Public Sides With NRA on School Safety

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by FreedomFan

Well wake the F up. We live in an authoritarian state rapidly marching towards a full police state.

And the majority of us want it that way. We DEMAND it. And I'm not talking about the major suicide inspiring inconvenience of *gasp* having to take your freaking shoes off at the airport.

I suspect most people like living in a totalitarian environment; someone telling them what to do every second of the day, no decisions to make, no personal responsibility. It's just easier that way.

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

And the majority of us want it that way. We DEMAND it. And I'm not talking about the major suicide inspiring inconvenience of *gasp* having to take your freaking shoes off at the airport.

I suspect most people like living in a totalitarian environment; someone telling them what to do every second of the day, no decisions to make, no personal responsibility. It's just easier that way.

If this wasnt true, why would so many men get married?

[Christy]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Look at past shootings:

The Luby's shooting in TX (not a gun-free zone)
.

Actually, this is not true. Due to the concealed carry laws that existed in Texas at the time you could not carry a firearm into a restaurant. Suzanna Hupp (who I've met personally) campaigned to have the laws in Texas changed so that you could.

In response to the massacre,[5] the Texas Legislature in 1995 passed a shall-issue gun law, which requires that all qualifying applicants be issued a Concealed Handgun License (the state's required permit to carry concealed weapons), removing the personal discretion of the issuing authority to deny such licenses. To qualify for a license, one must be free-and-clear of crimes, attend a minimum 10-hour class taught by a state-certified instructor, pass a 50-question test, show proficiency in a 50-round shooting test, and pass two background tests, one shallow and one deep. The license costs $240 to $290, depending on the added instructor's fee.

The law had been campaigned for by Suzanna Hupp, who was present at the time of the massacre where both of her parents were shot and killed. She later expressed regret about deciding to leave her gun in her car lest she risk possibly running afoul of the state's concealed weapons laws; during the shootings, she reached for her weapon but then remembered that it was "a hundred feet away in my car."[6] She testified across the country in support of concealed handgun laws, and was elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1996.[7] The law was signed by then-Governor George W. Bush.[8]

[FreedomFan]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

And the majority of us want it that way. We DEMAND it. And I'm not talking about the major suicide inspiring inconvenience of *gasp* having to take your freaking shoes off at the airport.

I suspect most people like living in a totalitarian environment; someone telling them what to do every second of the day, no decisions to make, no personal responsibility. It's just easier that way.

Yeah, well, that's one way to live life. You pays your money, you makes your choice I s'pose.

[Cheeky1]

Originally Posted by bcp

If this wasnt true, why would so many men get married?

HA!

In the end, they'll blame us men too!

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Christy

Actually, this is not true. Due to the concealed carry laws that existed in Texas at the time you could not carry a firearm into a restaurant. Suzanna Hupp (who I've met personally) campaigned to have the laws in Texas changed so that you could.

But the point is, do you think that the Luby's (or anywhere else some crazy person decided to shoot people) was chosen specifically because it was a gun-free zone?

Don't get me wrong - I think gun-free zones are complete and total nonsense. Psycho criminals do not go, "Hmmm...I'd like to shoot a bunch of people today. Let's look and see where the gun-free zone is..." I just think there are better arguments against the gun grabbers than that.

[Chris0nllyn]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

But the point is, do you think that the Luby's (or anywhere else some crazy person decided to shoot people) was chosen specifically because it was a gun-free zone?

Don't get me wrong - I think gun-free zones are complete and total nonsense. Psycho criminals do not go, "Hmmm...I'd like to shoot a bunch of people today. Let's look and see where the gun-free zone is..." I just think there are better arguments against the gun grabbers than that.

Again, then why don't we see mass shootings at gun shows, gun shops, sportsman clubs, or gun ranges?

You don't think it's possible that, in the back of their mind, they think they have a better chance of NOT being shot if they don;t go to those places?

Not everyone, but some?

[thatguy]

Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn

Again, then why don't we see mass shootings at gun shows, gun shops, sportsman clubs, or gun ranges?

You don't think it's possible that, in the back of their mind, they think they have a better chance of NOT being shot if they don;t go to those places?

Not everyone, but some?

A lot of these guys dont plan on getting away, they intend to be shot or to kill themselves at the end.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by thatguy

A lot of these guys dont plan on getting away, they intend to be shot or to kill themselves at the end.

And we know that because many times they shoot themselves.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn

Again, then why don't we see mass shootings at gun shows, gun shops, sportsman clubs, or gun ranges?

You don't think it's possible that, in the back of their mind, they think they have a better chance of NOT being shot if they don;t go to those places?

Not everyone, but some?

Mom kills son, then self at gun range - US news - Crime & courts | NBC News



And like I said above, most of these psychos end up killing themselves.

I think it's entirely reasonable that someone intent on taking out as many people as possible before killing themselves will most likely not try that in a location that is filled with experienced shooters with loaded guns.

So what?

I've already agreed that gun-free zones are stupid, but I also agree that expecting every citizen to be comfortable with guns and carry one with them at all times is just as stupid. Armed guards at schools, or even arming teachers, is just another knee-jerk feel-good do-nothing "solution" to a problem that is statistically insignificant.

You're not going to convince some durhard leftover hippie or airhead soccer mommy that more guns is the answer. You're just not.