Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by GermanyChris, Sep 3, 2013.
Oh Joy, just what we need a dunk/high 18yo carrying a gun
Why not outright say it's all about the money?
Where did you get that claim?
Something along the lines of "GTFO of my classroom" comes to mind.
College students never drink or otherwise partake in intoxicating substances?
Did it say that in the website? Is that what they're lobbying for?
No, it isn't.
In Texas, it's against the law for anyone under 21 to be drunk, for anyone under 21 to carry a handgun, and for anybody who's under the influence to carry any firearm, regardless of age. So I don't see how their position makes it any more likely that, as you put it, "a dunk/high 18yo carrying a gun" is going to become any more of a problem. The only thing they're lobbying for is removing gun-free status from college campuses.
How can I argue with such logic I've you've got your checkmate
Good points. Also most mass shootings have occurred in gun free zones, so this should make the campus safer. All for it.
The problem is, is there's so much going on at that time of their lives. All the emotions and stress from love/relationships, school, outside problems, financial situations, etc. It's a nightmare waiting to happen, and the minute you put weapons in their hands, you're just fueling the fire.
Right, but isn't what conservatives love to say is "criminals don't follow laws"?
Can't tell if serious...
Gun-free zones aren't intended to prevent mass shootings. They're intended to stop arguments between people who brought a gun for defense from becoming deadly alterations (think bars, concerts, etc) when the gun turns into an offensive weapon.
And it's all going on regardless of whether they're on campus, wouldn't you agree?
A 21-year-old with no felony record is legally able to get a concealed carry permit. He can carry just about anywhere in public (subject to the same rules as anywhere else). But now you're concerned for his relationships and finances when he goes to class? I don't see the connection.
I disagree. Gun free zones are intended to give people who are afraid of lawful firearms a false sense of security.
And you really think this will deter anyone who wants to commit violence or a mass killing? If anything it would just persuade them to be better prepared.
How would guns on campus stop someone from committing another UT tower shootings?
How effective would hand guns be against someone like the Aurora shooter who was armed to the teeth, and had ballistic protective covering his whole body?
You're right. It's much better to do nothing.
Who said do nothing, or not take steps in prevention?
Playing cowboy is not the answer.
OK. I'll play...
Anything that makes a bad guy work harder is a deterrent.
People who shoot at innocents from towers are cowards. Fear of return fire is a strong deterrent.
Nobody can say with any certainty, but the alternative (disarm the law abiding) is certainly less effective.
Source or scientific citations, please.
In the case of State or Federally funded Universities this should be 100% allowed.
Don't like the U.S. Constitution, MOVE!
Don't most school shootings end with the person killing themselves?
Amazingly enough, this isn't a Second amendment issue.
Really, why do you say that?
You don't have a constitutional right to concealed carry.
A firearm? Sure. Concealed carry? No.
We are going to have to disagree on that statement...
So would your opinion change if it was "Students for OPEN carry"
I would be arguing it is silly, but it would be completely within the Constitution.
That statement by itself is true. But you seem to think being armed is a real deterrent against bad guys. Which is not true.
You want a Source or scientific citations for that?!?! Wow