Concealed weapons on campus?

[<RJMC>]

well the good thing is that if they are bored they can whit the guns in the campus

dude1:"hey lets play real life ****er strike dude!"
dude2:"yeah dude!"
*insert scenes of massives shooting sprees here*

dude1:"fock yeah I won! now respawn bitches!..........c'mon we dont have all day...."

 

[Pesmerga]

You fail to take into accout ch-ch-ch-chain reactions as I outlined on the first page.

This isn't laser tag, kid, those kinds of things don't actually happen.

PEOPLE WHO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSES ARE TRAINED, PROUD GUN OWNERS. THEY ARE NOT YOUR AVERAGE PUNK GOTH KID WHO THOUGHT IT WOULD BE COOL TO SPEND $200 ON A GLOCK.

 

[repiV]

In contrast with your extensive experience with gun crime?

Yes, because of course there are only two possibilities here - ideas grounded in prejudice and wilful ignorance of the facts, or firsthand experience of facing down the barrel of a gun.
Are you insane?

Wait...aren't liberals people who want weak government and individual freedoms? What are conservatives then?

No. Traditionally, yes, but not now. Liberalism as it exists in the Western world today is based on authoritarianism, control and conformity. Instead of a certain brand of conservativism which seeks to impose moral standards of public conduct upon everyone, liberalism seeks to restrict people's rights to exist outside the mainstream of consumerist society. Sacrifices must be made for the "common good", and people must be protected from themselves.
Ironically it's actually conservatives that want weak government and individual freedoms.

Label_1:
You're being an as*hole by reducing complex debates into simplistic 'smart people vs. stupid people' arguments.

On the contrary, I'm not the one reducing a complex issue into a ridiculously simplistic "more guns = more death" equation.

Funny, considering the right wing has had more political clout in recent years.

Goto Label_1

Hardly. The "right-wing" that is currently ruling the US is anything but, and the culture of authoritarianism that is suffocating pretty much the entire Western world is entirely leftist.

 

[Eejit]

This isn't laser tag, kid, those kinds of things don't actually happen.

PEOPLE WHO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSES ARE TRAINED, PROUD GUN OWNERS. THEY ARE NOT YOUR AVERAGE PUNK GOTH KID WHO THOUGHT IT WOULD BE COOL TO SPEND $200 ON A GLOCK.

Of course ch-ch-ch-chain reactions would happen, people would get confused, startled and scared by loud banging noises and screams, draw their gun and just shoot at whoever else nearby they see holding a gun. It is inevitable! Especially if they're "proud" about having a concealed weapon, then they're more likely to want to be heroic with it in that kind of situation!

 

[Pesmerga]

*sigh*

Whatever, Eejit. Obviously you have it all worked out.

 

[Tyguy]

maybe we should reanalyze our gun control laws

 

[repiV]

Of course ch-ch-ch-chain reactions would happen, people would get confused, startled and scared by loud banging noises and screams, draw their gun and just shoot at whoever else nearby they see holding a gun. It is inevitable!

Sorry, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Especially if they're "proud" about having a concealed weapon, then they're more likely to want to be heroic with it in that kind of situation!

On the contrary, it goes against every human impulse to shoot another human being. Until they started to develop mental conditioning techniques in training in the 1960s, the vast majority of soldiers didn't even fire at the enemy. British victory in the Falklands is largely attributed to the 95% kill rate of our troops, compared with an enemy who were much more averse to taking life.
And we're talking civilians here, not soldiers.

 

[Eejit]

It. Is. Inevitable!

Just think about it logically, you have your gun, you hear shooting and screams and them a bunch more gunshots. Since you have no idea what's going on and you're scared shitless you shoot the first other person you see shooting in the belief that they're the nutjob when they could actually be someone shooting the nutjob!

I convinced Pesh I can convince you too!

 

[repiV]

It. Is. Inevitable!

Just think about it logically, you have your gun, you hear shooting and screams and them a bunch more gunshots. Since you have no idea what's going on and you're scared shitless you shoot the first other person you see shooting in the belief that they're the nutjob when they could actually be someone shooting the nutjob!

That's not logical at all. In all likelihood any encounter is going to be in very close quarters, like a classroom, and all the guns would be pointed right back at the shooter.
Furthermore, not many people would have anything like the kind of skill necessary to take someone down at the kind of distances you would need to be confused about who was the perpetrator. Accurately firing a weapon is very difficult, and cannot be done by an average person in a moment's reflex action.
And like I said, you don't just pick up a gun and shoot somebody. If anything the criticism should be that the CCW holders might be ineffective against an aggressor because they're reluctant to actually take action, not that they'd end up shooting each other.

Obviously if this could happen on a campus, there's no reason it would be any less likely to happen elsewhere - but the US is an armed society, and how often do you hear of the occurence of free-for-all shootouts? I've never, ever heard of that happening.

 

[Eejit]

But there would be smoke all over the place from shooting the gun confusing the issue. Most school shooters use flare guns in recent years for that very reason.

I'm not saying this would happen every time, but once it starts it's a ch-ch-ch-chain reaction that could wipe out half the school.

 

[repiV]

But there would be smoke all over the place from shooting the gun confusing the issue. Most school shooters use flare guns in recent years for that very reason.

Now I'm really not following you...

 

[Pesmerga]

Eejit is a failed troll.

 

[Eejit]

Too surreal?

 

[Sulkdodds]

I'm extremely skeptical about the virtue of guns in a campus environment, even though I can see the strength of the argument. School shootings are rather special cases in which shooters are part of a close environment and are able to access students when they are packed together stationary in one place with few exists. I'm not convinced that quite the same rules apply as do in, say, a metropolitan centre.

I suppose there is only one way to find out.

Hardly. The "right-wing" that is currently ruling the US is anything but, and the culture of authoritarianism that is suffocating pretty much the entire Western world is entirely leftist.

No, this obviously isn't true. Right-wing and left-wing are confused terms but the people who use 'right' to mean libertarian and 'left' to mean communist are not noticeably in the majority. And of course, what people call 'socially right-wing' is never responsible for any authoritarianism! Thatcher was entirely unoppressive!

I can't quite work out whether you are trying to redefine the argument of 'left vs right' in a silly way, or whether you're just confusing terms. Either what you mean by 'left-wing' or 'right-wing' or 'liberal' is very different to what everyone else means, or you're wrong. I'm almost tempted to suggest you are intentionally messing with words in order to twist discourse towards absurd places.

This, however, is clearly an argument for another topic, and I don't appreciate you bringing it into this one. What are you, CptStern? You seem to be just looking for opportunities to bring up your pet projects - as if this thread about guns, a common preoccupation of yours, were not enough of a stimulation for your libertarian muscles without you dragging in your wider social and political theories. We don't really need to hear about how this is all down to the 'liberals' (indiscriminate) and how it all links to wider social movements of which you (and, now, we) are violently aware. There's a fine line between linking well to wider issues and dragging in what isn't necessary. I think we are close to crossing that line and should step back from it. This isn't necessary. I'm perfectly happy to argue the point(s) with you some other time, but it's best this thread stays strictly and narrowly on-topic: guns.

If you have such great big axes to grind, then you should combine them into some kind of master argument and start a new thread some time.

PS: This is only addressed to repiV because it's most obviously his axe. It also goes for everybody else - like Vikram and, ultimately, like me. This is as much a warning to myself as anyone else.
PS2: I'm not going to enforce anything, it's just I can see this thread spiralling away into a big dialectic wankython and it'd be half my fault, as always. I'd much rather see something rigorous emerge regarding gun policy.

 

[Kula Meenur]

I can't really see this bill being passed, and I really hope it doesn't. Maybe I'm not giving the students enough credit or maybe the school will have an awesome way to filter who gets to carry and who doesn't...I have no idea. I love guns and I love shooting, but this just seems like a terrible, awful "solution".

You're absolutely right, it's a bullshit solution. :|




The only way that i can see this working is if they bring state hired securtiy firms in for on campus security; or they pass a bill to only allow teachers to carry small calibre weapons on campus, only after they have completed a 12wk training course in association with the police and with state sponsership.



The supposed bill is el la crap.

 

[Jintor]

I don't want to weigh into the gun debate thing, but I do not like how the mentality for 'prevent gun shootings' is 'bring more guns to the table'.

 

[French Ninja]

Okay...
Even I think this is a really bad idea.
What were they thinking?!

I'd imagine everyone carrying guns would just cause mass confusionm as to who is the killer.

QFE

 

[Ennui]

I personally would feel remarkably less safe if I knew that other students were allowed to carry concealed firearms on my campus than I do right now with them not allowed.

 

[jverne]

well the good thing is that if they are bored they can whit the guns in the campus

dude1:"hey lets play real life ****er strike dude!"
dude2:"yeah dude!"
*insert scenes of massives shooting sprees here*

dude1:"fock yeah I won! now respawn bitches!..........c'mon we dont have all day...."

lol :cheese:

 

[Tagaziel]

I don't want to weigh into the gun debate thing, but I do not like how the mentality for 'prevent gun shootings' is 'bring more guns to the table'.

Yeah, it's kind of like to "prevent bombings in Iraq" by "bombing even more shit out of Iraq".

 

[Sam]

This is all ridiculous. The real thread is Zombieturtle going to cut some bitches in his spare time.

 

[Steven]

don't a lot of these school shooters kill themselves afterwards anyway?

I don't support carrying guns to school but if they shoot themselves after the damage is already done.

 

[Mr Stabby]

Yeah, it's kind of like to "prevent bombings in Iraq" by "bombing even more shit out of Iraq".

No, it's more like trying to stop violence in Iraq by increasing the number of armed soldiers.

 

[sinkoman]

Thanks but no thanks.

Can't see this being detrimental, but I can't see it being at all beneficial either.

On the other hand, I can see some deprived maniac thinking to himself, "**** yeah, imma kill myself, WAIT! I have a better idea! SCHOOLWIDE GUNBATTLE!!!!!!"

Why can't they just arm security?

Seriously. ****, come on, I can semi-understand how intimidation could work in this situation, but why the **** are they arming the student body?

Why not arm the guys that are ye know... Supposed to protect...

 

[Jintor]

No, it's more like trying to stop violence in Iraq by increasing the number of armed soldiers.

Nah, more like increasing the amount of people with guns.

So basically just replaced 'school' with 'Iraq'.

 

[Pulse]

No, it's more like trying to stop violence in Iraq by increasing the number of armed soldiers.

I didn't realise students are equal in terms of skill and training in comparison to armed soldiers.

I'm off to get an RPG.

 

[Mr Stabby]

I didn't realise students are equal in terms of skill and training in comparison to armed soldiers.

I'm off to get an RPG.

A concealed carry permit requires a competency test. I wasn't comparing students to soldiers, just making the point that guns act as a deterrent.

 

[xcellerate]

A concealed carry permit requires a competency test.

not in a lot of states, including alabama (mine). To get a concealed carry license you just have to go to the court house and pay them the $7.50. If you're allowed to own a handgun then you can be allowed to carry it pretty much.

here are the restrictions:

(1) Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year;

(2) Is a fugitive from justice;

(3) Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;

(4) Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution;

(5) Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or an alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;

(6) Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his or her citizenship;

(8) Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner; or

(9) Has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

(10) Cannot lawfully receive, possess, ship, or transport a firearm.

 

[PvtRyan]

A concealed carry permit requires a competency test. I wasn't comparing students to soldiers, just making the point that guns act as a deterrent.

Yes, I'm quite sure a psychotic, suicidal maniac will be deterred by the prospect of getting shot.

If you wanna continue the Iraq analogy, it's more like sending more troops to Iraq with the hope that the suicidal Muslim extremists will suddenly be scared and cease their fighting.

 

[Druckles]

(5) Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or an alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;

But what if the aliens get in legally! There will be no stopping them!!

/me puts on his tin hat.

 

[Cormeh]

I get angry about the argument that students should also carry weapons to deter murderous gun wielding maniacs from a killing spree, it's naive and arrogant.

I'd bet you anything the next murderous gun wielding maniac would simply say "oh, the kids in this school are packing, I'll just go and shoot up a shopping centre or primary school or SOMEWHERE I CAN KILL PEOPLE FOR AS LONG AS I CAN MANAGE"

And colleges around the U.S would have a fantastic rise in applications for the next semester, because every stupid ****ing idiot student twat has a gun.

 

[Druckles]

I'll just go and shoot up a shopping centre or primary school

Holy Crap! What if that happens! Better dish out weapons to primary school kids! D:

 

[Mr Stabby]

Yes, I'm quite sure a psychotic, suicidal maniac will be deterred by the prospect of getting shot.

No deterrent works 100% of the time, but there will be cases in which they will.

If you wanna continue the Iraq analogy, it's more like sending more troops to Iraq with the hope that the suicidal Muslim extremists will suddenly be scared and cease their fighting.

Isn't the troop surge working?

I get angry about the argument that students should also carry weapons to deter murderous gun wielding maniacs from a killing spree, it's naive and arrogant.

I'd bet you anything the next murderous gun wielding maniac would simply say "oh, the kids in this school are packing, I'll just go and shoot up a shopping centre or primary school or SOMEWHERE I CAN KILL PEOPLE FOR AS LONG AS I CAN MANAGE"

That's ridiculous, that's like saying people shouldn't defend their homes as the burglar will just target someone else.

And colleges around the U.S would have a fantastic rise in applications for the next semester, because every stupid ****ing idiot student twat has a gun.

Everyone shouldn't be able to get a gun, it should be regulated properly and some parts of America don't regulate guns properly. A blanket ban on everyone from getting a gun, when there are people proficient enough and sane enough to use one, is also absurd.

 

[Godron]

I expect most shooting sprees would be shorter if the gunner gets shot before he can kill 20 people. Instinctively I'm very uneasy about the idea of everyone carrying guns around, but instincts don't really count for anything. I feel a lot worse about a gunner opening fire on a classroom of unarmed students, than a class of students some of whom have guns. As for this making it easier for a nut to get hold of a gun, I expect they could find one pretty easily anyway in most places. If he has a license, then it wouldn't exactly be hard to sneak it into a school, and if not then, well, look at Virginia Tech. The guy had a history of mental illness, and he still got one.

The only thing I'm worried about is that having guns illegal on campuses makes them something of a taboo. If you remove the restriction, then suddenly guns become normal and commonplace. In that environment, it's concievable that someone who otherwise wouldn't comtemplate murder could become more violent. I dunno though, I'm not a psychologist. Just a thought.

 

[Cormeh]

That's ridiculous, that's like saying people shouldn't defend their homes as the burglar will just target someone else.

What? Who needs a gun to burgle you?

 

[Mr Stabby]

What? Who needs a gun to burgle you?

Where did I say they did?

 

[Tagaziel]

Isn't the troop surge working?

It's performing flawlessly at dumping the US economy.

 

[Sulkdodds]

No deterrent works 100% of the time, but there will be cases in which they will.

But studies show that most deterrents don't work at all - and that's because in most cases criminals either commit their crimes 'in the heat of the moment' leaving no time for premeditation, or they simply don't expect to get caught. Neither of these complexes apply to the typical school shooter but only because he has his own pattern: he generally plans his crime meticulously as if it were a combat operation and does so in the full knowledge that he is prepared to die in what he imagines as a blaze of glory.

Exactly how would arming the students deter him?

The best arguments for allowing carry rights on campus have to do with the likelihood of actually stopping the spree, or to do with whether or not campuses are 'special places' where the normal rules shouldn't apply. Deterrent, though? Not really.

 

[Mr Stabby]

What studies show that deterrents don't work, it's impossible to tell if a deterrent has worked, as the crime that was deterred never happened and was never known about.

EDIT: The shooter may not be suicidal, so the prospect of getting killed is a deterrent. He may not plan it at all, if he believes he'll be shot dead before he can fully carry it out.


And yes, the fact that armed students could stop a shooter is the main argument against a blanket ban on guns.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I have a load of citations in law textbooks but they're at home-home, not here with me at my university accomodation.

The statistics suggest that deterrents don't work by registering (in various instances) no significant drops in crime rates when harsher sentences are imposed, and no significant rises when sentences are lowered. I believe the key example is the end of the death penalty in Britain. When they stopped hanging people, the rate of murder did not rise (in fact, fell, I seem to recall). I think there was some kind of psychological study that supported the conclusion that criminals don't imagine that they'll get caught.

I'm afraid I can't at present be more specific than that, but I hope you'll take it on a kind of trust that the information is valid. In any case, it is logical, as is the supposition that an armed populace will not deter school shooters.

I just wanted to remove the deterrent argument from any position it might have held as a point in favour of liberal carry laws. It doesn't support the anti-restrictionist case. Pretty useless to try and argue it much further.