Gun Free Campus Protest

[crockett]

Originally posted by BiGBMAW
 

Do you need a shoulder to cry on? Maybe you can cry on GtoRA2's

[BiGBMAW]

typical response from a clueless dolt

I now Impose and IDIOT FREE ZONE!!!!


Lets see if it works...corcket.....IF you respond...Its not working

[crockett]

Originally posted by BiGBMAW
typical response from a clueless dolt

I now Impose and IDIOT FREE ZONE!!!!


Lets see if it works...corcket.....IF you respond...Its not working

I felt my reply was equal to your post in post quality and content. Sorry about your idiot free zone, maybe you can go watch some Fox news to make up for it. I hear Bill O Reilly is good with that.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by cpxxx
I think you misunderstood. I wasn't referring to the general right to bear arms. I didn't make it clear to be fair. But strictly in the case of carrying guns on a school campus where they have banned the carrying of guns because of the fear of shootings.  

Neither side are serving their cause any good by digging into deeply entrenched positions.

I understood you very well Cpxxx.  I still very much feel that the Constitution provides for only one side on this.  That is the 2nd Amendment side.  

At the very least, the persons enacting the "gun free zone" on that campus should be held accountable for criminal negligence in expecting that a criminal, psychopath, or mentally deranged individual would respect such a law.  In my eyes, the persons enacting these "gun free zones" should be further held as accomplices to any gun crime committed in these areas as their (persons enacting the gun free zones) have violated the rights of those who should have the right to carry to protect themselves.

[BiGBMAW]

See perfect Example..


I made a Law..and you broke it..


Now..How can you not figure out..Because someone sticks a sign in a yard that says Gun Free Zone..That criminals DONT Give a CRApppp


?

Can you answer that???....Dont worry ..I removed the No Idiot Zone sign

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by Bodhi
I understood you very well Cpxxx.  I still very much feel that the Constitution provides for only one side on this.  That is the 2nd Amendment side.  

At the very least, the persons enacting the "gun free zone" on that campus should be held accountable for criminal negligence in expecting that a criminal, psychopath, or mentally deranged individual would respect such a law.  In my eyes, the persons enacting these "gun free zones" should be further held as accomplices to any gun crime committed in these areas as their (persons enacting the gun free zones) have violated the rights of those who should have the right to carry to protect themselves.

It would only take a single lawsuit and a win to change the "Gun Free Zone" policy.  I'd like to see it done.

[crockett]

Originally posted by BiGBMAW
See perfect Example..


I made a Law..and you broke it..


Now..How can you not figure out..Because someone sticks a sign in a yard that says Gun Free Zone..That criminals DONT Give a CRApppp


?

Can you answer that???....Dont worry ..I removed the No Idiot Zone sign

Your law means nothing because you have no way to enforce it. You are not a mod on this forum. So your point is really mute.

It's pretty much the same as you putting up a no dog sign in your grass and having me come along a letting my dog poop on your lawn. You can get upset if you want, but you still have dog doo on your lawn. At the end of the day not much you are going to do about it either.

Btw as far as signs go.. I haven't heard of too many criminals whom really worry much about if there is a "gun free zone" sign up or not. I really don't think too many of them pick and choose their targets based on if it's a gun free zone such as a school or not.

You guys are really grasping at straws on that one.

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by crockett
Btw as far as signs go.. I haven't heard of too many criminals whom really worry much about if there is a "gun free zone" sign up or not. I really don't think too many of them pick and choose their targets based on if it's a gun free zone such as a school or not.

You guys are really grasping at straws on that one.

Yet all the worst massacres occur at gun free zones.  That indicates one of two things.

1.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of their higher chance of survival.

2.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of ease of killing targets.



Nothing else is logical.  But then again, what ever is when dealing with a liberal?

[Trell]

I think most pick there rampage based on the place that set them off.  Children wih guns spend most of their time at school.  So when they want to kill people the school is where they go

Just like the postal shooting of years past.  those happened where the nut spent most of his time  work.


I think gun free zones are stupid,  but dont blame them on why the nuts were there.  the people were either enroled or employed there for the most part.

[moot]

Originally posted by Bodhi
I understood you very well Cpxxx.  I still very much feel that the Constitution provides for only one side on this.  That is the 2nd Amendment side.  

At the very least, the persons enacting the "gun free zone" on that campus should be held accountable for criminal negligence in expecting that a criminal, psychopath, or mentally deranged individual would respect such a law.  In my eyes, the persons enacting these "gun free zones" should be further held as accomplices to any gun crime committed in these areas as their (persons enacting the gun free zones) have violated the rights of those who should have the right to carry to protect themselves.

Very true.

[crockett]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yet all the worst massacres occur at gun free zones.  That indicates one of two things.

1.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of their higher chance of survival.

2.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of ease of killing targets.

Nothing else is logical.  But then again, what ever is when dealing with a liberal?

Yet mass killings account for the smallest amount of gun deaths yearly out of any of the categories. They just get the most news coverage. In fact accidental shootings account for more gun deaths per year than mass killings do.

Most shootings occur where the person whom was shot could have legally carried a gun, yet they didn't carry a gun. So what makes you think that allowing people to carry guns anywhere would somehow make up for the amount of accidental shootings?

You think everyone having guns makes people commit less crimes? Go visit South Africa and see how well that theory holds up.

Read your history books about the wild west, when everyone had a gun. Was it safer then? Societies whom are heavily armed in public have solid histories of being more violent. History it's self speaks against you and disproves your argument.

Not to mention this post has been active roughly 3 days. The average daily death toll in the US is 85 people per day whom are killed by guns. That doesn't take into account wounded, just dead.

So roughly 255 people have been shot to death by guns since this topic was started. What did all the gun carrying vigilantes do to save those 255 people? I bet you would be hard pressed to find one case out of the 255 in the last 3 days where some legal gun carrying citizen saved the day. (other than a public servant as in police officer)

How many times do you hear that a gun carrying vigilante, saved people from getting shot? Might happen on occasion but it damn sure doesn't happen enough to out weigh the risks of accidental shootings, that would occur if irresponsible kids were carrying guns at colleges.

So amuse me... dig up some stats that show how often legal gun carrying good vigilante saved the day.

Oh and btw since we are on the subject of mass shootings. Most mass shootings such as the school shootings and the occasional guy going postal, are carried out with legally bought guns. Most mass shootings are not carried out by the typical "criminal" types.

[moot]

South Africa isn't the USA, wild west isn't today, .  Apples to apples Crockett..
The USA's history is bloody, but what country's history isn't?  What country has striven for everything the USA stands (or is meant to anyway) for without some bloody conflict at some point?

Amuse everyone else Crockett, what is your better alternative to the second amendment?
There's more wrong with the man than with the guns in just about everything you denounce.

Red Herring, dark side of the moon, non sequitur.. take your pick:

Not to mention this post has been active roughly 3 days. The average daily death toll in the US is 85 people per day whom are killed by guns. That doesn't take into account wounded, just dead.

Just bleeding heart maybe?  In that case you're adding your share to the complications, creating problems where there are none.

[rpm]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Yet all the worst massacres occur at gun free zones.  That indicates one of two things.

1.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of their higher chance of survival.

2.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of ease of killing targets.



Nothing else is logical.  But then again, what ever is when dealing with a liberal?

You forgot the correct answer:
3.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of the people they want to shoot.

It's not political. It's psychological.

We're talking about kids with guns. Not AlQueda snipers.

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by rpm
You forgot the correct answer:
3.) Shooters pick their rampage locations based off of the people they want to shoot.

It's not political. It's psychological.

We're talking about kids with guns. Not AlQueda snipers.

That may be so, but it doesn't make #1 and #2 any less true.

[lazs2]

nice dodge crock-it.. of course school shootings are rare..   you would not think so tho by the coverage they get from your lefty media.  They don't mention however that fully a third are stopped eventually by a citizen with a gun... more guns.. more stopping of shooters.

You said that criminals don't care... you are again.. of course.. wrong.  Interviews with hardened criminals prove every time that they fear citizens with guns more than even cops.

But..it is not just anecdotal.. it is real cause and effect.   Very few burglaries are done in America "hot" like in your socialist paradise your-0p.  

the other point you make is not well thought out either...those who would kill will kill even if they get what they want.   they will also have the drop on people.. the real facts tho are that law abiding gun owners don't kill.. not in the vast majority of cases.. the real truth is that according to FBI stats... people with firearms stop between 1.5 and 3 million crimes a year.   They don't kill or even wound but they prevent those things from happening.

Do us all a favor and get educated on the subject so we don't have to do all the work.

Please read "more guns less crime" it is very detailed and heavily footnoted and amoung the thousands of facts in it.. so far only one or two very minor ones have been found to be in error... an economist wrote it so it is anal.

If that is too much to read... (lots of facts and footnotes) then read "the seven deadly myths about gun control"   this is a shorter more lively version with less hardcore data but speaks to every left wing myth about guns and gun control.

lazs