|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 21, 2011 13:35:21 GMT -8
Very good answer and good example. That is exactly why I said I would outgun the student. I should have said "Who says there is a benenfit for students to have guns." |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Apr 21, 2011 14:11:42 GMT -8
I am certainly glad that the killer only killed two and wounded seven. He was handicapped in his killing spree by the single shot deer rifle. What if he had a handgun like the killer did recently in Tucson? I recognize the thought behind the "let's all be armed to the teeth, so us good guys can just shoot the bad guys" The good guys always win, don't they? Pretty soon there would be no more bad guys and this would be the best of all possible worlds. I call that fantasy. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 21, 2011 14:47:35 GMT -8
I am certainly glad that the killer only killed two and wounded seven. He was handicapped in his killing spree by the single shot deer rifle. What if he had a handgun like the killer did recently in Tucson? I recognize the thought behind the "let's all be armed to the teeth, so us good guys can just shoot the bad guys" The good guys always win, don't they? Pretty soon there would be no more bad guys and this would be the best of all possible worlds. I call that fantasy. I'm delighted to see that you are "glad" that only two people were killed and seven wounded. Your "let's all be armed to the teeth" comment and the rest of your hyperbolic drivel does not relate to the linked article. That is your fantasy. Be that as it may, the Arizona campus carry legislation was intended to apply only to state and federally recognized permit holders, and not just "let's all... blah, blah, blah". If the bill was poorly written, as the governor said, then let the legislature correct it and send it back to her. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Apr 21, 2011 19:31:03 GMT -8
I am certainly glad that the killer only killed two and wounded seven. He was handicapped in his killing spree by the single shot deer rifle. What if he had a handgun like the killer did recently in Tucson? I recognize the thought behind the "let's all be armed to the teeth, so us good guys can just shoot the bad guys" The good guys always win, don't they? Pretty soon there would be no more bad guys and this would be the best of all possible worlds. I call that fantasy. I'm delighted to see that you are "glad" that only two people were killed and seven wounded. Your "let's all be armed to the teeth" comment and the rest of your hyperbolic drivel does not relate to the linked article. That is your fantasy. Be that as it may, the Arizona campus carry legislation was intended to apply only to state and federally recognized permit holders, and not just "let's all... blah, blah, blah". If the bill was poorly written, as the governor said, then let the legislature correct it and send it back to her. Of course it relates. You just don't want to admit it.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 22, 2011 10:58:08 GMT -8
I'm delighted to see that you are "glad" that only two people were killed and seven wounded. Your "let's all be armed to the teeth" comment and the rest of your hyperbolic drivel does not relate to the linked article. That is your fantasy. Be that as it may, the Arizona campus carry legislation was intended to apply only to state and federally recognized permit holders, and not just "let's all... blah, blah, blah". If the bill was poorly written, as the governor said, then let the legislature correct it and send it back to her. Of course it relates. You just don't want to admit it. It relates? Spell it out! Once again, you know not what you are talking about.  |
|
|
|
Post by markyc on Apr 22, 2011 12:14:38 GMT -8
Very good answer and good example. That is exactly why I said I would outgun the student. I should have said "Who says there is a benenfit for students to have guns." This is your argument for guns in schools, really? Weak. Random shootings happen all over the place not just in schools. If you want a gun in your house to protect yourself then go for it but, we cannot have people with IQ's lower than their age running around thinking this is the old west. Carrying them with you at all times is a bit ridiculous. The classroom is NO place for guns or weapons of any kind, you're just asking for it if you do allow them. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 22, 2011 12:30:21 GMT -8
Very good answer and good example. That is exactly why I said I would outgun the student. I should have said "Who says there is a benenfit for students to have guns." This is your argument for guns in schools, really? Weak. Random shootings happen all over the place not just in schools. If you want a gun in your house to protect yourself then go for it but, we cannot have people with IQ's lower than their age running around thinking this is the old west. Carrying them with you at all times is a bit ridiculous. The classroom is NO place for guns or weapons of any kind, you're just asking for it if you do allow them. Why do you continue with this transparently emotional gob of hyperbole? The bill in question concerned state and federally recognized permit holders. GET IT? Or is your IQ lower than your age? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 22, 2011 12:31:39 GMT -8
Very good answer and good example. That is exactly why I said I would outgun the student. I should have said "Who says there is a benenfit for students to have guns." This is your argument for guns in schools, really? Weak. Random shootings happen all over the place not just in schools. If you want a gun in your house to protect yourself then go for it but, we cannot have people with IQ's lower than their age running around thinking this is the old west. Carrying them with you at all times is a bit ridiculous. The classroom is NO place for guns or weapons of any kind, you're just asking for it if you do allow them. I doubt that you will find many teachers with IQs lower than their age and most will be offended by that comment. In reality, I would find a way to keep guns off school grounds, but until that time I see no reason for a teacher not to be armed at least as well as their students. Now the students and their parents may be those low IQ folks, but not the teachers. We are talking about the teachers here and not their union reps.  |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 22, 2011 12:52:10 GMT -8
I'm delighted to see that you are "glad" that only two people were killed and seven wounded. Your "let's all be armed to the teeth" comment and the rest of your hyperbolic drivel does not relate to the linked article. That is your fantasy. Be that as it may, the Arizona campus carry legislation was intended to apply only to state and federally recognized permit holders, and not just "let's all... blah, blah, blah". If the bill was poorly written, as the governor said, then let the legislature correct it and send it back to her. Of course it relates. You just don't want to admit it. From the article: "...grabbed a .30-30 lever action deer rifle." You call that a single shot. Not true. Although each cartridge had to be loaded into the chamber, that is accomplished by merely throwing the lever and feeding in a fresh cartridge directly from the magazine. Lever actions are indeed "repeaters". The Arizona bill was not about "let's all be armed to the teeth". But you knew that. You are just trying to construct a straw man argument. |
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Apr 22, 2011 14:35:54 GMT -8
I challenge any far right winger on here.... that if they were a professor.... that they would go ahead and give an "F" to a student if they knew they were packing!!  Being by nature a far right winger on occasion (even though I mostly post as a liberal on here), I would not care if somebody else was packing. Self defense is a private and individual issue that the government has no right to meddle in. Now, as a liberal poster, I would report my suspicions to the campus police in a minute and hope they quickly busted that crazy son of a bitch for packing and expelled him from school. "Self defense is a private and individual issue. . ." As a liberal I would say: true until the effing bullet bounces off an innocent skull or off someone else's property. Which, is what happens far more often than any self defense. As a conservative, I would say that I have a right not to be afraid all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Apr 22, 2011 15:37:58 GMT -8
Of course it relates. You just don't want to admit it. From the article: "...grabbed a .30-30 lever action deer rifle." You call that a single shot. Not true. Although each cartridge had to be loaded into the chamber, that is accomplished by merely throwing the lever and feeding in a fresh cartridge directly from the magazine. Lever actions are indeed "repeaters". The Arizona bill was not about "let's all be armed to the teeth". But you knew that. You are just trying to construct a straw man argument. I read it in the above link. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 22, 2011 16:33:51 GMT -8
From the article: "...grabbed a .30-30 lever action deer rifle." You call that a single shot. Not true. Although each cartridge had to be loaded into the chamber, that is accomplished by merely throwing the lever and feeding in a fresh cartridge directly from the magazine. Lever actions are indeed "repeaters". The Arizona bill was not about "let's all be armed to the teeth". But you knew that. You are just trying to construct a straw man argument. I read it in the above link. You read....what? That 30-30 lever action rifles are "single-shot deer rifles"? That the Arizona bill would have enabled a "let's all be armed" policy? WTF are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Apr 22, 2011 17:59:31 GMT -8
You read....what? That 30-30 lever action rifles are "single-shot deer rifles"? That the Arizona bill would have enabled a "let's all be armed" policy? WTF are you talking about? The part where it said the rifle had to reloaded after every shot caused me to think it was a single shot rifle. Now that you point out that it was a lever action rifle I withdraw the single shot phrase. I still have the impression that both articles are in favor of the vast majority of the population needs to be armed at all times. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 23, 2011 7:21:45 GMT -8
I have to wonder about one thing - just because someone is a registered gun owner it does not mean they know how to use it properly, so how many people would be killed in the crossfire?
=Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 23, 2011 7:23:16 GMT -8
I have to wonder about one thing - just because someone is a registered gun owner it does not mean they know how to use it properly, so how many people would be killed in the crossfire? =Bob Register a gun? Why? |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Apr 23, 2011 9:30:52 GMT -8
Because it targets one person and laws targeting one person are generally unconstitutional. =Bob It would appear to target one person, but in reality there should always have been such a law. True. We all, when in leadership or management positions, occasionally find a circumstance that we thought there was a rule covering some instance. Oftentimes it is uncovered when investigating some problem or issue. So when one uncovers something missing or wrong, they fix it. To get a security clearance, to hire on as a federal employee, to join the military, etc, you have to provide proof of who you are and other PII. It sounds as in the case in Arizona, they found a loophole or missing part of the pie and are closing it. Fair enough. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 23, 2011 12:38:54 GMT -8
I have to wonder about one thing - just because someone is a registered gun owner it does not mean they know how to use it properly, so how many people would be killed in the crossfire? =Bob That's a good point, but it isn't about "registered gun owners". It's about those who have a permit or license to carry a concealed weapn in public. In most jurisdictions I know, in order to qualify for such a permit/license, one must pass a proficiency exam as well as demonstrate knowledge of the laws concerning the use of lethal force. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 23, 2011 12:46:21 GMT -8
You read....what? That 30-30 lever action rifles are "single-shot deer rifles"? That the Arizona bill would have enabled a "let's all be armed" policy? WTF are you talking about? The part where it said the rifle had to reloaded after every shot caused me to think it was a single shot rifle. Now that you point out that it was a lever action rifle I withdraw the single shot phrase. I still have the impression that both articles are in favor of the vast majority of the population needs to be armed at all times. Well, the wording is a little misleading. In fact, the lever action has to be manually reloaded after each shot, but that is accomplished simply by throwing the lever after each shot. Depending on the model, the typical lever action can hold up to 10 rounds in the magazine. Even a semi-auto has to be reloaded after every shot, but it is typically done through the action of the gas on the slide... automatically, but requiring the manual effort of a trigger pull for each individual shot. The only impression I got was that had Vice Principal Myrick not been required to run to his off-campus vehicle to retrieve his pistol, the damage inflicted by the nut may have been less. We'll never know that for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 23, 2011 12:53:15 GMT -8
OBTW, for Markyc:
Next time you want to sling around epithetical stereotypes, don't stop at "IQ less than their age". You should add "gap-toothed", "never goes to the dentist", and "inbred".
The libtards will love it, and your friends will jizz in their pants.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Apr 23, 2011 13:03:33 GMT -8
I'm sure the gun paranoia in America is not pushed by the NRA and the manufactures, in a large part, for strictly economic reasons.  |
|
