In States that allow concealed carry on campus I wonder what % of kids actually carry?
Florida’s legislature had a couple of ‘guns on campus’ bills die in committee last month. One bill would have allowed school employees and teachers at K-12 schools with police or military experience to carry guns at schools. The other bill would have allowed those with concealed pistol-toter permits to carry weapons on Florida college campuses. Around one million Florida residents have state issued concealed carry licenses/permits.
http://tbo.com/news/education/guns-on-campus-bill-stalled-amid-faculty-opposition-20150413/
I doubt many do. And in Texas, one must be 21 years old to get a license. That means most college students who are eligible are well into their junior year.
The statistics prove, over and over, that a loaded gun is far more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting than it is to be involved in self-defense. No one thinks THEIR gun will be the next one in the news. The problem is, if you have a gun you can use quickly enough to defend yourself, it’s ready for an accident too.
That’s the main reason I have never owned a gun and never would. Too many ways it can be used against you or result in some kind of horrible accident. That’s jmo, I don’t have any statistics to back up my feelings.
DH mulled over the idea of giving D2, who lives alone in a house, a gun and gun training. But she is a tiny little thing, and I could so see her being overpowered and that gun used against her. So instead, we got her a good security system, she actually lives in a pretty safe neighborhood, and about half the time she is there, our dog is with her.
Fascinating how all the bad*** wannabes think they could magically defend themselves against a bad guy. How many trained shooters were at Fort Hood and weren’t able to take down the major who shot them up?
It’s a bubba fantasy IMO.
I can at least comprehend having a gun in your home on the grounds of someone breaking in. But actually going out and about to the grocery store, dry cleaner, coffee shop, movies, first date (as awctnb suggests) with a gun? What a masturbatory fantasy.
My dad loved guns and had quite a few in the house. My mother disliked guns but never complained, which I thought was odd. Dad said his guns weren’t loaded so it was okay. Dad said no kids could ever find the ammunition, so the guns were safe. He just loved his guns.
When my dad passed away and we had to go through the house to sell it we found out why no one could ever find the ammo - he didn’t have any! The safest guns in the world.
“How many trained shooters were at Fort Hood and weren’t able to take down the major who shot them up?”
Everyone in the room with Hassan might have been a trained shooter, but lest you imagine that they all walk around with a pistol on their hip, weapons are strictly controlled on military bases.
The soldiers at Fort Hood were disarmed by base regulations. They could not carry their weapons. They did not have a fighting chance against a bad guy with a gun.
Actually, the argument is just the opposite. Imagine how much less looting there might have been if the rioters knew that the owners of every mom and pop store being looted and burned could have been inside their stores packing heat?
There’s a deterrence in the possibility that the person you are attacking might be armed.
From the number of shootings in Baltimore over the last month, it would be hard to argue that the strictest gun control laws in the United States have resulted in fewer gun-related deaths. LIterally, the only people carrying firearms are criminals. And those criminals have absolutely zero fear that a law abiding citizen might attempt to defend themselves or their property with a gun. No deterrence at all.
I’ve never owned a gun or even shot a gun (except shooting tin cans with a 22 once as a kid). So, I’m not a big NRA advocate, but there it is very difficult to support the argument that strict gun control laws produce any societal benefit. And, is important to weigh the imagined benefit against the Constitution:
“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It does not, for example, read “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed (except on college campuses)”
Actually, that is incorrect. Gun owners know how powerful guns are, as that is why they have the gun in the first place. CCP classes and other gun safety courses are all designed around limiting the amount of accidents.
More importantly, this is totally subjective in accepting one method of accident over another because accidents happen. Just realize the exact same can be said about a car. No one expects their car to be involved in an accident. However, 30,000+ people per year get killed in car accidents and another 2,000,000+ are injured non-fatallty. Accidents involving guns are but a fraction of 1% of total car fatalities and injuries. Yet, people drive on the road without a thought with people who should not be behind the wheel of 3,000lbs of metal moving at 30 to 70 mph.
Or the most useless, depending on your perspective. I am happy that your Dad never was in the position to have to depend on the gun for self or family defense.
Interestingly, my dad was the same re having guns, except there was ammo for them. Everyone in the house was trained how to use them, lock them up etc. We all knew accidents could happen and we were trained and acted in a way to minimize those chances.
More importantly, what is an intellectual non-sequitor is because accidents happen with guns (as with anything else deadly), then some think they can tell everyone else they cannot have guns. It is fine if someone does not want to afford themselves a method of defense, but this concept that it means taking the choice from others is just trying to force me to be as helpless as you. I’ll pass on that, thanks.
That was not always the case. It was Clinton who disarmed the bases in some misguided concept it would make bases safer because of less guns. Go figure. It is like putting a target on their backs for terrorists and other anti-military crazies, e.g., Hassan.
And why do you think the military doesn’t want everyone walking around with a gun even though they are highly trained? But Bubba McRedneck walking around Safeway is going to save the day if someone butts in front of him in line.
Its just so compensation- for- small-body-parts thinking. Get a Corvette instead.
We need Texas to balance out the idiotic things brought up for court review in California.
If I’m understanding correctly, this new law allows only those people who have concealed-carry permits (about 850,000 people in the state), to conceal-carry their guns on public college campuses as well, subject to gun-free zone limitations.
I agree with those who think concerns about this law are overblown. Criminals are going to carry their guns wherever they want regardless of the law, and already no one knows whether a student is unlawfully armed or not. I like the idea that some licensed, law-abiding citizens may (or may not) be carrying concealed weapons. I won’t be carrying one, but I will benefit because every bad guy will have to wonder who around him is armed if he cares about staying alive.
When I’m out and about anywhere in Florida I just assume that the other guy has a gun on him. Even some 85 year old grannies carry guns in their purses even when they have arthritic hands that can’t even lift two lbs. of anything much less a Glock 19 pistol.
I did not suggest it. I was responding to a poster who said that it was the female’s fault if she were raped and not packing a gun.
Overall though, I have nothing against any female having a concealed weapons permit and having it on her all the time, if she so chooses - on first date, last date, when married, etc. None whatsoever.
I wonder how many date rape victims were left wishing that they could have been more self-defense proactive and did have a weapon? Of course, it is not their fault, but this concept that the only choice is non-defense or very limited defense and getting raped or beaten is too passive for my tastes.
I rather my sister or wife having a fighting chance to come out the other side thinking she defended herself and stopped /got the ■■■■■■■ - that to me is empowering. Having to spend the rest of one’s life on a therapist’s couch strikes me as the reverse of empowering. But, obviously, we all have our different perspectives.
You need help. Your sexual fixation with the meaning of guns and the need to keep calling people “bubba, redneck and thug” and other names because they have guns are rather telling. You have too many issues to be addressed here. Call your therapist.
People who have guns do not find the need to call people who choose not to defend themselves with guns, “stupid nitwits.” Nor do we find the need to say,“What an idiot. He was just asking for it and deserved whatever crime happened.”
In reality, we feel sorry for people who think that lying down and taking it and being dependent on the kindness of a criminal and hoping the police gets there are forms of defense. However, if you choose to do as much, then we wish you the best. We do draw the line when you think you have the right to make us as defenseless as you.
LOL…
Maybe a hairy legged, patchouli oil and tie dyed shirt wearing, certain president brings me to a frothing swoon type of therapist could help with the Bubba fixation.
Then again, it’s okay to label people red-necks, bubba, southern hick etc. It just proves how very cool, educated and superior one is when compared to …said rednecks, bubbas and southern gun toting, John Wayne watching baffons. It’s okay to stereotype as long as it is the CORRECT and acceptable PC stereotype. Otherwise…well you’re just …a bubba, redneck fool and need to be edjubacated.
Not true. Check the date:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a272176.pdf
It was Bush I who “disarmed the bases in some misguided concept…yadda yadda”
No question!
I found it an interesting (and under-reported) story, that Texas (under Gov Rick Perry and Attorney Gen Greg Abbott) set up a new constitutional law division with the explicit directive of going out and finding constitutional cases to push to the appellate courts. It’s also been somewhat under-reported that Ted Cruz clerked for a the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and has been one of the more frequent litigators in recent Supreme Court cases.
For example, on gun control law, he wrote the amicusi brief on behalf of 31 states in the 2008 Heller case that upheld a lower court ruling that overtuned Washington DC’s ban on the legal possesion of handguns: