Reply With Quote
Then answer why in other countries with strict gun control laws there is far less crime with guns then the United States with more lenient gun laws?
Yeah, you are going out on a limb. First of all, wherever concealed licenses are available, you're not going to even approach 100% of the population applying. I don't even think it approaches .1% (as suggested in your next point)
If I'm not mistaken, where available, you have to be 21 to even buy a gun or apply for a conceal-carry permit. So, .1% of all students over 21 is an even smaller universe but, perhaps, large enough to have thwarted Cho on Monday.
I don't think you'd even approach the number of accidental deaths due to excessive drinking, car accidents, and falls now experienced. Plus, we have concealed carry permits in Austin and I've yet to hear of an accidental shooting on 6th street (where most of the college kids do their partying).
The training associated with receiving a concealed permit is fairly thorough -- particularly where your liability is concerned. A reasonable person -- and, considering the relatively low incident of accidental shootings by existing permit holders -- this training is taken to heart.
Well, the solution pursued by VTech was more than risky, it encouraged Cho while prohibiting a potential resolution.
Then answer why in other countries with strict gun control laws there is far less crime with guns then the United States with more lenient gun laws?
Charging Cho with a crime when he was stalking those female students would have prevented him from legally purchasing a gun.
Expelling him instead of giving him a private tutor when he began weirding out in class would have eliminated him from campus way before his tea kettle started whistling.
There were answers.
No one is advocating arming students but allowing those, who wish to, arm themselves -- within the provisions allowed by law.
Why is having a unarmed student body so obvious to you?
I agree it is impossible to predict the breaking point and probably even difficult to stop the initiation of a violent act but, if just one other person had been armed on the second floor of Norris Hall, it is at least a good possibility he would have been stopped before 30 more people lay dead.
Also, considering all that is coming out, this atrocity was very preventable -- had it not been for the politically correct manner in which the school chose to handle his mental illness.
The fact remains that students and faculty have thwarted rampages on at least two occassions, at other schools (one in Virginia), by retreiving guns from their vehicles.
Or as simple as doing away with "Gun-Free Zones" which only deter the lawful.
I think you find your answer somewhere in here...
A Culture of Passivity
Argentina must have it all figured out.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133823,00.html
Four Killed in Argentina School Shooting
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina — A 15-year-old student drew a handgun and opened fire in a school classroom in southern Argentina (search) on Tuesday, killing four classmates and wounding five, authorities said.
Police said the shooting came minutes before the start of classes in the Islas Malvinas public school in Carmen de Patagones (search), a city some 600 miles south of Buenos Aires.
Mario Oporto, education minister for the vast Buenos Aires province where the shooting occurred, said two teenage girls and a boy were killed instantly and a fourth student died soon after at a hospital. At least three of the dead were aged 14-16.
Four of the wounded were treated immediately on the scene and a fifth student was hospitalized in serious condition, authorities said.
Police detained a teenage suspect and were questioning him but said they had no known motive and only sketchy details of what happened. Authorities were planning to transfer the suspect to a juvenile court in Bahia Blanca (search), another city in southern Buenos Aires province.
Police on the scene said students told them the shooter entered the room without saying a word and began firing a 9-millimeter handgun, aiming first at the walls as students cowered beneath desks.
Students who were outside the classroom at the time told local television they thought they heard firecrackers going off, then saw bloodied students screaming as they fled the classroom. They said the shooting began around 7:30 a.m., before the teacher had shown up.
One teenage boy said he was in an adjacent classroom when he heard intermittent shots.
"We heard gunfire and a lot of screaming and then everyone coming out into the hallway," said the boy, who did not identify himself. "We saw three bodies on the ground with bullet wounds."
Outside the school, a crowd gathered along with ambulances, police squad cars and a fire truck. Police removed the bodies while forensic experts remained behind for hours.
The episode touched off a debate on national television about rising violence in public schools in Argentina, home to 36 million people and long considered one of the safest countries in South America.
Stabbings and beatings of students and teachers have been reported in recent weeks, raising public concern about the nation's schools. Surging school violence has also come on the heels of a crime wave in Argentina marked by ransom kidnappings, street shootings and carjackings.
Before traveling to the scene, Oporto told local radio Argentines were grieving over the tragedy.
"This is a case of violence that has exceeded all bounds," Oporto said.
...concealed carry policies on college campuses.
The minimum age to purchase a handgun is 21 years old in most states. By definition, this would limit concealed carry to mostly juniors, seniors and graduate students, non-traditional (older) underclassmen, faculty, and staff.
Limit concealed carry to students housed off-campus, and to faculty and staff members. Firearms would not be allowed in the dormitories. This is both a practical and legal consideration. In-dorm firearms could not be secured properly and uniformly, and should not be allowed.
Those students, faculty and staff must prove that they have secure storage for their firearms in their off-campus dwellings.
They must register the firearm they wish to carry on campus with the university police, and qualify with that firearm to show proficiency and safety at least once per calendar year. These requirements are already served by the current CCW licensing process in some states, and actually exceed the CCW licensing of others, who may only require a one-time qualifying performance. It is also comparable to the qualifying guidelines of most police departments.
In addition to these state guidelines, those faculty, staff and off-campus students who qualify under state CCW guidelines should also take a university-prescribed course detailing any additional campus restrictions, and then require them to pass a written test showing these understand both state CCW laws and campus restrictions.
Universities should adopt guidelines for acceptable firearms and ammunition for those who wish to carry on campus, using the following as a general outline:
- All university-approved CCW firearms shall be of modern design and sound mechanical shape, as shall holsters and spare magazine carriers;
- All firearms shall be of standard self-defense calibers, and these calibers are designated as follows: .380 ACP, .38 Special, 9mm Parabellum, .357 SIG, 40 S&W, .44 Special, and .45 ACP or comparable cartridges;
- All firearms using lower-powered cartridges (below .380 ACP) shall not be allowed;
- All firearms using higher-power cartridges (.357, .41, 44 Magnums, and above) shall not be allowed;
- All firearms using bottlenecked ammunition ( exception: .357 SIG) shall not be allowed;
- Only commercially-loaded frangible ammunition shall be allowed.
Pistol magazines shall be of "standard length" (not exceeding the butt of the firearm but more than 1 inch, including any "bump" pads). The number of magazines would be restricted to one in the firearm and one spare magazine in an approved spare magazine carrier.
The guidelines above are very practical in nature. Certain calibers are simply better than others for CCW purposes, and the calibers cited above encompass the overwhelming majority of those in which defensive handguns are chambered. The frangible ammunition mandate may be new to some that are more familiar with full metal-jacketed (FMJ) and hollowpoint ammunition, and so may need to be explained.
Frangible ammunition is designed to fragment or disintegrate upon or shortly after contact. This significantly reduces the dangers associated with overpenetration, by transferring most or all of the projectile's energy into the target as the bullet fragments. While typically being more lethal to the target, frangible ammunition is not as likely to penetrate structural components (walls, floors, doors). Glaser and MagSafe are two of the most common examples.
As for carrying and storage guidelines, all students would be required to carry their firearms and magazines on their persons at all times while on campus (not in a desk, satchel, purse, or bookbag), and all faculty and staff would be expected to follow these same guidelines, with the additional provision that firearms can be kept in individual locked offices in university-approved, bolted-down gun storage safes for faculty and staff.
The requirements and restrictions outlines above are only a rough roadmap of reasonable outlines for a campus concealed carry program.
A similarly-implemented plan would create an atmosphere where the faculty, staff, and students can be confident that those who are allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus are perhaps better trained than their CCW-licensed counterparts in the rest of society, and are arguably as well trained as some municipal police officers.
Your thoughts?
Stolen from here.
TheOneAndOnly is a credit to the MookieCrew.
Stabbings and beatings of students and teachers have been reported in recent weeks, raising public concern about the nation's schools. Surging school violence has also come on the heels of a crime wave in Argentina marked by ransom kidnappings, street shootings and carjackings.
Show us how it's done smeag...
See you still get all the violence...but at least we'll be armed here if we get a Galtieri...or a Chavez.
Framers of the cons ution>>>>>Mr.Peabody, GGA, and smeagol.
So?
Reason#10102039458 why you should be listening to us instead of viceversa....
Too much of a Euro influence is Argie's problem.
I dispute the point that a tank is less efficient than a handgun.
You do?
So, an M1 Abrams would be more efficient on the second floor of Norris Hall than my 9mm Glock?
Look up the word efficient.
I wish forums had the smilie for "sarcasm" or better yet a "right over your head".
Look at the facts.
http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/gunfacts.shtml
http://www.gunowners.org/fs9901.htm
As of 2000, Florida ranked #4 in population but ranked #21 in suicides. Since the right-to-carry law was enacted in Florida the following changes occured. The homicide rate dropped 36%, firearm homicides dropped 37%, and handgun homicides dropped 41%. In the ten states that adopted right-to-carry laws the results were:
* "no change in the suicide rate
* a 0.5% rise in accidental firearm deaths
* 5% decline in rapes
* 7% decline in aggravated assaults
* 8% decline in murder and
* 845 fewer multiple victim public shootings..""Approximatey 11% of gun owners and 13% of handgun owners have used their firearms for protection from criminals at the rate of about 760,000 times a year." "There are also two million defensive gun uses per year."
"After Washington DC enacted their hand gun ban their homicide rate rose 200% while the overall U.S. rate only rose 12%." "Of the 6.3 million violent crimes of rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple assault only 8% involved firearms."
"For decades the U.S. Dept of Justice's Crime Victimization Survey has shown that resistance with a gun is by far the safest course of action when one is confronted by a criminal. The probability of serious injury from a criminal confrontation is 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than resisting with a gun."
* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."20
* 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."21
* 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."22* Washington, D.C. has, perhaps, the most restrictive gun control laws in the country, and yet it has one of the highest murder rates in the nation.
* Objection: Critics claim criminals merely get their guns in Virginia where the laws are more relaxed. This, they argue, is why the D.C. gun ban is not working.
* Answer: Perhaps criminals do get their guns in Virginia, but this overlooks one point: If the availability of guns in Virginia is the root of D.C.'s problems, why does Virginia not have the same murder and crime rate as the District? Virginia is awash in guns and yet the murder rate is much, much lower. This holds true even for Virginia's urban areas. The murder rates are:Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.15
* Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.Nationwide. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:
* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;12 and
* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2
* Of the 2.5 million self-defense cases, as many as 200,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.3
* Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).4 And readers of Newsweek learned in 1993 that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The "error rate" for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."5
* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.Also, there are probably over 200 million guns in the US. There are an average of 29,000 deaths where a gun was used. Take out suicides and self-defense deaths and you're most likely left with maybe about 15,000 deaths if that. Divide 15,000 by 200 million and you get less than 1% of all guns are used in homicide. Is that point whatever percent of guns used wrongly worth it to take them away from the responsible owners?. England and Canada's murder rates were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates. 114
2. The murder rates in England, Canada and Japan have risen tremendously since passing their gun control laws.115 And most crime rates in England have now surpassed the rates in the U.S.:
* In 1998, a study conducted by a British professor and a U.S. statistician found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States. "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study that was published by the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ). "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's."116
* The murder rate in the United States is higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years."117
3. United States: Take away the guns, and there is still more murder. United States' NON-GUN murder rate is higher than the TOTAL murder rates in England, Canada or Japan.118 In other words, Americans kill each other more often with weapons other than guns -- such as with knives, fists and feet.
* It is absurd to claim that the U.S. has more murders because it has more guns. If one were to "magically" make every gun disappear in the U.S., the hard fact is that Americans would still kill each other-without guns-more often than the citizens of England, Canada or Japan kill each other will ALL types of weapons.
* The problem is not the type of weapons used, but rather, the failure in America to keep violent criminals off the street. (See point 2 under Myth #2 above.)
Last edited by The Captain; 04-19-2007 at 04:05 PM.
What the world thinks about gun laws in the US.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...-virginia-tech
This link is not opening up. But I agree with the world view.
That truth has brought down many great men.
Of course a small % of total guns are used in homicides.
The question is what percentage are guns used in homicides?
The second floor of Norris Hall wouldn't exist if Cho had an M1A2.
Want to argue efficiency? The M1 has a 95% hit ratio with it's main gun, no one will get close to that with a pistol.
In conclusion, I'll make sure to add sarcasm tags to my posts.
[/sarcasm]
Massachusetts getting after it
"....The new law, which was approved in July and was supposed to be implemented later this month, cracks down on privately made, unserialized firearms called "ghost guns" and criminalizes the possession of bump stocks and trigger cranks, which increase the firing rate of guns.
Besides regulating firearms, the legislation places more responsibility on gun owners by requiring applicants for a gun license to complete live-fire training and it also expands the state's so-called "red flag" law to allow police as well as health care and school officials to alert courts if they believe someone with access to guns poses a risk. The courts can then determine whether to, at least temporarily, take away the guns..."
https://www.newsweek.com/massachuset...un-law-1962995
Tim Walz is friends with school shooters, so I dunno, ask him? His friends should have the answers.
Communist anti-2A legislation for sure, that's why it was stupid of Trump to ego-out Charlie Baker who at least provided a check on this kind of thing and nominate a MAGA candidate in a deep blue college educated state and obviously let a very far leftist like Maura Healey win. Dolores Umbridge vibes... shudder.
Letting far-leftist courts such as MA subjectively enforce already uncons utional red flag laws is very, very dangerous. On the slippery slope to totalitarian government control. Without a doubt, straight white men will be disproportionately unfairly misadjudicated-against as they have been nationally in the past couple decades at least. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to comprehend that straight white men are under attack and subversion throughout the West. The Soros and Rothschilds of the world, the Goldman Sachs and Barclays and Buffetts and BlackRocks and Blackstones and Vanguards are laughing.
Do you really believe he is friends with school shooters?
I mean, you take a man for his word until he's proven to be a liar, no?
Like being unanimously convicted of 34 felony counts for fraud?
Or not being inaugurated President of the United States because he lost the 2020 election?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
