Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Texas passes bill to allow guns to be carried on campus.

124

Comments

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

  • TheocritusTheocritus Member LegendaryPosts: 10,024

          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........

  • SabiancymSabiancym Member UncommonPosts: 3,150
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

     

    No one is pushing to remove the second ammendment.  Stop acting like the repeal is on the senate floor about to be passed.

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

     

    Agreed

    I also agree it isn't like guns are about to all be gathered up and sent to be destroyed so there is no reason to go alarmist.  Still with as much anti-gun movement as there often is people got to stay vigilant on protecting the 2nd amendment.

    image
  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372
    Originally posted by Theocritus


          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........

     

    Knives....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad......

    Axes...

    spears...

    explosives....

    etc....

    ie kind of an asanine statement

     

    A gun is a tool, it is how someone chooses to use it that makes it good or bad.  It is funny how often people focus purely on the ways guns are used for evil.  But no one ever focuses on how many times guns have saves lives.  How often cops use guns to save lives or defuse bad situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.

    image
  • SabiancymSabiancym Member UncommonPosts: 3,150
    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey

    Originally posted by Theocritus


          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........

     

    Knives....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad......

    Axes...

    spears...

    explosives....

    etc....

    ie kind of an asanine statement

     

    A gun is a tool, it is how someone chooses to use it that makes it good or bad.  It is funny how often people focus purely on the ways guns are used for evil.  But no one ever focuses on how many times guns have saves lives.  How often cops use guns to save lives or defuse bad situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.

     

    No one is wanting to take guns out of the hands of police.  Terrible argument.

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372

    --situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.

     

    This doesn't apply only to police, could mean anyone.  I used Police since they are a very commonly occuring example of a gun used properly.  Thank you for nitpicking and reading things how you wanted to read them. :P

    I notice you also conveniently didn't read the rest, guns are tools, nothing more.

    image
  • SabiancymSabiancym Member UncommonPosts: 3,150
    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey


    --situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.
     
    This doesn't apply only to police, could mean anyone.  I used Police since they are a very commonly occuring example of a gun used properly.  Thank you for nitpicking and reading things how you wanted to read them. :P
    I notice you also conveniently didn't read the rest, guns are tools, nothing more.

     

    There are no stats to keep track of how often a gun saved anyone, but I think that its considerably less than how often a legally owned gun hurts someone.  That's an opinion.

     

    And I did read the rest.  It's the same argument I've heard all along.  People kill people, not guns.  So if that is the case, I'm sure you would be fine if we legalized fully loaded civilian owned tanks for those who can afford them.  Maybe allow C4, hand grenades and fully assembled chemical weapons to be purchased at wal-mart.  After all, people kill people, not weapons.

     

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372

    hehehe

    The sad thing about that is a lot of people would be perfectly responsible tank owners.  There are just no thought police so there is really no way to know who will do what or when.  Guns are a good deterrent in my opinion, guns should be outlawed entirely in other peoples opinion.  I can honestly see the anti-guns viewpoint I just don't agree with it.  This is just a situation that no easy or clear cut answer, I do think we do ok overall with it.  But we could use a bit stricter screening processes, licensing, and all that.  Just don't ban guns altogether, ever.

    image
  • clwoodsclwoods Member Posts: 625
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

    Your math is flawed for one reason.  Amendment=/= a freedom.  The Eighteenth Amendment wasn't a freedom, it was a restriction of freedom.  In this case 17 amendments+1 amendment=one less freedom.  The 22nd amendment also restricts the freedom of a citizen to be president more than twice.

     

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by clwoods

    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

    Your math is flawed for one reason.  Amendment=/= a freedom.  The Eighteenth Amendment wasn't a freedom, it was a restriction of freedom.  In this case 17 amendments+1 amendment=one less freedom.  The 22nd amendment also restricts the freedom of a citizen to be president more than twice.

     

    I was very specific and said The Bill of Rights.  The Constitution would not have existed without those 10 amendments.  The rest, you are correct, don't necessarily set any precident for freedom, however several do define freedom more justly.

  • daeandordaeandor Member UncommonPosts: 2,695
    Originally posted by Sabiancym

    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

     

    No one is pushing to remove the second ammendment.  Stop acting like the repeal is on the senate floor about to be passed.

    No, what is going to happen is that the current administration is going to work around the Constitution and put so many limitations on the 2nd amendment that it might as well be repealed because nobody will be able to either (a) afford guns and ammo and / or (b) be able to meet the requirements to own guns and ammo.

  • kobie173kobie173 Member UncommonPosts: 2,075
    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym

    Originally posted by daeandor

    Originally posted by Sabiancym



    I've never owned a gun and probably never will.  Maybe I should start practicing my slave labor songs.
     

     

    Freedom really isn't a matter of opinion in the US.  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights set the ground rules for freedom in the US and if you eliminate part of them, you become less free.  It's simple logic, math, whatever you want to call it:  10 original amendments minus 1 amendment  = 9 amendements.  9 defined rights is less than 10, therefore less free.

     

    Just because an individual chooses not to excersice all their rights, does not mean that others should lose rights to remain "equal."

     

    No one is pushing to remove the second ammendment.  Stop acting like the repeal is on the senate floor about to be passed.

    No, what is going to happen is that the current administration is going to work around the Constitution and put so many limitations on the 2nd amendment that it might as well be repealed because nobody will be able to either (a) afford guns and ammo and / or (b) be able to meet the requirements to own guns and ammo.



     

    Says who? Wayne LaPierre?

    Is there any impending gun control legislation out there right now, even in committe? NO.

    From an April article in the Chicago Tribune (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-obama-gunsapr27,0,5634133.story):

    "Earlier this month, Obama suggested he does not believe the re-authorization of a federal ban is politically viable now. While he said he still believes the ban "made sense," he expressed greater interest in stricter enforcement of existing gun laws and efforts to more widely distribute gun-tracing information to local law enforcement."

    The assault weapons ban (which is a GOOD thing) and some mild restrictions on how many handguns one can purchase per month are the only gun-control measures Obama has endorsed. And if you need assault weapons for "protection," I think you had better ask what you're protecting yourself from.

    The whole "Obama's gonna git your guns!" is more fearmongering cooked up by the right and sponsored by the NRA. The NRA has done more to damage the reputation of the safe, responsible gun owner than most people recognize. They stopped being about protecting the rights of gun owners a long time ago and became more about expanding their own political power by fearmongering those gun owners into thinking those rights are in imminent danger.  

     

    So I started to walk into the water. I won't lie to you boys...I was terrified. But I pressed on, and as I made my way past the breakers, a strange calm came over me. I don't know if it was divine intervention or the kinship of all living things, but I tell you, Jerry, at that moment ... I was a marine biologist.

  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey

    Originally posted by Theocritus

          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........


     
    Knives....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad......
    Axes...
    spears...
    explosives....
    etc....
    ie kind of an asanine statement
     
    A gun is a tool, it is how someone chooses to use it that makes it good or bad.  It is funny how often people focus purely on the ways guns are used for evil.  But no one ever focuses on how many times guns have saves lives.  How often cops use guns to save lives or defuse bad situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.

    A nail gun is a tool.

    A staple gun is a tool.

    A glue gun is a tool.

    A firearm is not a tool. It is a weapon.


    The more you frame your argument in disingenuous terms, you cannot be taken seriously. There is no cop alive that considers his sidearm a "tool".

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372
    Originally posted by popinjay


     

    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey


    Originally posted by Theocritus
     
          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........

     

    Knives....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad......

    Axes...

    spears...

    explosives....

    etc....

    ie kind of an asanine statement

     

    A gun is a tool, it is how someone chooses to use it that makes it good or bad.  It is funny how often people focus purely on the ways guns are used for evil.  But no one ever focuses on how many times guns have saves lives.  How often cops use guns to save lives or defuse bad situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.

     

    A nail gun is a tool.

    A staple gun is a tool.

    A glue gun is a tool.

     

     

    A firearm is not a tool. It is a weapon.

     



    The more you frame your argument in disingenuous terms, you cannot be taken seriously. There is no cop alive that considers his sidearm a "tool".

     

    huh?  you really just twist words around don't you and then act like you are clever?  lol

    I thought you had agreed to disagree not sat around all day plotting how to come up with completely asanine post making it sound like I brought up Staple guns o.O wtf, lol.  *boggles*

    Note well every example I used was a WEAPON, lol.  Jeez

    image
  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey
    Originally posted by popinjay  

    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey

    Originally posted by Theocritus
     
          Guns.....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad.........
     
    Knives....an invention that started off goood and turned out bad......
    Axes...
    spears...
    explosives....
    etc....
    ie kind of an asanine statement
     
    A gun is a tool, it is how someone chooses to use it that makes it good or bad.  It is funny how often people focus purely on the ways guns are used for evil.  But no one ever focuses on how many times guns have saves lives.  How often cops use guns to save lives or defuse bad situations that could have turned out worse had a gun not been in the right persons hand at the right time.


     
    A nail gun is a tool.
    A staple gun is a tool.
    A glue gun is a tool.
     
     
    A firearm is not a tool. It is a weapon.
     

    The more you frame your argument in disingenuous terms, you cannot be taken seriously. There is no cop alive that considers his sidearm a "tool".



     
    huh?  you really just twist words around don't you and then act like you are clever?  lol
    I thought you had agreed to disagree not sat around all day plotting how to come up with completely asanine post making it sound like I brought up Staple guns o.O wtf, lol.  *boggles*
    Note well every example I used was a WEAPON, lol.  Jeez


    First, not to be "nitpicky", but you spelled this word (asinine) wrong twice now critizing someone else's posts and considering the meaning of the word, (especially entry #2), I'd think you'd want to spell it correctly from now on if you're going to continue using it.


    Second, you used an axe as an example. An axe that chops down trees is not a "weapon", until someone uses it as such. A gun a policeman uses has only one use, to kill. When a policeman shoots, he does not aim for a leg or arm, he aims centermass because that is where the vitals are and probably will kill the guy/gal.


    A weapon is not a "tool" either. A gun or a firearm is a weapon. No one considers it a "tool". I did not twist your words. You said a gun is a tool. By casualizating it, you make it seem as though it's no more than something used at Home Depot, when everyone knows it's infinitely more serious than that.

  • ZoeMcCloskeyZoeMcCloskey Member UncommonPosts: 1,372

    At least this is a fun if asanine thread :P  yes I did it wrong again just for you :)

    More seriously.

    It could be said guns are used for hunting, blah, blah

    Either side can come up with endless excuses as to why they are right and the other side is wrong.  You don't hear me saying everyone cling to yer guns beforin' Obamma takes dem all away!  I said my views, more regulation fine, take them all away not fine.

    image
  • popinjaypopinjay Member Posts: 6,539


    Originally posted by ZoeMcCloskey
    At least this is a fun if asanine thread :P  yes I did it wrong again just for you :)
    More seriously.
    It could be said guns are used for hunting, blah, blah
    Either side can come up with endless excuses as to why they are right and the other side is wrong.  You don't hear me saying everyone cling to yer guns beforin' Obamma takes dem all away!  I said my views, more regulation fine, take them all away not fine.

    This is very true, and if you had just stated that in the beginning, I wouldn't have had disagreed. But you claimed a gun was just a tool in reference to a policeman using them.


    The primary purpose of a "gun", "firearm" or "weapon that discharges projectiles" is to kill. Not maim, not scare, but to kill people. No cop uses a gun as a tool to pistolwhip the perp into submission. It is a weapon plain and simple.


    A rifle for hunting or plate shooting is a nothing more than a weapon that was changed ever-so slightly from it's origins of killing people to shoot inanimate objects or game, but that's not what a "gun" was made for and not what most guns are bought for in the United States and world today, which is the discussion.


    On the other hand, an axe, knife or spear's primary uses are not as weapons although they have been used that way over the ages. Your argument is based on that backwards logic.

  • ismelltruthismelltruth Member Posts: 24

    Just as the Forefathers have written in many, many papers; the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting and EVERYTHING to do with protecting our Rights from a tyrannical government. This is a fact, end of story. The Constitution isn't like the Bible where the church businesses interpret the story to control the masses.

    People with CCW/CWL undergo an extensive background check. Moreso than a normal firearm buyer. These individuals are unlikely to break any laws. That is why, a law was required for them to carry LEGALLY because criminals, the ones that are NOT allowed to own guns, bring them to campus anyways.

    How many times have classrooms in that college in Atlanta been robbed at gunpoint from inhabitants of the surrounding ghetto? The answer is 6 if you're too lazy to Google it.

    Instead of parroting Liberal (or Conservative in other cases) views that are pushed from the talking heads on tv, try looking up some FACTS. Here are a bunch of numbers that I ran across looking at various government websites.

    Death by the flu : 30,000

    Death by a vehicle accident : 39,800

    Black on White rape: 37,000

    White on Black Rape : 6

    Crimes Prevented by use of firearm : 2,500,000

    Crime involving a firearm :____________?

    Crime involving a firearm from someone with a CCW/CWL:____________? (Hell, you can use total violent crimes with or without a firearm for this number, it's still next to nothing)

    Go ahead, look it up.

    The fact remains, CCW/CWL people are NOT the problem and are the ones most likely to FOLLOW the law not BREAK them.

    If I wanted to kill a bunch of people, I wouldn't ask permission from the government.

    Hmm, another FACT. 80 Million Americans LEGALLY own a firearm. There are over 200 Million firearms Legally owned. So according to the liberal way of thinking, why doesn't the legal owners vs. crimes involving firearms not match? And I'm seriously asking, if you have an answer based on fact that is.

  • ismelltruthismelltruth Member Posts: 24

    One last point before I go.

    Imagine putting this same effort into this issue that will never go anywhere into actually upholding our current laws in-place and going after the criminals that use firearms in a crime?

    That is faaaar easier and will get waaaay more results for both of you parties.

    Does this make any sense or am I just out of my mind?

  • clwoodsclwoods Member Posts: 625
    Originally posted by ismelltruth


    Just as the Forefathers have written in many, many papers; the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting and EVERYTHING to do with protecting our Rights from a tyrannical government. This is a fact, end of story. The Constitution isn't like the Bible where the church businesses interpret the story to control the masses.
    People with CCW/CWL undergo an extensive background check. Moreso than a normal firearm buyer. These individuals are unlikely to break any laws. That is why, a law was required for them to carry LEGALLY because criminals, the ones that are NOT allowed to own guns, bring them to campus anyways.
    How many times have classrooms in that college in Atlanta been robbed at gunpoint from inhabitants of the surrounding ghetto? The answer is 6 if you're too lazy to Google it.
    Instead of parroting Liberal (or Conservative in other cases) views that are pushed from the talking heads on tv, try looking up some FACTS. Here are a bunch of numbers that I ran across looking at various government websites.
    Death by the flu : 30,000
    Death by a vehicle accident : 39,800
    Black on White rape: 37,000
    White on Black Rape : 6
    Crimes Prevented by use of firearm : 2,500,000
    Crime involving a firearm :____________?
    Crime involving a firearm from someone with a CCW/CWL:____________? (Hell, you can use total violent crimes with or without a firearm for this number, it's still next to nothing)
    Go ahead, look it up.
    The fact remains, CCW/CWL people are NOT the problem and are the ones most likely to FOLLOW the law not BREAK them.
    If I wanted to kill a bunch of people, I wouldn't ask permission from the government.
    Hmm, another FACT. 80 Million Americans LEGALLY own a firearm. There are over 200 Million firearms Legally owned. So according to the liberal way of thinking, why doesn't the legal owners vs. crimes involving firearms not match? And I'm seriously asking, if you have an answer based on fact that is.

    I already said I'm fine with Texas passing this law.  It's their state they can do what they want.  I'm also fine with guns, I hunt myself, own 3 different guns.  For some reason, though I don't know why, I always have to play the devils advocate.  So here goes.  Random numbers time.

    In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

    American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

    Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)

    The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

    What I'm really thinking on this is that gun violence is an issue here.  I think that's undeniable.  Crime in general in  America is pretty ridiculous when you consider the position of our country in comparison to the rest of the world.

     

     

  • ismelltruthismelltruth Member Posts: 24
    Originally posted by clwoods

    Originally posted by ismelltruth


    Just as the Forefathers have written in many, many papers; the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting and EVERYTHING to do with protecting our Rights from a tyrannical government. This is a fact, end of story. The Constitution isn't like the Bible where the church businesses interpret the story to control the masses.
    People with CCW/CWL undergo an extensive background check. Moreso than a normal firearm buyer. These individuals are unlikely to break any laws. That is why, a law was required for them to carry LEGALLY because criminals, the ones that are NOT allowed to own guns, bring them to campus anyways.
    How many times have classrooms in that college in Atlanta been robbed at gunpoint from inhabitants of the surrounding ghetto? The answer is 6 if you're too lazy to Google it.
    Instead of parroting Liberal (or Conservative in other cases) views that are pushed from the talking heads on tv, try looking up some FACTS. Here are a bunch of numbers that I ran across looking at various government websites.
    Death by the flu : 30,000
    Death by a vehicle accident : 39,800
    Black on White rape: 37,000
    White on Black Rape : 6
    Crimes Prevented by use of firearm : 2,500,000
    Crime involving a firearm :____________?
    Crime involving a firearm from someone with a CCW/CWL:____________? (Hell, you can use total violent crimes with or without a firearm for this number, it's still next to nothing)
    Go ahead, look it up.
    The fact remains, CCW/CWL people are NOT the problem and are the ones most likely to FOLLOW the law not BREAK them.
    If I wanted to kill a bunch of people, I wouldn't ask permission from the government.
    Hmm, another FACT. 80 Million Americans LEGALLY own a firearm. There are over 200 Million firearms Legally owned. So according to the liberal way of thinking, why doesn't the legal owners vs. crimes involving firearms not match? And I'm seriously asking, if you have an answer based on fact that is.

    I already said I'm fine with Texas passing this law.  It's their state they can do what they want.  I'm also fine with guns, I hunt myself, own 3 different guns.  For some reason, though I don't know why, I always have to play the devils advocate.  So here goes.  Random numbers time.

    In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

    American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

    Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)

    The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

    What I'm really thinking on this is that gun violence is an issue here.  I think that's undeniable.  Crime in general in  America is pretty ridiculous when you consider the position of our country in comparison to the rest of the world.

     

     



     

    So crack down on parents and criminals?

    Why should my Rights be infringed because some kid got shot? That's not my problem. My concern is that the police enforce these laws and take these kids to jail.

    Most of those stats you posted were crimes. How many of those were from inner-city crime? And why does this shock anyone?

    I think some of you (generally speaking) are afraid to point out the real problem here. There is a trend. But nobody is willing to point it out.

  • tayschrenntayschrenn Member Posts: 234

    Guns don't kill people...... Rappers Do

     

    www.youtube.com/watch

    "The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur." -George W. Bush, discussing the decline of the French economy with British Prime Minister Tony Blair

  • clwoodsclwoods Member Posts: 625
    Originally posted by ismelltruth

    Originally posted by clwoods

    Originally posted by ismelltruth


    Just as the Forefathers have written in many, many papers; the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting and EVERYTHING to do with protecting our Rights from a tyrannical government. This is a fact, end of story. The Constitution isn't like the Bible where the church businesses interpret the story to control the masses.
    People with CCW/CWL undergo an extensive background check. Moreso than a normal firearm buyer. These individuals are unlikely to break any laws. That is why, a law was required for them to carry LEGALLY because criminals, the ones that are NOT allowed to own guns, bring them to campus anyways.
    How many times have classrooms in that college in Atlanta been robbed at gunpoint from inhabitants of the surrounding ghetto? The answer is 6 if you're too lazy to Google it.
    Instead of parroting Liberal (or Conservative in other cases) views that are pushed from the talking heads on tv, try looking up some FACTS. Here are a bunch of numbers that I ran across looking at various government websites.
    Death by the flu : 30,000
    Death by a vehicle accident : 39,800
    Black on White rape: 37,000
    White on Black Rape : 6
    Crimes Prevented by use of firearm : 2,500,000
    Crime involving a firearm :____________?
    Crime involving a firearm from someone with a CCW/CWL:____________? (Hell, you can use total violent crimes with or without a firearm for this number, it's still next to nothing)
    Go ahead, look it up.
    The fact remains, CCW/CWL people are NOT the problem and are the ones most likely to FOLLOW the law not BREAK them.
    If I wanted to kill a bunch of people, I wouldn't ask permission from the government.
    Hmm, another FACT. 80 Million Americans LEGALLY own a firearm. There are over 200 Million firearms Legally owned. So according to the liberal way of thinking, why doesn't the legal owners vs. crimes involving firearms not match? And I'm seriously asking, if you have an answer based on fact that is.

    I already said I'm fine with Texas passing this law.  It's their state they can do what they want.  I'm also fine with guns, I hunt myself, own 3 different guns.  For some reason, though I don't know why, I always have to play the devils advocate.  So here goes.  Random numbers time.

    In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

    American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

    Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)

    The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

    What I'm really thinking on this is that gun violence is an issue here.  I think that's undeniable.  Crime in general in  America is pretty ridiculous when you consider the position of our country in comparison to the rest of the world.

     

     



     

    So crack down on parents and criminals?

    Why should my Rights be infringed because some kid got shot? That's not my problem. My concern is that the police enforce these laws and take these kids to jail.

    Most of those stats you posted were crimes. How many of those were from inner-city crime? And why does this shock anyone?

    I think some of you (generally speaking) are afraid to point out the real problem here. There is a trend. But nobody is willing to point it out.

    Your rights aren't being infringed.  I never suggested they should(it's late and I'm tired but I'm pretty sure I never said that).

    Also I agree about the whole parents thing.  We have some shitty parents here.  Unfortunately we can't really do much until it's too late.

  • ismelltruthismelltruth Member Posts: 24
    Originally posted by clwoods


    Your rights aren't being infringed.  I never suggested they should(it's late and I'm tired but I'm pretty sure I never said that).
    Also I agree about the whole parents thing.  We have some shitty parents here.  Unfortunately we can't really do much until it's too late.



     

    Oh no man. I'm not saying that you did.

    I read all your replies, I think everything that you have said is reasonable.

    I am mainly refering to the loud cries for an outright ban, which isn't going to happen. Well, by law it could, but I don't think we'll see 80 million legal gun owners giving up their 200 million firearms ever, ban or not.

    Who exactly is going to try and enforce it? You know what I mean?

    I would even be for parents going to prison if the "child" is too young to be tried as an adult. Though I think that a "child" involved with a gun crime should be tried as an adult automatically.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.