides."all guns are dangerous and should disappear" is just as irrational as "guns for everyone!"

 

[Borat]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

This is like saying that you live in fear of your house burning down unless you have a fire extinguisher on hand. Is anyone seriously experiencing fear if they don't have one? No, probably not. But it's nice to be prepared, so responsible people keep one in the house.But I know that it feels good to say that the other side is "living in fear" and that it makes them seem irrational, so I do understand your choice of words here.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

I don't want some school administrator deciding on the fly what situations warrant them pulling and discharging their weapon around a bunch of kids. Not every case is going to be as clear cut as this school shooting and mistakes will be made.I would also worry that a situation which could be resolved without violence being escalated into a shoot out by an over zealous armed administrator.I want law enforcement professionals making these types of decisions. No matter how much training these school officials will receive, it won't be as much as a police officer.Just my two cents.

thanks.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

School officials meaning teachers/principals/counselors?What are the rules, and liability restrictions for these people? If they kill someone, what happens?

yes.TBD - I'd assume that it would be harsher than the liability restrictions for similar actions in the real world, but that's for the legislatures to sort out.

 

[Bogeys]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Nice. You can not see other peoples sides, very rational sides, so you call names. I can see this debate is going nowhere

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

Seriously? You don't understand why some of us, heck a lot of people, don't want guns around our kids? Because they are guns! Jeebus, are you really that thick?

 

[TobiasFunke]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.

All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Everything has a cost and a benefit. 1. Qualified, trained and vetted people with properly secured and concealed weapons sometimes kill people they might not have if they didn't have access to weapons. Qualifications vary, training varies, the vetting process varies, and even if you make it tight as a drum some people will fall through the cracks. I don't know how often it happens, but I'm fairly certain the number is greater than zero. People have offered up stories in this thread. This link provides tallies of wrongdoing by people authorized to carry concealed weapons. I'm not saying the harm outweighs the good done by their presence in society, but pretending the harm done is zero is just stupid. If you want people to take any pro-gun argument seriously, admitting this is the first step.

2. Just because a reason is "soft" doesn't make it wrong. Some people want to protect their kids' innocence and don't want them to get scared, or they don't want their kids to feel comfortable with the presence of guns and think of it as normal instead of understanding their dangers. It doesn't matter if you think that perspective is emotional or irrational. If they feel that way, it's real and it's valid.

Also, separately, the benefit is being overstated here IMO. People act like if there had just been a weapon or two somewhere at Sandy Hook where an authority figure or two could get to it, the killing would have been limited or stopped entirely. But there were armed guards on campus at Columbine. Virginia Tech, too. A couple authority figures with weapons isn't a guarantee of safety. Far from it. It does help (and the anti-gun people need to admit that), but let's not overstate the case.

 

[Henry Ford]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Then you're not reading everything.Having a gun in a room increases the likelihood that someone will get shot. From, you know, zero. The likelihood of a school shooting happening is very low. The likelihood of a person who has a gun screwing up with that gun is also low, but believed to be higher than being in a school shooting by people arguing against any guns on campuses. Therefore, the net effect of having a gun free zone is higher safety than not.That's the argument.

 

[Gr00vus]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

there's plenty of irrational behavior on both sides."all guns are dangerous and should disappear" is just as irrational as "guns for everyone!"

All guns are dangerous. Their sole function is to enact destruction.Should they all disappear? I think that'd be great. I don't see why that's an irrational hope. Is that a practical approach to take for the short term? Definitely not. But dismissing everyone who starts with that thought in mind as irrational doesn't really work towards any sort of useful solution.

 

[Apes with Guns]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

School officials meaning teachers/principals/counselors?What are the rules, and liability restrictions for these people? If they kill someone, what happens?

yes.TBD - I'd assume that it would be harsher than the liability restrictions for similar actions in the real world, but that's for the legislatures to sort out.

I don't know if something like that would be able to be worked out in a way that would make it a viable option for a teacher to consider taking on the possible liability. I sure as heck wouldn't want to be in the pilot program.My belief that is that the liability involved makes it an untenable solution.

 

[Glass Joe]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

How about this - guns are dangerous. Having them around you introduces danger. I don't want to increase the chances of something going wrong around my kids. Holy #### are you gun nuts myopic.

would you agree that a gun-free zone, in a world where guns exist, can also dangerous?

Everyplace is dangerous when you allow people to carry guns. I see a gun-free zone as a lessening of that risk. I recognize that criminals wouldn't care about a gun free zone. I also recognize that a well-intentioned gun nut with a CCW introduces additional danger. The harm is worse than the benefit.

 

[ATC1]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

I don't want some school administrator deciding on the fly what situations warrant them pulling and discharging their weapon around a bunch of kids. Not every case is going to be as clear cut as this school shooting and mistakes will be made.I would also worry that a situation which could be resolved without violence being escalated into a shoot out by an over zealous armed administrator.

I want law enforcement professionals making these types of decisions. No matter how much training these school officials will receive, it won't be as much as a police officer.

Just my two cents.

Is it possible? There are also plenty of times that a CCP holder pulls his gun and no one ends up killed, or shot. There is room for compromise, but it is an issue worth discussing because there are states that allow CCP holders to carry in school. Trying to dig up some research on parent reaction, but it seems most of these schools are universities right now.

 

[Apple Jack]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

 

[Apes with Guns]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

there's plenty of irrational behavior on both sides."all guns are dangerous and should disappear" is just as irrational as "guns for everyone!"

All guns are dangerous. Their sole function is to enact destruction.Should they all disappear? I think that'd be great. I don't see why that's an irrational hope. Is that a practical approach to take for the short term? Definitely not. But dismissing everyone who starts with that thought in mind as irrational doesn't really work towards any sort of useful solution.

FWIW, I don't want guns to disappear. I enjoy shooting guns.

 

[Don Quixote]

I'd like to see how it would work out in Universities first where students are old enough to understand and parents may not be as concerned as a parent of an elementary school parent.

Doesn't just about every university have a campus police now? I thought most carried arms too, but that may vary by state and school.

 

[tom22406]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.

All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Everything has a cost and a benefit. 1. Qualified, trained and vetted people with properly secured and concealed weapons sometimes kill people they might not have if they didn't have access to weapons. Qualifications vary, training varies, the vetting process varies, and even if you make it tight as a drum some people will fall through the cracks. I don't know how often it happens, but I'm fairly certain the number is greater than zero. People have offered up stories in this thread. This link provides tallies of wrongdoing by people authorized to carry concealed weapons. I'm not saying the harm outweighs the good done by their presence in society, but pretending the harm done is zero is just stupid. If you want people to take any pro-gun argument seriously, admitting this is the first step.

2. Just because a reason is "soft" doesn't make it wrong. Some people want to protect their kids' innocence and don't want them to get scared, or they don't want their kids to feel comfortable with the presence of guns and think of it as normal instead of understanding their dangers. It doesn't matter if you think that perspective is emotional or irrational. If they feel that way, it's real and it's valid.

Also, separately, the benefit is being overstated here IMO. People act like if there had just been a weapon or two somewhere at Sandy Hook where an authority figure or two could get to it, the killing would have been limited or stopped entirely. But there were armed guards on campus at Columbine. Virginia Tech, too. A couple authority figures with weapons isn't a guarantee of safety. Far from it. It does help (and the anti-gun people need to admit that), but let's not overstate the case.

that's fair, and a set of rational arguments. Despite my ranting, I'm not set on this idea, and alot of what I'm presenting is devil's advocate style, trying to advance the argument. I'm carrying this position as far as I can, and am frustrated that the only stated response thus far is "I just don't want guns around my children"...if you can't articulate why, I have no patience for that.I think that this is a valid topic for consideration and should be carefully considered.

 

[Glass Joe]

...And by the way - why are we focusing only on schools? Don't you realize this guy could have done this at a zoo, at a preschool, at a museum, or at an amusement park?

I understand that all you dirty harrys think you'd stop a gunmen from shooting people. You'd probably shoot an innocent bystander trying to do so. And btw, I don't trust ANYONES judgement around a gun, with the exception of law enforcement. I don't for a second believe that policemen and private citizens are equal in judgement of the gravity of a situation.

 

[Apple Jack]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Having fewer of them around would be a start. Making it more challenging for new bad guys on the scene to get would be a start. It will take a long time, but it's kinda important, so it's worth putting in the time.

 

[Gr00vus]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

Is it any less rational of a viewpoint than that of those living in fear to the extent that the only way they feel safe is to carry a gun?

there's plenty of irrational behavior on both sides."all guns are dangerous and should disappear" is just as irrational as "guns for everyone!"

All guns are dangerous. Their sole function is to enact destruction.Should they all disappear? I think that'd be great. I don't see why that's an irrational hope. Is that a practical approach to take for the short term? Definitely not. But dismissing everyone who starts with that thought in mind as irrational doesn't really work towards any sort of useful solution.

FWIW, I don't want guns to disappear. I enjoy shooting guns.

I understand that. I've shot some myself - and part of me enjoyed it. I don't think the risks are worth that small reward however. I think the overall quality of life for the totality of humanity would be more enhanced by decreased destruction than it would be reduced by the lack of a shooting hobby.

 

[moleculo]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

School officials meaning teachers/principals/counselors?What are the rules, and liability restrictions for these people? If they kill someone, what happens?

yes.TBD - I'd assume that it would be harsher than the liability restrictions for similar actions in the real world, but that's for the legislatures to sort out.

I don't know if something like that would be able to be worked out in a way that would make it a viable option for a teacher to consider taking on the possible liability. I sure as heck wouldn't want to be in the pilot program.My belief that is that the liability involved makes it an untenable solution.

good points.

 

[Gr00vus]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Eventually it would be.

 

[badmojo1006]

Here is an editorial that appeared in our local paper coincidentally a day before the Sandy Hook Incident. They were able to talk the girl down. What would have happened if the teachers/principal been armed. Most likely somebody would have been dead

 

[ATC1]

No matter how many times you rephrase the question, my answer remains that I don't want more guns around my children. I want less guns around my children.

I get that, but I don't get the why.

you aren't going to win this one. They are coming from an emotional, irrational vantage point, and rational arguments aren't going to work here. It's like debating with a woman.

The fact that you don't agree doesn't make the position irrational.

I haven't heard a single argument against limited number of qualified, thoroughly trained, and vetted school officials maintain properly secured and concealed weapons on campus.All we hear is a repeated "I just don't want guns around children" or "guns make me feel icky" or "won't someone think of the children?" or "I don't want my teacher putting a gun to her ear while she is learning cursive."

Then you're not reading everything.Having a gun in a room increases the likelihood that someone will get shot. From, you know, zero. The likelihood of a school shooting happening is very low. The likelihood of a person who has a gun screwing up with that gun is also low, but believed to be higher than being in a school shooting by people arguing against any guns on campuses. Therefore, the net effect of having a gun free zone is higher safety than not.

That's the argument.

If that was the case there would be no reason to carry. Columbine, Newton, VTech, etc. woud have never happened. I do see your point. I'd like to see the statistics on gun violence vs accidents in schools that allow CCP holders in Utah and Colorado, but it's just a small sample size.

 

[jurb26]

Everyplace is dangerous....

The rest of you're sentance was not needed.

 

[Glass Joe]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Make all private citizens turn them in - legally. Make ridiculous penalties for having a gun after that time. Shut down sales. Essentially choke off the industry.No it won't ever rid the country of them. But it definitely will make them harder to get.

 

[Glass Joe]

Everyplace is dangerous....

The rest of you're sentance was not needed.

Because of this sacred amendment which has f'd our country.

 

[jurb26]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Make all private citizens turn them in - legally. Make ridiculous penalties for having a gun after that time. Shut down sales. Essentially choke off the industry.No it won't ever rid the country of them. But it definitely will make them harder to get.

This may very well cause another civil war. Furthermore, it's highly unconstitutional.

 

[moleculo]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Make all private citizens turn them in - legally. Make ridiculous penalties for having a gun after that time. Shut down sales. Essentially choke off the industry.No it won't ever rid the country of them. But it definitely will make them harder to get.

I'd love it if that were possible. This would probably take an amendment to the Constitution, which I don't think is feasible any time soon.

 

[glock]

Guns are ALWAYS a threat. It's what they are.

http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/gunsafe.pdf

Firearm Deaths:

- Every seven and a half hours a child or teen is killed by a gun by either accident or suicide.

- From 1995 to 2000 an average of 4 to 5 children died every day in non homicide firearm incidents.

- From 1995 to 2000, more than 1,790 children were killed in firearm accidents.

- In each of the last 10 years an average of 1,323 kids committed suicide with a firearm; 155 were under 15 years of age.

Firearm Injuries:

- In 2001, there were 14,571 kids injured by a firearm.

- In 2001, 13,572 kids were injured by BB/pellet guns.

Firearm Ownership:

- 40% of American households have guns

- 34% of children in American homes live in homes with at least one firearm

Storage Practices:

- Among homes with children and firearms

- 28% do not always keep guns locked in a secure place

- 25% only "occasionally" lock and store the bullets separate from the gun

- 48% do not regularly make sure that guns are equipped with child safety and trigger locks

- In 30% of hand gun owning homes, the gun was stored unlocked and loaded at the time of the survey

Accessibility:

- In 72% of unintentional deaths and injuries, suicide and suicide attempts, the firearm was stored in the residence of the victim

- 47% of high school kids and 22% of middle school kids said they could get a gun

- 6% of high school kids said they had carried a gun to school within the last 30 days

- 72% of parents think their kids would not handle a gun without their permission.

 

[ATC1]

I'd like to see how it would work out in Universities first where students are old enough to understand and parents may not be as concerned as a parent of an elementary school parent.

Doesn't just about every university have a campus police now? I thought most carried arms too, but that may vary by state and school.

Large universities, yes, but it did not help VTech. Don't know what the campus police were able to carry etc. at the time of the shooting.

 

[bostonfred]

If you want to put guns in schools, why not increase funding for the police and have them cycle from school to school? It makes no sense to arm the administrators.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

You know where there is a really low likelihood of people getting shot? Where there are no guns. Crazy thought, I know.

So how do we get these guns out of the bad guys hands?Simply saying do away with them is not the answer.

Make all private citizens turn them in - legally.

Would the government pay the citizens for their guns or just take'em? Some people have thousands of dollars worth of guns. What would the government do with all the guns? Destroy them?

 

[moleculo]

Guns are ALWAYS a threat. It's what they are. http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/gunsafe.pdf...- 6% of high school kids said they had carried a gun to school within the last 30 days

I wonder how many of these kids were arrested for having a gun in a Gun Free Zone?