Page 30 of 48 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 477

Thread: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

  1. #291
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Again, there is cause. It's a liability issue, a needless risk, with no place for it in the HS.
    You keep saying this, but you have nothing to back it up with. What is the risk? How much is it? Do you understand that this is a major flaw in your arugment? Does it penetrate your skull that when you say it is a needless risk that maybe you should quantify the risk. If I get rid of guns on my campus today, how much lower is the probability that I will be killed that day? How much? Can you answer it? Because if you say it is a risk then it must have some effect on my overall probabilities of death on any given day. So, what is it? How much are my probabilities lowered by removing guns on my campus?

    You can't say anything in any amount of quantifiable assertion. And yet you want us to accept infringments against the rights of the individual based on your flawed, incomplete, and illogical argument? You can't be f'n serious.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #292
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    It is if someone shoots themself. I once saw a student hurt herself with a shot put. In the classroom. Imagine if it were a gun she mishandled.
    How often does that occur?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    The data without interpretation doesn't mean anything. It's just numbers. That's why Harvard didn't reach the conclusions you do. Statistics do not speak for themself.
    You aren't even posting the data, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Again, there is cause. It's a liability issue, a needless risk, with no place for it in the HS.
    That's fine that you hold that position, but you need to demonstrate it.

    I can tell you right now that whatever argument you can make against firearms, I can make a stronger argument on medical mistakes and vehicular homicide; so by your logic we have to ban cars and paramedics before we ban firearms.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Many wouldn't go that far.
    One of my chief instructors was, is, militant gun control. Oh yes, he would not have hesitated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    There are those here who know who I am, having seen a newpaper artcile featuring me. I'm a teacher at a cummunity college. However, if you read what I wrote, please pay attention to what I was careful to include: Too small a group for any kind of statisitcal data, but thought it was interesting.
    So there was no reason in mentioning it in this debate.

  3. #293
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    What I'm trying to say is I believe you misunderstand the right. It is not absolute. It can be restricted and has been since the first days of this country.
    You may not infringe upon the rights of others while exercising your own rights. That's the one and only natural restriction on our rights. Other than that, anything made by the government is force against the use of that right and that force must be justified. You cannot just say "I feel this will be more dangerous" and expect that to be proper argument. How the hell can you not get this by this point in the argument?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I think it is beyond reasonable doubt. We know with almost certainty that sooner or later someone will make a mistake. The history is fairly clear on this and the maturity level.
    This is one of the worst arguments in the history of bad arguments. Someone will make a mistake? Well hell, that's true for everything. Someone will manipulate, someone will cheat, someone will skirt the edge of the law. It will always happen. Every single right we have is dangerous. Every single right we have can and is abused. From the smarmy thief using the 4th amendment to give him time to hide his misdeeds, to the slimy snakeoil salesman making a new scam and hiding it as religion (Scientology). Every single right can and is abuse. But now here you come saying that a certain group of adults cannot be trusted and because of that we should further restrict their rights for their sake and ours. Can you not seriously see the flaw in that argument? Can you not seriously understand the danger of that argument?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Like I said, I taught at a school voted the second most violent campus in America. And the need never came up for anyone to need a gun. To be honest, I think it so clear, so rooted in commone sense that asking for proof is like asking for proof that driving drunk is a bad idea. But, I have given proof of the maturity level, and I see no evidence of anyone needing a gun on campus.
    You see you see you see; but that's all you can give. I'm starting to think that you're blind. You did this, you did that, you saw this you saw that, you think this is necessary you think that is not necessary. And somehow in all this "you think", you have thought that because you think something you have thus made proper argument against the rights and liberties of the individual. You need PROOF. You cannot engage government force against the rights and liberties of the individual, particularly the adult population, on just feelings alone. To justify the use of that force you need PROOF.

    For the love of all that is holy! This is what should be so clear, so rooted in common sense, that asking that someone provide proof is like asking that the State demonstrate its case first before condemning a man to death row.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #294
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    You keep saying this, but you have nothing to back it up with. What is the risk? How much is it? Do you understand that this is a major flaw in your arugment? Does it penetrate your skull that when you say it is a needless risk that maybe you should quantify the risk. If I get rid of guns on my campus today, how much lower is the probability that I will be killed that day? How much? Can you answer it? Because if you say it is a risk then it must have some effect on my overall probabilities of death on any given day. So, what is it? How much are my probabilities lowered by removing guns on my campus?

    You can't say anything in any amount of quantifiable assertion. And yet you want us to accept infringments against the rights of the individual based on your flawed, incomplete, and illogical argument? You can't be f'n serious.
    It's my experience that anti-gun usually derive their bias from some childhood events we are unable to properly address.

  5. #295
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    In any case, if I knew you had a gun while remodeling my kitchen, I'd have fired you and gotten someone else.
    As is your right.
    I just wanted to caution you to be sure you're familiar with the terms of the contract you hire someone under. Yes, you can kick anyone off your property for any or no reason, but you may still have to pay that contractor for the work you're now not allowing them to do.

    Similarly, after delivery from the manufacturer to the contractor, you may have to pay the total cost for custom cabinets or other supplies. If the supplies have not yet arrived from the manufacturer, you may be obligated to pay a "cancellation/restocking" fee, which can be 20% of the retail price. If you've fired your contractor, you may have to pay a delivery fee as well.

    Even if we're only talking about day-labor, once you accept a worker, you're obligated to pay for at least 4 hours (in SD). So if a laborer arrives, you accept them by putting them to work, and 5 minutes later excuse them for having a firearm, you still have to pay 4 hours. If your home is in the hills, they would have all car pooled, and excusing one from your property means excusing them all. So then you would have to pay 4 hours each for the whole crew, and get no work.

    Just be up front with entities and tell them that you don't allow firearms. I've requested day laborers with no felonies before, and I know that some jobs (very few) request women only. You can do this because you are not the laborer's employer; their agency is their employer.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-02-11 at 03:17 PM.

  6. #296
    Student Iron River's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    09-16-17 @ 06:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    254

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    someone will make a mistake.
    Let’s agree that there will be a mistake and then we have to figure out what the chance is that the mistake will result in an injury. So far I haven’t had an accident in the 40 years that I have carried a hand gun. Three times I have felt that my gun saved me from injury or death.

    No law will keep a person with bad intentions from taking a gun to a school – unless the law is one that leaves the person wondering how many guns he may face at the school.

    I taught at a school voted the second most violent campus in America
    Did you ever think that if the teachers were armed there might have been less violence against the teachers and the students? You can’t possibility tell us that the teachers were never attacked or threatened. I personally know a teacher that was molested and threatened on a regular basses. If she had shot the first student that grabbed her breast the other thugs would have been less likely to touch any of the teachers.

  7. #297
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    Did you ever think that if the teachers were armed there might have been less violence against the teachers and the students? You canít possibility tell us that the teachers were never attacked or threatened. I personally know a teacher that was molested and threatened on a regular basses. If she had shot the first student that grabbed her breast the other thugs would have been less likely to touch any of the teachers.
    Given context, the groping could meet the statutory definition of attempted rape, and lethal force would be authorized.

  8. #298
    Student doctorhugo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Last Seen
    02-10-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    263

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    I'm a Second Amendment guy too, but I realize there can be legitimate limitations. Those limitations, can be tested in court by constitutional challenge. Public law, in this case, USC 930 Section 18, titled Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities, states:
    (a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly
    possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous
    weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility),
    or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
    not more than 1 year, or both.
    (b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon
    be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes
    to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal
    facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or
    imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
    (c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of
    subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal
    facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon,
    or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as
    provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.
    (d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to -
    (1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer,
    agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political
    subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or
    supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or
    prosecution of any violation of law;
    (2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a
    Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such
    possession is authorized by law; or
    (3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons
    in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful
    purposes.
    (e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly
    possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court
    facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title,
    imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
    (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described
    in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).
    (f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the
    United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or
    orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of
    weapons within any building housing such court or any of its
    proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.
    (g) As used in this section:
    (1) The term "Federal facility" means a building or part
    thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal
    employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing
    their official duties.
    (2) The term "dangerous weapon" means a weapon, device,
    instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is
    used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious
    bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket
    knife with a blade of less than 2 1/2 inches in length.
    (3) The term "Federal court facility" means the courtroom,
    judges' chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms,
    attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the
    court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States
    marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of
    any court of the United States.
    (h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be
    posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal
    facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted
    conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court
    facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under
    subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such
    notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had
    actual notice of subsection (a) or (e), as the case may be.
    Anybody with a carry permit should be aware and familiar with this and realize that although government buildings are the subject of this law there are laws for other "public" areas. One thing must be borne in mind though. If that is so it is "reasonable" to understand that the courts in any Second Amendment challenge to a law restricting or limiting possession of firearms in 'private' buildings/facilities/areas would be inclined to uphold such as in the "public interest", because that interest overrides any individual right.
    "Ignorance confuses. Knowledge mediates. Truth resolves." (doctorhugo)

  9. #299
    Student doctorhugo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Last Seen
    02-10-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    263

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    In response to this inane comment;
    Originally Posted by Boo Radley
    It is if someone shoots themself. I once saw a student hurt herself with a shot put. In the classroom. Imagine if it were a gun she mishandled.
    My question to you is...[sarcasm]Did you immediately, if not sooner, demand of the school administration that they ban shot-put balls in all classrooms and initiate a petition to that effect?[/sarcasm]
    "Ignorance confuses. Knowledge mediates. Truth resolves." (doctorhugo)

  10. #300
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

    Quote Originally Posted by doctorhugo View Post
    I'm a Second Amendment guy too, but I realize there can be legitimate limitations. Those limitations, can be tested in court by constitutional challenge. Public law, in this case, USC 930 Section 18, titled Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities, states:

    Anybody with a carry permit should be aware and familiar with this and realize that although government buildings are the subject of this law there are laws for other "public" areas. One thing must be borne in mind though. If that is so it is "reasonable" to understand that the courts in any Second Amendment challenge to a law restricting or limiting possession of firearms in 'private' buildings/facilities/areas would be inclined to uphold such as in the "public interest", because that interest overrides any individual right.

    What we've been asking for is a demonstration of that public interest.

    It's simply not enough to say it's there, or have an opinion or claim 'common sense'. Data is required to manifest the interest.

Page 30 of 48 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •