2nd Amendement Rights

[DGTess]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Way to call me out.

Don't know which assertions you're talking about. But I won't put time and effort into providing anything in this thread.

You have consistently, through this thread and the NIU shootings thread, made assertions that research shows this or that, or that colleges will not allow this or that. You have yet to back anything up.

I find many who fall back on rhetoric when they can't (or won't, as you say) provide facts. You appear to be saying it's wasting your time to go get facts. Too bad. Those who do research sometimes learn things.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DGTess

You appear to be saying it's wasting your time to go get facts. Too bad. Those who do research sometimes learn things.

Rightbackatcha.

I discuss the research from both sides of this debate, and others, everyday as part of my profession. I won't discuss it here and you'll just have to get over that.

But you should read up on both sides of the issue. Being married to one side of the debate shouldn't happen until you do that. I'm not anti-guns, which is obvious if you've read my posts, I just believe that it's not as simple as "every law abiding adult have gun access anywhere." My stance is an informed one based on the neutral research on the nature of violence and guns (because you can't understand this issue unless you understand violence, which is why most of my posts have discussed general violence and crime issues), as well as research from both sides of the gun control debate.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DGTess

You have consistently, through this thread and the NIU shootings thread, made assertions that research shows this or that, or that colleges will not allow this or that. You have yet to back anything up.

And I just reread my 2 posts in this thread and realized that you exaggerated.

I did not mention "research" in this thread but moreso general info. If you do not know that you're more likely to get in a car accident than shot or that you're more likely to be victimized by someone you have more frequent interaction with than a stranger, you've missed out on basic info on crime and violence. And that would tell me that you've sensationalized the issue of violence and guns to fit your "pro-guns everywhere because the boogeyman may try to get you one day and you can shoot the boogeyman" stance.

I also know that many colleges won't allow guns in the classrooms because it's true because I'm psychic. As I said, SydneyK is not a minority when she says she will stop going to work if guns are allowed on campus.

[shinerbock]

Have no fear DGTess, I'm sure these criminals just aren't seeing the gun free zone signs. If we make them bigger, that should be enough to guarantee the safety of those law-abiding citizens who are left vulnerable by the law.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Have no fear DGTess, I'm sure these criminals just aren't seeing the gun free zone signs. If we make them bigger, that should be enough to guarantee the safety of those law-abiding citizens who are left vulnerable by the law.

Indeed.

It's this kind of fairy tale logic that makes these discussions null and void most of the time and not worth delving into the real substance behind the issue.

If guns were allowed on campuses, would would-be assailants also see huge gun zone signs that let them know whether a significant portion of people on that campus are actually taking advantage of their newfound right to have a gun during class?

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Indeed.

It's this kind of fairy tale logic that makes these discussions null and void most of the time and not worth delving into the real substance behind the issue.

If guns were allowed on campuses, would would-be assailants also see huge gun zone signs that let them know whether a significant portion of people on that campus are actually taking advantage of their newfound right to have a gun during class?

I'm not worried about deterrence, as I've continually stated.

[PeppyGPhiB]

My boyfriend has completely changed my opinion of guns. I used to be very anti-gun and thought no one should have them. But after I met him I decided that I wanted to learn how to load and shoot a gun in case I ever needed to. So, he took me to the range for the first time, and I now realize how careful and safe most gun owners are with their guns. They take ownership very seriously - they're not a bunch of wackos brandishing their guns about. However, I do think there should be some restrictions on the kinds of guns you can buy - no automatic weapons (done), but also restrictions based on what a gun is realistically used for. For example, at the range we go to sometimes, the shop there has a 50 caliber long-range gun...the kind that you have to use with a tripod on the ground. What is someone going to use that gun for? Surely not self-defense, and not hunting either. That gun could blow up a car hundreds of yards away, and in my opinion it has no business being owned by Joe Somebody.

Anyone who's seen Bowling for Columbine remembers the cartoon debate in it that pondered why there is so much gun violence in America. And they'll also probably remember from that that there was no clear answer as to why America is so different from the rest of the world in this regard - remember, Canadians have more guns per capita than Americans But what I do think separates the US from the rest of the "big" countries is our obsession and TOLERANCE of violence...period. Not gun violence, but any type of violence. We are a very aggressive, hostile country and it seems that more and more kids are not being disciplined when they act up. Well, those kids grow up...and then they turn into teenagers, then adults, who act up. And I should say that it's not just about disciplining them when they act up, but it's also about teaching them why they shouldn't act up in the first place...why it's not a desirable behavior.

For the past week I was down in L.A./Orange County, and I can't tell you how many times my friends and I sat someplace for lunch or whatever and watched pre-teens and teens disrespect the people and property around them. We saw kids kicking planters, spitting on cars, shoving people aside as they ran around a boardwalk, etc. That stuff may seem minor, but it's a lack of discipline and control like that that I think leads to some of the violent behaviors. These kids aren't being taught right vs. wrong by their parents. Sure, they may know what's right or wrong in the law's eyes, but what's right morally/ethically is not being instilled. We're not raising kids with character and good sense anymore...just "go for it", independent, and in some cases, book smart, individuals who don't care about doing the right thing.

[Kevlar281]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

However, I do think there should be some restrictions on the kinds of guns you can buy - no automatic weapons (done), but also restrictions based on what a gun is realistically used for. For example, at the range we go to sometimes, the shop there has a 50 caliber long-range gun...the kind that you have to use with a tripod on the ground.

It’s probably a bipod.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I'm not worried about deterrence, as I've continually stated.

You don't remember saying that your gun under your pillow deters individual criminals?

You took it back after I questioned you but your first instinct was deterence.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

You don't remember saying that your gun under your pillow deters individual criminals?

You took it back after I questioned you but your first instinct was deterence.

Oh right. I forgot about that imaginary conversation.