carlfense Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Fort Hood has gun free zones. There was not armed security where the shooting took place, they had to wait for MP to respond to the call. Yep, 10 minutes .Now, were there other security breaches that happened which allowed the perp to go through with his act? It seems likely. Were those MPs armed? Were those MPs allowed to carry in gun free zones? (Those are rhetorical, you don't have to actually answer. ) So you are disputing the CNN report that states that the guard was on lunch at the time, and not where he normally would be? You're trying to stretch things a little far, aren't you? Going from the guard was "not present" to "not where he would normally be." Also forgetting that he exchanged fire with the shooters. I also fail to see how a ban on guns would have stopped these two from using bombs and the reported "hand grenades." How many students were killed by their bombs and hand grenades? The answer might interest you. Anyways, I can't recall saying that we should ban guns . . . The Do. Co. Courthouse has armed sheriff's deputies as you walk in the door . . . Military bases though . . . those are quite defenseless. Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 You can take away all of the types of guns and clips all you want. You can arm someone at the door or in the classroom all you want. It still does not eliminate the element of surprise. Take the guy from the movie theatre at the Batman opening. He walked in from an exit and people thought he was part of the show. If he would have been armed with say only a standard handgun and a shotgun, and the entire crowd was armed, he still would have killed some people by the element of surprise. Would he have killed or wounded more than he did? Most likely no. Would he have been shot dead instead of going to trial? Most likely, yes. But it would have been no less tragic as some people would have lost their lives even if they were armed. Link to comment
Enhance Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 So this (and DC) are perfect bexamples are why strict gun control laws won't work here. Thanks. It's better than maintaining the status quo. Outside of strict gun control laws, what other options do we have? We have high gun violence because of severe socio-economic problems and relatively lax gun laws. And it's far easier to take the guns out of a situation than to take years of developed socio-economic problems out. That's not to say I wouldn't love to see a place like North Omaha shape up, but it's just not realistic in a short amount of time. Gun control laws can be effective from get-go. Incorrect. What does disarming law abiding citizens due, besides putting them more at the mercy of criminals? Why not deal with the problem instead of looking for feel good answers that don't solve the problem. As we see, criminals don't care about the laws, do you really expect them to give a damn about another touchy feely law? How many of these crimes are perpetrated by normal, decent, law abiding citizens? Few, if any. So why are we discussing punishing those people? Because you want to make more innocent victims? That is the only answer. You're absolutely right, it's not the law abiding citizens commiting crimes, it's the people who obtain guns illegally. And while we sit here and bicker about socio-economic issues and bad parenting, another person is being shot and killed by an illegally obtained weapon. Law-abiding citizens can still get their weapons, it just needs to be far more difficult to do so. Furthermore, people do not need assault rifles or any of that nonsense on their personal properties, for reasons I've already outlined. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 5 Mind-Blowing Facts Nobody Told You About Guns pretty good read. the gun debate is pretty complicated. here is where i am at: guns should be hard to get, but people who can responsibly own guns should be able to. (now this is where people will get riled up) guns should be treated as a privilege, not a right. Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/news/article/jim-carrey-assault-rifle-owners-have-very-little-their-body-or-soul-worth-protecting Link to comment
sd'sker Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting now we know why jim carrey and jenny mccarthy got along so well for so long. Link to comment
Junior Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting Ok... so one guy said something dumb. You prefer the NRA making sure that potentially abusive spouses keep their guns? Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting Ok... so one guy said something dumb. You prefer the NRA making sure that potentially abusive spouses keep their guns? I don't like the NRA, nor have I said that I support them, so we've got that clear. They're merely a political organization, which like the democrats and republicans, cannot be trusted... And that guy saying something dumb, is only being heard due to his popularity. I mean, he makes crappy movies, so this gives him the ability to pass judgement? Just because he's got the ability to communicate via social media, doesn't make him any less a dumbass... Link to comment
beanman Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/adam-lanza-newtown-search-warrants-released-131056789.html Argue away! Link to comment
Junior Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting Ok... so one guy said something dumb. You prefer the NRA making sure that potentially abusive spouses keep their guns? I don't like the NRA, nor have I said that I support them, so we've got that clear. They're merely a political organization, which like the democrats and republicans, cannot be trusted... And that guy saying something dumb, is only being heard due to his popularity. I mean, he makes crappy movies, so this gives him the ability to pass judgement? Just because he's got the ability to communicate via social media, doesn't make him any less a dumbass... I agree, and I don't give a 1/2 of a crap about what Jim Carrey has to say about anything. He's free to speak his mind and you are free not to listen. I guess my point was, why are you getting your underwear all in a knot and complaining about "the media and hollywood" when it is really only about what one guy said? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 The sad thing is there is a hefty amount of our population that does listen to what some numb skull in Hollywood has to say like it's the most profound thing ever said. Link to comment
Junior Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 The sad thing is there is a hefty amount of our population that does listen to what some numb skull in Hollywood has to say like it's the most profound thing ever said. And sadly, there is a hefty amount of our population that listens to what Bill O'Reilly or Wayne LaPierre have to say like it's the most profound thing ever said. Link to comment
carlfense Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting That is stupid. Link to comment
Ziggy Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 . . . those in the media and Hollywood are portraying those normal folks that own guns as threats. What are you referring to exactly? Do you have some examples? What Jim Carrey tweeted about gun owners a few weeks ago... http://cnsnews.com/n...orth-protecting That is stupid. haha, the video he did almost makes the anti-gun movement look stupid. The stuff almost makes him look as crazy as some of the far right/left. Making a stupid video does nothing to further the conversation, and I would argue that it actually entrenches the pro-gun side to not want to make concessions with people that back up Jim Carrey. Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I agree. Ray Stevens tried it with Obamacare. Link to comment
Recommended Posts