YES
NO
that's something every individual should know before getting a permit and deciding to carry. bc fact of the matter is, if they're not ready to actually pull the trigger, then they probably won't draw their weapon in the situation you describe anyway.Originally Posted by fcman
yes
no, for which i am thankful
bc i know myself
wrong, yes you can.
take online courses? so basically the way to ensure your safety is to never leave the house? what about home invasions which are becoming all the more common?
ONE school shooting is enough to justify carrying on campus imo bc it's one too many.
tracking gun sales has nothing to do w/the recent spat of shootings, maybe you didn't hear but all the guns used in the VT shooting, the NIU shooting and even the kid at the mall in Oklahoma were obtained LEGALLY.
Its proven people with conceal permits are not as likely to pull a stunt like that. IDK If its a good idea or not though.
no, but i am moving it to wallstreet/politics. kinda impressed by the rather civil posts in here so far and would like to keep it that way.
Thought about it, Nah not a good idea.
exactly, until such a time as when it really mattered. when was the last time you saw someone that you KNEW was carrying concealed?
most ppl don't understand that as it stands now, a LOT of ppl carry EVERYWHERE regardless of the law and don't get noticed in any way bc they refuse to be caught off guard.
I am not scared of the world, so that was for the guy who really needs a gun on campus to feel safe.
Well many more shootings will occur if everyone starts carrying
Last edited by TIGERJC; 04-25-2008 at 10:54 AM.
2006 Evo IX - Bolt ons
I think they should stiffen the laws so that getting a license is more difficult. I know of several people who can get licenced when they really arnt responsible. Just by reading posts on IA, I wouldnt want 95% of IA to get licenced.
I dont have a problem with carrying on school property, if only done by experienced individuals. In the heat of things, your attitude and actions change dramatically- which bothers me.
I vote no. Not a good idea.
i'm sorry but i have no clue what you just tried to say there...
agreed, i think most all states should adopt utah's training/requirement regiment in order to obtain a CCW. i mean, there is a reason that utah's permit is recognized by more states than any other out there.
EDIT: ^^ I took too long to post.
Allow it.
They just need to force CL applicants to take training courses and some sort of "scenario" class before they receive their CL. See, MOST concealed licenses carriers do this now anyway or were already well trained!
Your side of the argument is just as flawed because it assumes that people DO have any sense of self responsability. It assumes that people are always going to have their safety switch on, never going to pull out the gun during times of extreme anger and what not, etc...
What??? If we start limiting? Wasnt there a bill passed allowing people to carry inside restaurants and marta? And now you want to be able to carry inside schools? You tell me, where does it stop?
That's obsured. You cannot take random posts by people rather they be a inside joke or not to heart. That's ignorant. If you don't know them IRL, you don't know them. You may know their personalities but you have no idea about things of that nature based on their posts.
\
It's not an assumption when it's backed up with facts.
So its a fact that people who have their concealed weapons permit never make mistakes and never **** up?
Quote me where I said that. You're ignorant as balls if you disagree with my post.So its a fact that people who have their concealed weapons permit never make mistakes and never **** up?
Prior military service or some kind of training should be required but I say yes.
What did u mean then? What are the facts that prove that everyone has self responsability?
Never said everybody. I said most people who CC do. Ask anyone.
If you say yes or no, please explain as too why.
I'm off to class, I will be back around 9 too continue.
Believe it or not, they're still some college students who are that immature. Jealousy is a *****. Have we forgotten about the high and middle schools as well. Maybe we should allow them to carry as well.originally posted by JConner
no you would not! People that can get a lisence to carry are not idiots that would shoot some guy because he looked at his girlfriend.Early well known cases started mostly in middle/high school and progressed to colleges.
While it might be safer, I don't see the law getting passed. In most of the cases, they have serious mental baggage and they planned their attack. Also they ended up committing suicide, after their shooting spree. You really think that guy will care if students around him are carrying? More than likely, he'll find the "ideal" place. He's still gonna shoot, even if he gets lit the **** up anyways.
i would say it's a fact that almost all the ppl that go crazy w/guns DON'T have a legal carry permit.So its a fact that people who have their concealed weapons permit never make mistakes and never **** up?
that bill was passed but has NOT been signed into law. not to mention we are hardly the first state to allow carry into such places.
what i refer to is the liberals that would sooner do away w/the 2nd amendment than anything else. "leaders" such as our great mayor who was just quoted yesterday saying:
“The presumption has to be, if this bill passes, that there are concealed weapons by people who just might get mad with them,” Franklin said. “The presumption needs to be, in order to have a safe city, that there are no concealed weapons. And only those who are acting criminally might have them.”
Wow! What truly amazes me is that people with such lack of general common sense are allowed to roam free, not only in the halls of said "higher" learning institutions, but down Main Street, U.S.A.
#1. Police and their departments ARE NOT designed in any way shape or form with the ability, nor more importantly the capabilities to protect EVERYONE at ALL TIMES. It is a physical IMPOSSIBILITY to achieve this. You would need such an astronomically large police force in order to physically have enough police officers roaming the streets to then be in the correct proximity to stop a crime as it is happening. Which begs the LOGICAL question.....WHO exactly is responsible for protecting ME? Answer? YOU. That's it. YOU. The police can help. The police may even be able to stumble upon a scene and prevent some crimes. But the bulk of their job and work go towards RESPONDING to calls AFTER the crime has been committed. So if you're banking on the Police ALONE to somehow protect you from being killed or seriously injured from some random unexpected crime, then you're either A: retarded, or B: have no logic.
#2. CCW holders are NOT police officers. They are merely people who apply the logic from above to their daily lives. They DON'T wait around for police to save their lives. They have a mindset that IF NECESSARY they will protect themselves and maybe others. Do you want to be in the same room with someone like that when some lunatic is walking down a hallway taking human target practice or would you rather just coward under a desk and wait until it's YOUR turn?
#3. Gun ownership has a ton of benefits, one of which is as a deterrent. Criminals, even those that seem like they've lost their minds, steer clear of guns and dogs. Why? Because there are TONS of softer targets for them to hit IF that's their purpose. Do you really think that some kid that's pissed off at the world would walk into that school and start shooting IF he KNEW there was a high possibility the "school" would shoot BACK????? Ummm, NOOOOO is the likely answer.
Let's look at it another way:
Prisoners, as in STILL IN prison, HATE prison life and swear they will "never do it again" WHILE they are IN prison. Judging by the return rate of most prisons, that tune changes the minute their feet hit the outside. Right or wrong? Well, go ask ANYONE that has EVER been SHOT if they would want to be shot again. I'd be willing to bet that short of the occasional wannabe hardas$, 100% of them would say "no". Which do you think is a more powerful deterrent? Now take that and compound it by applying it to a "criminal" who would rather go back to jail than get shot. Still think that prison, police, and getting in trouble are deterrents to these people? Hell no. Getting shot damn sure is though. This is why and how guns deter crime. If YOU had to choose between getting 3 squares and not having to work for a living albeit confined or getting SHOT and possibly being DEAD.....which would YOU choose? Do you think a criminal is any different in that respect?
#4. Why do people think that if you carry a gun you are suddenly and automatically reverted back to the Wild West and become crazed with wanting to shoot everything? That is moronic. I'm willing to bet that most of you that I've met IRL had no clue that I was packing when I met you, yet there is very high possibility that I was. That's the purpose of a CCW. It's not to walk around with two holsters and a bandolier full of shells on your chest. I would much rather stand next to someone that takes a proactive approach to protecting themselves/their family, than stand next to some idiot that happens to run faster than me.....as in, "I don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than YOU....."
#5. Why do so many of you want to succumb to someone else whose only advantage is that he/she is using a weapon? A gun is nothing more than a weapon.....a tool. It is inanimate. Mere paper weight until it's picked up. Right? So why would anyone coward down to another human being just because they happened to have picked up that tool first???? I'm a firm believer of the addage that says, "don't bring a knife to a gun fight.." If you have the gall to pull out a gun on me, by God you'd better be ready to get shot yourself because that's exactly what's about to happen to you. If not, then put your gun away and move on.
#6. I'm sick and tired of people insinuating that people that carry guns are somehow "paranoid" or "scared" and that is the reason they carry. I'm going to say for the record that I've gotten in more fist fights than 95% of everyone reading this long ass post. So I can say w/o remorse that I'm by far NOT scared to trade lumps with someone. Now only if someone had taught the same things to the CRIMINALS.....
#7. I know LOTS of LEO's. I mean LOTS. I almost became one myself not too long ago. I can attest to the FACT that not all of them are marksmen. So, if you're depending on "police" to somehow come when summoned by some great big "P" being flashed up in the night sky, ala Batman......it's not the way it happens. They are human just like anyone else. They just happen to step up and do a job 99% of us aren't willing to do. Like I said, that's been my calling, so I'm not knocking it at all. I'm just tired of everyone thinking that is the ONLY answer to crime. It's not.
In closing, I'd like for the pundits to think about one thing:
Why do you bother worrying about the person that announces he/she is willing to defend themself when this world is chock full of losers that don't have the guts to? Worry about the coward that plots and schemes to take what belongs to you instead of the person that is willing to HELP you keep it.
Last edited by Jaimecbr900; 04-25-2008 at 01:57 PM.
Wow! What truly amazes me is that people with such lack of general common sense are allowed to roam free, not only in the halls of said "higher" learning institutions, but down Main Street, U.S.A.
#1. Police and their departments ARE NOT designed in any way shape or form with the ability, nor more importantly the capabilities to protect EVERYONE at ALL TIMES. It is a physical IMPOSSIBILITY to achieve this. You would need such an astronomically large police force in order to physically have enough police officers roaming the streets to then be in the correct proximity to stop a crime as it is happening. Which begs the LOGICAL question.....WHO exactly is responsible for protecting ME? Answer? YOU. That's it. YOU. The police can help. The police may even be able to stumble upon a scene and prevent some crimes. But the bulk of their job and work go towards RESPONDING to calls AFTER the crime has been committed. So if you're banking on the Police ALONE to somehow protect you from being killed or seriously injured from some random unexpected crime, then you're either A: retarded, or B: have no logic.
#2. CCW holders are NOT police officers. They are merely people who apply the logic from above to their daily lives. They DON'T wait around for police to save their lives. They have a mindset that IF NECESSARY they will protect themselves and maybe others. Do you want to be in the same room with someone like that when some lunatic is walking down a hallway taking human target practice or would you rather just coward under a desk and wait until it's YOUR turn?
#3. Gun ownership has a ton of benefits, one of which is as a deterrent. Criminals, even those that seem like they've lost their minds, steer clear of guns and dogs. Why? Because there are TONS of softer targets for them to hit IF that's their purpose. Do you really think that some kid that's pissed off at the world would walk into that school and start shooting IF he KNEW there was a high possibility the "school" would shoot BACK????? Ummm, NOOOOO is the likely answer.
Let's look at it another way:
Prisoners, as in STILL IN prison, HATE prison life and swear they will "never do it again" WHILE they are IN prison. Judging by the return rate of most prisons, that tune changes the minute their feet hit the outside. Right or wrong? Well, go ask ANYONE that has EVER been SHOT if they would want to be shot again. I'd be willing to bet that short of the occasional wannabe hardas$, 100% of them would say "no". Which do you think is a more powerful deterrent? Now take that and compound it by applying it to a "criminal" who would rather go back to jail than get shot. Still think that prison, police, and getting in trouble are deterrents to these people? Hell no. Getting shot damn sure is though. This is why and how guns deter crime. If YOU had to choose between getting 3 squares and not having to work for a living albeit confined or getting SHOT and possibly being DEAD.....which would YOU choose? Do you think a criminal is any different in that respect?
#4. Why do people think that if you carry a gun you are suddenly and automatically reverted back to the Wild West and become crazed with wanting to shoot everything? That is moronic. I'm willing to bet that most of you that I've met IRL had no clue that I was packing when I met you, yet there is very high possibility that I was. That's the purpose of a CCW. It's not to walk around with two holsters and a bandolier full of shells on your chest. I would much rather stand next to someone that takes a proactive approach to protecting themselves/their family, than stand next to some idiot that happens to run faster than me.....as in, "I don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than YOU....."
#5. Why do so many of you want to succumb to someone else whose only advantage is that he/she is using a weapon? A gun is nothing more than a weapon.....a tool. It is inanimate. Mere paper weight until it's picked up. Right? So why would anyone coward down to another human being just because they happened to have picked up that tool first???? I'm a firm believer of the addage that says, "don't bring a knife to a gun fight.." If you have the gall to pull out a gun on me, by God you'd better be ready to get shot yourself because that's exactly what's about to happen to you. If not, then put your gun away and move on.
#6. I'm sick and tired of people insinuating that people that carry guns are somehow "paranoid" or "scared" and that is the reason they carry. I'm going to say for the record that I've gotten in more fist fights than 95% of everyone reading this long ass post. So I can say w/o remorse that I'm by far NOT scared to trade lumps with someone. Now only if someone had taught the same things to the CRIMINALS.....
#7. I know LOTS of LEO's. I mean LOTS. I almost became one myself not too long ago. I can attest to the FACT that not all of them are marksmen. So, if you're depending on "police" to somehow come when summoned by some great big "P" being flashed up in the night sky, ala Batman......it's not the way it happens. They are human just like anyone else. They just happen to step up and do a job 99% of us aren't willing to do. Like I said, that's been my calling, so I'm not knocking it at all. I'm just tired of everyone thinking that is the ONLY answer to crime. It's not.
In closing, I'd like for the pundits to think about one thing:
Why do you bother worrying about the person that announces he/she is willing to defend themself when this world is chock full of losers that don't have the guts to? Worry about the coward that plots and schemes to take what belongs to you instead of the person that is willing to HELP you keep it.
Jaime, you are my bro and you make some very good points.
However, I am going to play a bit of devil's advocate here.
This is another example of trying to tackle a problem with another problem. There are wacko's with gun on campus. So let's give everyone a gun and let them carry. Isn't the real problem the wacko with the gun in the first place? I think it would be far more effective keeping the wacko off-campus to begin with. There are a lot of measures we can take i.e. Metal detectors, increased security, increased pat-downs, dogs.. yes... i know.. it sounds a bit over the top, but ever been flying lately? Is there a reason they won't let passengers carry on plane's ONLY US marshalls (and some pilots)?
This whole debate rests on a lot of assumptions: Assumptions that ALL licensed gun carriers would be able to stop the thread point blank with one-shot, one kill. that all carriers are totally CAPABLE of knowing their weapons and extensively trained in proper usage. That ALL carriers are mentally stable enough to warrant them carrying a deadly device. That ALL carriers can exersice enough control when going friday night binge drinking not to pull out their weapon because someone called them Cracker or the N* word. That all carriers would remember to put the safety on at all times to prevent accidental discharges.
And everyone assumes the 'Hero' scenario where the good kid with a gun will take the bad guy in class and save the day. I think the real world scenario would be quite different. No one knows how you would react in such situation unless you actually find yourself in one. I predict a lot of kids running would get shot by stray bullets rather than by the wacko himself.
Now it does not mean I am against guns or against carrying. I just think that there is a time and place to have a weapon, and other areas who should remain 'off-limits. But of course, it seems we can have neither. most campusus don't provide appropriate measures to ensure a student's safety, so it is up to the individual to defend himself.
I just think issues like these should be carefully evaluated, as it is not as easy a 'yes' or 'no' solution as it seems.
I got free clear tails with my ride.....
it's always hard to follow up one of jaime's posts, as he has a way of taking words right out of your mouth. but i would like to just throw a few more points onto some of what he's already said. with regards to:
#1 apparently ppl here have never heard of the Peelian Principles, which are the basic foundation of modern policing.
1) The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2) The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
3) Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4) The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5) Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6) Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7) Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8) Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9) The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
#3 absolutely, i've said it once and i'll say it a million times more, there's a VERY good reason why shootings happen in schools, malls, restaurants as opposed to a gun store or a gun range!
#4 wild wild west mentality or not, if you allowed guns EVERYWHERE today to those who had a concealed carry permit, i will openly admit there's a great chance that some of those idiots will blast off and do something stupid. however, i guarantee you that those idiots will quickly kill each other off bc the simple fact of the matter is, an idiot with a gun is still an idiot.
Jamie's post is the best post I think I've ever read. Amazing, Jamie.
I am with you on all this man great logic.
Thanks, man.
all that's missing is the name of the school/college above the door...
Jaime's post was awesome. Reps to him.
I agree that guns should be allowed on campus to those with CCW permits.
I find it extremely moronic to think that since a college would allow students with permits to carry, then every other person out there would instantly have guns. I assume that most college students do not have CCW permits, so there would be a relatively low number of armed students compared to unarmed (unlike the Wild West style ideas that people jump to). This low number is still a great way to deter shootings, and I don't think it would result to additional shootings because of hotheads. Anybody with a CCW permit is highly documented of having a gun and have had at least some training on when to use their gun and when not to. I think they would add to the safety of college campuses rather than lower it.
UGA: Everybody is laughing at us this year.
Yes, Yes, And to the last question because Its my job not too. I personally agree with guns on campus, I am also all for public hangings ( but thats another topic). IThink about it this way average response time for PD/FD/EMS is 8 mins not to mention a S.W.A.T call out is about 15-30 mins ( average), A Glock hand gun can fire >900 RMP. I would rather there be someone in the room with a gun to handle the issue in < 1 second. In all reality I am hoping they will OK Fire/EMS personnel to carry fire arms. I don't know if any of you have had the joy of being in the middle of a domestic dispute but it is not fun, and even though we are there to help they still want to get us for helping.
Try not. Do or Do not.
i dont think that would be wise. too many problems with college kids. girlfriend probelms, room mate problems, money problems... bad grades.. bad prof... too much partying. college kids have so much emo **** going on i def dont think they should be walking around strapped.
You do understand that 75%+ of all college students aren't 21, right? So that means that we are only talking about mostly seniors that are even old enough to carry in the first place. Factor out that the majority of seniors are more worried about chasing split tails than they are about applying for a CCW......what it REALLY means is a very small percentage of 21+ year olds that are way less likely to be your "emo" kids crying over getting jilted by some girl.
So, once again, the perception of possibly getting shot by one of these "seniors" is far more powerful than the fact.
Look at it like this:
Parents that use spank will attest that they hardly ever spank. Why? Because all they had to do was spank once or twice and after that their kids BELIEVE that if they SAY they are going to they will. That means they hardly, if ever, have to after that. The PERCEPTION is just as powerful if not MORE than the lack thereof.
Follow that? Same thing will happen in schools, malls, and/or any public place when one or two John Q. Publics stop some maniac from going on a huge killing spree. Criminals and idiots will then start thinking twice before thinking that's just easy sitting duck prey.
You should stick to lurking.
I have not read past the first few posts, but anyways if this hasnt been said, what if two students start fighting, student 1 comes at student 2 with chair attempting to hit him with it, student 2 pulls out his peice and shoots student 1. now would that be considered stand your ground law? if it would be, how often do you think it would happen? Anyone ever seen the southpark episode, where the guys are hunting and cant shoot the animals unless they are "coming right for them."
it's going to be one messy case...unless student 1 comes out of nowhere and tries to attack student 2...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
