Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They're not shooting at you . . . until they are. So they go from "good guy with a gun" to "bad guy with a gun" right at that moment? Doesn't give you a lot of time to deal with that new piece of information.
That's not enough time? Liberal anti gun nuts constantly complain when a law abiding citizen shoots a criminal before being shot or shot at, now you think that's not enough time to react?
I always find it odd that liberals get what they call news from comedians. Not surprising really given the maturity level, but odd anyway that they consider what a comedian says to be news.
Public school is a gun free zone but not courthouses. You seem to not understand what a gun free zone is. When a facility has on-premise armed security and security checkpoints, it's not a gun free zone. For example, airport and the school Obama's daughters go to are not a gun free zone but your public school is.
Oh, I fully understand certain people like to bury their heads in the sand and pretend the world is full of fairies and angels. I totally understand that and I respect their rights not to arm themselves and let others decide theirs and children's fate.
What I don't understand is why they don't respect my rights to arm myself.
I don't have any problem working with armed coworkers. If they want to kill me, they wouldn't give a second thought about the Gun Free Zone sign I put up.
A LEO can carry a gun into a Gun Free Zone Public School, or a Courthouse. Hello? We had armed Sheriff's Deputies in the Florida Public Schools, but Staff and Parents were not allowed to bring a gun inside/outside. Same with those Courts. They too had armed LEO's but the Public could not carry a gun in there either.
Interesting stats that only 3% are stopped by good guys with a gun, which is in consistent with that only 2% of population have concealed carry permits and even less carry.
So this article actually proved NRA's point that more guns in the law abiding citizen's hands, the better.
Well that's creative, only the article didn't specify concealed carry. I think we are close to having everyone in the US owning a gun, 70%? So 3% would be a failure.
So we just saw 30 civilians carrying guns, hundreds of policemen and one shooter, how did that turn out? Where did the 30 riflemen go that thought they would make a difference or did they make a wrong turn on the way to the firing range.
Why anyone would think they need to carry a gun to make a difference is beyond me, but as usual the answer is "more guns", like some weird, convoluted wheel of fortune.
Trying to twist words just makes you look pedantic.
Didn't I offer you a discussion with a rape victim. Come on. Put up or shut up. Come to NY and tell a rape victim that them not having a firearm, as per laws you support, so her 99% chance to stop rape with a 0.1% chance of injury should be put aside for a 69% Chance to stop rape with a 40% chance of injury for "public safety concerns". Go ahead.
Uh, ok. This rape victim is better off without a gun. More than likely, it will be used against her(you made up those stats) . Not sure what your point is exactly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
