• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Horrifying Details Emerge in Hearing on Virginia Tech Murder

Not your property, not your rules. That's that. Don't like schools which won't allow you to carry on campus, don't go to schools that won't allow you to carry on campus. What you're wishing to do is going to open a can of worms in which no one wins.
 
Not your property, not your rules. That's that. Don't like schools which won't allow you to carry on campus, don't go to schools that won't allow you to carry on campus. What you're wishing to do is going to open a can of worms in which no one wins.

Yeah I guess.. it just pisses me off to no end that they see a problem of rising violence..

Yet they hide behind this.. "Schools are safe" facade, while people are dying.. and they're actively denying people a right to protect themselves.

blah

in my favorite words when it comes to Concealed Carry.. don't ask, don't tell. :)
 
I agree with this to a point, but on both sides.

I remember when you had recent killings involving a bunch of guns people started coming out of the woodwork saying we needed more gun laws.

It'd be like looking at this and going...

"We need to ban knives! Knives kill people! This guy probably walked int oa Bed Bath and Beyond and got his killing tool. Knives are made to stab things, which kills things, so they must be banned cause this person used one".

Absolutely! I hate this worse than the other actually, since it is liberals in the case you describe doing it, and get embarrassed by them.
 
if I'm actively denied the right to protect myself.. those that are denying that right are responsible for my safety. As they're the ones that put me in to that situation.




I agree, in NYC however, it was determined that the police are under no "legal obligation" for your security.
 
I agree, in NYC however, it was determined that the police are under no "legal obligation" for your security.

Im not sure there would be a single police officer in the country if Officers were under "legal obligation" for your security.
 
Im not sure there would be a single police officer in the country if Officers were under "legal obligation" for your security.




there isn't. And they shouldn't be. That said, we should not be barred from choosing the right tools to be the arbritrators of ours own security.
 
I'm sorry, but I think this is just another case of the "good old days." Truth of the matter is that most people are ******s and will not do things that place themselves in serious danger in order to help others. I'm sure that everyone on DP would have immediately jumped into action, disarmed the attacker, tended to the victim's wounds, and then decapitated and crucified the attacker (to show we mean business!), but in the real world, most people are just going to be concerned about themselves, regardless of age or whether they "have testicles."
It boils down to basic human deceny IMO, one would have to be very callous to stand by and watch someone get murdered at knifepoint, surely someone could have rallied at least a few counter attackers to action, a knife is worthless in a situation where multiple people have armed themselves with something, this was a cafe, so there had to be trays, ceramic cups for bludgeoning, chairs, and silverware.
With any luck the attacker would have acquiesed until security could apprehend him, but as it stands, he had free reign over the situation.
 
So here is another scenario for you, the campus allows guns and a criminal goes on a shootting spree. A student fires at the criminal, but hits and kills an innocent person. Both the criminal and innocent person die.

Is the campus held responsible for allowing guns? Is the student that fired at the criminal? I would be willing to bet in a heartbeat that the family of the innocent person would sue and win.

Every mass shooting spree has occured in "gun free zones". Obviously this policy is failing to make student safe, however the "What if someone shoots the wrong person" argument is strong enough for some to deny people the chance to save themselves.

Amazing.
 
Every mass shooting spree has occured in "gun free zones". Obviously this policy is failing to make student safe, however the "What if someone shoots the wrong person" argument is strong enough for some to deny people the chance to save themselves.

Amazing.

Source?

~10 character rule bites~
 
Source?

~10 character rule bites~


There is the source cop out again.

Apparently you haven't payed attention to national news wires in the last decade.
 
There is the source cop out again.

Apparently you haven't payed attention to national news wires in the last decade.

Apparently you cannot prove your claims, in which case they are as likely to be made up as real.
 
Apparently you cannot prove your claims, in which case they are as likely to be made up as real.
You sir, have messed with the wrong troll.

May my wooden spoon spanketh your ass a thousand times with requests for....


Caine said:
Source? .......
 
Apparently you cannot prove your claims, in which case they are as likely to be made up as real.

April 16, 2007 America North  Blacksburg, Virginia Virginia Tech massacre[255][256] 0,000,033 33[citation needed] Seung-Hui Cho shoots and kills 32 people, and wounds 25 others, in two separate shootings on the campus of Virginia Tech. Cho later committed suicide.
01966-08-01 August 01, 1966 America North Austin, Texas University of Texas massacre 0,000,016 16 University of Texas was the site of a massacre by Charles Whitman, who killed his mother and wife at their homes before killing 14 and wounding 32 others at the University atop the university tower before the police killed him.
01991-10-16 October 16, 1991 America North Killeen, Texas Luby's massacre 0,000,023 23[citation needed] George Jo Hennard drove his pickup truck into a Luby's Cafeteria and shot and killed 22 people, wounded another 20 and then committed suicide by shooting himself.
[196]

01999-04-20 April 20, 1999 America North Littleton, Colorado Columbine High School massacre 0,000,015 15>[242][citation needed] Two teenagers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold open fire on their classmates on April 20, 1999 at Columbine High School, killing 12 students and one teacher before committing suicide.
01993-01-08 January 08, 1993 America North Palatine, Illinois Brown's Chicken massacre 0,000,007 7 Seven people were murdered at the Brown's Chicken and Pasta in Palatine[207]


[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres]List of events named massacres - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


All but one were committed in places or under circumstances where concealed carry was banned, and that one was in Illinois so CC was probably banned there too.



I posted a PAGE full of vital stats, dozens of posts ago, about issues relating to this debate, which you completely ignored...so I think your requests for sources are no longer considered legit.



G.
 
Last edited:
You sir, have messed with the wrong troll.

May my wooden spoon spanketh your ass a thousand times with requests for....

You might go through my posts. I tend to source my claims up front. I tend to state when I am merely offering an opinion. I expect others to do the same, and I will not hold it against any one to ask me to back up any claim I make with a source. That is how to debate, you make a claim of position, and then back it up with facts. You apparently lack facts.
 
List of events named massacres - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All but one were committed in places or under circumstances where concealed carry was banned.



I posted a PAGE full of vital stats, dozens of posts ago, about issues relating to this debate, which you completely ignored...so I think your requests for sources are no longer considered legit.



G.

Ummmm...the list goes back to 390 AD. If you are just counting the ones from the 20th century, I count 55, and your claim about concealed carry being banned in all but 1 falls apart.

21st century, there are 4 listed worldwide, and nothing at all is said about concealed carry laws.
 
Want some more facts about whether guns are net-good or net-bad? You've raised all kinds of questions, about accidental shootings, permit-holder-reliability, effectiveness of private arms in self-defense, etc...well if you need proofs, you get proofs. Here ya go...it's a lot to chew on, don't choke.




the Kleck Study:
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

Number Of Protective Uses Of Firearms In U.S: Projected at a minimum of 2.5 million cases annually, equal to 1% of total U.S. population each year. Criminal assailants are killed by their victims or others in only about 0.1%, and wounded in only about 1.0% of incidents as described above. Most such crimes are prevented by mere presence of a firearm in the hands of an intended victim.(Dr. Gary Kleck, PhD, Florida State University, Targeting Guns, 1998)


A 1993 Gallup Poll study (hardly a conservative partisan group) found a likely annual rate of defensive gun use (DGU) of 777,153 per year in the US.
An LA Times 1994 study found an implied national DGU of 3,609,682.

National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).

Data from the NCVS imply that each year there are only about 68,000 defensive uses of guns in connection with assaults and robberies, [16] or about 80,000 to 82,000 if one adds in uses linked with household burglaries. [17] These figures are less than one ninth of the estimates implied by the results of at least thirteen other surveys, summarized in Table 1, most of which have been previously reported. [18] The NCVS estimates imply that about 0.09 of 1% of U.S. households experience a defensive gun use (DGU) in any one year, compared to the Mauser survey's estimate of 3.79% of households over a five year period, or about 0.76% in any one year, assuming an even distribution over the five year period, and no repeat uses. [19]
The strongest evidence that a measurement is inaccurate is that it is inconsistent with many other independent measurements or observations of the same phenomenon; indeed, some would argue that this is ultimately the only way of knowing that a measurement is wrong. Therefore, one might suppose that the gross inconsistency of the NCVS-based estimates with all other known estimates, each derived from sources with no known flaws even remotely substantial enough to account for nine-to-one, or more, discrepancies, would be sufficient to persuade any serious scholar that the NCVS estimates are unreliable.
...The NCVS was not designed to estimate how often people resist crime using a gun. It was designed primarily to estimate national victimization levels; it incidentally happens to include a few self-protection questions which include response categories covering resistance with a gun.


The Kleck study concluded that there were possibly as many as 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year, many of which involved no shots fired or no one injured, and many of which were not reported:
The most technically sound estimates presented in Table 2 are those based on the shorter one-year recall period that rely on Rs' first-hand accounts of their own experiences (person-based estimates). These estimates appear in the first two columns. They indicate that each year in the U.S. there are about 2.2 to 2.5 million DGUs of all types by civilians against humans, with about 1.5 to 1.9 million of the incidents involving use of handguns.

These Wikipedia articles are good sources of general information on concealed-carry permits and related issues.
They include information from both pro and anti perspectives.

Concealed carry in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Carolina reports only 0.2% of their 263,102 holders had their license revoked in the 10 years since they have adopted the law.[61]

Permit holders are a remarkably law-abiding subclass of the population. Florida, which has issued over 1,408,907 permits in twenty one years, has revoked only 166 for a "crime after licensure involving a firearm," and fewer than 4,500 permits for any reason.[62]

More Guns, Less Crime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

John Lott's study is not without controversy, but despite nit-picking about techincal proceedures remains siginficant:
Lott examines the effects of shall issue laws on violent crime across the United States.

His conclusion is that shall issue laws, which allow citizens to carry concealed weapons, steadily decrease violent crime. He explains that this result makes sense because criminals are deterred by the risk of attacking an armed victim. As more citizens arm themselves, the danger to criminals increases.


From an excellent summary page:

Firearms as Used in Crime
Annual Criminal Abuse of Firearms Nationally: Less than 0.2% of all firearms, and less than 0.4% of all handguns. More than 99.8% of all guns, and 99.6% of all handguns are NOT used in criminal activity in any given year.(BATF, FBI)
Crime in the United States
Chance of Any Single Individual Being a Victim of Violent Crime In Their Lifetime: Currently about 65 to 70%, depending on age, profession, lifestyle, geographic and demographic factors.(US DoJ, FBI UCR)

Firearms Accidents and Firearms Safety Education
Fatal Firearms Accidents for All Ages Annually: 1,134 nationwide in 1996. Rate of 0.4 per 100M population. Represents a roughly 90% decrease from record high in 1904. Accident rate is down by 65% since 1930, while U.S. population has doubled and number of privately-owned firearms has quadrupled. Compare to other types of fatal accidents, for all ages: Motor Vehicles 16.7/100M, Falls 4.8/100M, Poisoning 4.0/100M, Drowning 1.7/100M, Fires 1.6/100M, Choking 1.1/100M.(National Safety Council, National Center for Health Statistics, BATF, US Census)

Fatal Firearms Accidents for Children 14 and Under Annually: 138 nationwide in 1996. About 3% of all fatal accidents under age 14. Represents a 75% decrease from record high of 550 in 1975. Compared to other types of fatal accidents for children: Motor Vehicles 44%, Fires 16%, Drowning 14%, Choking 4.5%.(Nat'l Safety Council, Nat'l Center for Health Statistics)

Gun control laws effects on criminals, specifically the Brady law and NICS:
Actual Effect on Criminals:
Nationally convictions for 'attempt to purchase' by disqualified individuals under Brady now total 7 since early 1994. There are now in excess of 20,000 federal, state and local gun laws on the books, yet few if any have proven clearly effective in reducing violence or a criminal's access to firearms. Some 93% of firearms used in crime are reported as stolen or come from some other uncontrollable source.(DPS/BCI, US DoJ, BATF)
 
That's sick, what I don't get is how other people let this happen, I don't necessarily want to ever have to take down an assailant ever again, but I sure as hell would never let someone innocent be murdered right in front of me.

People are taught, over and over and over again, to DO NOTHING except call for help.

Thus airplanes are used as WMD's, commuter train passengers let their attacker RELOAD, college students line up to get shot one by one, and on and on and on no one does a damn thing to protect themselves because they've spent their entire life hearing that they might get hurt if they do something.

Ain't the metrosexualization of America just grand?

Yeah, whack that guy with a chair. What the hell, he only had a knife. I'd take a club to a guy with a knife. Better than listening to some girl scream while her head's cut off.
 
Ummmm...the list goes back to 390 AD. If you are just counting the ones from the 20th century, I count 55, and your claim about concealed carry being banned in all but 1 falls apart.

21st century, there are 4 listed worldwide, and nothing at all is said about concealed carry laws.

I chose the more recent ones as being relevant, of course, and I happen to be well informed on the subject. Concealed carry is banned at almost all schools. At the time of the massacre in Texas, concealed carry permits were almost impossible to obtain.

I know this subject dude.

G.
 
I chose the more recent ones as being relevant, of course, and I happen to be well informed on the subject. Concealed carry is banned at almost all schools. At the time of the massacre in Texas, concealed carry permits were almost impossible to obtain.

I know this subject dude.

G.

Only 4 on the list in the last 20 years ocured in schools as best I can tell.
 
Back
Top Bottom