/ Register

  1. Hello! You are currently viewing our community as a guest. Register today and apply to be a member of one of the longest standing gaming communities around. Once you have registered learn about our team and how to apply!

What a terrible idea

Discussion in 'General Open/Public Discussion' started by Strygun, 15 Apr 2008.


  1. Strygun

    Strygun

    Strygun, 15 Apr 2008
    #1
  2. Hamma

    Hamma Commanding Officer Officer

    Officer
    I think it's a great idea, if not students faculty and staff at least. Only law abiding citizens read the "No guns" sign the criminals walk right in and shoot all the defenseless people as evident by Columbine, Virginia Tech and the countless others.

    They are allowed to do it in Utah:
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/20/cnnu.guns/index.html

    Haven't heard of any shootouts there yet.. :p
     
    Hamma, 15 Apr 2008
    #2
  3. Aeternus

    Aeternus DragonWolf

    Sounds like a good idea to me...

    What's the rationale for such a restriction anyway? If you allow certain persons - supposedly responsible enough - to carry a firearm off-campus, why do they suddenly become a risk or liability on campus? The idea proposed by one of the Police officers that they want to focus on prevention doesn't hold any water with me. Law enforcement works towards prevention of crimes off campus, and yet they allow firearms to be carried there...
     
    Last edited: 15 Apr 2008
    Aeternus, 15 Apr 2008
    #3
  4. springwheat

    springwheat DragonWolf

    I don't see anything wrong with it. There are far more unstable, incompetent individuals out there with driver's licenses than there are concealed carry permits. Contrary to what some believe, people with a loaded firearm are not going to use it as a solution to every problem regardless of how big or small it is. The decision to use deadly force is not one any rational human being takes lightly or on a whim.
     
    springwheat, 15 Apr 2008
    #4
  5. Sentrosi

    Sentrosi Protocol Officer Officer

    Officer
    If someone is disturbed enough to plan out a school massacre, they're going to find a way to do it. I would rather have a means to end something like that by taking one life than having that nutjob take several.
     
    Sentrosi, 16 Apr 2008
    #5
  6. Strygun

    Strygun

    My biggest issue is the idea of gun-toters in consistently populated areas. Depending on your campus, there could be 2-3 thousand students in a one block radius, all walking around outside, minding their own business. That's how many targets?

    On top of that, I surely don't trust the current CCW licensing process enough to be comfortable with some of the people who get a license to carry. Is it a long process? Sure? Are there lots of checks and rechecks? Of course. But isn't the process of buying a gun supposed to be "secure" as well? Obviously, it's not.

    Putting guns in the hands of potentially irresponsible young adults (20-21-22) year olds on a college campus is not the best idea. What happens when one of those students gets angry at another student and then his friends egg him on to get back at him? Trust me, I AM a college student - people do ALL KINDS OF THINGS that they normally wouldn't do just because their friends are watching.

    Not to mention the fact that I think this quote is very accurate: ""The other side of that, I shoot everybody with a gun who doesn't have a uniform on and I then I end up shooting somebody who was a citizen with a carry permit," Ferrara said." You're actually increasing your chances of being shot if you carry. When some police officer (or worse, campus security officer) comes rushing into a building that gunfire has come out of, they're not going to stop and ask to see your CCW license before they start shooting at anyone with a weapon.
     
    Strygun, 16 Apr 2008
    #6
  7. Hamma

    Hamma Commanding Officer Officer

    Officer
    You are assuming that anyone with a gun will just up and use it which is not the case. If you are going to go through the trouble of getting a valid CCW (which really is a pain in most states) you are going to be responsible with that power. If you aren't then you would have found other means already to get a weapon.

    By your logic since I carry a pocket knife I could randomly break it out and start hacking away at someone randomly if I don't like what they said to me. Or that I am going to start running people down with my car (a deadly weapon by far) just because they are in my way and I don't think they should be there. It's the usual double standard we see when it comes to handgun ownership :(

    It's the criminals that will obtain a weapon and use it for unfavorable reasons. I don't know the stats on CCW users but I bet the percentage of them that go postal is very small. There are plenty of students carrying in college already in some states, and just because this particular story wants to arm students does not mean that every single student will all of a sudden go out and get a CCW and start packing. There's alot of folks out there who already have that CCW and just can't carry in certain areas. Just because you can carry do not assume that everyone on campus will be carrying.
     
    Last edited: 16 Apr 2008
    Hamma, 16 Apr 2008
    #7
  8. springwheat

    springwheat DragonWolf

    You're assuming the decision to carry a weapon is correlated with a decision to use it.

    This is a fairly dumb statement. A best effort is made to ensure legally purchased firearms are not sold to at risk individuals. Arbitrary denial without cause constitutes discrimination. The Va Tech shooter passed all of the appropriate checks to obtain his weapon if I remember correctly. Who is responsible for predicting that someone may go over the edge in the future?

    Again, you're associating the ability to carry a firearm and use deadly force with a predisposition to employ deadly force. I drive a car to and from work every day. I have the capability to run over any pedestrian I see if the mood strikes me. Do I? No, because I can behave in a rational manner even when pissed off. For what its worth, the military consists of large numbers of 18-19-20 year old legal adults that are all given some firearms training. How often do these people gun each other down over trivial issues?

    That really needs clarification or context. Shooting a guy with his hands in the air or thats prone on the ground whether or not he has a weapon in his hand is idiotic.
     
    springwheat, 16 Apr 2008
    #8
  9. Strygun

    Strygun

    If I remember correctly, there was something on the VT shooter's record that should've prevented his capability of buying a gun. Didn't really stop him though, did it? Obtaining a firearm is relatively easy when compared to obtaining a CCW license. But even still, if the VT shooter can get a firearm, he can get a CCW.

    How often? Well at this point it's about twice a year. And it happens at schools. Read the article to get a bunch of references. Schools!


    Idiotic, sure. Common? Probably more than we'd like to believe.
     
    Strygun, 16 Apr 2008
    #9
  10. symen

    symen DragonWolf

    Actually, I've known several individuals who did just that. Frankly, it was a terrifying thing to behold. That said, I don't see any particular problem with this idea. The Second Amendment to the Constitution prevents the government from infringing on our right and freedom to keep and bear arms. It doesn't say anything about the right not applying in certain places.
     
    symen, 21 Apr 2008
    #10
  11. symen

    symen DragonWolf

    And that's illegal -- police officers lose their jobs and go to jail for shooting someone who isn't shooting back. And that's a good thing.
     
    symen, 21 Apr 2008
    #11
  12. Strygun

    Strygun

    People going on a shooting rampage is also illegal. At this point, it's useless to talk about what's legal/illegal in this situation.
     
    Strygun, 22 Apr 2008
    #12
  13. symen

    symen DragonWolf

    In most jurisdictions, yes. ;)

    I disagree wholeheartedly with this. In this situation, police officers are expected to be able to discern who is on a shooting rampage and who is not. Frankly, given the situation, that's less difficult than most other things they are charged with investigating. If they are allowed to shoot whomever they want to to restore order, than they are much more dangerous to the average person than the shooter on a rampage -- there is no accountability to them for who they shoot. At least the original shooter ostensibly has a legal penalty for his or her actions.
     
    symen, 22 Apr 2008
    #13
  14. The Peacemaker

    The Peacemaker

    I think we need automated sentry turrets built into the buildings. They pop up and shoot whom ever is brandishing a fire arm with a stun gun like dart. This solves all the problems :D
     
    The Peacemaker, 30 Apr 2008
    #14
  15. Indecisive

    Indecisive DragonWolf

    Indecisive, 9 May 2008
    #15

Share This Page