![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Not yet, not publically anyway, but it's come close:
http://www.slate.com/articles/health..._firearms.html http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/1...h-Good-Guy-Gun |
Quote:
http://controversialtimes.com/issues...uys-with-guns/ |
12 what? The discussion was over incidents regarding 'good guys' potentially shooting each other. If it is going to be extended to other incidents involving guns held by civilians*, logically it also needs to include incidents like this:
Quote:
And back on the topic of 'good guys' potentially shooting 'good guys', read this: Quote:
* Edit: just noticed that not all of the 12 incidents involved civilian 'good guys' anyway. I don't think anyone is arguing that U.S. law enforcement officers should be unarmed. |
Quote:
Just remember what Giffords is advocating is making sure that potential victims never have the ability to fight back. What i'd like to see is those who create "gun free zones" are held responsible when they don't prevent a mass killer from gaining access to that zone. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
August, if you want to claim that easy access to firearms makes mass killings less likely, please provide the data. Not anecdotes, data.
|
Quote:
What I do believe however most firmly is that gun free zones are nothing but playgrounds for mass murderers where only the potential victims are disarmed. If you can prove me wrong then do so but opinion pieces are not proof. |
Quote:
|
It will be interesting to observe how this test case works out. I am glad it is in Texas.
|
Quote:
The real obvious truth here is that the only people actually prevented from carrying firearms in a gun "free" zone are the potential victims, those who don't intend to cause anyone harm in the first place and care enough about the law to obey it. Prove me wrong but show me something besides opinion pieces. Now if you think that walling off entire colleges and installing armed guard checkpoints and metal detectors in every doorway is better response than allowing properly licensed gun owners to carry concealed like they can everywhere else then more power to you but I disagree. If you won't do the former (and so far they haven't) then you have to allow the latter or you're telling people that their lives aren't as important as your political agenda. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.