interestrateripoff Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8338805/Universities-in-Texas-to-allow-students-to-carry-guns-on-campus.html A new law that looks certain to pass through the Texas legislature would mean that its 38 public colleges, which are attended by half a million students, must permit concealed handguns on site.It would become only the second state, after Utah, to enforce such a rule. More than 20 states have rejected similar proposals introduced since the Virginia Tech massacre in April 2007. At present, colleges in Texas – along with churches and businesses – are free to ban firearms from their premises. Guns are prohibited from university buildings, dormitories and surrounding grounds. The plan is likely to astonish most who recall the mass shootings at Virginia Tech, where a student killed 32 people, and in Northern Illinois the following year, where five people were murdered. Didn't realise one state had already passed this. Denniger keeps harping on about how these massacres would easily be stopped if everyone carries guns. If people can shoot straight and not miss then perhaps that will be the case. Trouble is if someone draws there weapon how do you know if they are a good guy or not? In the worst case scenario your going to get a blood bath as students open on each other. Even worse they open fire and try not to kill the person they are aiming for and shoot above their heads and hit someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Yup. Denningers pretty hardline on these things. A few weeks ago (if i read correctly) he suggested that driving tests and licenses for private citizens should be abolished (though i assume for commercial purposes should remain) I dont disagree that it should be a state matter, and the federal govt should feck off, but probably wouldnt advise getting rid of driving tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 It's time for people like Denninger (and Sarah Palin) to get into power in the USA - I'm not talking about lightweights like George Bush the 2nd. Only then will we know for certain that whether they are cretins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 It's time for people like Denninger (and Sarah Palin) to get into power in the USA - I'm not talking about lightweights like George Bush the 2nd. Only then will we know for certain that whether they are cretins. Im pretty sure Palins just another Bush. A bit like Bush said 'im a fiscal conservative' whilst borrowing more than every predeccesor put together (or Brown basically being the same with his 'prudence' BS) shes finds that stuff chimes with voters who actually believe politicians (of whom their are still surprisingly many) Denninger keeps saying the Tea partiers keep chickening out, anyway. Dont think he has anymore faith in Palin than Bush. Ron Paul is the nearest presidential candidate to Denninger, but unfortunately, while he can string a sentence together, unlike Bush, his speech doesnt flow, sometimes seems waffly, and while i dont think he is, sometimes at least sounds confused. That said, if she remembers to detach her weeny brain from her mouth and just read the teleprompter (a bit like Obama) i guess Palin could fill a role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 let's get these Libertarians into power for once and see what they do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8338805/Universities-in-Texas-to-allow-students-to-carry-guns-on-campus.html Didn't realise one state had already passed this. Denniger keeps harping on about how these massacres would easily be stopped if everyone carries guns. If people can shoot straight and not miss then perhaps that will be the case. Trouble is if someone draws there weapon how do you know if they are a good guy or not? In the worst case scenario your going to get a blood bath as students open on each other. Even worse they open fire and try not to kill the person they are aiming for and shoot above their heads and hit someone else. In every case where people have been allowed more freedom to carry firearms in the USA none of the horror stories spouted by those against the proposals came true - not once. In 1987 when Florida changed it's law from discretionary issue of concealed carry licences (essentially only the mates of the loal police chief got them) to "shall issue" where everyone who met the criteria must be issed one there were rabid howls of objection and those against said that it would result in shoot-outs on every street corner and the streets would run with blood. It never happened, not slightly, not one little bit. In actual fact what happened is the tourists started getting car-jacked. This was because criminals stopped targeting native Floridians because they might shoot back so started going for rental cars which were easily identifiable as hey had distinctive licence plates as the occupants were less likely to be armed. If you look at the places where mass shootings take place they are almost without exception those places from which firearms are prohibited; schools, colleges, churches, government buildings, etc. I'm not aware of many which take place in gun shops, ranges, etc. People who have passed the relevant training courses and background checks to get concealed carry licences don't perpetrate mass shootings. In fact they have lower rates of criminality than serving police officers so it really isn't going to cause a problem although that will never be reported in the media, especially the British media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The libertarians' point is that you would never be confronted by mercenaries from Chad while you protest in Tripoli, because they know you will return their fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 In every case where people have been allowed more freedom to carry firearms in the USA none of the horror stories spouted by those against the proposals came true - not once. In 1987 when Florida changed it's law from discretionary issue of concealed carry licences (essentially only the mates of the loal police chief got them) to "shall issue" where everyone who met the criteria must be issed one there were rabid howls of objection and those against said that it would result in shoot-outs on every street corner and the streets would run with blood. It never happened, not slightly, not one little bit. In actual fact what happened is the tourists started getting car-jacked. This was because criminals stopped targeting native Floridians because they might shoot back so started going for rental cars which were easily identifiable as hey had distinctive licence plates as the occupants were less likely to be armed. If you look at the places where mass shootings take place they are almost without exception those places from which firearms are prohibited; schools, colleges, churches, government buildings, etc. I'm not aware of many which take place in gun shops, ranges, etc. People who have passed the relevant training courses and background checks to get concealed carry licences don't perpetrate mass shootings. In fact they have lower rates of criminality than serving police officers so it really isn't going to cause a problem although that will never be reported in the media, especially the British media. Have you lived in the USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 The libertarians' point is that you would never be confronted by mercenaries from Chad while you protest in Tripoli, because they know you will return their fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Have you lived in the USA? Does that alter the rightness, or otherwise, of what I'm saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Anyway, no where in the constitution does it say that the right to bear arms is limited to guns. Or that anything needs to be concealed. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Does that alter the rightness, or otherwise, of what I'm saying? Have you lived in the USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Anyway, no where in the constitution does it say that the right to bear arms is limited to guns. Or that anything needs to be concealed. Just saying. And that has what to do with the issue at hand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Have you lived in the USA? Is there an answer I can give that somehow makes my argument better or worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 And that has what to do with the issue at hand? The issue at hand is the right to bear arms as implied by the 2nd amendment (as well you know) Geez, you rightwing nuts are as bad as athom and his islamic jihad posts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Is there an answer I can give that somehow makes my argument better or worse? Have you lived in the USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Have you lived in the USA? What difference does it make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 What difference does it make? instead of spouting some rubbish off some rightwing site, go and get some credible data (i.e. not Fox News or the Drudge Report ) for gun crime in Florida since 1987. Then compare that gun crime rate to cities of a similar size in the rest of the developed world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Here's some help in your quest for the truth: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Crime/State/statebystatelist.cfm Interestingly, California also shows a downward trend over time since the late 80s/early 90s, as do all the states I've looked at so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6538 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 instead of spouting some rubbish off some rightwing site, go and get some credible data (i.e. not Fox News or the Drudge Report ) for gun crime in Florida since 1987. Then compare that gun crime rate to cities of a similar size in the rest of the developed world. It's not from any site. It's what I've learned about the issue over years. Did rental cars start getting attacked in 1987 when Florida changed the rules on issuing carry permits - answer is yes. Did those against the proposal make bold statements as to the effect that the number shoot-outs would increase dramatically - yes, and one was a police chief who subsequently admitted that he was wrong and that, in fact,m the opposite was true. Do people with carry permits often shoot each other ort commit firearms related crime - no. The tiny number of permits which Florida has revoked tells you that. The point I'm making was not about overall gun crimes rates (that's not the point of the discussion) it's about what effect more people legally carrying them has on criminals. Florida may well have massive gun crimes rates (it doesn't, by the way) but the point is whether they change and to what extent when people (or different people) are allowed to carry them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patfig Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8338805/Universities-in-Texas-to-allow-students-to-carry-guns-on-campus.html Didn't realise one state had already passed this. Denniger keeps harping on about how these massacres would easily be stopped if everyone carries guns. If people can shoot straight and not miss then perhaps that will be the case. Trouble is if someone draws there weapon how do you know if they are a good guy or not? In the worst case scenario your going to get a blood bath as students open on each other. Even worse they open fire and try not to kill the person they are aiming for and shoot above their heads and hit someone else. God Bless America, if there is a god of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPin Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 God Bless America, if there is a god of course God should have a capital letter Mr Fig, and he probably already has a 9mm semi-auto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patfig Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 God should have a capital letter Mr Fig, and he probably already has a 9mm semi-auto! Like in Gordon you mean? Mr pIN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oracle Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 people seem to be completely ignorant of the fact that that clause is actually also part of our constitution too.....it's just been chipped and eroded away in the most spectacular fabian fashion over the last hunderd years(particularly the last couple of decades. They have no right to amend this,because it is actually enshrined in law that they can't. not under ANY guise...public safety,mental health or anything. these numpties are relying on your apathy and forgetfulness...not to mention back-to-front politics. ie implied consent if you don't vote for it....but we'll make sure you don't get to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 people seem to be completely ignorant of the fact that that clause is actually also part of our constitution too.....it's just been chipped and eroded away in the most spectacular fabian fashion over the last hunderd years(particularly the last couple of decades. They have no right to amend this,because it is actually enshrined in law that they can't. not under ANY guise...public safety,mental health or anything. these numpties are relying on your apathy and forgetfulness...not to mention back-to-front politics. ie implied consent if you don't vote for it....but we'll make sure you don't get to vote. Oh yeah, our written UK constitution. Does it mention guns in the Magna Carta then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.