Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mg1942 on February 14, 2008, 05:02:04 PM
-
Today: Northern Illinois
Last Week: Louisiana
-
Yeah I'm watching it now, I'm here in Chicago, my step sister just transfered out of NIU this semester, thank god for that, but her moms on the phone with her right now, there trying to find out if any of her friends were hurt.
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=5778011&version=27&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1
-
i don't understand, the campus is a GUN FREE ZONE, didn't the killer know that? :rolleyes:
for the slow people, that was sarcasm.
-
Atleast the guy who did it is dead, there saying he was using a shotgun, thats how he hurt so many people with just a few shots.
I'm just so glad my step sister transfered out of there in January.
-
I just don't understand whats going on in these peoples heads that do this, why take out your anger on innocent students trying to get an education, most likely people who never did anything to you, I mean at the high school and elementary level you can kinda understand it, kids at those ages can be bullied and picked on by other kids, but that really doesn't happen as much on the college level, I just don't understand it.
-
In the previous shooting this week the woman, I hear, had been previously raped by the two who she shot among herself. Hardly innocent victims in that case.
-
Well thats completely different, this guy walked into a class and opened up on them with a shotgun, so far 2 are dead and 17 injured. Back in December when my step sister was having finals, on a Saturday a note was found in a bathroom on campus threating to shoot people, they canceled finals for that Monday, so I wonder if it was this guy who wrote it.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I just don't understand whats going on in these peoples heads that do this, why take out your anger on innocent students trying to get an education, most likely people who never did anything to you, I mean at the high school and elementary level you can kinda understand it, kids at those ages can be bullied and picked on by other kids, but that really doesn't happen as much on the college level, I just don't understand it.
Same sort of nutcases in both cases. Gimp today, gimp always.
-
Im going to have to go with the lazs(tm) approach here.
Why was there no one else armed at that school?
double triple check whoever, i dont even care if it is the janitor, give them daily psych exams to make sure they are still sane and can safely carry a sidearm.
someone needed to take that guy down before the cops took 15 minutes to get there.
i cant imagine how long it takes to walk into school with a shotgun and kill 3 kids and injure 17 others. but even with a browning A5 that is 1 reload. but i kinda hope that some would have been quicker (people that are angry or insane or on drugs/alcohol cant shoot for ****) to at least save 2 kids
-
I just don't understand whats going on in these peoples heads that do this, why take out your anger on innocent students trying to get an education, most likely people who never did anything to you, I mean at the high school and elementary level you can kinda understand it, kids at those ages can be bullied and picked on by other kids, but that really doesn't happen as much on the college level, I just don't understand it.
They do it for the infamy. A product of our celebrity culture. Within hours they are on every cable news channel and Web sites around the world, including this one. Before the mass media age they just ate the barrel alone in their bedroom.
Charon
-
My mom is an NIU alum, class of 1947. I think it was called Northern Illinois Teachers College back then.
-
Makes me want to pack heat when I teach.
-
My school allows guns on campus. They can't bring them into buildings, other than the Public Safety office, but students have them in their trucks at times, because they hunt in between classes. Even with all those guns around, not one person has ever been shot, shot at or injured by anyone with a gun (except that one handsomehunk who shot himself in the foot to see if it would hurt).
-
I don't think having people with guns on campus would do much, like this guy today it was all over in minutes, the police were there within 2 minutes of the first call and he still injured over 17 people and killed atleast 3 so far. The guy at Virgina Tech chained all the doors so even if someone had a gun they couldn't get in right away. Other then having an armed guard in each room I don't think it would have that big of an impact.
-
Seventeen wounded, three critical, no innocent deaths yet thank God.
Schools with gun free zones should at least have armed security (or staff) with quick reaction capabilities. Guns really aren't the problem. Yes, it would be nice if we lived in a heaven like utopia, but as long as people are vulnerable to violent mental illness we should at least provide capable security for the rest of society to give us protection from these roaming nutbags.
Our entire society suffers.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I don't think having people with guns on campus would do much, like this guy today it was all over in minutes, the police were there within 2 minutes of the first call and he still injured over 17 people and killed atleast 3 so far. The guy at Virgina Tech chained all the doors so even if someone had a gun they couldn't get in right away. Other then having an armed guard in each room I don't think it would have that big of an impact.
I highlighted the most important words of what you wrote.
Just as much as it can be over in mere seconds, it can be stopped just as quickly. Not by police who are only ever a reactionary force, but by those armed in the classroom.
It is unfeasible and just laughable to think you can hire an armed Security officer for every classroom..
-
I think the only time that having armed security would help is if the shooting goes on for awhile, like going from class to class, other then that the guy is gonna kill people if thats what he wants to do.
I just can't believe that these people just can't put the gun to there own head, they have to go out and take as many as they can with them before they kill themselves, most likely people they don't even know, it's just sad.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Just as much as it can be over in mere seconds, it can be stopped just as quickly. Not by police who are only ever a reactionary force, but by those armed in the classroom.
I think having armed students in class is just a bad idea, thats just asking for trouble IMHO.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I don't think having people with guns on campus would do much, like this guy today it was all over in minutes, the police were there within 2 minutes of the first call and he still injured over 17 people and killed atleast 3 so far. The guy at Virgina Tech chained all the doors so even if someone had a gun they couldn't get in right away. Other then having an armed guard in each room I don't think it would have that big of an impact.
Well lets put it to you this way.
Popquiz
Your sitting in class with your trusty gun at your side.
some nutcase walkes in with a shotgun and starts shooting people.
What do you do?
and how long does it take you to do it?
Is it less then 17 people and two minutes?
-
Originally posted by trax1
I think having armed students in class is just a bad idea, thats just asking for trouble IMHO.
First off, you wouldn't arm all students. No one is saying that. You would only allow those who can be legally armed via CCW permits to carry guns.
Next, you have to understand that out of all of the subcategories that Americans can be split up as, people who carry concealed weapons are THE most law abiding group.
Next, you have to understand that with the permitting of CCW's, crime goes down. Unlike your liberal fears where this will turn to a lawless frontier town, all the evidence shows otherwise. Nothing will happen, just take a look at Florida. In florida, they instituted laws where you no longer have to believe that a criminal is going to kill you for you to shoot him. Florida did not become a state full of gunslingers, anyone just killing anyone they please. Just the opposite is true.
But asking someone to understand those is very difficult what with all of these facts. This in itself can be understood by realizing that the Liberal brain does not operate off of Facts.
-
Originally posted by john9001
i don't understand, the campus is a GUN FREE ZONE, didn't the killer know that? :rolleyes:
for the slow people, that was sarcasm.
yea but your not funny
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Well lets put it to you this way.
Popquiz
Your sitting in class with your trusty gun at your side.
some nutcase walkes in with a shotgun and starts shooting people.
What do you do?
and how long does it take you to do it?
Is it less then 17 people and two minutes?
Yeah but then your gonna get idiots who accidentally shoot themselves, or get mad at someone and because they have a gun on them they over react without thinking and shot someone, like I said IMO it's just asking for trouble arming students.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Yeah but then your gonna get idiots who accidentally shoot themselves, or get mad at someone and because they have a gun on them they over react without thinking and shot someone, like I said IMO it's just asking for trouble arming students.
But that DOES NOT HAPPEN! CCW permit holders DO NOT over react and shoot just for ****s and giggles!
-
Originally posted by trax1
Yeah but then your gonna get idiots who accidentally shoot themselves, or get mad at someone and because they have a gun on them they over react without thinking and shot someone, like I said IMO it's just asking for trouble arming students.
Laz,
Cleanup in isle 4
-
Maybe your right, I don't know, like I said it's just my opinion, I really wouldn't like the idea of my kids in class with other students armed.
-
I think that teachers who have CCW should be allowed to carry weapons. My highschool has one and sometimes two police officers at the school, but it wont be enough
Virginia Tech Shooter went to my school, along with two of his victims
Michael Kennedy who shot 2 police officers down the street from the school. (if you live in Northern VA then you should have heard about this)
A student who i knew shot himself in the head.
A teacher, who had a CCW permit, got fired for having a pistol in his car.
anyone from northern VA will probably know what school im talking about...
-
i don't even own a gun...but i have no problem whatsoever with a heavilly armed populace.
give the people who put these idiots down the spotlight...that'll help take away the luster.
tired of these morons.
-
Originally posted by JB88
give the people who put these idiots down the spotlight...that'll help take away the luster.
tired of these morons.
Only problem with that is almost always its that person that kills themselves at the end, actually I can't think of one school shooter thats was killed by someone other then themselves.
-
probably because they didn't have a citizen in their proximity carrying a bullet for their head.
you clipped my quote.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Only problem with that is almost always its that person that kills themselves at the end, actually I can't think of one school shooter thats was killed by someone other then themselves.
Even supposing that was an actual problem, it isn't enough to offset the 2nd amendment. Find a good substitute for it and you may have a good enough reason to disarm the public.
-
Originally posted by moot
Even supposing that was an actual problem, it isn't enough to offset the 2nd amendment. Find a good substitute for it and you may have a good enough reason to disarm the public.
Thats not what I meant, re-read his post then mine. I don't see anywhere that I said we need to take away peoples rights to bear arms, I just dont think armed students in class rooms is a good idea.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Only problem with that is almost always its that person that kills themselves at the end, actually I can't think of one school shooter thats was killed by someone other then themselves.
... Your reasoning proves OUR point. The shooter was NOT killed by anyone other than himself because there was NO one else to kill him.
The shooter's take their own lives after they've leisurely killed / shot as many people as they want.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I think having armed students in class is just a bad idea, thats just asking for trouble IMHO.
I bet the entire grade curve would go up though :)
-Sik
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
... Your reasoning proves OUR point. The shooter was NOT killed by anyone other than himself because there was NO one else to kill him.
The shooter's take their own lives after they've leisurely killed / shot as many people as they want.
Thats your opinion, I just think that having students armed to stop a person on that very rare occasion that it would actually be needed doesn't justify arming students, you cant say that people with CCW have never accidentally killed or wounded someone, or even did it on purpose, now I think theres more a chance of something going wrong with the gun in a classroom, then actually needing on the very rare occasion you would need to kill someone in a class.
-
It's not arming students but students (civilians) arming themselves. Psychos usualy aren't (as far as the media reports anyway) put down by said students/bystanders because those same joe publics aren't allowed to be armed as per your sort of supposition that joe public shouldn't be armed.
Psychos will be armed either way. So we're back to square one. The only way for psychos not to be armed is to remove guns entirely. This conflicts with the 2nd amendment as well as the common sense of a single object equalizer as Lazs has described a number of times.
So the only answer to that is to either let students/bystanders be armed, or removing the 2nd amendment, which could only happen if it had a substitute.
Or having security checkpoints..
Or removing the 2nd without anything to substitute for it, and you end up with the same situation as pretty much anywhere else in the world.
-
Teachers should be aloud to carry guns in their class.
-
You know what, theres no point in arguing about it, the laws aren't gonna change, atleast for the foreseeable future, and 5 students are dead and that is extremely sad and tragic thing, so I'm gonna leave it at that.
-
Or people could just give up and let someone else decide what's good for them.
-
It appears that the killer was upset that he did not receive any Valentine Cards today.
SIG 220
-
5 dead. That's just hilarious.
-
Quite obviously, we need to increase security around our colleges.
Maybe we can expand the scope of the TSA.
Put a big fence around the place. Xray all incoming packages. The students could go through metal detectors and explosive sniffing devices.
Maybe even "random" searches of students that look troubled or maybe wear too much black clothing.
That'll fix it.
-
I think the only true fix for something like this is to make it illegal to mention the killers name in the press. But that would be a First Amendment issue.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Quite obviously, we need to increase security around our colleges.
Maybe we can expand the scope of the TSA.
Put a big fence around the place. Xray all incoming packages. The students could go through metal detectors and explosive sniffing devices.
Maybe even "random" searches of students that look troubled or maybe wear too much black clothing.
That'll fix it.
Add a microchip with gps on a wristband for the students. It could also have a mic that can pick up and transmit what the student sais if he uses some key phrases. :aok
-
Only info out so far on the shooter is that he is a former student at the university.
So it is just another one of those cases of a bitter ex-student who had problems and failed in school getting revenge back on the school ( which he no doubt probably blamed for all of his problems ).
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by trax1
Thats your opinion, I just think that having students armed to stop a person on that very rare occasion that it would actually be needed doesn't justify arming students, you cant say that people with CCW have never accidentally killed or wounded someone, or even did it on purpose, now I think theres more a chance of something going wrong with the gun in a classroom, then actually needing on the very rare occasion you would need to kill someone in a class.
It's not that we need a teacher or student in every classroom with a weapon. The thing with CCW is that the possibility of an armed citizen being present deters crime. When you make a gun free zone you tell all potential mass killers the best place to go to kill a bunch of people before killing themselves.
Look up some facts on CCW permit holders. They are in fact very unlikely to commit crimes. There have been a couple of incidents where CCW permit holders have broken the law, but not by killing or shooting someone that they shouldn't have.
Iirc the very first CCW holder in Florida to use his weapon in self defense was a cab driver that shot his passenger when the passenger pulled a gun and tried to rob him. The passenger had been out of jail for less than 2 days iirc. So yes, CCW holders have used their weapons and actually shot and killed people.
Statistics show that CCW is a very positive thing.
-
Honestly, I agree about the CCW permits. If you have the permit to carry, you should be allowed to do so. knowing that at any minute you could be surrounded by law abiding people who are armed and able can serve as an excellent deterent to premeditated incidents. For those that aren't premeditated, i.e. crazy people, it can save tons of lives.
-
I told y'all this crap would continue and probably increase in the coming years. i can find references to old threads if need be.
islamist with bombs and school children with guns, both killing innocents. both the same thing.
perhaps GW Bush should be advocating the war on terror in his country, not in the sandy wastes.
who here is going to try and tell me the human race is not a watermelon faced waste of time?
-
Going from cavemen to today is something of an improvement...
-
I read that this most recent shooting all took place within 2 minutes.
The guy pulled out the shotgun, fired and then killed himself.
There was no time for anyone to react.
:(
-
There was a shooting at a city hall in Missouri last week. The shooter killed 2 police officers who were on guard duty, 1 inside, 1 outside. He also killed 3 other people before more police turned up and killed him.
He wasn't deterred by the knowledge armed police would be there, and he wasn't prevented from killing by the presence of armed police.
The idea that having someone armed will prevent these shootings is a fallacy.
-
I will take my chances with some shooter than some ccw dork all pumped on adrenalin, never being in a situation before who thinks he is Rambo out to save the world.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan
There was a shooting at a city hall in Missouri last week. The shooter killed 2 police officers who were on guard duty, 1 inside, 1 outside. He also killed 3 other people before more police turned up and killed him.
He wasn't deterred by the knowledge armed police would be there, and he wasn't prevented from killing by the presence of armed police.
The idea that having someone armed will prevent these shootings is a fallacy.
I'm pretty sure the police officers at the City Hall meeting weren't armed.
I read that this most recent shooting all took place within 2 minutes.
The guy pulled out the shotgun, fired and then killed himself.
There was no time for anyone to react.
All it would have taken was 5 seconds for a CCW holder to pull a gun and TRY something. Instead it was open season on defenseless students for however long the gunman wanted.
I will take my chances with some shooter than some ccw dork all pumped on adrenalin, never being in a situation before who thinks he is Rambo out to save the world.
Asking a European to save himself is like asking a Fish to walk on land.
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
I will take my chances with some shooter than some ccw dork all pumped on adrenalin, never being in a situation before who thinks he is Rambo out to save the world.
i don't carry gun to protect you, i carry a gun to protect me, i really don't care what happens to you.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I'm pretty sure the police officers at the City Hall meeting weren't armed.
Yes they were. That's why he killed them first.
-
I was mistaken, the police officers WERE armed. However, that doesn't mean that carrying guns concealed is useless. It means that OPENLY carrying guns is useless. He can't directly go to kill a CCW holder if he doesn't know who they are.
Myelo hit it.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Asking a European to save himself is like asking a Fish to walk on land.
ever been to europe? have you ever even left the USA??
i have been to America. Richmond, Virginia. beautifull countryside, amazing wildlife and some very good people.
your pathetic, ignorant statements are much of the cause for why some people like to fly planes into your buildings. I hope you are prepared to accept that your idiocy and other fools like you have cost your nation many innocent lives.
oh, and i find it rather amusing that we quite possibly evolved to the state we are in now because a fish decided to walk on land ;)
-
Originally posted by john9001
i don't carry gun to protect you, i carry a gun to protect me, i really don't care what happens to you.
Not asking you to. The point was the ccw dork playing Rambo is just as dangerous as the nut job to my well being.
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Not asking you to. The point was the ccw dork playing Rambo is just as dangerous as the nut job to my well being.
Except for the fact that he's not. There is no evidence to show that a CCW holder made any incident worse.
-
Ok.. this is the deal...I stopped reading after the first page to reply.. will go back.
Here is the deal... armed security is the second best choice. As someone correctly pointed out.. they can be avoided by our little fame seeking dark avengers... also.. the licence for security guard is probly less stringent than that of concealed carry.. many security guards have some problems. failed police.. most concealed carry are taking a personal responsibility... I trust them far more than security guards.
Better than nothing cause the shooters are cowards.. will have some preventitive power... certainly much better than a big sign at the entrance saying "Baaaaaa... no one here but us sheep"
The real solution is to allow concealed carry... If the little "americas favorite dark avenger idol" thinks he can be shot dead before he does enough damage to be on CNN.. he will find some other place the liberals have made people into sheep.
trax and a few others bring up the good sounding but mythical idea that it will cause shootouts over who got more pudding or less.. this is the same arguement the socialists used for concealed carry for the general population.. it was said that every fender bender would result in a gunfight.. Of course.. that never happened and.. still doesn't.
Who would and should carry? well.. that is already in place. 21 is the age for most states for carry.. that would mean most students (rightfully) would not be armed.. of the remaining.. only about 10% would bother.. that is what real world figures tell us. Teachers? mostly liberal wussies and idiots... maybe 2% would be bright enough and responsible enough.. staff? again.. 10%
You would have.. about 3 guns concealed per 100 people on campus. It would be enough. It would cause no problems except in the heads of those too stubborn to see the truth and look at the stats.
lazs
-
I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who felt this way on this subject, I said it before, on the very very very rare occasion that a person in a class with a CCW would be needed doesn't justify doing it because I think theres a much bigger chance that a person with CCW in a class would kill or injure an innocent person. A classroom is no place for guns.
-
and trax.. the last shooting at the religious school was stopped by citizens putting bullets into the shooter.. he was shot 3 times.. he may have shot himself after that but... he was out of the fight.
The number is that 1/3 of all school shootings have been stopped by a citizen with a gun. there are several dramatic examples if you care to look.. in most cases the citizen had to go to the parking lot to get his gun.. it would have turned out better had he had it on him in the first place.
In the latest city council shooting.. the cop who was outside guarding the proceedings was the first person shot and then everyone else was a sheep. he was shot because the shooter knew he was the only threat.
lazs
-
a class room is no place for guns.....true.
but when the lunatic brings a gun into the class room....well..i'm with gun nuts on this one....i would rather have an option available to me than sit there weeping before i was excecuted. meakly thinking 'this cant be happening to me' *BANG* lights out.
well, it is happening, you are maybe going to die, and damned if i am not going to take every legal option presented to protect myself in that situation.
luckily i dont live in a gun country, so for me this is a moot point. if i did however, i would want to be armed AT LEAST to the same level as the resident homicidal maniac.
-
I will concede that there is a way to make armed guards work.
Every building will have to be build like casinos. There will need to be a sharpshooter in behind the one way glass on the walkway above all the open areas. He will need to have a casino like view of everything.
lazs
-
Carrying a gun should be made mandatory; if everyone would have guns things like this wouldn't happen. More guns = safer.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
a class room is no place for guns.....true.
but when the lunatic brings a gun into the class room....well..i'm with gun nuts on this one....i would rather have an option available to me than sit there weeping before i was excecuted. meakly thinking 'this cant be happening to me' *BANG* lights out.
well, it is happening, you are maybe going to die, and damned if i am not going to take every legal option presented to protect myself in that situation.
luckily i dont live in a gun country, so for me this is a moot point. if i did however, i would want to be armed AT LEAST to the same level as the resident homicidal maniac.
Sorry for inferring that Europeans aren't willing to protect themselves. It's just hard to think otherwise with the rampant liberalism.
-
milo.. you bring up nothing but myth.. there are millions of citizens carrying concealed. Florida alone has issued about 1,300,000 and over 400,000 in one year. women are the latest big class of permit holders.
I have never heard of one all pumped up on rambo juice harming someone who didn't need it.
the amount of permits revolked is tiny... 0.02% and mostly for neglect.. forgetting to leave the gun in the car when in a prohibited place for instance or.. being convicted of some unrelated crime like alleged spousal abuse.
You really have nothing to fear from concealed carry holders.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Sorry for inferring that Europeans aren't willing to protect themselves. It's just hard to think otherwise with the rampant liberalism.
thats ok i expect it.
did you answer my question?
have you ever left the US of A?
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Not asking you to. The point was the ccw dork playing Rambo is just as dangerous as the nut job to my well being.
Do you really think you are safer using Armed Security guards? what makes you think a security guard (and not all of them are armed either) is better than a person with CCW licence? what leads you to call CCW holders dork? Playing Rambo. Do you know what the requirements are to get a CCW license? You dont just walk in and get a license.
Certification course costs $125, re-certification course $75. The license itself is $140. The instructors get their training and certifiaction from the DPS. They are monitored by the DPS,
Texas requires a 10 - 15 hour certification course. Obtaining a permit to carry concealed handguns in the State of Texas requires a 10 hour Texas Concealed Handgun License Certification course which trains men and women self defense techniques, gun safety, child safety around guns, and Texas laws regarding use of force and licensing requirements.
Recertification is required every five years by holders of a Texas Concealed Handgun License who wish to continue to carry concealed handguns in the State of Texas.
Instructors teach Texas laws on weapons and the use of deadly force.
Knowledge of Firearms, Gun Safety, Selection of Handguns & Ammunition, Child Safety, Dispute Resolution, Use of Force, Gun Storage, etc...
On top of that there are requirements that must be met or DPS will not issue a CCW license.
A number of factors may disqualify you from obtaining a license, such as: felony convictions and some misdemeanor convictions, including charges that resulted in probation or deferred adjudication, pending criminal charges chemical or alcohol dependency, certain types of psychological diagnoses, protective or restraining orders, defaults on taxes, governmental fees, student loans or child support.
DWI is at least a Class B misdemeanor, and you are ineligible for a license for five years after a conviction for a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or disorderly conduct. This includes cases that were dismissed after you completed probation or deferred adjudication. If you have been convicted of two or more alcohol or drug-related offenses within the last 10 years, you may not be eligible.
Under the concealed handgun law, it is illegal to carry a handgun if you are intoxicated.
I dont see any Rambo's getting CCW Licences...
-
I think it is fair to point out that milo... if he lives here or visits here... that he has been around CCW "dorks" all the time and just didn't know it.
If he does not live here or ever been here.. then he really has no clue in any case.
to summarize.. he doesn't know.. the facts show him to be wrong and.. he maybe doesn't even know America or Americans.
bat.. I have been to england. I was shocked by how little the people there know about firearms. I don't think that any of them could seperate myth from fact without some serious research. I was not comfortable with british law and would not want to live there under any circumstance.
lazs
-
hey me too lazs, i just got birthed here, no choice in the matter. im Irish Scottish and a bit of other stuff by blood. if i had a choice i would be jamaican....
if you have been to europe then i respect your observations sometimes more than my own countrymen. If you have never left your own country you do not deserve to make blanket statements about other cultures, imo.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
thats ok i expect it.
did you answer my question?
have you ever left the US of A?
Once to Canada, but that probably doesn't count.
-
"The number is that 1/3 of all school shootings have been stopped by a citizen with a gun."
You keep throwing this out as fact and I have yet to see any evidence that this has been the case at all. The only thing you do is point me to Lott's book.
You have the book, can you please tell me how he arrived at these figures?
-
hey, thats cool if you want to damn canadians. im sorry if i struck out too hard with my knee jerk reaction. I am just rather intolerant of people who have no experience of another culture yet surmise that they can judge an entire nation from what they see through the vastly inaccurate world medias.
this type of ignorance is no less of a crime than an arab telling me my culture is wrong when he has never left his sand pit ...and moreover i will be blown up because of it.
come to england, see how it really is, then i might even prime the fuse for you...
-
Originally posted by lazs2
and trax.. the last shooting at the religious school was stopped by citizens putting bullets into the shooter.. he was shot 3 times.. he may have shot himself after that but... he was out of the fight.
The number is that 1/3 of all school shootings have been stopped by a citizen with a gun. there are several dramatic examples if you care to look.. in most cases the citizen had to go to the parking lot to get his gun.. it would have turned out better had he had it on him in the first place.
In the latest city council shooting.. the cop who was outside guarding the proceedings was the first person shot and then everyone else was a sheep. he was shot because the shooter knew he was the only threat.
lazs
I think your taking what I've said wrong, I have absolutely no problem with guns, I love guns, hell I had my first gun when I was 10 and got myself a FOID card, in my family guns are something we all enjoy very much, I love nothing better then going out to the range and shooting off a few thousand rounds, and I have no problem with CCW's, it's just when it comes to school I don't think they belong in the hands of students.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I think your taking what I've said wrong, I have absolutely no problem with guns, I love guns, hell I had my first gun when I was 10 and got myself a FOID card, in my family guns are something we all enjoy very much, I love nothing better then going out to the range and shooting off a few thousand rounds, and I have no problem with CCW's, it's just when it comes to school I don't think they belong in the hands of students.
Guns are ALREADY in the hands of students. Many college students have CCW permits and DO carry their guns with them.
Except for where they are not allowed to, one of which is a college campus.
These people who you will never know walk around day in and day out ready to protect you, me and anyone else. Yet somehow something magical happens to them the moment they step on a college campus?
-
Originally posted by trax1
I don't think having people with guns on campus would do much, like this guy today it was all over in minutes, the police were there within 2 minutes of the first call and he still injured over 17 people and killed atleast 3 so far. The guy at Virgina Tech chained all the doors so even if someone had a gun they couldn't get in right away. Other then having an armed guard in each room I don't think it would have that big of an impact.
If the nutcase knew that there was a chance that SOMEONE had a gun on campus for the sole purpose of killing nut jobs who are intenet on killing others, he may have thought twice before carrying out his plan and just offed himself alone at home.
-
Like I said, this is just what I believe, thats guns don't belong in classrooms, and you believe what you believe, and you know what, thats what makes this country great is you get to believe what you want and I get to believe what I want.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
If the nutcase knew that there was a chance that SOMEONE had a gun on campus for the sole purpose of killing nut jobs who are intenet on killing others, he may have thought twice before carrying out his plan and just offed himself alone at home.
I seriously doubt that, if a person has come to the decision that he's gonna kill some people then kill himself I don't think the thought maybe someone will kill me before I get to kill myself is gonna stop him.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I seriously doubt that, if a person has come to the decision that he's gonna kill some people then kill himself I don't think the thought maybe someone will kill me before I get to kill myself is gonna stop him.
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
Exactly!
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
Are you serious, thats your argument...ok
-
Originally posted by Donzo
If the nutcase knew that there was a chance that SOMEONE had a gun on campus for the sole purpose of killing nut jobs who are intenet on killing others, he may have thought twice before carrying out his plan and just offed himself alone at home.
The guy wanted to die, Having guns in the school would not have changed him mind.
Treat this guy the same way as a suicide bomber, He was planning to die.
But if more people had guns in school, One of them "May" Have been able to shoot him.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Like I said, this is just what I believe, thats guns don't belong in classrooms,
yeah, well armed killers that are off their meds don't belong in classrooms either.
-
Originally posted by john9001
yeah, well armed killers that are off their meds don't belong in classrooms either.
I agree with you on that.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
Originally posted by trax1
Are you serious, thats your argument...ok
Do you have a response to his argument? Or is it too complicated for you to comprehend?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
Because Massacres happen at of home or work most often, Places where the stress or arguments with others are the cause, where people spend most of their time.
Last time i was at a gun range it was not much of either of those. Most often it is just people doing there own thing.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Do you have a response to his argument? Or is it too complicated for you to comprehend?
Your right, why didn't we think of this before, we just turn all the classrooms into gun ranges and no one will ever want to kill anyone there, I mean Wow thats just an amazing idea there.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Your right, why didn't we think of this before, we just turn all the classrooms into gun ranges and no one will ever want to kill anyone there, I mean Wow thats just an amazing idea there.
Who said anything about turning classrooms into gun ranges?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Who said anything about turning classrooms into gun ranges?
Well he compared people not wanting to kill people at gun ranges so that must be the key, just turn the classroom into a gun range, no more school shootings.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
If that's the case, how come more massacres do not happen at Gun Ranges?
because mostly only people who want to enjoy firearms in a safe and responsible attitude go to the range?
you're trying to say that because people are armed at a gun range, that is the only reason why nutters dont go there to kill people?
why dont these massacres happen at disney land? well that donald duck is a bit of a loose cannon on a good day, makes sense i spose.
bet you $100 more people die at shooting ranges from firearm related crime than do at the Orlando sealife center.
or is that because the sea lions have ccw permits?
-
Originally posted by trax1
Well he compared people not wanting to kill people at gun ranges so that must be the key, just turn the classroom into a gun range, no more school shootings.
The key to the argument was WHY people wouldn't want to kill people at gun ranges, not turning classrooms into gun ranges.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Your right, why didn't we think of this before, we just turn all the classrooms into gun ranges and no one will ever want to kill anyone there, I mean Wow thats just an amazing idea there.
first you said guns don't belong in classrooms, now you want to turn classrooms into gun ranges.
sounds like you are a confused extremist, first no guns then lots of guns, perhaps when you grow up you will develop a more rational approach to problems.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
because mostly only people who want to enjoy firearms in a safe and responsible attitude go to the range?
you're trying to say that because people are armed at a gun range, that is the only reason why nutters dont go there to kill people?
why dont these massacres happen at disney land? well that donald duck is a bit of a loose cannon on a good day, makes sense i spose.
bet you $100 more people die at shooting ranges from firearm related crime than do at the Orlando sealife center.
or is that because the sea lions have ccw permits?
Exactly
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
bet you $100 more people die at shooting ranges from firearm related crime than do at the Orlando sealife center.
or is that because the sea lions have ccw permits?
Are you talking about people dying at the Orlando sealife center by firearms or just dying in general? I need specifics before I start my research. Your post was a little confusing.
-
Originally posted by john9001
first you said guns don't belong in classrooms, now you want to turn classrooms into gun ranges.
sounds like you are a confused extremist, first no guns then lots of guns, perhaps when you grow up you will develop a more rational approach to problems.
I guess your unfamiliar with sarcasm.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I guess your unfamiliar with sarcasm.
john9001 unfamilar with sarcasm?
uh.....no.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Are you talking about people dying at the Orlando sealife center by firearms or just dying in general? I need specifics before I start my research. Your post was a little confusing.
If you honestly think that the "People don't go to a gun range to commit mass murder" argument is a valid one then I don't know what to tell ya.
-
Originally posted by trax1
If you honestly think that the "People don't go to a gun range to commit mass murder" argument is a valid one then I don't know what to tell ya.
So, do you think that people DO go to gun ranges to commit mass murder?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
john9001 unfamilar with sarcasm?
uh.....no.
:rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So, do you think that people DO go to gun ranges to commit mass murder?
You win then buddy, wow the world is saved, I see things in a whole new light now, why didn't I see it before gun ranges=no mass murder.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Are you serious, thats your argument...ok
It's either Coincidence, Causation, or Correlation that NO massacres happen in areas with high concentration of weapons, but all the massacres that do happen occur in places with minimal concentration of weapons.
So choose.
Is this Coincidence, Causation or Correlation?
-
Honestly if you think that a person intent on killing people and then killing himself is gonna give it a second thought that there might be a chance he's killed before he gets to kill himself is gonna stop him, then I really don't know what to tell ya.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I guess your unfamiliar with sarcasm.
I believe Johns' middle name is sarcasm... and his last name,...
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Are you talking about people dying at the Orlando sealife center by firearms or just dying in general? I need specifics before I start my research. Your post was a little confusing.
from firearms related crime.
and i dont have $100 to pay if im wrong :p
-
Also if your suggestion is that the solution is to put a high concentration of guns in schools then I'd have to say thats just insane.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
from firearms related crime.
and i dont have $100 to pay if im wrong :p
so if someone died at a gun range due to an accident, then that doesnt count...
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's either Coincidence, Causation, or Correlation that NO massacres happen in areas with high concentration of weapons, but all the massacres that do happen occur in places with minimal concentration of weapons.
:huh
And just what to people use when they create massacres? marshmallows?
I suppose 300 panicked students, each armed to the teeth, would create a safer learning environment. I'm sure it would make campus and local police feel oh, so much better, as well.
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
I suppose 300 panicked students, each armed to the teeth,
your statement defies all logic.
and what does "armed to the teeth" mean?
-
A student carrying a loaded firearm, to me, is armed to the teeth. You imply that had the college allowed firearms, than in all likelihood students would have armed themselves, therefore this event would not have happened.
Yes, my (sarcastic) statement did defy all logic, which only goes to illustrate how foolish your argument is for eliminating gun free zones on college campuses.
Thank you for proving my point.
-
a high concentration of guns in schools then I'd have to say thats just insane.
====
Imagine, if you will, a law that required every able bodied adult man or woman to carry a concealed weapon at all times in public places. What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure as a result compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Imagine, if you will, a law that required every able bodied adult man or woman to carry a concealed weapon at all times in public places. What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure as a result compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
probably less crime, definitely not 0% crime. more devastating crime and very rapid escalatory crimes in most situations.
now then...
What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure if guns had never been invented compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
or even....
What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure if no weapons at all had ever been invented compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
at the very worst we would be living by wits and strength again, like all the real life forms on our planet that havnt yet devolved to parasites or bacteria
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
probably less crime, definitely not 0% crime. more devastating crime and very rapid escalatory crimes in most situations.
now then...
What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure if guns had never been invented compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
or even....
What sort of crime do think we as a society would endure if no weapons at all had ever been invented compared to our current model? Less, the same, more crime?
at the very worst we would be living by wits and strength again, like all the real life forms on our planet that havnt yet devolved to parasites or bacteria
To say that we would have no weapons is to say that we have no tools. If we have no tools, that means we are still swinging from branches and flinging poo at each other.
-
well then, at least we made a good start on one of those two problems, we have stopped swinging from the branches.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan
There was a shooting at a city hall in Missouri last week. The shooter killed 2 police officers who were on guard duty, 1 inside, 1 outside. He also killed 3 other people before more police turned up and killed him.
He wasn't deterred by the knowledge armed police would be there, and he wasn't prevented from killing by the presence of armed police.
The idea that having someone armed will prevent these shootings is a fallacy.
The possibility of an armed citizen does deter crime. One only has to look at crime statistics in states that have CCW laws to see this. Obviously not all criminals are detered by the prescence or possibility of the prescence of a firearm.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
To say that we would have no weapons is to say that we have no tools. If we have no tools, that means we are still swinging from branches and flinging poo at each other.
Flung poo could be a weapon :noid
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
from firearms related crime.
and i dont have $100 to pay if im wrong :p
Then why make the bet in the first place, poser?
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
at the very worst we would be living by wits and strength again, like all the real life forms on our planet that havnt yet devolved to parasites or bacteria
Yeah, e basta with Mozart and Von Braun and Shakespeare and Michaelangelo, goodbye Henry Ford and brother Wright, Edison and Tesla, so long Heston and Kittinger and good riddance to any and all future parasites and bacterias of their kind...
We can all disarm ourselves and let the smarts of the teeming masses of average people that brought us GWB and Clinton, Clinton and Giuliani and countless others, make our choices for us the same way being unarmed allows anyone below the average thug's physical prowess and criminal street smarts to be thoroughly abused by said thugs...
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Then why make the bet in the first place, poser?
because if you found out i was right you would have been more likely to orbit the earth in a pot of pidgeon stew than pay me the $100, materialistic oppertunist.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
because if you found out i was right you would have been more likely to orbit the earth in a pot of pidgeon stew than pay me the $100, materialistic oppertunist.
Interesting.
You throw out a bet (thinking no one will question your "fact")
Someone shows interest in researching your "fact".
You state that you will not pay up if your "fact" is found to be wrong.
You defend this by assuming that if you had been right the person challenging you would not pay up.
Class. :aok
-
Why is it that these mass shootings always (or nearly always) happen in places that do not allow guns? Places such as schools, the mall in Omaha etc.
Could it be that these shooters know there will be no opposition for at least a few minutes until the police can arrive?
Why don't we see mass shootings at places where people are likely to have guns? The gun range is actually a good example of this. Could it be that the shooter realizes he might not be able to complete his goals (whatever they might be) before his death?
I agree that it would be best to have classrooms where students don't have to fear anything. Classrooms where students don't have to fear a crazed gunman.
Far to often these days some lunatic comes to the conclusion that it is time to end his own life and to take as many folks with him as possible. The best place to do this is in a gun free zone simply because no one will be in a position to stop the lunatic.
My proposal to protect our students is to remove the gun free zones from our schools. Allow CCW holders to carry their weapons on campus. Based on crime statistics from states that allow CCW I think it's a pretty safe bet that these types of shootings will become far less common and may stop completely.
For those that disagree with allowing CCW or guns of any kind on a campus, what is YOUR proposal to protect our students?
-
Originally posted by moot
Yeah, e basta with Mozart and Von Braun and Shakespeare and Michaelangelo, goodbye Henry Ford and brother Wright, Edison and Tesla, so long Heston and Kittinger and good riddance to any and all future parasites and bacterias of their kind...
thats a great point. and one that i could surely tear apart with any wild and apparently conceited humanity cursing improvised ethic that even in my own head has its own counter argument.
but why would i bother?
if i share my most pesimistic thoughts in a somewhat related discusion that is a great freedom we all have and one i wholeheartedly enjoy taking advantage of...once. if i was to go on and persue the topic indefinitely i would become a fanatic. worse than that if i instanty convert i become a fake, or a sheep.
Far worse than either would be that i try and break down your realistic argument and force you to agree with my realistic argument. to atempt to crush the greatness you see in these subjects would be a crime unfathomable by our human laws and justice.
We can all disarm ourselves and let the smarts of the teeming masses of average people that brought us GWB and Clinton, Clinton and Giuliani and countless others, make our choices for us the same way being unarmed allows anyone below the average thug's physical prowess and criminal street smarts to be thoroughly abused by said thugs...
yes, like i said 'all the other real lifeforms'. human's are scared to live by nature's laws? of course. pathetic self centered spieces that negates the natural physical progresion embraced by practicaly every other lifeform on the planet.
clearly when the first 'intelligent' physical weakling rolled some rocks off a cliff onto a pack of physicaly dominant speceimens just because they didnt give him as much meat.... it was one small self centered step for man, one giant devolutionary leap for mankind.
and dude...that was a really long time ago.
-
overdrive thoughts cooled down now and dropped from critical mass it all became clear.
that weakling caveman who killed the others...
can anyone think who that lifeform relates to for our original thread topic?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Flung poo could be a weapon
I'll give up my poo when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Why is it that these mass shootings always (or nearly always) happen in places that do not allow guns? Places such as schools, the mall in Omaha etc.
Could it be that these shooters know there will be no opposition for at least a few minutes until the police can arrive?
Why don't we see mass shootings at places where people are likely to have guns? The gun range is actually a good example of this. Could it be that the shooter realizes he might not be able to complete his goals (whatever they might be) before his death?
I agree that it would be best to have classrooms where students don't have to fear anything. Classrooms where students don't have to fear a crazed gunman.
Far to often these days some lunatic comes to the conclusion that it is time to end his own life and to take as many folks with him as possible. The best place to do this is in a gun free zone simply because no one will be in a position to stop the lunatic.
My proposal to protect our students is to remove the gun free zones from our schools. Allow CCW holders to carry their weapons on campus. Based on crime statistics from states that allow CCW I think it's a pretty safe bet that these types of shootings will become far less common and may stop completely.
For those that disagree with allowing CCW or guns of any kind on a campus, what is YOUR proposal to protect our students?
You wanna know why they usually choose a school, it because thats the source of whatever the precived problem in there life is, it's not like they just up and decide one day that they want to kill people then die and just randomly pick a school to do it in, for them it's either the school itself or the students within that they see as the ones causing the problem in their life, they don't choose to kill people at the school just because they know that no one there has a gun. Allowing certain people to have a CCW isn't going to stop them from going through with their plans, for them more often then not they are anger at those students or the school itself and they want to take out their anger on them.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Interesting.
You throw out a bet (thinking no one will question your "fact")
Someone shows interest in researching your "fact".
You state that you will not pay up if your "fact" is found to be wrong.
You defend this by assuming that if you had been right the person challenging you would not pay up.
Class. :aok
I really don't think anyone on this BBS would have taken B@tfinkV's bet serious.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I really don't think anyone on this BBS would have taken B@tfinkV's bet serious.
Apparently he did because he stated he would not pay if found to be wrong when his rhetoric was challenged.
Anything else you care to add to this discussion?
-
jesus christ donzo if you're gunna be that shallow considering the subject matter of the thread then go play in the kiddy pool.
if you forget your gambling habits for a min and look closer you can see we have created a legitimate theory for why we can blame cavemen for the public shootings, and possibly all war on this planet.
then entire history and missery of human conflict and destruction is infact not our fault. its Thag's from 4000bc.
and you care about $100 bet that you probably would have lost and not paid. this is history before your very eyes sir please take a seat.
-
Well you can take it up with him, but I highly doubt he was seriously saying he was gonna give anyone a $100 if he was found wrong, but if you took him serious then you can take it up with him.
-
I thought it was an interesting suggestion, except there are problems with the question/bet,... All gun ranges against 1 Seaworld site? Or All gun ranges VS all Large Outdoor amusment parks (Seaworlds, Six Flags, ext) its still a bit lopsided but I gut tells me more people have been shot at amusement parks than at gun ranges (exception for accidental discharges, which can happen at gun ranges but if safety procedures are followed..)
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
jesus christ donzo if you're gunna be that shallow considering the subject matter of the thread then go play in the kiddy pool.
if you forget your gambling habits for a min and look closer you can see we have created a legitimate theory for why we can blame cavemen for the public shootings, and possibly all war on this planet.
then entire history and missery of human conflict and destruction is infact not our fault. its Thag's from 4000bc.
and you care about $100 bet that you probably would have lost and not paid. this is history before your very eyes sir please take a seat.
I could care less about the bet. The point I was making was how you were just throwing made up statistics out there in support of your point. When challenged you back-peddled.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
I could care less about the bet. The point I was making was how you were just throwing made up statistics out there in support of your point. When challenged you back-peddled.
You take things way to literally, I doubt he actually meant that he went out and looked up these statistics about people being killed at Sea World compared to gun ranges, he was just throwing out an example.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
I could care less about the bet. The point I was making was how you were just throwing made up statistics out there in support of your point. When challenged you back-peddled.
ah, i must appologise then, i didnt realise that was your agenda. there was me thinking you were really going to look..
..indeed sir i am in your debt here on. i never would have noticed the back pedal without your quick thinking.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
ah, i must appologise then, i didnt realise that was your agenda. there was me thinking you were really going to look..
..indeed sir i am in your debt here on. i never would have noticed the back pedal without your quick thinking.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by trax1
You wanna know why they usually choose a school, it because thats the source of whatever the precived problem in there life is, it's not like they just up and decide one day that they want to kill people then die and just randomly pick a school to do it in, for them it's either the school itself or the students within that they see as the ones causing the problem in their life, they don't choose to kill people at the school just because they know that no one there has a gun. Allowing certain people to have a CCW isn't going to stop them from going through with their plans, for them more often then not they are anger at those students or the school itself and they want to take out their anger on them.
That may be true, but it does not consider that it never happens in gun rich environments. To think that difficult life only exists in schools, or in gun free zones is just lunacy.
People perceive problems everywhere. Yet we still get back to the point of:
THERE ARE NO MASSACRES IN GUN RICH ENVIRONMENTS!
-
Originally posted by trax1
You wanna know why they usually choose a school, it because thats the source of whatever the precived problem in there life is, it's not like they just up and decide one day that they want to kill people then die and just randomly pick a school to do it in, for them it's either the school itself or the students within that they see as the ones causing the problem in their life, they don't choose to kill people at the school just because they know that no one there has a gun. Allowing certain people to have a CCW isn't going to stop them from going through with their plans, for them more often then not they are anger at those students or the school itself and they want to take out their anger on them.
For some instances this is correct. Columbine shooting is a perfect example. What about an adult that goes to an elementary school for his killing spree then suicide? That has happened as well.
You don't know that allowing folks with CCW to carry on campus won't stop people from thinking twice about going on a killing spree. Statistics from states w/ CCW show fairly dramatic decreases in violent crime rates.
In a perfect world school shootings wouldn't be an issue, but we both know that we don't live in a perfect world.
I'll ask again, what is your solution/plan to help deter this sort of thing?
-
Every time a kid or person blasts a bunch of people at a school, it should serve as a message to everyone, your futures are very upseting to others.
hope you dont put down, piss off or begrudge someone in your future, less a bullet take your life.
people are getting fed up with being walked on, over looked or just downright disrespected, day in and day out.
call em nuts, call them loony, call them loosers, call them whatever you need to help YOU sleep better at night, just know your name calling left someone awake at night, whos teeth grinded with pure anger, prey that person keeps it under wraps.
This, will not be the end of it any time soon.
This world lacks compassion morals and understanding, all reasons things like this will happen.These campuses are a breeding ground for such acts aswell, could it be our school and general outlook by the students is the problem.?
nono, just one nut job out of a few thousand brainless soulless self serving rats, trying to make there own futures.
Hmph..what a bleek outlook on life.
-
Originally posted by trax1
You wanna know why they usually choose a school, it because thats the source of whatever the precived problem in there life is, it's not like they just up and decide one day that they want to kill people then die and just randomly pick a school to do it in,
Like that guy that attacked and killed those kids at that Amish school,... teacher gave him a bad grade and the kids picked on him...:confused:
Right, no one would radomly just pick a school...
-
Unfortunately I don't think there is a sulotion to the school shooting problem, IMO though arming the students isn't the answer, as I said I really don't think thats gonna stop anyone from going through with their plan to kill fellow students, just imagine the mindset of someone who feels he has been pushed to a point that he wants to take revenge on the people he perceives as the ones who have ruined his life and is willing to die afterwards by his own hand, now why would the chance of there being someone in the class with a CCW stop him from wanting to go through with his plan.
As for Donzo, I've never said I'm against CCW's, I just don't think that they should be brought onto schools and in classrooms.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Like that guy that attacked and killed those kids at that Amish school,... teacher gave him a bad grade and the kids picked on him...:confused:
Right, no one would radomly just pick a school...
Sure there are the random nut jobs, but I'm sure probably just about ever school shooting is by a person that attends that school.
-
Originally posted by BaDkaRmA158Th
Every time a kid or person blasts a bunch of people at a school, it should serve as a message to everyone, your futures are very upseting to others.
hope you dont put down, piss off or begrudge someone in your future, less a bullet take your life.
people are getting fed up with being walked on, over looked or just downright disrespected, day in and day out.
call em nuts, call them loony, call them loosers, call them whatever you need to help YOU sleep better at night, just know your name calling left someone awake at night, whos teeth grinded with pure anger, prey that person keeps it under wraps.
This, will not be the end of it any time soon.
This world lacks compassion morals and understanding, all reasons things like this will happen.These campuses are a breeding ground for such acts aswell, could it be our school and general outlook by the students is the problem.?
nono, just one nut job out of a few thousand brainless soulless self serving rats, trying to make there own futures.
Hmph..what a bleek outlook on life.
I couldn't agree with you more.
-
Every shooter is usually came off meds or on meds.What if instead of gun control we enforce nutcase control?
-
This one appeared to have chosen the school as her target simply because she thought it would be fun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Ann_Spencer
This one appears to be a school chosen at random.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton_massacre
Here's one where a teacher retrieved a handgun from his vehicle and stopped the perpetrator from continuing his murderous rampage at another school.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting
Here's another one where an armed citizen prevented an incident from becoming worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wurst
This time armed students subdue the shooter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting
This school appears to have been chosen at random as well by a 53 yr old with no apparent connections to the school.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platte_Canyon_High_School_shooting
Another chosen apparently at random by someone not connected to the school.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_school_shooting
While many school shootings are the target of a disgruntled student, not all of them are as shown by the links that I provided. In at least 2 instances an armed citizen was able to prevent the atrocities from becoming worse than they already were.
If schools weren't gun free zones just how many more school shootings would have been either prevented or the atrocities being committed lessened by someone who had a weapon or had access to one? That's an answer we will never know. However, I think it's safe to say that at least some of the other incidents may have been either prevented entirely or the loss of life and injuries lessened.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Sure there are the random nut jobs, but I'm sure probably just about ever school shooting is by a person that attends that school.
Many are, but look at my other post for examples of some that don't fit that profile.
Many of the shootings by students are done by students that have felt persecuted by his fellow students.
Unfortunately I don't think there is a sulotion to the school shooting problem
There is a possible solution, you just don't like it.
Another possible solution to help prevent these sorts of things is for teachers and schools to be more active in stopping kids from persecuting other kids by bullying, name calling etc.
-
Originally posted by KgB
Every shooter is usually came off meds or on meds.What if instead of gun control we enforce nutcase control?
Of all the school shootings I researched in America I didn't see one where the shooter was on meds or was supposed to be on meds but wasn't.
I do know of an incident involving a Nebraska football player a number of years ago. Scott Baldwin had a medical condition involving his brain. It wasn't discovered until he was found naked as the day he was born, beating the crap out of an innocent woman. It took multiple officers to wrestle him to the ground and subdue him. Months later after he had been put on meds to control his condition (I forget what exactly that condition was) he had forgotten to take his meds and another identical incident to the first happened. Only this time a female police officer shot him and he ended up paralyzed from the waist down for life.
Neither incident occurred on the University campus though.
-
I didn't say that every case involved the person having to attend the school, and really what difference does it make on why that person goes into the school and start shooting people, the fact remains that it's really not gonna detour someone from going into the school and killing people on the chance that he might not get the chance to kill himself but instead get killed by someone else. Arming students just isn't the solution. I'm mean what do you suggest we arm are elementary students, or high school students? Obviously no, so that just leaves college and like I've said if a person is determined to go into a college and kill people he's gonna do it no matter if theres an off chance some people on campus have a CCW, majority of school shootings are by someone who attends that school, so he's gonna do it no matter what because he wants his revenge on the people he see's wronged him. I think the chance of something going wrong like an accident is more likely with a CCW then the chance it would save someone by being in the right place at the right time on that rare occasion your involved in a school shooting.
-
Of course we aren't suggesting arming underage students, that's just silly.
What we are suggesting is allowing CCW permit holders to actually carry on school grounds. Only adults can apply for and receive a CCW permit.
Look at the cases where someone was able to retrieve a weapon and put a stop to the madness. How many lives were saved? How many folks weren't injured because someone was able to retrieve a weapon? Thankfully, we'll never know the answer to that one either.
I am not suggesting that CCW permit holders will be able to prevent all school shootings, that would be silly as well. What I am suggesting is that CCW permit holders just might be able to lessen the madness and in rare cases just might be able to stop the madness before it really gets started.
If schools weren't gun free zones would they be the target of these lunatics as often? We don't know that for sure but if statistics from states that allow CCW are any indication at all, then yes, these types of incidents will become rarer.
Firearms accidents with CCW holders are rare at best simply because there are training courses that are required before the permit can be issued.
I don't have time right now so I'll look it up later, but there was a mall shooting in Nebraska at the Crossroads Mall in Omaha where an individual had an opportunity to stop the shooter.......except the Mall is a gun free zone.
I'll post those details later.
-
Originally posted by BaDkaRmA158Th
Every time a kid or person blasts a bunch of people at a school, it should serve as a message to everyone, your futures are very upseting to others.
hope you dont put down, piss off or begrudge someone in your future, less a bullet take your life.
people are getting fed up with being walked on, over looked or just downright disrespected, day in and day out.
call em nuts, call them loony, call them loosers, call them whatever you need to help YOU sleep better at night, just know your name calling left someone awake at night, whos teeth grinded with pure anger, prey that person keeps it under wraps.
This, will not be the end of it any time soon.
This world lacks compassion morals and understanding, all reasons things like this will happen.These campuses are a breeding ground for such acts aswell, could it be our school and general outlook by the students is the problem.?
nono, just one nut job out of a few thousand brainless soulless self serving rats, trying to make there own futures.
Hmph..what a bleek outlook on life.
No the world lack parents willing to keep their children well dicplined and willing to teach them what the world really is. And not just the way the world should be
Many parents these days couldnt hold a candle to their parents.
Everyone is about making nice nice now. Give the kiddies a "time out" or a talking to no matter how bad they are.
What they;'re raised is an entire generation of spoiled little brats who think the entire world should be full of sugar and honey and that they are entitled to all of each they care to take
An entire generation whos only real need is to have a strap taken to their arse once in a while and told "no" Instead of having everything handled to them their entire childhood. just because they whine for it.
Then they enter the real world and they find out the world just isnt the way that mommy and daddy said it should be. And they dont know how to handle it.
This newer generation has this problem where they think they are owed happiness and a fair chance.
That everything should just come their way because they want it to
Yea. Lota luck with that thought
Tied of getting walked on. oh boo hoo. Damn shame. EVERYONE gets walked on now and again.
From the lowliest street junkie to the president of the United States
The world is unfair get used to the idea
. Dont expect to not be walked or overlooked or have people watermelon on you and you will never be disappointed. Its going to happen. Get used to the thought
"This world lacks compassion morals and understanding"
Tell me. When was this euphoric time period that the world was full of any of that?
Yes This world lacks compassion morals and understanding.
It always has and always will.
Congratulations. Welcome to planet Earth and the culture known as humanity.
sorry if its not all you expected or wanted it to be. But humans are kinda funny in the way they dont always tend tofollow the rules they were taught about whats nice or morally right or fair or compassionate
Hope you enjoy your stay. but if not. Remember. The exit is just a hardware store and a length of rope or a gun shop away.
Just try not to make too much of a mess when you leave.
As almost certainly someone else will unfairly be asked to clean up your mess after you've left
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Firearms accidents with CCW holders are rare at best simply because there are training courses that are required before the permit can be issued.
Yes but the question is, whats rarer, school shootings were a person with a gun would be in a place to do good, or an accident from a person with a CCW, I'd have to think that it would be the school shooting situation would be the rarer event. So if theres a bigger chance of harm from an accident with a CCW in a school, then wheres the benefit?
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
No the world lack parents willing to keep their children well dicplined and willing to teach them what the world really is. And not just the way the world should be
Many parents these days couldnt hold a candle to their parents.
Everyone is about making nice nice now. Give the kiddies a "time out" or a talking to no matter how bad they are.
What they;'re raised is an entire generation of spoiled little brats who think the entire world should be full of sugar and honey and that they are entitled to all of each they care to take
An entire generation whos only real need is to have a strap taken to their arse once in a while and told "no" Instead of having everything handled to them their entire childhood. just because they whine for it.
Then they enter the real world and they find out the world just isnt the way that mommy and daddy said it should be. And they dont know how to handle it.
This newer generation has this problem where they think they are owed happiness and a fair chance.
That everything should just come their way because they want it to
Yea. Lota luck with that thought
Tied of getting walked on. oh boo hoo. Damn shame. EVERYONE gets walked on now and again.
From the lowliest street junkie to the president of the United States
The world is unfair get used to the idea
. Dont expect to not be walked or overlooked or have people watermelon on you and you will never be disappointed. Its going to happen. Get used to the thought
"This world lacks compassion morals and understanding"
Tell me. When was this euphoric time period that the world was full of any of that?
Yes This world lacks compassion morals and understanding.
It always has and always will.
Congratulations. Welcome to planet Earth and the culture known as humanity.
sorry if its not all you expected or wanted it to be. But humans are kinda funny in the way they dont always tend tofollow the rules they were taught about whats nice or morally right or fair or compassionate
Hope you enjoy your stay. but if not. Remember. The exit is just a hardware store and a length of rope or a gun shop away.
Just try not to make too much of a mess when you leave.
As almost certainly someone else will unfairly be asked to clean up your mess after you've left
I saw a story on 60 minutes about this a few months ago, and how this generation thats entering the workplace now has this sense of entitlement and that everything should go there way.
-
Ive been carrying concealed since I was 21. Thats 20+ years and I haven't even had to contemplate producing my sidearm in self defense, or any defense for that matter.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Ive been carrying concealed since I was 21. Thats 20+ years and I haven't even had to contemplate producing my sidearm in self defense, or any defense for that matter.
Thats great, and I hope you never do, and I support your right to have that legal side arm, the only thing I've said I dont think students should be coming into classrooms armed.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Thats great, and I hope you never do, and I support your right to have that legal side arm, the only thing I've said I dont think students should be coming into classrooms armed.
I think the point thats been tried to be made was them having the option to do so.
Obviously its unlikely that all the students would carry.
On the other hand. theese "no gun zones." are even more then obviously useless as they prevent nothing but allowing those who might have been able to defend themselves from being shot by some nutcase to do so.
My old man used to have a saying.
"If the police cannot protect the people. then the people must be able to protect themselves."
The one thing the police CANT do. Is protect you.
-
Originally posted by Xargos
I think the only true fix for something like this is to make it illegal to mention the killers name in the press. But that would be a First Amendment issue.
No it wouldn't, just like it's not a First Amendment issue not to name sexual crime victims in the press. Newspapers and television news organizations can make the decision not to mention the name of the shooter if they choose to.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
thats a great point. and one that i could surely tear apart with any wild and apparently conceited humanity cursing improvised ethic that even in my own head has its own counter argument.
but why would i bother?
Hmm.. why bother posting? If you're going to take the time to say you've got a reply, then type it out, don't just say you do.
if i share my most pesimistic thoughts in a somewhat related discusion that is a great freedom we all have and one i wholeheartedly enjoy taking advantage of...once. if i was to go on and persue the topic indefinitely i would become a fanatic.
Yeah no need to take it that far. Just point out the inconsitency.
worse than that if i instanty convert i become a fake, or a sheep.
Far worse than either would be that i try and break down your realistic argument and force you to agree with my realistic argument. to atempt to crush the greatness you see in these subjects would be a crime unfathomable by our human laws and justice.
Like I said just take it easy and concisely point out the logical flaw(s).
yes, like i said 'all the other real lifeforms'. human's are scared to live by nature's laws? of course.
No.. Nature's laws is (to keep this post brief) physics. If something wasn't natural it wouldn't happen.
pathetic self centered spieces that negates the natural physical progresion embraced by practicaly every other lifeform on the planet.
Anthropomorphism...
clearly when the first 'intelligent' physical weakling rolled some rocks off a cliff onto a pack of physicaly dominant speceimens just because they didnt give him as much meat.... it was one small self centered step for man, one giant devolutionary leap for mankind.
and dude...that was a really long time ago.
What's the connection here?
-
Originally posted by myelo
Yes they were. That's why he killed them first.
In fact, the killer took the .40 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol that the first officer had, and used it during the rest of his murder spree in the city council chambers.
He caught both officers off-guard, and they never had a chance to draw their weapons. Both thought he was just up to his usual protesting antics, and not any danger.
Their protective bullet-proof vests were also of no help, as he shot each officer in the head at close range with single shot from his own .44 Magnum revolver.
In fact, he targeted the heads of everyone he shot, which helps to explain why so few were wounded, and instead died. How the Mayor is still alive after being hit twice in the face with the .40 S&W is sort of a miracle. The last report on him was that he could briefly open his eyes, and squeeze the hand of a person at his bedside.
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
so if someone died at a gun range due to an accident, then that doesnt count...
Most of these are now suicides, where a person goes to a shooting range, rents a gun, and then blows their brains out. They only came to the shooting range to kill them self, so it does not count.
Actual accidents at shooting ranges are now extremely rare in the USA.
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Guns are ALREADY in the hands of students. Many college students have CCW permits and DO carry their guns with them.
Except for where they are not allowed to, one of which is a college campus.
These people who you will never know walk around day in and day out ready to protect you, me and anyone else. Yet somehow something magical happens to them the moment they step on a college campus?
Here at the University of Oregon, any student with a CCW permit that is caught carrying a gun on campus is immediately expelled from the school, with no exceptions.
Even non-students with CCW permits are banned from carrying on campus. At the football games, folks are checked for alcohol and weapons when they enter.
No such security is done at the basketball games, though, and I have carried a pistol to a few of the Oregon Ducks basketball games in the past. But if my gun had been detected, I would have been immediately kicked off campus. Since I never broke any actual law, I could not have been charged with any crime.
There have been a few rapists that have prowled the campus in recent years, looking for victims. But the University would never change their rule during these times of crisis, even when several co-eds protested it as being unfair to women.
In Eugene, OR there is a man currently on the loose who has twice tried to kidnap young girls coming home from elementary school in the past two months. A man matching the same description broke into a home in the middle of the night this past week and was in the bedroom of a young girl touching her, when her mother entered the room and screamed real loud. He unfortunately escaped back out the window he came through.
He is still at large right now. :O :O
SIG 220
-
Originally posted by trax1
Yes but the question is, whats rarer, school shootings were a person with a gun would be in a place to do good, or an accident from a person with a CCW, I'd have to think that it would be the school shooting situation would be the rarer event. So if theres a bigger chance of harm from an accident with a CCW in a school, then wheres the benefit?
You're assuming accidents are going to be more common than the school shootings, all we have to go on is statistics from the past. I'm going to let you do the research on firearms accidents involving CCW permit holders. Frankly, I think you are reaching on this point.
If a CCW permit holder is in a position anytime to stop a lunatics murdering spree it's worth it. If CCW is allowed at schools/college campus's and it slows down the rate at which school shootings happen by even 1% it's worth it in lives saved.
Here's some info I found with a quick google search.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
* Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. At the time the law was passed, critics predicted increases in violence. The founder of the National Organization of Women, Betty Friedan stated:
"lethal violence, even in self defense, only engenders more violence." (13)
* When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them. (13)(15)
* 221,443 concealed carry licenses were issued in Florida between October of 1987 and April of 1994. During that time, Florida recorded 18 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. (15)
* As of 1998, nationwide, there has been 1 recorded incident in which a permit holder shot someone following a traffic accident. The permit holder was not charged, as the grand jury ruled the shooting was in self defense. (7)
* As of 1998, no permit holder has ever shot a police officer. There have been several cases in which a permit holder has protected an officer's life. (7)
CCW permit holders are a not an issue when it comes to accidents and commiting crimes.
The issue here is how do we protect our kids from these lunatics. I and several others have brought up removing the gun free zones from schools so that CCW holders can help out. That is a viable solution as shown in several of the links I provided in a previous post.
You have no solution or suggestion to help protect our kids. Doing something is better than doing nothing at all or just giving up and letting the lunatics have their way in our schools.
-
It is pure fantasy to think allowing students to carry guns on campus would make the problem of copycat killers go away. Suppose you are sitting in class with your gun hidden away. In comes a killer and opens fire. Do you cooly draw your gun, place a couple of well aimed rounds between the killer's eyes and then graciously accept the plaudits of the other students. In your day dreams maybe.
The reality is probably quite different, you would be taken by surprise. You fumble for your gun, while diving for cover. The killer, with adrenalin flowing would be a lot quicker than you. Special forces and SWAT teams train constantly for that type of scenario, you on the other hand do not. At best you might get off a couple of unaimed shots in the vague general direction of the killer.
Perhaps you hear the shooting, draw your gun and run towards the sound. But now you are just another gunman wandering the corridors and grounds of the college. Other students draw their guns. How do you know which is the killer? How do they know you are not the shooter. How does campus security, the cops and other students know that you're there to help not kill?
A good example of how having a gun doesn't help is the Chai Vang incident. He shot eight hunters, killing six, all of whom were presumably armed. You would have thought at least one might have got him.
But the real question to ask yourself is this. What kind of society is it, that many people feel the need to carry weapons to protect themselves?
-
Yes cpxxx, laz and some others need to read your post.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's either Coincidence, Causation, or Correlation that NO massacres happen in areas with high concentration of weapons, but all the massacres that do happen occur in places with minimal concentration of weapons.
So choose.
Is this Coincidence, Causation or Correlation?
Barbarossa.
That was kind of my point originally.
Will bad things always happen? Yes. Will bad things always happen to unarmed people? Yes. Will bad things happen to armed people? Yes. But maybe on whatever grand scale you want to think of it..One less person will be hurt.
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
You see death and know it's you next if you don't put the gunner down. You obviously don't draw his attention and with the same discipline you trained for when you got such a lethal weapon, you simply unload into the gunner as soon as a clear shot presents itself.
Better him than you, and definitely better him than one or more dozen dead. You only go into any sort of shock after the fact.. On the spur of the moment you are more angry than anything else, that someone would take the rest of your life away from you before your time and without your consent.
T,FTFY... Guns in the classroom? What's the difference with anywhere else? If guns are allowed, classrooms should be no exception, especialy if classrooms get gunmen's attention and there's no security filter of any sort.
And cpxxx, you don't propose any substitute for the 2nd amendment. Without one, you can't reasonably disarm people in the US.
-
Originally posted by Charon
They do it for the infamy. A product of our celebrity culture. Within hours they are on every cable news channel and Web sites around the world, including this one. Before the mass media age they just ate the barrel alone in their bedroom.
Charon
RACK HIM
This guy gets it!!!
-
Originally posted by moot
What's the connection here? [/B]
the first time we used our brains to destroy on a stronger, dumber human, was also the first public murder by an underdog on the physicaly superiour.
that madness and jealousy is the same as what urges a modern day 'underdog' to take a gun to a public place.
we evolved to kill each other, no other animal resorts to killing its own spieces as quickly.
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
The reality is probably quite different, you would be taken by surprise. You fumble for your gun, while diving for cover. The killer, with adrenalin flowing would be a lot quicker than you. Special forces and SWAT teams train constantly for that type of scenario, you on the other hand do not. At best you might get off a couple of unaimed shots in the vague general direction of the killer.
and this happened to you when?
-
Originally posted by SIG220
In fact, the killer took the .40 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol that the first officer had, and used it during the rest of his murder spree in the city council chambers.
He caught both officers off-guard, and they never had a chance to draw their weapons. Both thought he was just up to his usual protesting antics, and not any danger.
2 law enforcement officers, armed, trained and on duty presumably for this very type of situation were caught situationally unaware. But a college student sitting in a classroom half asleep would obviously fare much better.
-
trax.. again... you have no proof that allowing 21 year old CCW holders to carry would cause any problems whatsoever and we have plenty of proof to the contrary.
Do you think CCW holders go insane from the school fumes? Fumes that exist no where else? fortunately the fumes do no go out to the parking lot because that is where many civilians have had to run to get their guns and stop the shootings.
Malls, offices.. schools.. that is where shootings take place 99% of the time.. why?
Some has to do, as you say.. with the concentration of people there who are percieved to be the irritant to the shooter but.. not malls say..
They do have one thing in common.. limited entrance and egress and confined space.. and... unarmed sheeple. that is the real thing.. the guys doing the shooting want to have a bottleneck and limited entrance.. they want to kill as many as possible.
An indoor range would work for that save.. they would get shot.. One I know of did try and did get shot.. instantly. No fame for him.. you have never heard of him I bet.
Nope... if the shooters knew that there was a big chance that they would be killed like a stupid little geek instead of slaughtering dozens of sheeple in the dark avenger role... well.. do they want to be talked about in awe on CNN or just be another laughing stock "dumb crook" story? You tell me.
There is no downside to getting the same kind of protection at schools as you have on the street every day.
I don't believe you are thinking this through very clearly or logically..
lazs
-
trax.. simple logic would shoot down (pun intended) your theory... besides being based on nothing but a "feeling"..
Where is there a high concentration of young men with raging hormones who are under a lot of stress and the humiliation and anger is sky high?
Why.. military bases.. lots of guys armed to the teeth and half crazed on hormones and anger. By your theory of the only reason the dark avengers shoot at schools and offices (forget malls) by your reasoning.. the irritant is their.. the cause of the irritation.. military bases and stations and even war zones would seem to bear out the facts as I have laid them out and not the "feelings" as you have laid yours out.
lazs
-
and.. for those of you who think it would be some sort of quickdraw situation...
this is not what is being proposed. your own examples kill your arguement.
the hunters.. they were armed.. they were obviously armed. the shooter caught them off guard because he targeted them. Same for the policeman in the council chambers.
The obvious threat was taken out.. use your heads.. if one in ten people.. students, mall goers.. office workers... is armed but concealed.. who do you shoot? they are all running and finding cover.
Use your head and think. In the council chamber.. if one of the people.. or six.. had been armed.. they were all hiding behind chairs and such.. the shooter ignored em.. he walked by them.
Who would get the drop on who? Read any incident of a shooting like that... lubby resteraunt... any school shooting.. the mall shootings..
That is why I favor concealed carry instead of open carry..
As too.. what kind of a society is it or.. what kind do I want to live in where I have to go armed?
every kind. there is always the chance someone will try to do something or take something from you by force. No assaults or rapes or murders in your country?
What kind of country do we live in that you have to wear a seatbelt? what kind of barbarians do you think are on the highway?
People are complex and will go feral.. you make that stop and we can talk.
You live in your fantasy land where you can make people safe by disarming the good guys and I will live in mine where I think I am better off armed when the bad guy shows up.
Mine has worked for me in real world.. has yours?
lazs
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
A good example of how having a gun doesn't help is the Chai Vang incident. He shot eight hunters, killing six, all of whom were presumably armed.
No, it's a bad example. Only one of the victims was armed.
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
A good example of how having a gun doesn't help is the Chai Vang incident. He shot eight hunters, killing six, all of whom were presumably armed. You would have thought at least one might have got him.
Originally posted by hubsonfire
No, it's a bad example. Only one of the victims was armed.
Exactly, hubsonfire.
Facts can really mess up an opinion.
Another thing to note on the Chai Vang incident; 4 of the 6 killed were shot in the back as they fled. I would imagine that had they all had guns at least one would have returned fire and taken out the threat.
The only thing that I can think of that even remotely comes close to being a "good example of how having a gun doesn't help" would be when confronted by someone like the 2 nut jobs in Calif. a few years back who were in full body armor and "armed to the teeth" while robbing a bank.
-
Ok... this week is just ridiculous!
http://www.lvrj.com/news/15698052.html
That's just 1 of 2 shootings that happened in my town yesterday.
-
As for what Lazs and other have said about having students armed in the classroom as being a deterrent to school shooters are going on the fact that you think enough students would want to carry a CCW into class, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a majority of student willing to carry a CCW into a classroom on the off chance that it would come in handy on that very rare chance that you'd be in the right place at the right time to do any good.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
* 221,443 concealed carry licenses were issued in Florida between October of 1987 and April of 1994. During that time, Florida recorded 18 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. (15)
So what happen more there, more things going wrong with a CCW in Florida or school shootings?
-
It is pure fantasy to think allowing students to carry guns on campus would make the problem of copycat killers go away.
No one is saying that. We are saying we believe that by removing the gun free zone tags on our schools and campus's and allowing CCW permit holders to carry that the problem will be relieved at least somewhat. The problem could be relieved to a very significant degree based on crime statistics from states that allow CCW.
You criticize our proposal without offering a proposal of your own.
I'll say it again, doing something is better than doing nothing at all or just giving up and letting the lunatics have their way in our schools.
-
Originally posted by trax1
So what happen more there, more things going wrong with a CCW in Florida or school shootings?
We don't know what those crimes were or even if their concealed carry weapon was involved. Without that knowledge it is impossible to make judgements. The crimes don't need to involve the weapon in order for the permit to be revoked.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
I'll say it again, doing something is better than doing nothing at all or just giving up and letting the lunatics have their way in our schools.
How about turning schools into very tightly controlled environments, we put up a fence with guards at all entrances, metal detectors that everyone has to pass through to get in, allow a security force on campus to be armed, I think that would help out more then allowing armed students into the classroom.
-
Originally posted by trax1
As for what Lazs and other have said about having students armed in the classroom as being a deterrent to school shooters are going on the fact that you think enough students would want to carry a CCW into class, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a majority of student willing to carry a CCW into a classroom on the off chance that it would come in handy on that very rare chance that you'd be in the right place at the right time to do any good.
CCW is a deterrent simply because would be criminals don't know who is and who isn't armed. How many actually carry is irrelevant to the deterrent aspect of CCW.
Lets use Florida as an example again, millions live in the state of Florida yet only a few hundred thousand have chosen to carry concealed and the violent crime rate showed a significant drop.
Initially, Florida didn't allow non-residents to carry and criminals started targetting tourists. Florida interviewed convicted felons to find out why this was happening. The universal answer from the felons was.....we know the tourists aren't armed, the law doesn't allow them to be armed. Florida promptly changed their CCW law to acknowledge permits from other states and tourists stopped being targetted to the degree that they had been. Why? Again, because criminals didn't know which ones were armed and which ones weren't.
Also, drop the students carrying argument. In elementary, middle and high schools students aren't even old enough to carry. In college the majority aren't old enough to get a permit. Most CCW holders would be faculty on college campus's and all would be in other schools. We're talking about adults carrying here, not kids.
-
Originally posted by trax1
How about turning schools into very tightly controlled environments, we put up a fence with guards at all entrances, metal detectors that everyone has to pass through to get in, allow a security force on campus to be armed, I think that would help out more then allowing armed students into the classroom.
You want to turn all our schools into a prison-like environment? Ok, that is a possible solution. Who is going to pay for this?
Armed students? Read my post above.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
You want to turn all our schools into a prison-like environment? Ok, that is a possible solution. Who is going to pay for this?
Armed students? Read my post above.
Actually,some inner city schools are run like that...metal detectors, security people, etc.
-
Yeah but see that argument really doesn't carry over to school shootings, as I've stated I have no problem with CCW laws, it's just when it comes to classrooms I have the problem. Yeah CCW laws might be a deterrent to criminals in preventing them from thinking twice about committing a criminal act, but in school shootings the majority of them have nothing to do with your common criminal, they are committing the act to get revenge on those they see as the problem in their life's. The possibility of someone in the school having a CCW isn't going to stop them from wanting to carry out the act because they have already come to the descision that they are going to die, either by their own hand or anothers.
-
trax, are you having problems in school? Are you being picked on, do some teachers dislike you? Girls make fun of you behind your back?
-
The possibility of someone in the school having a CCW isn't going to stop them from wanting to carry out the act because they have already come to the descision that they are going to die, either by there own hand or anothers.
Then why don't we see these lunatics going to gun ranges or military bases or anywhere else there is a high concentration of people with weapons to commit their heinous crimes? Why do we only see these things happening in gun free zones? Surely there are other places that cause significant irritants to people other than just schools and colleges?
These lunatics want to go out in style by killing as many as they can before someone kills them or they kill themselves. They want their 15 minutes of fame, they want their names remembered even if it's remembered in infamy. I'm not sure we can ever stop all of them but if we can stop some of them through removing the gun free zone tags and maybe your suggestion as well, is it not worth it?
-
john, trax could be exactly right in many cases. how funny will it be when one of you gets caught in a firearms crime in your gun club? dont you think youre being a bit stupid feeling so confident? you might get shot in the back of the skull without ever drawing your weapon.
-
trax.. you simply are not paying attention or.. you have a stubborn preconcieved "feeling" that you refuse to give up in the face of facts.
No one said that you would arm all the students.. you would simply allow those who already had ccw to carry their like everywhere else. As was pointed out to you many times.. it is not that they will always be able to shoot a nutjob.. it is that the nutjob won't bother to take the risk. Maybe a few might.. but certainly much less.
You don't really think that ccw holders are a problem do you? the vast majority of the "offences" are because they violated the law on where they carried.. either by accident or choice.. no one was hurt. some small amount were revolked for other crimes that had nothing to do with guns.
I find it strange that so many trust the saintly teacher to cover a student with their body as a shooter stands over them and pumps rounds into them but fails to give the teacher the credit for the ability and judgement and morality to carry a firearm.
There is no difference.. there is no magic "common sense" remover barrier at schools.. there is no reason why students that already have a ccw and carry everywhere else need to leave the gun in the car when they enter a school. They are still the same people they 20 minutes before.
If nothing else.. they can sure as hell break the concentration of a shooter long enough for the cops to get there.
But.. your solution is welcome. Name one thing that would work better.. so far as I know... about everything else has been tried.
It is also about how you want to live. do you like the way airports are these days? is that a pleasant thing to you? Would you like the same kind of security at schools? some have em.. metal detectors.. random searches.. armed guards glaring at you? is that more pleasant than CCW holders going about the campus unknown to you and others?
seriously.. is it?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Actually,some inner city schools are run like that...metal detectors, security people, etc.
You have any infos on how much that sort of thing costs per school?
I'm not sure how feasible it is for a college/university campus though since they tend to be spread out over a large area with many buildings unlike elementary/middle/high schools which are just one building or just a few buildings in a small area.
-
As Willie Sutton the bank robber said when asked why he robbed banks, 'because that's where the money is'.
-
You don't really think that ccw holders are a problem do you? the vast majority of the "offences" are because they violated the law on where they carried.. either by accident or choice.. no one was hurt. some small amount were revolked for other crimes that had nothing to do with guns.
Lazs do you have infos on exactly what the issues were? I would be interested in finding out.
-
would you shoot a bank robber in a hold up?
-
A better question is would you shoot someone trying to kill someone else?
Money is not relevant here. Money is easily replaced, whereas human lives, especially those of children, cannot be replaced, and cannot be measured in terms of paper or metal.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Then why don't we see these lunatics going to gun ranges or military bases or anywhere else there is a high concentration of people with weapons to commit their heinous crimes? Why do we only see these things happening in gun free zones? Surely there are other places that cause significant irritants to people other than just schools and colleges?
These lunatics want to go out in style by killing as many as they can before someone kills them or they kill themselves. They want their 15 minutes of fame, they want their names remembered even if it's remembered in infamy. I'm not sure we can ever stop all of them but if we can stop some of them through removing the gun free zone tags and maybe your suggestion as well, is it not worth it?
The reason they don't do it at a gun range or military base is for one they have no connection to the people there, they don't have any reason to want revenge on those people, and for the fact that every single person is armed there, yes if thats your solution I'd agree it would work to arm every single person at a school. As I've stated several times the reason in the majority of cases they goto the school to kill is because those are the people they see as the ones that have caused whatever problem they have in their life.
I also just don't think theres really enough students that have CCW's or would want to carry a gun into a classroom to actually be in a situation where they would be a help by being in the right place at the right time to help, in the big picture school shooting are rare when you take into account the number of schools there are.
-
Trax, have you ever been in a situation where you have been attacked?
-
Originally posted by trax1
I also just don't think theres really enough students that have CCW's or would want to carry a gun into a classroom to actually be in a situation where they would be a help by being in the right place at the right time to help, in the big picture school shooting are rare when you take into account the number of schools there are.
so you have gone from arming every student to not many would carry.
If not many would carry, why do you object to a few guns in the whole school?
you see, not everyone has to be armed, it just has to be known that some may be armed.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Trax, have you ever been in a situation where you have been attacked?
Actually yes, I was at a gas station when I was a teenager a guy pulled out a 357 on us, thankfully a cop was driving by as we ran out and the guy was arrested, the guy tried to claim he was an undercover cop, but he was just an off-duty security guard and wasn't supposed to carry a weapon, so he was arrested. Now saying that I've said several times I have no problem with guns or CCW's, it's just when it comes to classrooms I don't think the students should come to class armed.
-
Trax the lunatics don't always have a connection to the people at the school. Many times yes, but not always.
I also just don't think theres really enough students that have CCW's or would want to carry a gun into a classroom to actually be in a situation where they would be a help by being in the right place at the right time to help, in the big picture school shooting are rare when you take into account the number of schools there are.
It's not about them being in the right place at the right time, that would most likely be rare. It's about the deterrent aspect. Let's go back to the Florida tourists. Initially the tourists in Florida had what was essentially a gun free zone tag on them, and the criminals knew it. Once that tag was removed, tourists were no longer targeted anymore than they had been before the CCW law was first put into place.
We will never stop all crime. Saudi Arabia has some of the toughest sentences for criminals and they have one of the lowest crime rates in the world, yet....crime still exists. What we want to do is deter as many criminals as possible and criminals themselves say the prospect of their victims being armed is a huge deterrent.
-
I have to go for a few hours, so I won't be able to participate for awhile.
-
Originally posted by john9001
so you have gone from arming every student to not many would carry.
If not many would carry, why do you object to a few guns in the whole school?
you see, not everyone has to be armed, it just has to be known that some may be armed.
I've said that the thought that even a few armed students probably isn't going to stop someone who's intent on killing other students. In his mind he's already come to the conclusion that he's gonna die, thats why they almost always kill themselves at the end. Now if he's already come to the conclusion thats he's gonna die why would the thought of there might be someone with a CCW in the class stop him? He might not get to kill himself, someone else would kill him, so why would that completely stop him from going through with his plan.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Trax the lunatics don't always have a connection to the people at the school. Many times yes, but not always.
It's not about them being in the right place at the right time, that would most likely be rare. It's about the deterrent aspect. Let's go back to the Florida tourists. Initially the tourists in Florida had what was essentially a gun free zone tag on them, and the criminals knew it. Once that tag was removed, tourists were no longer targeted anymore than they had been before the CCW law was first put into place.
We will never stop all crime. Saudi Arabia has some of the toughest sentences for criminals and they have one of the lowest crime rates in the world, yet....crime still exists. What we want to do is deter as many criminals as possible and criminals themselves say the prospect of their victims being armed is a huge deterrent.
These people who do this aren't you average criminals, they aren't doing it for money, they are doing it for revenge, they have a totally different mind set, in the majority they are going into it for revenge and have already come to the conclusion that they are going to die, criminals who are going after tourist aren't going into the crime with the mind set they are going to die.
-
Originally posted by trax1
The reason they don't do it at a gun range or military base is for one they have no connection to the people there, they don't have any reason to want revenge on those people, and for the fact that every single person is armed there, yes if thats your solution I'd agree it would work to arm every single person at a school. As I've stated several times the reason in the majority of cases they goto the school to kill is because those are the people they see as the ones that have caused whatever problem they have in their life.
I also just don't think theres really enough students that have CCW's or would want to carry a gun into a classroom to actually be in a situation where they would be a help by being in the right place at the right time to help, in the big picture school shooting are rare when you take into account the number of schools there are.
Do you know why this nut job in IL did what he did?
Are you on the investigative team?
Here's a breakdown on some logic:
1. "Gun free zone"means that there is close to a 100% chance that no one will have a gun in this "zone".
2. A normal "zone" (not a posted "gun free zone") means that there is anywhere between 0% and 100% chance that SOMEONE will have a gun.
Do you think that #2 might cause some would be fame seeker to hesitate?
It's not a matter of everyone having a gun or the ones with them being at the right place at the right time. It's a matter of there being a chance that some will be armed and will stop them that may cause them to rethink their stupid plan.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Do you know why this nut job in IL did what he did?
Are you on the investigative team?
Here's a breakdown on some logic:
1. "Gun free zone"means that there is close to a 100% chance that no one will have a gun in this "zone".
2. A normal "zone" (not a posted "gun free zone") means that there is anywhere between 0% and 100% chance that SOMEONE will have a gun.
Do you think that #2 might cause some would be fame seeker to hesitate?
It's not a matter of everyone having a gun or the ones with them being at the right place at the right time. It's a matter of there being a chance that some will be armed and will stop them that may cause them to rethink their stupid plan.
Why would the thought of someone other then himself killing him, almost all of these people going into it have come to the conclusion that they are going to die, so why would they think to themselves "well I might not get to shot myself, someone else might kill me, I better not go through with it", that just doesn't sound plausible.
No I don't know why this guy did what he did, but as I've stated the majority of school shooters go to that school and are doing it to get revenge on the students or the school itself.
-
I just want to thank everyone who's participated in this debate, I've enjoyed it, and good points have been made on both sides of this argument, so thanks everyone.
Edit:also I hope theres no hard feeling Donzo, never meant to offend you in anyway, and I apologize if I had, sometimes in a debate things can get heated.
-
Saying "I don't think it's a good idea for people to be armed" isn't making a point, it's expressing an opinion. There is a difference. There are no good points for making it illegal or even difficult for people to defend themselves in life-or-death situations.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Saying "I don't think it's a good idea for people to be armed" isn't making a point, it's expressing an opinion. There is a difference. There are no good points for making it illegal or even difficult for people to defend themselves in life-or-death situations.
I never said that I was stating anything other then my opinion on the matter.
-
Originally posted by trax1
As for what Lazs and other have said about having students armed in the classroom as being a deterrent to school shooters are going on the fact that you think enough students would want to carry a CCW into class, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a majority of student willing to carry a CCW into a classroom on the off chance that it would come in handy on that very rare chance that you'd be in the right place at the right time to do any good.
You don't need a majority, just one bullet in the right place at the right time. The number of CCWs isn't proportional to the size of the crowd but to the number of gunmen.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
the first time we used our brains to destroy on a stronger, dumber human, was also the first public murder by an underdog on the physicaly superiour.
that madness and jealousy is the same as what urges a modern day 'underdog' to take a gun to a public place.
we evolved to kill each other, no other animal resorts to killing its own spieces as quickly.
Strawman.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
no other animal resorts to killing its own spieces as quickly.
you are wrong, with many species the male will kill the offspring of other males.
-
Originally posted by john9001
you are wrong, with many species the male will kill the offspring of other males.
Enough with facts!
This is an emotionally driven opinion thread, facts are frowned upon.
-
they might do that becuase they are 'dumb beasts' it is not common behaviour unles the male of the murdered infants is neglegent of his duty or two slow to defeat an attack. he can always make more infants. and this type of attack is not common in many spieces at all. which other animal has marched in arms against another massed army of the same animal?
insects on the other hand. now those guys are mean. if they had half our size and strengh we would never have got past throwing rock before we were wiped out.
-
Bat you're making anthropomorphisms everywhere.. Animals aren't "better" than humans.
(http://www.subotai.org/pics/int2.jpg)
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
which other animal has marched in arms against another massed army of the same animal?
one wolf pack fighting another wolf pack over hunting territory.
-
ants do it.
so do koala bears. huge vicious armies of koala bears...in armor.
-
Originally posted by moot
You don't need a majority, just one bullet in the right place at the right time. The number of CCWs isn't proportional to the size of the crowd but to the number of gunmen.
Just check the 3 links I posted earlier for examples of people with access to weapons stopping a killing spree. Granted in none of the examples were the killing sprees prevented, but the were halted before they became worse.
How many more times would these types of incidents be halted if folks had access to weapons? We'll never know unless we give that access.
-
I've said that the thought that even a few armed students probably isn't going to stop someone who's intent on killing other students. In his mind he's already come to the conclusion that he's gonna die, thats why they almost always kill themselves at the end.
This is an incorrect assumption as well. Many perpetrators of school shootings are actually serving long prison terms or life sentences. Go read up on all of the school shootings in America. I have, but I'll warn you, it's quite depressing.
-
Originally posted by B@tfinkV
insects on the other hand. now those guys are mean. if they had half our size and strengh we would never have got past throwing rock before we were wiped out.
ants?
good example with wolves though. give you that. wolves not invented nukes for their fights though, they evolved weapons on their bodies.
-
Originally posted by moot
Bat you're making anthropomorphisms everywhere.. Animals aren't "better" than humans.
(http://www.subotai.org/pics/int2.jpg)
its ok to kill other spieces for defence or food. ... even those dogs are more humane than our slaughter houses and animals on death row.
great picuture, but you show me dogs eating dogs .
-
Originally posted by Elfie
This is an incorrect assumption as well. Many perpetrators of school shootings are actually serving long prison terms or life sentences. Go read up on all of the school shootings in America. I have, but I'll warn you, it's quite depressing.
Yeah but were any of those people college students who went into a college and started killing people, because having armed students would only happen at that level, and I'm not stating a fact here, but all the college spree killings that I've heard of are dead, but like I said I'm not saying all because I'm sure theres some shootings that I've never heard of.
-
What's the difference Bat, between hyenas eating bulls and dogs eating dogs? Suppose I did show you such a picture.. Then what? What's your point?
Killing your own species is more blasphemous than other species because?
wolves not invented nukes for their fights though, they evolved weapons on their bodies.
And? The intent is the same. They'll eat the weak and young of their prey with zero humaneness, will strike on the strong in the most treacherous and unfair ways.... That they're too stupid or physicaly ill-equipped to make the tools we have or realize that killing rivals is a very advantageous means to the same ends they're intent on (food, defense), or that they're geneticaly predisposed to work in packs of their own species is beside the point.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Yeah but were any of those people college students who went into a college and started killing people, because having armed students would only happen at that level, and I'm not stating a fact here, but all the college spree killings that I've heard of are dead, but like I said I'm not saying all because I'm sure theres some shootings that I've never heard of.
Go look it up. :) There were lots I'd never heard of.
-
One thing I will say, after this shooting I've been seeing things on the news here about people being outrage and wanting stronger gun control laws, and thats just not an answer, how are stronger gun control laws gonna stop things like this, how do you know who's a nut job capable of things like this, the fact is you don't, and making stronger gun control laws isn't gonna stop things like this from happening. This guy at NIU got all his guns legally and even had a FOID card, what kinda gun control law can tell who's gonna go off the range and go on a shooting spree.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Go look it up. :) There were lots I'd never heard of.
Where is it that you've look this stuff up, if theres a link to a site you could post for me I'd appreciate it.
-
Originally posted by trax1
Where is it that you've look this stuff up, if theres a link to a site you could post for me I'd appreciate it.
I just did a quick google search for *mass school shootings*. Wiki has a nice article that lists all (?) US school shootings. A few are listed but don't have articles written about them yet. Most of them are pretty well documented as well.
Here is the main Wiki article. This article has links to articles for a majority of the school shootings in America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
I found the research to be very sad and depressing, hence why I don't want to do it again.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
I just did a quick google search for *mass school shootings*. Wiki has a nice article that lists all (?) US school shootings. A few are listed but don't have articles written about them yet. Most of them are pretty well documented as well.
Here is the main Wiki article. This article has links to articles for a majority of the school shootings in America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
I found the research to be very sad and depressing, hence why I don't want to do it again.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
It is pure fantasy to think ........
You forget that it was an American that invented DisneyLand.
We love fantasies!
SIG 220
-
I will always say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people"
But, why do hell do i hear about school shootings so often in USA.So many people in other developed countries have guns, but they don't go killing students and kids so often.
What a fluffied up country i say whenever i see school shootings on news.
-
Originally posted by croduh
I will always say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people"
But, why do hell do i hear about school shootings so often in USA.So many people in other developed countries have guns, but they don't go killing students and kids so often.
What a fluffied up country i say whenever i see school shootings on news.
Yeah why can't we just be more like Croatia and just have mass genocide rather then have a few school shooting a year.
-
See Rule #7
-
elfie.. I don't have the list of crimes the CCW holders committed but I did give the numbers. It is like 0.02% of em lose their permit. No shooting by one was ever murder. this is pretty favorable even compared to cops.. much better than security guards. Only one shooting over a traffic incident and that was deemed self defense..
I have read that most violations were for carry in the wrong place.. either by mistake or... not. I am not sure there is a list of crimes but...
Common sense tells us that with the dozens of powerful and rabid anti gun groups who hate ccw and have unlimited access to the press... that if there were any serious violations or.. a rash of them.. it would be headline news and a subject of every oprah and 60 minutes and 20 20.
Let's look at fad crime.. skyjacking.. one guy did it then they all did.. todays nazi like indignities did not stop the rash of skyjaking.. praying for them to stop didn't do it. stricter gun control at airports didn't even slow it down.
Sky marshals with concealed guns stopped it.. not 50% of the passengers with guns.. not even 10%.. sometimes not even one. They weren't on every flight but the bad guys didn't know that. It stopped.
Now take school and mall and "gun free zones" shootings. It is a fad crime to a great extent just like skyjacking.. bad guys are not bright.
We simply went the wrong direction.. stricter gun control worked/works at schools about like it did for the skyjacking... diddly.
We skipped concealed carry/sky marshal for schools tho and went right to nazi "papers please" and "step out of the line" crap. That is not working cause not every school can do that.
CCW holders allowed to carry at school would be the sky marshal program. sometimes you would have one out of 50... sometimes none at all.. no one, including the bad guy would know the number tho.
and... even if he took a chance.. CCW at the VERY LEAST slow down the spree and make the shooter lose time and concentration.
Sooo... good points...
Many school shooters would simply be deterred... they would not want to face the possibility of an armed sheeple and the humiliating death at the hands of one.
The remaining dedicated nut jobs would be paranoid and have a fight.. they could not concentrate as well.. the death toll would be less the sheeple would have more time to gather the herd and flee.
bad points? none really..
the possibility of stray bullets? as oppossed to aimed ones at close range?
the possibility that some schools would be targeted because it was percieved they didn't have anyone willing to act like a moral human and carry... day care for instance.
I will ask you all.. would you feel better sending your kids to a school where a teacher or two had CCW's or not? I know I would. I worry that my grand daughter is at a school where no one can protect her.
lazs
-
I think armed guards with full autos should be installed in the class rooms; that'd take care of this problem.
-
yes.. I imagine you do "think" that.. if it can be called "think" by any stretch of the imagination.
What I "think" is that you lack the ability to do so in any recognized way.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Brownshirt
I think armed guards with full autos should be installed in the class rooms; that'd take care of this problem.
You'd need an army then :D And hope that the armed guard isn't some nut.
Anyway, I did read that this was the 6th class shooting that week. :huh
-
You guys do what you want... I will avoid "gun free zones" as much as possible.
I will really be ticked tho if my grand daughter is a victim of this idiotic gun free zone BS.
lazs
-
Let's look at fad crime.. skyjacking.. one guy did it then they all did.. todays nazi like indignities did not stop the rash of skyjaking.. praying for them to stop didn't do it. stricter gun control at airports didn't even slow it down.
Sky marshals with concealed guns stopped it.. not 50% of the passengers with guns.. not even 10%.. sometimes not even one. They weren't on every flight but the bad guys didn't know that. It stopped.
That just might be the most convincing argument for dropping the gun free zone tag on our schools and allowing CCW.
Common sense tells us that with the dozens of powerful and rabid anti gun groups who hate ccw and have unlimited access to the press... that if there were any serious violations or.. a rash of them.. it would be headline news and a subject of every oprah and 60 minutes and 20 20.
So true. If a CCW holder committed a serious crime the anti gun folks would be all over it like stink on pewp.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Let's look at fad crime.. skyjacking.. one guy did it then they all did.. todays nazi like indignities did not stop the rash of skyjaking.. praying for them to stop didn't do it. stricter gun control at airports didn't even slow it down.
Sky marshals with concealed guns stopped it.. not 50% of the passengers with guns.. not even 10%.. sometimes not even one. They weren't on every flight but the bad guys didn't know that. It stopped.
That just might be the most convincing argument for dropping the gun free zone tag on our schools and allowing CCW.
I'm sorry but I don't think it is, comparing a skyjacker to a school shooter doesn't add up. A skyjacker is committing his crime for a monetary gain, a school shooter does not. A skyjacker is going into his crime knowing theres a chance of him dying and thats a big reason for them to rethink doing it. A school shooter is going into his crime knowing theres a really good chance that he's not going to survive his crime by either his own hand or by the hand of law enforcement. For the school shooter dying is something he's willing to do in order to carry out his crime, a skyjacker is doing it to make money, not to die. The risk of dying for a skyjacker is to great now for him to want to commit that crime, the risk of dying to a school shooter is something he is willing to do to carry out his crime.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I'm sorry but I don't think it is, comparing a skyjacker to a school shooter doesn't add up. A skyjacker is committing his crime for a monetary gain, a school shooter does not. A skyjacker is going into his crime knowing theres a chance of him dying and thats a big reason for them to rethink doing it. A school shooter is going into his crime knowing theres a really good chance that he's not going to survive his crime by either his own hand or by the hand of law enforcement. For the school shooter dying is something he's willing to do in order to carry out his crime, a skyjacker is doing it to make money, not to die. The risk of dying for a skyjacker is to great now for him to want to commit that crime, the risk of dying to a school shooter is something he is willing to do to carry out his crime.
Ahem......9/11? There was no monetary gain there. Quite a few hijackings are/were done by Arab extremists trying to make some sort of political statement.
How many hijackings of American airliners have there been since Sky Marshals have been flying armed? Not one. Even though every flight doesn't have a Sky Marshal just the possibility of one being there has, so far, deterred hijackings of American airliners. Deterrence does work.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Ahem......9/11? There was no monetary gain there. Quite a few hijackings are/were done by Arab extremists trying to make some sort of political statement.
How many hijackings of American airliners have there been since Sky Marshals have been flying armed? Not one. Even though every flight doesn't have a Sky Marshal just the possibility of one being there has, so far, deterred hijackings of American airliners. Deterrence does work.
You really think thats it the sky marshals that have prevented the terrorist from trying it again, and only the sky marshals? I think it's more likely all the increased security to get on a plane, and the fact that they know no one on the plane would just sit by while anyone tried to hijack the plane.
And just so you know sky marshals have been on US airliners since before 9/11, so obviously it wasn't a detourant for them.
-
Yes, Sky Marshals have been on US airliners since the late 60's or so. Since 9/11 the rate at which Sky Marshals fly on US airliners has been beefed up and highly publicized. I don't think many realized that US airliners had a chance to have a Sky Marshal on them prior to 9/11, it just wasn't publicized very well.
The increased security at airports still hasn't stopped things from being smuggled onto airliners. I don't recall the exact incidents or what items made it on board but I do recall that several of those incidents were discussed here in the O'Club.
Only 1 of the 4 hijacked airliners on 9/11 saw the passengers rise up against the hijackers, not a very good percentage. Most folks aren't going to do that anyways. Very commendable actions on the part of the passengers on the fourth airliner however.
Armed people can and do make a difference, not every time mind you, but they do make a difference whether you want to believe it or not.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Only 1 of the 4 hijacked airliners on 9/11 saw the passengers rise up against the hijackers, not a very good percentage. Most folks aren't going to do that anyways. Very commendable actions on the part of the passengers on the fourth airliner however.
You wanna know why that was, because before 9/11 when a plane was hijacked they didn't go flying the plane into buildings killing everyone, they reason the people on flight 93 did something to stop it was because they talked to family members on the phone who told them that the planes were being flown into buildings, so they knew if they did the usually during the hijacking by sitting there and waiting for it to be ended that they were all going to die. They had to stop it and couldn't do the norm for a hijacking by doing nothing. Now today if Muslim terrorist tried to hijack a plane do you honestly think that the people on the plane would do nothing? Ofcourse not, they would do what the passengers of flight 93 did and do whatever it took to regain control of the plane, and the terrorist know this, and thats why you will never see terrorist try to hijack another US airliner, not because they have more sky marshals, because they know that Americans will never just sit by and watch the plane be hijacked, they will do whatever it takes to end it, and I think that terrorist were well aware that sky marshals flew on some US airliners before 9/11.
Think about it, if you were on a airliner today, and Muslims tried to hijack it would you sit by and do nothing?
-
Ofcourse not, they would do what the passengers of flight 93 did and do whatever it took to regain control of the plane, and the terrorist know this, and thats why you will never see terrorist try to hijack another US airliner, not because they have more sky marshals,
Of course you can't give any credit to armed personnel having any form of detterence. /yawn
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Of course you can't give any credit to armed personnel having any form of detterence. /yawn
What I'm saying is that a sky marshal isn't the only reason for preventing hijacking, it's not as if you were to remove the sky marshals from U.S airliners that you'd start having skyjackings again, or is that what you think is preventing hijackings from happening?
-
Originally posted by trax1
fact that they know no one on the plane would just sit by while anyone tried to hijack the plane.
.
There ya go.
Pre 9/11 your typical hijacking they just demanded to go from point A to point B.
People. even our own government rationalised that iwhile it was a very dangerous and deadly situation. If you just remained calm. There would be little if any loss of life.
The real danger to lives came not from Hijackings. but from bombs planted on planes
The Events of 9/11 changed all that.
And people will fight to save their lives.
They say when confronted with a Grizzly bear you can play dead and it might not eat you.
But if a Black bear attacks you. Fight for your life because if you dont he will eat you anyway.
Now I dont know if that saying about Grizzlies is true.
But t is safe to say that people will recognise a hijacker as a Black bear now.
the fact they know people are now willing ot fight back instead of just sit there is the deterrence.
The only other thing they can do now is just blow up the planes.
THERE is where security comes into play
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Of course you can't give any credit to armed personnel having any form of detterence. /yawn
And exactly what kind of deterrence did armed personell have before and during 9/11?
-
One time in all the history of hijackings have the passengers fought back......one time. The only reason the passengers knew what was going to happen was they talked to people on the ground via cell phones. Simple enough for hijackers to get around that, take away all the cell phones in any future hijackings.
One time is a deterrent for the future when its so easy to plan around? I think not.
You can argue with yourself now. I'm done with this thread. :)
-
Originally posted by Elfie
One time in all the history of hijackings have the passengers fought back......one time. The only reason the passengers knew what was going to happen was they talked to people on the ground via cell phones. Simple enough for hijackers to get around that, take away all the cell phones in any future hijackings.
One time is a deterrent for the future when its so easy to plan around? I think not.
You can argue with yourself now. I'm done with this thread. :)
Wow, are you serious? So if you were on an airplane that got hijacked today you would just sit back and do nothing? Well then I think you'd be alone in that respect. If anyone tried hijacking an airplane now after 9/11 no one on that plane would just sit there and be like "well we'll just see how this plays out", they would all have what happen on 9/11 in there minds and do everything they could to get control of that plane back. I gotta say I think your not really thinking this through to clearly.
Pre 9/11 yeah I'd say your right, but ever since that day people look at a hijacked airplane in a different light.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
One time in all the history of hijackings have the passengers fought back......one time. The only reason the passengers knew what was going to happen was they talked to people on the ground via cell phones. Simple enough for hijackers to get around that, take away all the cell phones in any future hijackings.
One time is a deterrent for the future when its so easy to plan around? I think not.
You can argue with yourself now. I'm done with this thread. :)
Make that two times.
Lets not forget the shoe bomber.
While technically not a hijacking. It was the passengers who were alert enough to stop a tragedy.
Not armed personel
-
Like I said, he's just not thinking it through clearly. He has no argument to defend his statement about it, and thats why he's said he's done with the thread.
Anyone who thinks that any terrorist could actually get away with trying to hijack and American airliner just aren't being realistic about it, nobody would sit by and do nothing to try and stop it in a post 9/11 world. The rules have change when it comes to hijackings now and the old sitting still and waiting out the hijacking to end just don't apply anymore. Before your odds of survival were good if you just waited for it to end, now no one would risk waiting it out on the chance they would use it as a missile again.
-
In the only school shooting in recent history (2002) a student walked into a Monash University with 5 legally owned handguns - shooting 2 dead, wounding 5 more and was tackled to the ground by the wounded Lecturer (hit in the shoulder and knee) and 2 other students when he started to swap weapons
Tronsky
-
For those that have done any research on the subject.....
I don't know the answer but I think it's just sitting there waiting for the right person to divine.
Why are there so many more of these incidents in the U.S.?
-
Originally posted by Thruster
For those that have done any research on the subject.....
I don't know the answer but I think it's just sitting there waiting for the right person to divine.
Why are there so many more of these incidents in the U.S.?
I'm sure it's due to a couple of factors, theres no 1 thing that you can point to and say that it.
Like one factor would be the easy access to hand guns in our country, now it's not that I'm saying we need to ban hand guns here or anything like that, or that we need tighter gun laws either, thats not gonna fix the problem, I love hand guns, and when they are properly handled and safely stored away in a gun safe they are safe from anything bad happening with them., as they say "guns don't kill people, people kill people".
Another factor here is probably how mean kids here can be towards one another, and those kids that get picked on see that in the media these kids that got picked on in other schools took things into their own hands and got revenge on their tormentors, so they get the idea to do it themselves.
I'm sure there are other factors to it aswell as the ones I've stated here.
-
A very good teacher used to say when speaking about guns in the US: "The history of the USA has always been bloody", and "There's a bit of Romans in all of us ", meaning Americans.
-
wow trax that ability to blind yourself is strong in you.
skyjacking.. only the first couple were for monetary gain.. the rest were for percieved slights or political reasons. pretty much... they were carried out by nutjobs who wanted the publicity. sound familiar?
sky marshal program... came in to being and skyjacking stopped. so well in fact that... the ended it.
ended program... skyjacking starts again.. this time they just increase security at airports and more searches and more nazi like programs. skyjacking attempts continue.. but.. everyone suffers.. most.. like myself.. avoid flying because of the stench of totalitarianism.
sky marshal program starts again... attempts end. but.. we still have searches and shoeless idiots wandering around airports an hour too early and grandmas being patted down in front of the rest of the "happy travelers"
Now.. we could do away with all the nazi crap.. the sky marshal and armed pilot/ heavy security pilot cabin doors is enough.
trax.. I am glad that the facts don't support your "feelings".. I think that you should be too if you just thought about it.
A pleasant school or airport or public place with no gestapo and a maybe a few CCW holders in the crowd is far preferable to the police state it would take to equal the amount of security so few provide.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
wow trax that ability to blind yourself is strong in you.
skyjacking.. only the first couple were for monetary gain.. the rest were for percieved slights or political reasons. pretty much... they were carried out by nutjobs who wanted the publicity. sound familiar?
sky marshal program... came in to being and skyjacking stopped. so well in fact that... the ended it.
ended program... skyjacking starts again.. this time they just increase security at airports and more searches and more nazi like programs. skyjacking attempts continue.. but.. everyone suffers.. most.. like myself.. avoid flying because of the stench of totalitarianism.
sky marshal program starts again... attempts end. but.. we still have searches and shoeless idiots wandering around airports an hour too early and grandmas being patted down in front of the rest of the "happy travelers"
Now.. we could do away with all the nazi crap.. the sky marshal and armed pilot/ heavy security pilot cabin doors is enough.
trax.. I am glad that the facts don't support your "feelings".. I think that you should be too if you just thought about it.
A pleasant school or airport or public place with no gestapo and a maybe a few CCW holders in the crowd is far preferable to the police state it would take to equal the amount of security so few provide.
lazs
What I said is that sky marshals aren't whats stopping planes from being hijack nowadays, never once said anything about it stopping them pre 9/11. Since 9/11 you will never see someone successfully hijack another American airplane because the people on the plane would never just sit by and watch it happen, and I think you can't deny that, I know that if you were on a plane that was hijacked you'd be right there with me and the other passengers coming up with someway to rush the terrorist and retake the plane.
And as far as pre 9/11 the majority of people who hijacked airplanes were terrorist who were doing it for political reasons like getting fellow freedom fighters(as they would refer to themselves) freed from jails, or getting other political things they wanted. The other kind was the hijacker doing it for a monetary gain(like D.B Copper). Now as far as the freedom fighters(aka terrorist) go they were willing to die for whatever they were trying to accomplish, so the though of a sky marshal maybe being onboard is no detourant to them. Now the guy doing it for a monetary gain he was probably detoured from attempting to skyjack a plane by the sky marshal. Now your original argument was comparing having sky marshals to having CCW's in classrooms, which as I stated isn't a good comparison because your school shooter isn't committing his crime for a monetary gain, he's doing it for reasons he's willing to die to carry out, so as with the terrorist dying isn't much of a detourant to them.
-
trax trax trax... listen to yourself man!
of course the skyjackers were political nutjobs who wanted the media attention.. they were willing to die to get it.
of course the increased security at airports did nothing... or very little.. the skyjacking attempts stopped when they put guns on the planes.. the sky marshal program and the pilots.
You could cut airport security in half.. to a reasonable and unobtrusive level and just allow CCW and cops to carry concealed (after a course in aircraft shooting and the proper tools) or.. simply fund the skymarshal program fully and call it a day.
same will work for schools.. nothing else seems to be working.. No CCW people are causing problems.. so far.. civilians with guns have only helped the situations..
That is what is so backward about "gun free zones".. it doesn't work and it prevents a demostrably workable solution from happening.
Just as the anti gun nuts fought CCW with "feeling" of horror stories of fender benders turning into OK corral shootouts... that kind of ignorance and arrogance.. fortunately.. did not prevail.. this current anti gun sillieness needs to go the same way.. to be drug out into the same light.
I feel that your attitude is getting children killed. Plain and simple. I think you do it out of ignorance but I am beggining to think that you have some agenda that trancends your ability to reason.. that is the only thing I can imagine at this point.
Prove me wrong tho.. show me how the sky marshal program has not worked.. show me how CCW has not worked. every day... a bigger percent of the population is getting their permit. It is solving more problems than it causes.. show me otherwise.
give me data that would support CCW holders being more of a danger than a help in schools... not arming 12 year olds.. but allowing CCW in schools.
I sure as hell want my grand daughter to be at a school where there are responsible and moral adults with firearms who will risk their life and step up to the plate to defend her... I hope that if they or theirs are in a situation I can help them.
lazs
-
I have no agenda, I'm no law maker, whatever I think or feel will make no impact on the laws this country makes. I could think putting evil purple monkeys into classrooms and it wouldn't effect any laws.
As for sky marshals like I said they have no effect on hijackers now in a post 9/11 America, the purpose they serve now is the peace of mind to the people flying in the planes, it makes people flying in the planes in a post 9/11 America feel safer knowing that there are undercover officers on planes with guns. Honestly do you think that sky marshals are whats preventing Al Qaeda' & other terrorist from trying to hijack another U.S airliner? I know I don't think thats what it is, IMO it's the increased security now to get on a plane, now-a-days you can't even get a finger nail clipper onto a plane. The other thing preventing Al Qaeda' & other terrorist as I've already stated, the people on board that plane would never allow it to happen, they would rush the hijackers and stop them.
As I've said, yes before 9/11 sky marshals probably did have an effect on the minds of potential hijackers, but not anymore, now there are other things preventing them from trying it.
-
Originally posted by trax1
I have no agenda, I'm no law maker, whatever I think or feel will make no impact on the laws this country makes. I could think putting evil purple monkeys into classrooms and it wouldn't effect any laws.
As for sky marshals like I said they have no effect on hijackers now in a post 9/11 America, the purpose they serve now is the peace of mind to the people flying in the planes, it makes people flying in the planes in a post 9/11 America feel safer knowing that there are undercover officers on planes with guns. Honestly do you think that sky marshals are whats preventing Al Qaeda' & other terrorist from trying to hijack another U.S airliner? I know I don't think thats what it is, IMO it's the increased security now to get on a plane, now-a-days you can't even get a finger nail clipper onto a plane. The other thing preventing Al Qaeda' & other terrorist as I've already stated, the people on board that plane would never allow it to happen, they would rush the hijackers and stop them.
As I've said, yes before 9/11 sky marshals probably did have an effect on the minds of potential hijackers, but not anymore, now there are other things preventing them from trying it.
Are you serious? Any news organization that's having a slow day will get nail clippers, scissors or even knives on a plane just for ****s and giggles. Just to show us how easy it is.
-
I like the ccw program and disagree with banning guns in school, But pointing to sky marshals for the reasons people quit taking planes hostage is silly.
No one stopped stopped hijackings because it was in the best interest of the people onboard not to.
The government for years pounded it into people’s heads that during hostage situations to do nothing.
9/11 Stopped that, not ccws sky marshals or anything else.
The proof is with United Airlines Flight 93 once they knew that it was not a hostage situation but a suicide bombing they took actions.
No one will ever take a plane in flight hostage again.
If the people in the planes knew that earlier none of that would have happened.
Look at the shoe bomber, He was not stopped by sky marshals or people with guns, He got his bellybutton kicked the old fashioned way.
-
Originally posted by moot
A very good teacher used to say when speaking about guns in the US: "The history of the USA has always been bloody", and "There's a bit of Romans in all of us ", meaning Americans.
Thats a good point. but one can look at humanity as a whole through out history.
We like to think we are more civilized then we were 2,000 years ago but we are really not when you stop and think about it.
We're more tecnologically advanced then we were 2,000 years ago. But we are certainly no more civilized.
The Greeks and Romans for example, had societies every bit as complex as ours today.
The only real difference is the types of rocks we throw at each other.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Are you serious? Any news organization that's having a slow day will get nail clippers, scissors or even knives on a plane just for ****s and giggles. Just to show us how easy it is.
I never said that the security was 100% bullet proof, I don't think you can say that any security system is 100% safe.
Yes I'm sure if you really want you can get nail clippers or scissors on a plane, but do you really think that anyone is gonna be able to hijack an airplane with a pair of scissors? No ofcourse not, anything that someone could use to hijack an airplane isn't gonna get through security, like bombs or guns. Any of that other stuff that you can get through security isn't going to stop the passengers from rushing the hijackers and taking control back.
-
Originally posted by Trell
I like the ccw program and disagree with banning guns in school, But pointing to sky marshals for the reasons people quit taking planes hostage is silly.
No one stopped stopped hijackings because it was in the best interest of the people onboard not to.
The government for years pounded it into people’s heads that during hostage situations to do nothing.
9/11 Stopped that, not ccws sky marshals or anything else.
The proof is with United Airlines Flight 93 once they knew that it was not a hostage situation but a suicide bombing they took actions.
No one will ever take a plane in flight hostage again.
If the people in the planes knew that earlier none of that would have happened.
Look at the shoe bomber, He was not stopped by sky marshals or people with guns, He got his bellybutton kicked the old fashioned way.
Exactly, thank you.
-
trax.. then please tell me how a person would skyjack a plane with security doors and armed pilots and sky marshals?
How would you do it? How would you get around some guy with a gun who had orders to not let you have what you wanted no matter what?
I for sure do think that sky marshals and armed pilots made the difference.. how could it not? how could someone get past that? the other thing is that people realize that no airport nazi like security will save their lives.. people are now attacking the skyjackers. they have nothing to lose. How could that not be better if the people had better tools (guns) and the bad guys didn't know who?
Schools are even better.. and worse.. more people... less closed in.. easier for the bad guys to have powerful weapons so that is the bad thing.. nothing can be done about that..
The good thing is that there is a bigger pool of 21 year old and older CCW holders to choose from. more chance that there will be a good guy with a gun.. not some cop or security guard that everyone knows has a gun and can be avoided or taken out instantly... but good guys who blend in.
No other solution that any normal person could stomach would work.
You guys are pretty much saying that DC is a gun free zone so that is why no one ever gets shot there.
I do not fear that my grand daughter would be shot by a CCW holder at school any more than she would get shot by one on the street. I do fear that some nut will get a gun and go there to get his 15 minutes of fame.
I really really dislike people who prevent her from having this protection. It is past being a debate or a disagreement.. it is to me.. that you are condoning the murder of innocents.
It makes you the problem in my opinion. I believe the you are culpable.
lazs
-
As far as airplane hijackings go I really don't think that sky marshals are the thing thats stopping terrorist from trying to hijack another U.S airliner now since 9/11.
I do think that the cockpit doors being reinforced was a good security measure that was put in place, but as far as the sky marshal goes, thats not whats preventing terrorist from trying to hijack another airliner. As I've stated before, one of the things preventing them is the increased searches at the check points before entering the terminals, along with the bans they've put on certain items from going passed that point like knives. It would be very hard for a hijacker to get any kind of weapon that he could use to take control of the plane and stop people on the plane from over powering him passed the check points. I know news crews have gotten nail clippers & scissors passed the check points, but I'm talking about something that would stop the people on board the plane from getting it away from him and retaking the plane.
Another thing stopping them from trying it again is Americans are more prepared to try and stop it on board the plane then they were before 9/11, no one would just sit there in the plane and do nothing to retake control of plane.
Do you honestly think that if we removed armed sky marshals from U.S airliners that terrorist would try to hijack another plane?
In a post 9/11 world people don't look at hijackings of airliners the same as they use to, they look at it more like a suicide bomber rather then your standard hijacking by terrorist looking to make some kind of political statement or get their fellow terrorist freed from jails.
As for trying to say I'm responsible for murders that happen in schools, well thats just outragous. I can't even vote, and I don't go out campaigning for anyone or any laws, so how can I even influence laws? If your so worried about your grand daughter then take her out of school and have her home schooled, or get out there and help get laws passed that would get CCW's allowed in classrooms, don't just talk about it on here, get out in the community and do something.
-
Lazs you are seriously wasting your time with trax. :)
-
elfie.. I agree that I am wasting my time with trax but.. it is not about him or even me. I hope that others are reading both of our posts and choosing the side that makes the most sense to them.. often.. I think that this may be the first time that many have ever really given it much thought. I hope that I (and others) can present a decent case.. I don't feel that he has.
To say that sky marshals and armed pilots had no effect but the increased gestapo atmosphere and tactics did..is to not notice what is going on around you..
every security measure is just one more thing that can be gotten around..they are blind policy and rules.. they don't think they don't react except after.
A thinking human with a firearm adapts. with trax's methods you get a shoe bomber with matches being (hopefully) stopped by unarmed passengers and the next week... maybe a new rule that all passengers have to wear airport issued slippers..
No liquids next week.. week after.. no clothing allowed on board... cavity searches.. whatever.. more and more intrusive.
And none of this security can work on a scale like schools or malls.
The only workable solution has been found in countries like israel who have had to deal with it. Armed citizens work.
lazs
-
elfie.. I agree that I am wasting my time with trax but.. it is not about him or even me. I hope that others are reading both of our posts and choosing the side that makes the most sense to them.. often.. I think that this may be the first time that many have ever really given it much thought. I hope that I (and others) can present a decent case.. I don't feel that he has.
I hadn't thought of it from that perspective, you are, of course, correct. Thanks. :)
-
You still haven't answered my question, do you think that if sky marshals were removed from airplanes that terrorist would attempt another hijacking?
Now I've never said that we don't need sky marshals, what I've said is that sky marshals aren't whats stopping terrorist from attempting another hijacking, what stopping it from ever being tried again is the people on the plane.
As I've stated several times now, people on board the aircraft would never just sit in their seats twiddling their thumbs saying "boy I hope we survive", no they are gonna act and try anything they can to retake control of the plane. Now Elfie is the one who seems to think this is the case, and that the people on the plane would do nothing to try and stop the hijacking and retake the plane. That has been my argument, the the passengers will do whatever it takes to retake the plane now in a post 9/11 world.
So lazs do you agree with Elfie that the passengers will do nothing to retake the plane? And that the thought of the passengers trying to retake the plane isnt a detouant to the terrorist?
-
I said that once in all the history of hijacking the passengers took the initiative and retook control of the airplane. Passengers also beat the crap out of the shoe bomber. So essentially that's twice in how many instances that passengers have done something?
History isn't proving your point in this case.
Now I've never said that we don't need sky marshals
Yes you are, with this:
what I've said is that sky marshals aren't whats stopping terrorist from attempting another hijacking
That's your view, you've stated it more than once.
If the Sky Marshals aren't what's stopping terrorists from attempting another hijacking then the logical conclusion is that they are not needed.
do you think that if sky marshals were removed from airplanes that terrorist would attempt another hijacking?
Imo, yes.
detouant
I have no idea what the heck that is, but I think you meant deterrent. :D
-
Well thank you grammar police for pointing that out, I'll try to make sure I never miss spell again, thank you.
First off, for you not to be able too see that what happen on 9/11 completely changed the way anyone would react to a hijacking is just unbelievable. If you can't see whats changed in the way anyone would act during a hijacking now then your just not thinking hard enough about it. Before 9/11 when a plane was hijacked no one on the plane would think they would use the plane as a weapon, and that if you just wait it out, then more then likely you'd make it out of the situation ok. Now when a plane would get hijacked here in America the first thing the people on the plane would think about would be 9/11, and that if they didn't do something to overpower the hijackers then everyone on the plane is gonna die. I'm sorry but I'd be willing to bet that your alone in thinking that if a plane was hijacked today that the passengers wouldn't act to stop the hijackers, I doubt that even lazs would agree with you on that one because I know that if lazs was on a plane getting hijacked he's be right there putting together a plan to retake it.
And I've said several times now and I guess I need to say it again "I've never said we don't need sky marshals", now you might try and try to put words in my mouth and say that I don't want sky marshals on planes. Just because I don't think that sky marshals are the "only thing" thats stopping terrorist from trying to hijack a plane doesn't mean that I don't think they should be there, for one if they were on a plane that got hijacked, him and the passengers would have a lot better chance in taking the terrorist out, secondly alot of times you get people on planes that get drunk and become violent and a sky marshal would be able to help, so yes I don think the sky marshals do play a role in the security of U.S planes, I just don't think that the sky marshal, and the sky marshal alone is whats stopping another hijacking from happening.
Why would the terrorist want to hijack another plane, but not go through with it on the chance that the plane they pick would have a sky marshal on it?
I really think you'd be alone in the idea that shy marshals are the "only thing" stopping a terrorist group from trying to hijack a plane, like I said before, sky marshals have been flying on U.S planes for years.
-
trax.. sorry I didn't answer your question directly as I thought I had answered it in context.
Yes I believe that sky marshals have stopped the skyjacking just as they did before the program was stopped.. a victim of it's own success. yes.. that is what I said.. it was so successful that we got lax and dropped it. and 911 happened.
the passengers are now reacting because the realize.. thanks to 911 and the world news of suicide bombers that they have nothing to lose but.. unarmed.. don't kid yourself.. a half dozen terrorists with ceramic knives could keep everyone down.. they will get weapons on no matter what the security.
you answer me this.. do you think they can't get weapons on? they do every day.. I know guys who have traveled with carbon fiber knives.. every bit as effective as steel and way more than a silly boxcutter.
Do I think that if they dropped the sky marshal program and the security door and armed pilots program we would have more skyjackings? absolutely. As I said.. it will never be possible to screen out all the bad guys or their weapons. some bad guys weapons are their hands.. when they break a few necks lets see how brave unarmed passengers are.
schools and malls are even better.. at the mall shooting a CCW holder there said that he would have had his gun if not for the "gun free zone" rule... he says that "as god is my witness.. I had a perfect shot at the shooter if I were carrying my gun."
The shooters don't know who the sheep is and who the CCW people are.. there is confusion and running and ducking for cover.. for him.. standing out in the open.. everyone is a threat... unless....
unless he knows it is a "gun free zone" his own personal clay pidgeon shoot for 10 minutes to an hour or so...
I just can't put it more simply or clearly than that. I can't believe you are still buying the party line and not using your head to look at the real facts..
CCW holders don't cause shootings they end em.. it matters not where.
lazs
-
And I've said several times now and I guess I need to say it again "I've never said we don't need sky marshals", now you might try and try to put words in my mouth and say that I don't want sky marshals on planes.
What you've said is that the Sky Marshal's isn't what is stopping the terrorists from pulling off more hijackings. The logical conclusion to that is if they aren't stopping terrorists from hijacking airliners then they are not needed. So while you haven't come right out and said.....Sky Marshals aren't needed, you have most certainly implied it, repeatedly throughout this thread.
If/when another hijacking takes place by a group of terrorists, you can bet the farm that they will have a plan to keep the passengers under control. The actions of the passengers of flight 93 have been widely publicized and the terrorists aren't stupid. They will have some type of weapon that they smuggled through security. If the media can smuggle scissors through, terrorists can get weapons through.
Interesting factoid. El Al airlines has not been hijacked since 1968. El Al airlines has multiple Sky Marshals on every flight. Incidentally, they have not been hijacked since they put multiple Air Marshals on all flights.
schools and malls are even better.. at the mall shooting a CCW holder there said that he would have had his gun if not for the "gun free zone" rule... he says that "as god is my witness.. I had a perfect shot at the shooter if I were carrying my gun."
This is the incident that I wanted to provide links for, but I haven't been able to find them yet. There was an individual that had a perfect side profile shot, he could have taken down the shooter.....that is if the mall in Omaha hadn't been a gun free zone. He could have stopped the shooter in his tracks before the casualties got worse.
-
The quote is in the latest issue of the Rifleman.. the NRA magazine...
In the Co. shootings several people, including the man who was shot in the arm while shouting to distract the shooter all said that they would have had easy, clear shots at the shooter.
the fact is.. the CCW holder is at a clear advantage in such situations.. he has a better chance... far better.. of shooting the killer than vice versa.
I shouldn't have to explain this as it should be obvious to anyone but a trax.
lazs
-
The reason El Al hasn't had a hijacking is because they are insane about there security, they put armed people on every flight, so I'll agree with that, if we put armed people on every flight yes you would have a record like El Al does.
The fact is we don't put armed people on every flight, I really doubt that terrorist wanting to hijack a plane would be stopped by the thought that the plane they pick might have a sky marshal on board. These terrorist are more then willing to die for what they believe, so I'll ask you again, why would the terrorist be stopped by the thought of getting killed by a sky marshal? All they would need to do is do what they did on 9/11, hijack multiple planes at once, I highly doubt that every plane they pick would be one with a sky marshal.
Saying that if the terrorist have knives that thats gonna be enough to hold back the passengers, the 9/11 hijackers had knives and even fake bombs, that wasn't enough to stop the people of flight 93 from attacking them. If your on a hijacked plane is any knife they have gonna make you just sit in your seat and do nothing while they ram it into another building?
And I guess I need to state this one more time for Elfie, no I never said that we should remove sky marshals, just because I think that sky marshals and sky marshals alone are stopping hijackers does that mean I think they don't play their role in our security. To say that "well there not the only thing stopping terrorist lets get rid of them" is stupid. I've said it before, I agree if there on a plane that gets hijack they are definitely going to help end it. By that reasoning your saying we can get rid of every security measure except for the sky marshals.
And lazs when did I say we need to un-arm pilots and get ride of the security doors?
-
trax... you just admitted that armed personnel on planes work.
I think you need to read what you yourself are saying.. you say that the fact is that sky marshals are not on every flight.. that is true but.. no one knows which ones they aren't on.. the deterrent is the concealed part... you are proving my point.
I am glad that you think passengers are so brave. Half a dozen bad guys with ceramic knives would do it.. after they gutted the first few or held a child up with a knife to his/her throat...
but look at what you are saying.. you are saying that unarmed passengers with no training are stopping skyjacking and.. can if one happens.. yet.. sky marshals with handguns or CCW holders with training are useless.
Far too many contradictions for me to even go into... not to mention...
You don't even touch on schools or malls where the advantage of CCW would be tenfold. The situation much better.. more room.. more confusion for the shooter and no possibility of hitting something that would kill everyone.
lazs
-
You aren't even thinking about what I have posted in regards to your comments about Sky Marshals not being what is stopping the hijackers. Those were your words, not mine. I just gave the logical conclusion to your words.
It wasn't until this page of the thread that you have changed what you are saying about Sky Marshals. Previously, you weren't giving them any credit. Now you are saying they aren't the only thing providing deterrent.
Saying that if the terrorist have knives that thats gonna be enough to hold back the passengers, the 9/11 hijackers had knives and even fake bombs, that wasn't enough to stop the people of flight 93 from attacking them. If your on a hijacked plane is any knife they have gonna make you just sit in your seat and do nothing while they ram it into another building?
I used the term weapons, that covers a wide range of items.
First, there is no guarantee that the next hijacking will be a 9/11 deal. Second, all it takes is for the hijackers to beat the crap out of one person, stab one person, kill one person etc....to put enough fear into the rest of the passengers to ensure they do nothing.
Not all hijackers are willing to die. Prior to 9/11 the majority of hijackings were by folks that were trying to get political prisoners freed, trying to make some sort of political statement etc. Those folks always tried to escape and many succeeded.
Passengers rising up against the hijackers is a very new occurence. Will it happen again? Maybe, but you can bet that any future hijackers will be prepared for it and will have a plan to ensure that it doesn't happen. After all, what good is it to hijack a plane only to let the passengers take it back from you?
*edit* I don't fly, haven't flown on a plane since the '80s so what I would/wouldn't do if a plane was hijacked is irrelevant.
-
What I've been saying since the beginning is that sky marshals are not whats stopping terrorist from trying to hijack American plans, yes I do admit and agree that if a sky marshal was on a flight that was hijack that he would have the best chance of stopping it. But to say that the sky marshal program, and the sky marshal program alone is whats stopping another attempt I can't agree with.
We have over 40,000 flights in the U.S daily, now if it were to be something that would make a terrorist group not even want to attempt a hijacking they would need a large percentage of those flights to have a sky marshal on them. Now I kinda doubt that we a thousands of sky marshals flying on planes here everyday. Now a terrorist group is not gonna be deterred from even attempting a hijacking unless there was a large percentage of those flights having sky marshals on them.
I think whats gonna prevent terrorist from trying another hijacking is a combination of security features that have been put in place since 9/11, and I still think that the passengers are part of that.
Edit: To think that terrorist groups are sitting there thinking to themselves "Man if only they didn't have sky marshals on some flights we could try it again, but now that they have sky marshals on some planes we better not try it again" I really doubt thats happening.
-
One other thing, don't get me wrong I'm not saying that I think armed sky marshals on planes is a bad idea, or that we don't need them, what I'm saying is that sky marshals aren't the only thing stopping terrorist from trying to hijack another U.S airliner. I think it's a combination of things that are stopping them. I mean hell if it was economically feasible I think we should be like El Al and have them on every flight, then if we we had them on ever flight I'd think they would be the reason terrorist wouldn't try to hijack another plane.
-
We have over 40,000 flights in the U.S daily, now if it were to be something that would make a terrorist group not even want to attempt a hijacking they would need a large percentage of those flights to have a sky marshal on them. Now I kinda doubt that we a thousands of sky marshals flying on planes here everyday.
We don't know how many flights have Sky Marshals and neither do the terrorists, thats the beauty of it. :)
-
trax, flight 93 crashed and everyone died.
-
Originally posted by john9001
trax, flight 93 crashed and everyone died.
That's a very valid point.
All those passengers vs 4 or so terrorists and they still all died. Instead of crashing into a building they crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. The passengers of flight 93 were successful in the sense that flight 93 didn't get plowed into the White House like the terrorists had planned, yet they were still unsuccessful in saving their own lives.
That leaves us with the shoe bomber as the only time passengers have successfully foiled a bomber/terrorist.
Just to be clear, I define success as not only foiling the bomber/terrorists plans but also surviving to tell the story.
-
I guess we could quit "feeling" and guessing and just look at facts about CCW.
CCW holders are involved in far less gun crime than the average citizen.
States with CCW permits easy to get show a decline in crime.
Criminals interviewed in jail all say that they fear armed citizens more than they do cops.. for one thing.. cops are easy to spot and.. let's face it.. they have more rules.
It is one thing to say that you "feel" that CCW holders will be dangerous to the rest of us but.. that flies in the face of the facts that they are all around us every day and we don't even know it.. there are millions of people (1.4 in Florida alone) with permits.. not to mention a large group who are carrying without the benifiet of the blessing of their backward states.
In order to say that allowing CCW holders on planes (or schools) will cause a problem you have to give examples of them doing so in the zillions of combined hours that they have been carrying already.
lazs
-
Well, if there was total freedom with all conceilable firearms...what would the place be like?
-
Originally posted by Angus
Well, if there was total freedom with all conceilable firearms...what would the place be like?
The Wild West.;)
-
two things... If everyone were allowed to carry concealed... Like in most states right now...
What would happen is that about 10% of the people would take the responsibility and moral courage to.. and then.. not 100% of the time.. that is what would happen.. we have the numbers.
And yes.. it would be more like the wild west.. where the homicide rate was about a 4th of what it is in detroit or DC with their handgun bans and crimes like rape were about... well.. 0%.
In towns that allowed open carry many shootings happened in bars and almost all were ruled as "duels" the participants were willing or it was self defense.
In towns that did not allow open carry.. most carried concealed.. that was when "pocket guns" and "hideout" guns came into their own... there were millions of these small guns sold.
the wild west would be a pleasure compared to today. the crime rate was very low.
lazs