• 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 Senate approves guns in college classrooms

Sure, sure... the right to heavy drinking and shooting.

Nothing like a loaded deadly weapon in the hands of someone with no inhibitions...

The football games are going to be a hoot. Especially the post-game parking lot...

Not all college students live their lives in a constant state of inebriation. So do you support denying adults the right to drink or bring alcohol on campus? Adults have the right to bear arms, and as a college student I would feel much safer with my peers being armed versus being unarmed and subject to maniacs that freely violate gun bans and have the intent of mass murder.
 
I doubt it will save many lives. The real world outcome of this isn't going to be much of anything. We allow concealed weapons on my campus, it's pretty much a non-factor. I'm willing to let anyone who wants to the ability to protect themselves, including carrying guns. But end of the day, not many students are going to do so; and if there were another mass shooting like Virginia or something, well you gotta to have one of those students with a gun in the proximity of the criminal and the fortitude to draw and fire before being taken out. Can it happen? Sure, but it's just not going to be highly likely. You're not really going to promote nor prevent school shootings. They're already relatively rare events and you'd need a right place at the right time sort of scenario for a student to stop one.

The individual level, sure you'd probably have some better defense if people choose to exercise their rights. But you just don't see many students doing so.

It's always a non-factor until it is a factor, eh?
 
Could you link something not from so biased a source. I want to confirm the accuracy of the stories.

I was at New Life Church with family the day Jeanne Assam used a legally owned, concealed handgun to stop Matthew Murray. The only thing that story does not mention was that Murray shot himself after being hit several times by Assam. Her bullet was not the fatal shot, but without her and her handgun in the way, Murray would have had no one between him and the main sanctuary of the church.
 
I was at New Life Church with family the day Jeanne Assam used a legally owned, concealed handgun to stop Matthew Murray. The only thing that story does not mention was that Murray shot himself after being hit several times by Assam. Her bullet was not the fatal shot, but without her and her handgun in the way, Murray would have had no one between him and the main sanctuary of the church.

Let's not forget this either:

The former security guard . . . ex-Minneapolis police officer.


Now, as I talk to law enforement folks, it's risky for some trained well. Maddess for the novice shooter. More likely to miss and hit others.
 
We also have law enforement making their cases for why it is a bad idea.

Not in Illinois.

Ill. Assn. of Chiefs of Police Support Legalizing Concealed Carry Proposal
Published : Thursday, 31 Mar 2011, 7:36 PM CDT
By Mike Flannery, FOX Chicago News

Chicago - Leaders of the Illinois Assn. of Chiefs of Police voted Wednesday to change their stance on the issue. They now support legalizing concealed carry.

It’s a big boost for those trying to repeal Illinois’s ban on the concealed carrying of handguns. The group of top cops had long opposed the idea. They voted two years to go neutral on the issue...

Personally, it's rather unlikely that I would never carry a handgun. But I completely support that others can. The world's a little safer when more good guys have guns.
 
It seems like a school shooter could manipulate this to his advantage.
 
Last edited:
Let's not forget this either:

The former security guard . . . ex-Minneapolis police officer.


Now, as I talk to law enforement folks, it's risky for some trained well. Maddess for the novice shooter. More likely to miss and hit others.

I have yet to stand next to a cop at the range that was any better or worse than your average 'skilled' shooter. Do you have any stats showing that the average citizen is not as good a shot as your average police officer? In either case, it comes down to practice and range time, with citizens very easily able to obtain an equal or greater level of proficiency to what is taught to LEO's.
 
I think anti-2nd amendment loons said the same thing about concealed permits, make my day laws, and another pro-2nd amendment and or pro-self defense law.

...which is funny, considering I've never been involved in a gunfight outside the saloon at high noon, despite the fact that I'm surrounded by gun owners as I go about my daily business. Why aren't more of these terrible gun battles-that-escalated-from-simple-arguments being reported? Why is the media so silent on all the innocent bystanders being killed by law-abiding citizens bearing arms involved in intense firefights?
 

Amazing how anyone can say that the mainstream media is not biased with a straight face when stories like these are ignored while some nutjob shooting up a crowd gets weeks of coverage. And even if a few of these stories are covered you will not hardly ever here elected officials trying to use stories like these to loosen up anti-2nd amendment laws.
 
I have yet to stand next to a cop at the range that was any better or worse than your average 'skilled' shooter. Do you have any stats showing that the average citizen is not as good a shot as your average police officer? In either case, it comes down to practice and range time, with citizens very easily able to obtain an equal or greater level of proficiency to what is taught to LEO's.

It's not the skill of hitting the target. It's the skill of knowing when to fire and when not to.
 
Amazing how anyone can say that the mainstream media is not biased with a straight face when stories like these are ignored while some nutjob shooting up a crowd gets weeks of coverage. And even if a few of these stories are covered you will not hardly ever here elected officials trying to use stories like these to loosen up anti-2nd amendment laws.

You do know I did a search to get the facts I listed above. It was covered.
 
Oh, come on.

Let's assume the shooter will fire 20 more shots.

In order to cause more casualties than the shooter is intending, multi people would need to miss multiple times and every miss hits an innocent. Or one person doesn't hit until the second mag and every round lands in an innocent.
 
Not in Illinois.



Personally, it's rather unlikely that I would never carry a handgun. But I completely support that others can. The world's a little safer when more good guys have guns.

Are you sure?

Who else is opposed to CCW? Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle; Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart; Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez; Chicago Police Department; Police Superintendent Terry Hilliard; Orland Park Chief of Police Tim McCarthy; Gurnee Police Chief Robert Jones; His Eminence Frances George Cardinal George, OMI, Archbishop of Chicago; Rabbi Michael Balinsky, Executive Vice President, Chicago Board of Rabbis; Bishop James Wilkowski, Evangelical Catholic Bishop, Diocese of the Northwest; Rev. Claude Christopher, Presiding Elder Chicago District AME Zion Church; The Right Rev. Jeffrey D. Lee, Episcopal Diocese of Chicago; The Right Rev. Dr. John C. Reynolds, Executive Presbyter, Presbytery of Chicago; American Academy of Pediatrics – Illinois, League of Women Voters, Voices for Illinois Children, National Council of Jewish Women, Northwest Municipal Conference, Children’s Memorial Hospital, Illinois Restaurant Association, Purpose Over Pain, Loyola University Chicago, Crime Victims United of Illinois, The Deborah Movement, and the Uhlich Children’s Advantage Network (UCAN).

http://www.ichv.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ccw-fact-sheet-ha2.pdf

Also in that article:

The evidence does NOT support the claim that CCW laws reduce crime. Numerous academic studies by respected researchers (including the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins University) have systematically criticized the methodology and faulty conclusions of studies cited by gun rights advocates as proof that CCW laws reduce violent crime.5 Studies published by the Stanford Law Review and the Journal of Trauma concluded that there is no statistical evidence that CCW laws reduce crime. The studies found that the adoption of such laws generally will increase crime. 6 In addition, a 2005 National Academy of Sciences report found that there is no evidence to support the claim that CCW laws have a causal link to crime rate reduction.7

I've noted this before, so i though a little preemption might avoid this coming up. ;)

Anyway, do a search, and you'll find links to law enforcement across the contry opposing such laws.
 
It's not the skill of hitting the target. It's the skill of knowing when to fire and when not to.

Please provide the studies that back up your claim. "When to fire and when not to" comes down to the practice and range time that I mentioned earlier. To say that LEO's have some mystical level of proficiency that can never be obtained by any regular citizen is just plain ignorant.
 
You do know I did a search to get the facts I listed above. It was covered.

Was it just a token mention so that they can claim they are not biased or did they actually run those stories for weeks like they do anytime there is a school shooting?
 
Was it just a token mention so that they can claim they are not biased or did they actually run those stories for weeks like they do anytime there is a school shooting?

Token mention? So, you want them to have the same fever as you have? Seriously, token mention is a judgement call on your part. It reflects your view, bis if you will. Like most who claim bias what you really want is for the media to biased, to hold your bias.
 
Please provide the studies that back up your claim. "When to fire and when not to" comes down to the practice and range time that I mentioned earlier. To say that LEO's have some mystical level of proficiency that can never be obtained by any regular citizen is just plain ignorant.

I got it in conversation, but I'll check with one of the local trainers and and get back to you. And I didn't and don't use absolutes. I use the word likely. Some officers are better than others, as are some civilians, but generally speaking, the likelihood as to who will respond best, well, the one most trained will likely respond better than the one not so well trained.
 
Token mention?

How is it not a token mention when they only do a story of a gun owner using his or her firearm to save people but a story of some nut shooting up a school gets weeks of airtime?

So, you want them to have the same fever as you have?
I want them to actually be unbiased like they claim to be.

Seriously, token mention is a judgement call on your part.

How is it not a token mention?

It reflects your view,

They barely mention stories of gun owners using their firearms to stop criminals while a story of someone shooting up a school or crowd of people gets constant airplay for weeks. How is this not a token mention.


.
bis if you will. Like most who claim bias what you really want is for the media to biased, to hold your bias.

I want the media to be unbiased like it claims to be.
 
How is it not a token mention when they only do a story of a gun owner using his or her firearm to save people but a story of some nut shooting up a school gets weeks of airtime?


I want them to actually be unbiased like they claim to be.



How is it not a token mention?



They barely mention stories of gun owners using their firearms to stop criminals while a story of someone shooting up a school or crowd of people gets constant airplay for weeks. How is this not a token mention.


.

I want the media to be unbiased like it claims to be.

Because we worry more about the nut than we do the saving the saving. The same way people don't stop to watch traffic moving smoothly but do stop to view an accident. This is the nature of who we are and not a commentary on the media. They simply respond to us.

And no, I've listened to you and those whining about the media for years. You want a bias. You wnat your beliefs highlighten, given more hearing, in essence you want them biased, biased in your favor.
 
It's about time. I don't know how many times I sat in class thinking to myself, "I could really use a gun right now".


I do approve of the legislation but I have to admit you cracked me up with this
 
On a quick search I did find this:

Interestingly, tests also reveal that when facing shoot/don't shoot decisions of their own, civilians tend to be quick on the trigger--and often wrong in their perceptions.

Read more: New study: When civilians would shoot...and when they think you should - U.S. First Responders Association New study: When civilians would shoot...and when they think you should - U.S. First Responders Association

So... a police forum says citizens are quick on the trigger? I'm convinced.

Would you now like to see a Pro-Gun forum talk about how citizens have a better track record of shooting the right person than LEOs?

I can post that too, but I just figured you'd want to keep this strictly to "reliable" sources. You are absolutely right though that the person with the most training will react the most efficiently in a stress situation. There are many proficient LEOs, just as their are many proficient citizens. This has absolutely nothing to do with gun control, as the law has no bearing on how much a person trains with their weapon.
 
So... a police forum says citizens are quick on the trigger? I'm convinced.

Would you now like to see a Pro-Gun forum talk about how citizens have a better track record of shooting the right person than LEOs?

I can post that too, but I just figured you'd want to keep this strictly to "reliable" sources. You are absolutely right though that the person with the most training will react the most efficiently in a stress situation. There are many proficient LEOs, just as their are many proficient citizens. This has absolutely nothing to do with gun control, as the law has no bearing on how much a person trains with their weapon.

I believe they talk about a study. Right? Believe it or not, but studies are important to the professionals in question. That's why they look at them.
 
Back
Top Bottom