guns on campus

Page 2 of 14  
azwiley1 wrote:


(Religious sermon deleted)

Hey, I thought it was Budd too. You're not alone.
Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
========= ==========

========= =========
Amen wudda sufficed.........
yer knowledge can be no greater than that of what is known.
but......if you have a need......carry on with yer rant.
~:~ mm ~:~
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
klumze wrote:

I don't blame god for anything, he doesn't exist.
JAM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Maybe not in the small spaces of YOUR mind.
Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am an atheist or more agnostic, but I would say that this post was in poor taste. I don't know your religious beliefs, but respect others. And, respect how other's grieve.
the same god that stood by and allowed this to happen?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The same could be said for you. You weren't required to read it.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Xclimation wrote:

They do not respect my non belief in baseless superstitions.
JAM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

if a magical god does exist it still wouldnt be his fault. the fault here lies with the bad guy and the liberals who banned carry.
--
Nathan in Montana
http://ConcealedCarryForum.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
No flaming, but respectful disagreement. You couldn't be much older than me, if at all. I went to University of Texas. I don't recall students openly carrying guns. As a matter of fact, students not carrying guns is a good thing. For one, Freshmen are 18 years old and wet behind the ears. Second, as much as we drank back then, and what the kids do now; the last I want is guns and alcohol. Now picture a scenario where a gunman comes into a class, and opens fire. Then if 1/4 of the class of sub 22 year olds are packing, take out there firearms, then chaos and bullets fly everywhere; and if the gunmen actually does get hit, so do alot of other unarmed bystanders. Also, the gunman would change his tactics with respect to everyone packing; and the bodycount is the same, if not higher. How about finding a way to keep people from popping a circuit, and recognizes signs of someone about to do something like this, instead of debating the gun issue?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can think of at least 31 students who would probably disagree with that fact.

I believe current US law requires one to be 21 to purchase a handgun, and therefore most states' CCW laws (for those states who believe in freedom) require the person to be 21.

I believe most states have severe punishments for those who consume alcohol while carrying a firearm. Since those who apply for and receive CCW permits/licenses tend to follow the law, it's not unreasonable to think that the firearm/alcohol problem wouldn't be a problem.

Picture another scenario, where the gunman, knowing that he has the only firearm in the room, lines everyone up against the wall and kills them one after another. But hey - at least there weren't any "accidental" shootings.

You mean like not walking into a building, locking everyone in, and picking people off at will?

Obviously, the current philosophy isn't working... so there's two other choices:
A. Ban all firearms. Ask the Brits or Aussies how well that works... B. Allow people to defend themselves by carrying their own weapon.

Okay - that's option C - mind control. I gotta admit, I missed that one.

Let's put you in a room with 100 random people. If you can pick out the one who's going to lose his mind tomorrow, I'll back your plan. Until then, option B still looks like the best plan to me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Damn you! You ruined my plans for tomorrow! I was thinking about going postal!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I always worried about you, Larry :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Of course there is severe punishment for possesion under the influence. Do you think a 21 year old thinks of this? Do me a favor, and study possible scenarios if at least 1/4 of 50 people had a gun. First off, a percentage will panic, and unload anywhere. Another percentage will unload on anything that moves. A trained police officer at a range of 10 feet with a handgun in a firefight will hit the intended target an average of 2-3 times per 10 shots. Don't believe me? Ask a police officer or someone who knows what they are talking about. I am talking a trained police officer who has experience, extensive training and practice, and who has to requalify every year. I am also considering the gun man not wearing body armour, because that changes things as well. The problem is people either watch too much TV, or only shoot in a range under ideal conditions, and do not understand just how inaccurate a hand gun really is. I am not advocating taking everyone's guns away. I just think the whole thought process of advocating everyone to carry a firearm is ridiculous. Also, something that is never talked about is the mental affect of carrying a firearm. I'm talking about the superiority complex some get when carrying a firearm. This is something that is also studied, and I encourage others to do their own research for themselves on it. I call it the Deputy Dawg syndrome. If the gunman lines up everyone as you say, then at least this gives extra time for a trained individual to respond, as well as give the gunman a chance to think twice. I'll take my chances with this, over bullets flying wildly everyone, not giving a chance for the situation to be controlled. As I said, I'm not for banning all firearms, but if you want to ask the Brits or Aussies as you state; you will notice that these mass shootings do not happen as near as much as here in the United States. Do you think that no one in Great Britian or Australia has a firearm? Maybe, I recommend famialiarizing yourself with the gun laws of these countries. A private citizen can own a firearm in these countries. Your "mind control" argument is over reaching don't you think? I never said anything about mind control. With all due respect, This sounds like the Black Helicopter conspiracy theorists that are in militias. I'm talking about researching the root cause of what makes one malfunction like this. Whether you like it or not, science will find a way to recognize these individuals before something like this happens.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
To add further to this: Do you think we would have world peace if we gave every country a nuclear weapon?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Xclimation wrote:

Maybe.
Nuclear weaponry forces a form of self-regulation that has never occurred before because everyone understands the weapon is a horrible one.
Look at the US-USSR. For 60 years, two nations, intensely hostile towards one another, armed to the teeth, don't go to war [directly] against one another!
Has anything like that ever happened before in human history?
Not certain but it must be a very unlikely situation.
Maybe there is something to be said for every nation having nuclear weapons, and every individual carrying a .45, in the name of world peace and social harmony of course!
SMH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Let's see... when only one country had nukes, over 200,000 people were killed by them. Since the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the death total from nuclear weapon use has been.... ummm.... zero.
Ya can't argue with numbers
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure you can, wanna see! <Where did I hide that K$N Filter thread>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Its kept us from going into Pakastan and gettin Bin Laden.
beekeep
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
beekeep wrote:

Yes, I remember the speech by GWB that claimed we would not make a distinction between the terrorist and those who harbor them.*
*except for nations that can defend themselves.
JAM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Dunkenfield wrote:

We have no evidence that the Pakistan Gov. is harboring and aiding Bin Ladin. Nice try with typical leftist hatred that does nothing towards presenting a solution. Do the Democrats have any plan for anything at all or is it all about what they don't like?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.