• 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!

Texas poised to pass bill allowing guns on campus

ReverendHellh0und said:
from your article:


Overall, violent-crime rates in Arizona are not far from rates for the U.S. as a whole, but the rate of deaths specifically tied to guns surprises national experts.
Click to expand...


FAIL
Click to expand...
:bs:doh


Please explain in detail why you consider that one sentence evidence of a fail.

:waiting:
 
hazlnut said:
:bs:doh


Please explain in detail why you consider that one sentence evidence of a fail.

:waiting:
Click to expand...



What that thier rates are in line with the country average? Please this hoplophobic hysteria is a bit much.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What that thier rates are in line with the country average? Please this hoplophobic hysteria is a bit much.
Click to expand...

And the rest of the sentence... how is that evidence of a fail?

And the other details presented in the article? (which I know you read before posting)
 
hazlnut said:
And the rest of the sentence... how is that evidence of a fail?

And the other details presented in the article? (which I know you read before posting)
Click to expand...




I did, the article is an anti-gun hit piece that takes bits of data to paint an innacurate picture.


The only line in there that is truthful is the one where it states what I quoted, that it's in line with the rest of the country...



And better than California, one of the most restrictive states.
 
Last edited:
SE102 said:
What are the rules of engagement? If someone else flashes theirs first does that make them the starter of the firefight? Is it illegal to duel? What can't I do with my gun?
Click to expand...

Take a concealed carry course. Or read Massad Ayoobs "In the Gravest Extreme". For starters. The fact that we have had decades of CC throughout the US and it hasnt yet devolved into the "wild wild west" is a pretty good indicator that MOST folks that carry do so responsibly. 'People' can do all kinds of things with their firearms. Most arent so stupid that they present a risk to others. Those that are that stupid likely arent impacted by this or any other law.
 
hazlnut said:
Is that the same Arizona with one of the worst gun-death rates in the U.S. ??



For a state that's mostly desert, people seem to get shot all over the place.

New GOP talking point: "At the OK Coral, mostly bad guys got shot... mostly."
Click to expand...

This isnt exactly what you call 'damning' evidence...especially coming from the writers of the study (taken verbatim from the article you linked)
"You can take very seriously the CDC data," he said, "as long as you keep in mind that there isn't any relationship between gun-ownership rates and the total suicide rate or homicide rate."

Zimring and Kleck caution against presumptions that state gun laws explain gun-death numbers, saying there are too many other factors involved.Read more: Arizona's gun-death rate among the worst in U.S.

Ummmmm...yeah...so....

Also, while they discuss suicide numbers (by firearm) higher than say...Massachusettes...they still dont lead the nation in firearm related suicides, nor does that mean there are less suicides...just by means other than firearms.
 
hazlnut said:
The point is, the only point, public safety trumps the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Rights trump safety.

hazlnut said:
Collage admins must put campus safety above all other concerns. There is no logical, practical, reason or benefit to have handguns on campus.

The GOP and NRA like to read the 2nd Amendment through a keyhole, thinking what works in WI should work in NYC. What works in rural areas DOES NOT work, is NOT PRACTICAL in urban areas.

Even the most conservative of law enforcement agents, criminal prosecutors, judges favor gun control that fits their community.
Click to expand...

But you've shown no data. Why should I infringe upon the rights of others based on your supposition? Here's the thing. In Colorado, concealed carry on campus is allowed. Colorado State University has a bar, it has concealed carry, hell Fort Collins proper has open carry. You can bring your guns where you like, businesses must post no firearms allowed signs. You can take it into the bar (so long as you ain't drinking) too. You know how much of a problem this is? None. No shootings, no drunken students in the bar pulling out guns, no threat to public safety, nothing.

Students in college are adults and as such entitled to exercise the full of their rights. You can't just say "oh it will be bad" based on no data, just assumption and supposition, and believe that it is valid argument to restrict the exercise of our rights. You're gonna need a little bit more.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, I think it works. Regardless of size, it has a purpose not meant to use at school. And that right has been subject to all kinds of restrictions from the very begining of this country. nothing new in restricting where you can carry it.
Click to expand...

Of course backhoes are allowed on school property. We remodeled an entire school just 2 years ago, and we had much bigger equipment on the grounds than a mere backho-loader. There were periods of time where the equipment was in operation while class was in session, too. So you see this analogy simply doesn't fit. I know you think it does, but your reader isn't getting it, so I suggest trying something different.

Boo Radley said:
Do you believe eveyone knows the tools they carry?
Click to expand...

The ones who don't stand out because most do.

Boo Radley said:
What would you consider evidence, as this is always part of the problem with these discussions.
Click to expand...

I began this thread by quoting an international Harvard study. That is the nature of evidence you need to bring.

Boo Radley said:
What role would people being armed play in the classroom?
Click to expand...

Professor, Administrator, Student, Janitor, or 3rd party contractor, as appropriate.

Boo Radley said:
What puropose would there be for having a number carrying guns?
Click to expand...

Self defense.


Boo Radley said:
I'm sure many won't, but what would it say about those who do?
Click to expand...

I'd probably talk shop with them in the commons.

Boo Radley said:
What does it say about them?
Click to expand...

That they like not being assaulted.

Boo Radley said:
Any chance somoene would want to show off?
Click to expand...

Of course.

Boo Radley said:
Any chance a young person would beimmature, and armed?
Click to expand...

Crime is everywhere, so I can't rule it out.

Boo Radley said:
Not sure what you're looking for, but it doesn't take much reasoning to see why this is a bad idea. I can't see many schools supporting this.
Click to expand...

You haven't given even one reason why firearms should be banned from school grounds.
 
Last edited:
Seriously? No one even glances at the only bit of hard data supplied in this thread? There is no conclusive evidence validating either side of the argument.

The reasoning behind banning firearms from school grounds to me seems obvious enough, I don't know about the schools you've been to, but I've seen (and sadly been apart of) some of the really stupid fights that happen at schools. They are places that combine huge amounts of stress with copious amounts of mind-altering substances. You don't have to be a genius to figure out that adding guns to that mix is a really, really bad idea.

I understand that you yourself may be a responsible gun-owner, but most people that I know that own weapons are NOT responsible. Or at the very least not all the time. And the amount of effort it takes to kill someone with a gun is so slight, the speed so quick, that rage-killings are so easy with that weapon.

Imagine tossing a gun into a bar-brawl. You instantly go from maybe a broken bone or two to death.
 
TheBook said:
Seriously? No one even glances at the only bit of hard data supplied in this thread? There is no conclusive evidence validating either side of the argument.

The reasoning behind banning firearms from school grounds to me seems obvious enough, I don't know about the schools you've been to, but I've seen (and sadly been apart of) some of the really stupid fights that happen at schools. They are places that combine huge amounts of stress with copious amounts of mind-altering substances. You don't have to be a genius to figure out that adding guns to that mix is a really, really bad idea.

I understand that you yourself may be a responsible gun-owner, but most people that I know that own weapons are NOT responsible. Or at the very least not all the time. And the amount of effort it takes to kill someone with a gun is so slight, the speed so quick, that rage-killings are so easy with that weapon.

Imagine tossing a gun into a bar-brawl. You instantly go from maybe a broken bone or two to death.
Click to expand...

Seeing a lot of brawls on college campuses these days?
 
TheBook said:
Seriously? No one even glances at the only bit of hard data supplied in this thread? There is no conclusive evidence validating either side of the argument.

The reasoning behind banning firearms from school grounds to me seems obvious enough, I don't know about the schools you've been to, but I've seen (and sadly been apart of) some of the really stupid fights that happen at schools. They are places that combine huge amounts of stress with copious amounts of mind-altering substances. You don't have to be a genius to figure out that adding guns to that mix is a really, really bad idea.

I understand that you yourself may be a responsible gun-owner, but most people that I know that own weapons are NOT responsible. Or at the very least not all the time. And the amount of effort it takes to kill someone with a gun is so slight, the speed so quick, that rage-killings are so easy with that weapon.

Imagine tossing a gun into a bar-brawl. You instantly go from maybe a broken bone or two to death.
Click to expand...

If you have any evidence to substantiated your argument, please let us know.
 
Jerry said:
Of course backhoes are allowed on school property. We remodeled an entire school just 2 years ago, and we had much bigger equipment on the grounds than a mere backho-loader. There were periods of time where the equipment was in operation while class was in session, too. So you see this analogy simply doesn't fit. I know you think it does, but your reader isn't getting it, so I suggest trying something different.



The ones who don't stand out because most do.



I began this thread by quoting an international Harvard study. That is the nature of evidence you need to bring.



Professor, Administrator, Student, Janitor, or 3rd party contractor, as appropriate.



Self defense.




I'd probably talk shop with them in the commons.



That they like not being assaulted.



Of course.



Crime is everywhere, so I can't rule it out.



You haven't given even one reason why firearms should be banned from school grounds.
Click to expand...

I think I've given you several reasons. Students tend to be immature. Few know their tool well. There is no purpose for it in school. It's asking for trouble. Accidents happen at home with them and could happen at school. It provides serious liability issues for schools. And in general, it's just a stupid idea. Kind of like car sufering or NCLB.
 
Boo Radley said:
I think I've given you several reasons. Students tend to be immature. Few know their tool well. There is no purpose for it in school. It's asking for trouble. Accidents happen at home with them and could happen at school. It provides serious liability issues for schools. And in general, it's just a stupid idea. Kind of like car sufering or NCLB.
Click to expand...

You've stated plenty of opinions, but you haven't sunstanchiated any point you've argued. Please link to the credible evidence you reviewed before reaching your current conclusions.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I did, the article is an anti-gun hit piece that takes bits of data to paint an innacurate picture.
Click to expand...

Be more specific.


The only line in there that is truthful is the one where it states what I quoted, that it's in line with the rest of the country...
Click to expand...

Can you back that up with anything like, um... evidence?



And better than California, one of the most restrictive states.
Click to expand...

Bigger cities and all...
 
hazlnut said:
Because all college students are so mentally stable... especially on Friday nights at kegger parities.

This is stupid beyond stupid.

Go Texas!!
Click to expand...
1) you have to be 21-meaning most college kids are excluded

2) you have to pass a test etc

3) you have to have a clean record

the youngest licensed CCW holders are older than thousands of thoseserving in the infantry carrying stuff far more lethal than a small pistol. and anyone who thinks 19 year old PFCs never drink is probably drunk
 
hazlnut said:
The point is, the only point, public safety trumps the 2nd Amendment.

Collage admins must put campus safety above all other concerns. There is no logical, practical, reason or benefit to have handguns on campus.

The GOP and NRA like to read the 2nd Amendment through a keyhole, thinking what works in WI should work in NYC. What works in rural areas DOES NOT work, is NOT PRACTICAL in urban areas.

Even the most conservative of law enforcement agents, criminal prosecutors, judges favor gun control that fits their community.
Click to expand...

if public safety trumps the constitution lets get rid of

1) Miranda
2) Gideon
3) 4th and 5th amendments

Just think of all the crooks we could keep in jail if the DAs didn't have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or if we had to presume criminals are innocent until proven otherwise or giving them lawyers.

the gun control those people favor are laws against improper USE of guns

very different than banning honest people from POSSESSING firearms as you want
 
TheBook said:
Seriously? No one even glances at the only bit of hard data supplied in this thread? There is no conclusive evidence validating either side of the argument.

The reasoning behind banning firearms from school grounds to me seems obvious enough, I don't know about the schools you've been to, but I've seen (and sadly been apart of) some of the really stupid fights that happen at schools. They are places that combine huge amounts of stress with copious amounts of mind-altering substances. You don't have to be a genius to figure out that adding guns to that mix is a really, really bad idea.

I understand that you yourself may be a responsible gun-owner, but most people that I know that own weapons are NOT responsible. Or at the very least not all the time. And the amount of effort it takes to kill someone with a gun is so slight, the speed so quick, that rage-killings are so easy with that weapon.

Imagine tossing a gun into a bar-brawl. You instantly go from maybe a broken bone or two to death.
Click to expand...

you do understand that one has to be at least 21 and pass a course.
most people you know? that is a testament to whom you associate with-not grounds to limit rights of others.

so how come "rage killings" have not gone up despite millions upon millions of people carrying guns-a trend that has significantly increased over the last 20 years

its illegal to take a gun into a bar in almost every state. your silly argument FAILS
 
SE102 said:
What are the rules of engagement? If someone else flashes theirs first does that make them the starter of the firefight? Is it illegal to duel? What can't I do with my gun?
Click to expand...
If I were having to make the ruling I would have to deny your pemit for CCW on the grounds of demonstrated mental instability.:lamo
 
Jerry said:
You've stated plenty of opinions, but you haven't sunstanchiated any point you've argued. Please link to the credible evidence you reviewed before reaching your current conclusions.
Click to expand...

I asked what would you consider substanization. I don't remember a clear answer. I think it is a logic problem, but maybe you think it is something else. Maybe you need someone you like saying it. I'm not sure. But ask yourself what happens if someone has an accident, shots someone. What happens then? That would bring up liablity issues for the school.

Do you need evidence that 20 year old can be immature? i think that is common knowledge but I can link information to support that.

Do you need verification that some gun owners don't know their tool weel? I'm sure some link can be give to verifiy that. But i would think that rather common knowledge.

Just let me know what you think would substaniate the opinion for you. I mean no disrespect, but I am really unsure what you could want.
 
Boo Radley said:
I asked what would you consider substanization. I don't remember a clear answer.
Click to expand...

Your answer was:
Jerry said:
I began this thread by quoting an international Harvard study. That is the nature of evidence you need to bring.
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
I think it is a logic problem, but maybe you think it is something else. Maybe you need someone you like saying it. I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Do you have anyone of verifiable authority saying it? Link please.

Boo Radley said:
But ask yourself what happens if someone has an accident, shots someone. What happens then?
Click to expand...

Accidental discharge is a crime, and a civil suit for damages would follow, also.

Boo Radley said:
That would bring up liablity issues for the school.
Click to expand...

Please cite the case-law or statute you're getting this information from.

Boo Radley said:
Do you need evidence that 20 year old can be immature? i think that is common knowledge but I can link information to support that.
Click to expand...

If you're trying to argue a demographic trend, please cite the study your getting your data from.

Boo Radley said:
Do you need verification that some gun owners don't know their tool weel? I'm sure some link can be give to verifiy that. But i would think that rather common knowledge.
Click to expand...

Again, there's a difference between a flook criminal and general demographic. Please site the study you're getting your information from.

Boo Radley said:
Just let me know what you think would substaniate the opinion for you. I mean no disrespect, but I am really unsure what you could want.
Click to expand...

Working links to research studies by credentialed persons or institutions, statistics, crime data from government or credentialed sources, etc. At this point, a link of any kind would be a step forward for you. It's irrational, if not utterly arrogant, to simply state your opinion and assume others are just going to instantly agree.
 
SE102 said:
What are the rules of engagement? If someone else flashes theirs first does that make them the starter of the firefight? Is it illegal to duel? What can't I do with my gun?
Click to expand...

You can either target practice at a proper location or defend your life or the life of another. That's it. If you take your weapon out of your holster for any other reason it had better to to clean or secure it.
 
Jerry said:
You can either target practice at a proper location or defend your life or the life of another. That's it. If you take your weapon out of your holster for any other reason it had better to to clean or secure it.
Click to expand...

I forget the people-maybe the Gurkhas but they carried knives for defense and offense and they were taught if they drew their knife they better draw blood. so if one drew his knife and there was no enemy he'd cut himself before sheathing his blade.
 
Jerry said:
If you have any evidence to substantiated your argument, please let us know.
Click to expand...

I've shown evidence. Twice. It was ignored both times.

TheBook said:
Something to note, the NRA named 10 states as lacking a "right to carry" law. This is a list from the most recent FBI crime database, with those 10 stats highlighted.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/69967-violent-crime-states.html

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence made a list of states with what they call lax gun control laws.

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Media

This group is also pretty well spread out across the violent crime list.
Click to expand...

Basically, the argument that guns make people safer is NOT shown by this data. The argument that being restrictive about them isn't either.
 
Jerry said:
In SD we're moving away from requiring a permit at all.

Given all the evidence demonstrating the benefit of an armed society, we view the requirement of a permit to exercise a specifically enumerated protected right as the equivalent of having to register your religion or get a permit to express a political opinion.

It is already illegal for the state or vendors to keep a list or require registration of any firearm, in the interest of privacy. The move away from requiring a permit follows that line of thinking.
Click to expand...

What state do you live in?
 
Jerry said:
In SD we're moving away from requiring a permit at all.

Given all the evidence demonstrating the benefit of an armed society, we view the requirement of a permit to exercise a specifically enumerated protected right as the equivalent of having to register your religion or get a permit to express a political opinion.

It is already illegal for the state or vendors to keep a list or require registration of any firearm, in the interest of privacy. The move away from requiring a permit follows that line of thinking.
Click to expand...

Dang, that'll make getting away with murder so, so much easier. Not to mention gun-running.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom