The liberals fault. Everything is the liberals fault. According to who? You and the NRA. Every Conservative site after the killings is saying the same thing. It's the liberals fault because not enough guns. And blaming it on no gun zones. Even after Sandy Hook you guys can't be budged. Not willing to compromise one iota. Point the finger somewhere else. And not even try to address what's going on.
I don't know why I ever bother. I did address it quite clearly. You just didn't like the answer because it didn't leave people as a bunch of helpless victims waiting for the next psychopath to show up.
Well I tell you. My daughter is a college student and I'm worried a lot about her safety. And I don't want everybody on campus carrying a firearm. But I do want Security, local police and maybe even qualified others who have been approved to carry on campus. But not everybody. That's crazy. And the idea that no gun zones are the reasons for these killings is nonsense.
This is what I said. I'll add to the above, a new sign should replace the "gun free zone" sign. It should read "Our teachers are armed". Gun Free Zone = Soft Target. Fact. They are the places being targeted by these people. Fact. Pandora's box has been opened now, just getting rid of them won't solve it since the perception is the target is soft. You need to "harden the target", as cman said. We had different approaches, same idea. I like mine better for a few reasons - mainly it's cheaper and it puts the defense directly in the classroom instead of some unknown distance away.
Just the logic of posting "gun free zone" should be an alarm in regards to the sense of anyone who would suggest it. Would you want a neon sign to light up saying "door unlocked" or "alarm not set" if you forget to set them so criminals know what house to hit? What possible purpose does that serve?
And while you're at it why don't you get your facts straight. That college was not a gun free zone. http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2015/10/umpqua_community_college_not_a.html
So you think "stats" are the way to figure crazy out? You think your bullshit liberal articles pose any solution? You think repeating "300 million" adds anything to the discussion? Yeah we've all got you pegged. Time for you to slink away with your patented "I'm no expert" deflection _
I don't know which site is right on this. I know that Oregon Live is a major site I never heard of the other one. But anyways qualified people can carry on that campus. I'm sure in a shootout they can enter campus buildings to save people's lives. To say the liberals have blood on their hands is preposterous.
Setting aside the foolishness of "gun free zone" itself, the thinking that who ever was about to commit a mass murder, would pick a different target because this one was "gun free" is beyond stupid. Oh, no guns on campus...OK I'll go to the mall. They are feel good laws that do nothing to make anyone safer. You keep repeating the NRA... but the Obama administration had 2 years with both houses and nothing on gun control was advanced. Both sides are making large money on this my friend. It's an issue neither side in Washington wants to go away. Whores the whole lot of them.
Who's we? Or do you need a posse to back you up. You can IM them if you want to if that makes you feel better. Still waiting to hear your views on the topic at hand.
Hahahaaa typical pcl posting crap then backtracking when called on it. "Hey guys, it's just something I read. I'm no expert." _
Not called on anything. Read the article I posted from Oregon Live. It says people could legally carry on campus. And it wasn't a gun free zone. If they had a license for concealed carry. The article he posted said true but not allowed to bring them in campus buildings. I'm not sure if that's accurate or not. I'm not making outrageous statements saying that blood is on the hands of conservatives or gun advocates. But you don't care anything about that just want to attack.
I hear both sides of the argument on this issue. I ask this, considering the state of affairs and you are a law abiding citizen, why wouldn't you legally arm yourself? If the issue isn't legal and responsible gun owners, become one.
Has nothing to do with attacking. I just find it humorous how often you post completely irrelevant or faulty or plains erroneous stuff then back away saying you're "no expert". _
Gun free zone or not, this guy was ready for a shootout. 5 guns, a flak jacket, and extra ammunition? Yeah, if it wasn't a gun free zone he would have backed down.
I'm not an expert on anything. As for the topic at hand every state has different rules and laws and even sub laws. If you have nothing constructive to say other than I'm an idiot and a phony you made your point. As for the topic at hand you don't say a word. To me this is derailing.
Fuck off. I made very salient points about the desire to own multiple guns and why it's acceptable. Why people own multiple tools or cars or knives or guitars. You brought up Teddy Bridgewater to derail the thread. I very easily could have mentioned your idiotic musings that Travis d'Arnaud could switch to outfield because in A ball 5 years ago he weighed 185 pounds. It's erroneous and moronic bullshit you feel the need to post them apologize that you're "not an expert" I find entertaining. Seriously, fuck off. _
