So Colorado's supremes overrule CU's gun ban in Boulder and professors get to take it or else. Have to assume this applies to open carry as well if the college can not ban them in any form it seems.Can you imagine a classroom where the students wear guns even if it's just one being displayed in that class?This is where we're at these days and down the road there will be a price to pay for throwing common sense out the window to appease what manipulated people perceive as "freedom". This shit ain't right.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Colorado Students in Class with Guns
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Since this school is no longer a "gun free zone", mass murderers wont be picking on this school anymore. People have had enough of being in a area where they can be shot like fish in a barrel. Almost EVERY mass shooting, if not all, has been in a "gun free zone" where the shooter can have his greatest victim count by being unopposed. This state and a couple of others have seen the light and the advantage of getting rid of "gun free zones". People have not been manipulated into anything, if anything people are taking back what they have been manipulated out of.
ReplyDeleteThe school is a state school and the teachers are state employees. Professor Jerry Peterson's "personal policy" is invalid under any employment conditions. If your personal policy (opinion) clashes with employment requirements then you have a decision to make, quit or keep your opinions to yourself.
If people were never disarmed in the first place, mass shootings would be a curiosity at least, non-existent at best.
That's total bullshit that the pro-gun crowd likes to repeat and repeat.
DeleteThe Gabby Giffords shooting is the proof.
"Almost EVERY mass shooting, if not all, has been in a 'gun free zone'..."
DeleteI clearly see the words "almost EVERY" which is factually correct. Please list mass shootings in the U.S. which did not occur in gun-free zones.
"if not all,"? How misleading do you want to be?
DeleteI already mentioned the Tucson shooting which showed us several things.
1. it was a non gun free zone
2. the several armed citizens present couldn't do shit
3. mentally ill people can buy guns legally
It is not an isolated or anecdotal case. We consider "mass" shootings those in which three or more people are shot. These happen daily at work places, at private homes, at anyplace some nut decides to lose it.
These guys are not the calculating villains you like to say they are. Most of them are spontaneously-acting lunatics who couldn't care less whether a place is gun-free or not.
Many workplaces ban guns. The Aurora theater banned guns. Malls often ban guns. Schools and houses of worship are gun-free zones in most states. Those are the places where these incidents typically occur.
DeleteYes, the Tucson shooting was out in the open. You've got one example. The good citizen with a gun that I've heard about was at some distance when the incident was happening. But, of course, since the wacko wasn't shot, that's a reason for no one to carry a handgun.
Why don't you tell me this: If the alarm goes off at my college to announce a shooter on campus, what would you suggest that I do? Since the law won't let me have my handgun with me, what's your answer in that situation? Don't tell me that you'll keep wackos from getting guns--that's unrealistic. Give me a workable solution in the scenario that I named.
So this time Anonymous asked the magic question which Mike chooses to ignore:
Delete"I clearly see the words "almost EVERY" which is factually correct. Please list mass shootings in the U.S. which did not occur in gun-free zones."
Well Mike? Is Tucson typical or is it the exception that proves the rule? We are all waiting with baited breath.
Tucson is not that rare of an example. There were many others which I'm not going to take the time to look up and list. That's one of your arguing techniques. Insist something is untrue and make your opponent spend time and energy to prove it while you knew it all along.
Delete"Almost EVERY" is too strong in my opinion.
And one of yours ... in fact your main technique ... seems to be making assumptions about events that have no basis in fact and presenting them as if it were fact.
DeleteAnd then you have the audacity to attempt to defend those positions even when shown that they are factually untrue.
Which I am pretty sure, if you were to take the time to look it up, is a pretty good definition of intellectual dishonesty.
Mikeb, these mass shootings most often take place in malls, schools, and houses of worship--in other words, gun-free zones, most of the time, whether by the choice of the property owner or by the law of the state. Tucson is the only one that I can recall that was not. I'm not saying that there aren't others. What I'm showing you is that they typically happen in areas where guns are banned. I know of nothing else to the contrary.
Delete"Tucson is not that rare of an example. There were many others which I'm not going to take the time to look up and list. That's one of your arguing techniques. Insist something is untrue and make your opponent spend time and energy to prove it while you knew it all along.
Delete"Almost EVERY" is too strong in my opinion."
Alright Mike. Since you are too lazy (or perhaps scared of what you will find) to do your own research and would much rather trust your gut rather than fact, I have done a little digging and crunching myself.
Now keep in mind this is by no means scientific, but it was an honest effort. First, I googled "list of mass shootings in america" and found this list:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9414540/A-history-of-mass-shootings-in-the-US-since-Columbine.html
Then I went through and marked which occurred in GFZ (gun free zones) and which occurred in FL (free liberty) zones. There was only one case in which I could not determine with reasonable certainty which it was.
I compiled them here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvqKDnBk43XddHRmVm9jdDBBVHhObUtYZWh3bDVKdWc
Of the 30 shootings listed, 26 occurred in GFZ while 3 were likely in places where guns were allowed and 1 I could not determine.
Gee, that sure seems like "almost every" to me ...
What of it Mike? Over 86% (and that is with me giving you the one I could not discover) of the mass shootings listed in that UK article occurred in a GFZ.
DeleteWouldn't you agree that qualifies for the "almost every" adjective?
Yes, that's definitely "almost every one."
DeleteThank you.
DeleteIts not total bullshit Mike and you know it. The Gabby Giffords shooting was in public, not in a gun free zone and other armed civilians were around to help stop that guy.
ReplyDeleteThe "pro-gun guys" also include state officials that pass these laws, the majority of the people that wanted these laws that rid themselves of gun free zones. So if you look at the crowds that repeat and repeat, its not just pro-gun guys, its the majority of the public as without their support, it couldnt happen. This is whats called a representitive republic. This is what happens when the majority is properly represented.
Yeah, and the shooter was surrounded by NRA cowards who were frozen with fear. Finally disarmed by a 70 YO woman. NRA cowards were too stupid and filled with fear to do shit.
DeleteYou have some evidence to support that assertion? As far as I can tell, you're just a whining little Jadegold knockoff who's brave enough to shout nonsense from the safety of a keyboard. I respect differing opinions that are based on intellectually honest thought, but I see none of that in what you say.
DeleteAnonymous is right, Greg. Texas is wrong.
DeleteUh huh--let's see:
Delete1. Gun control legislation fails repeatedly. In everywhere but California and one or two other states, gun laws get looser and looser over time. Gun control candidates lose elections.
2. Anonymous presents no evidence that anyone in the Tucson incident was a member of the NRA.
Mikeb, I keep forgetting that you're a resident of Bizzaro World.
Peterson is in the physics department and is worried that class discussions could get heated enough that someone would pull a gun. I guess we in English are a calmer bunch. But if Peterson has so little control over himself that he can imagine wanting to kill someone who disagrees with him, then he shouldn't carry a gun. At the same time, he shouldn't impose the rules that he has to follow to keep himself in line on saner people.
ReplyDeleteThis is akin to Little Rock in 1957. Rights are rights. I look forward to this coming to Arkansas. I won't have a fit and cancel class because a student is carrying. I'll be carrying too. And the discussions will continue as before.
Really, I cant think of any off the top of my head except the Giffords shooting that Mike wants to classify as a mass shooting.
ReplyDeleteBut I bet Mike can fill in that blank for us!
Sorry, this was a reply to Anonymous, hit the wrong reply button.
DeleteFor Tex coward moron and Greg, I pray the prayer of St Gunsel: You love guns, so I hope that your loved ones are at the next massacre to feel the love back.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, why is it that you oppose guns? You clearly are not against violence. Why don't you try being reasonable in these discussions?
DeleteSo how is it going in your neck of the woods Nasty Jack? Cant stir up hate and discontent on your site?
Delete