Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-06-2015, 07:58 AM
 
Location: Falls Church, Fairfax County
5,162 posts, read 4,488,801 times
Reputation: 6336

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Never Never Never View Post
There is some very inaccurate information in this thread. Given the sources it's understandable. Yes, I think active duty military need to be armed. Domestic terrorists living in the United States will of course object to any and all armament of anyone who may pose a problem or interrupt their plans. Arm them, and wait.
Have you been in the US military?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2015, 12:48 AM
 
563 posts, read 524,281 times
Reputation: 1170
Default Guns in the hands of military? Not a bad idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brrabbit View Post
I'm kind of split on this issue. On one hand, there are positive examples where military personnel is allowed to carry guns even when taking a short vacation and visiting home. But on another hand, should we create another class of priviledged citizens?

And also, liberals tell us, that military weapons aren't suited for our streets. So, I guess police and military has no need to carry their machine-guns either.

I think it should be allowed for active duty military to carry guns in public. I mean, everyone else can! The military people I know and the others i have met, seem so much more capable and trustworthy. I think I would feel safer! But then again, I live in LA....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 03:36 AM
 
Location: South Texas
4,248 posts, read 4,162,816 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
And yes, after events such as Sandy Hook, walking directly toward a school while open carrying a firearm is "harassing and threatening children."
No child could feel harassed or threatened, because no child saw him standing there with a firearm on his person. Children should not be taught to fear guns, they should be taught to calmly avoid them until they are old enough to learn gun safety.


Tell me, how many school shootings can you prove that the Gun Free School Zones Act has prevented since its passage in 1990? I can point you to a list of over 200 school shootings that it did NOT prevent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 03:39 AM
 
Location: South Texas
4,248 posts, read 4,162,816 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpm1 View Post
You realize schools used to have shooting ranges? Open carry is threatening children? That is effing retarded.
As a member of the riflery team, I fired a .22 rifle at the on-campus shooting range in 1999.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 03:43 AM
 
Location: South Texas
4,248 posts, read 4,162,816 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
But you openly carry a weapon on school grounds where my kids are inside with nothing to protect them, and this is one concealed-carry permit holder who will risk jail time to protect his kids. Whether you agree with the law or not, anyone who violates the GFSA is not a law-abiding citizen by definition, and therefore is not a "good guy with a gun".
The GFSZA violates the 2nd Amendment.

Personally, I think that good guys with guns should be protecting our kids. We've seen dozens of examples of the carnage that occurs when bad guys with guns decide to shoot up a (gun-free) campus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 07:15 AM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
3,045 posts, read 5,244,282 times
Reputation: 5156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
The GFSZA violates the 2nd Amendment.

Personally, I think that good guys with guns should be protecting our kids. We've seen dozens of examples of the carnage that occurs when bad guys with guns decide to shoot up a (gun-free) campus.
No, it does not violate the 2nd amendment. The law doesn't infringe on the right to keep and bear arms; keep and bear all you want. Instead the law sets limits on how you are allowed to use public property set aside for the safety and education of children.

Similar laws prohibit carrying firearms inside a prison, which is also public property. Are you suggesting that prohibiting a random yay-hoo from wandering around in a prison yard while open-carrying an AR-15 is a violation of the 2nd amendment? Or even better, are you suggesting that not allowing convicts to open carry while actually serving time for murder is a violation of the 2nd amendment? The 2nd amendment isn't a suicide pact.

Even in the "wild west" there were "guns free zones" where people had to check their guns on entering towns or certain businesses.

I personally think modern "guns free zones" are stupid, but they are legal.

And yeah, good guys with guns should be protecting our kids. If they choose to do so, teachers and administrators should be allowed to concealed carry. If not concealed carry, then if they choose to do so there should be weapons scattered around campus locked up for use in an emergency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Falls Church, Fairfax County
5,162 posts, read 4,488,801 times
Reputation: 6336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
No child could feel harassed or threatened, because no child saw him standing there with a firearm on his person.
How do you know this? Do you have a source? The school was on lockdown so I am sure someone felt threatened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
Children should not be taught to fear guns, they should be taught to calmly avoid them until they are old enough to learn gun safety.
I agree that people should not be afraid of guns, but they should fear the decision making process of some of the people that carry them. They should not believe a someone is good just because a person is carrying around an assault rifle where one is clearly not needed. They should be scared of the person that is scared enough to feel they have to carry a pacifier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
Tell me, how many school shootings can you prove that the Gun Free School Zones Act has prevented since its passage in 1990? I can point you to a list of over 200 school shootings that it did NOT prevent.
Yeah, that list of 200 school shootings is a problem and part of the reason the anti-gun movement in this country is growing. I have no idea how many shootings that the GFSZA has prevented, but how many school shootings have civilians armed with firearms prevented? We know they have at least caused 200...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Falls Church, Fairfax County
5,162 posts, read 4,488,801 times
Reputation: 6336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX View Post
The GFSZA violates the 2nd Amendment.

Personally, I think that good guys with guns should be protecting our kids. We've seen dozens of examples of the carnage that occurs when bad guys with guns decide to shoot up a (gun-free) campus.
Slowpoke how do you tell the a "good guy" from a "bad guy"? I think one of my ways of telling an irresponsible person is if they are carrying an assault rifle around outside of a school and taunting the police who he is hiding behind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Falls Church, Fairfax County
5,162 posts, read 4,488,801 times
Reputation: 6336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Never Never Never View Post
There is some very inaccurate information in this thread. Given the sources it's understandable. Yes, I think active duty military need to be armed. Domestic terrorists living in the United States will of course object to any and all armament of anyone who may pose a problem or interrupt their plans. Arm them, and wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Guard View Post
Have you been in the US military?
I guess the answer is no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2015, 04:19 PM
 
Location: South Texas
4,248 posts, read 4,162,816 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
No, it does not violate the 2nd amendment. The law doesn't infringe on the right to keep and bear arms; keep and bear all you want.
Yes, it does violate the 2nd Amendment, by rendering the Amendment null and void on and near campus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:02 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top