Va Tech shootings

[Glickman]

sure, a gun might have helped in this instance. but this is pretty rare.


the worry is when there's people walking all over campus carrying guns. one loses they're cool, draws and kills someone.

fyi, the last attempted Virginia school shooting was stopped by two students who went to their cars and grabbed guns and disarmed the attacker.


there is no CCP's in virginia

[Eagle]

there is no CCP's in virginia

am I reading this right? You're saying that there is no conceal carry permit law in Va? I've lived in the Richmond Va area most of my life, and I have a conceal carry permit through my home county. Have for a couple of years. My gf just applied for hers. Your info is wrong

[Glickman]

am I reading this right? You're saying that there is no conceal carry permit law in Va? I've lived in the Richmond Va area most of my life, and I have a conceal carry permit through my home county. Have for a couple of years. My gf just applied for hers. Your info is wrong

my bad

one i rechecked, it seemed my info was a little old, as of 2006 though, it seems that CCP's are needed for only handguns.

[Ole Unka Phil]

sure, a gun might have helped in this instance. but this is pretty rare.


the worry is when there's people walking all over campus carrying guns. one loses they're cool, draws and kills someone.

You must have missed one of my posts. Over 2 million recorded instances of Legal gun owners protecting themselves with their guns against criminals. They happen every day. No one hardly ever reports them. Not so rare at all. In fact, quite common. And more common since passage of Personal Protection Act.

Has not happened... Since the passage of the Personal Protection Act there are literaly millions of people with carry permits already. Your assumption is the same logic used to try and prevent that passage of that act. It was commonly predicted by the apponents of the bills. And since then 10 years have passed and there have been litteraly only a handful of incidents where a CWP holder has improperly used his weapon. I can count them on one hand. In fact most of the detractors are completely at a loss as to why their predictions of "blood in the streets" and "Wild west shoot outs" has not occured. I can tell you why... because only the responsible and level headed bother to get properly licensed and go through the background checks. It is more extensive and so its likely to weed out more bad apples. It is mostly very responsible people. Typicaly made up of people that are more likely to avoid a situation than get into one. So... there is a good deal of historical data that proves that wrong. it just has not happened. As in this case, there is always that one though. One that slips though any crack. But overall its been a tremendous success. Which is why more and more states are issuing them. Almost all of them as a matter of fact. Very few do not. Vermont actual always has allowed carry WITHOUT any permit process. Always has. Virgina has an OPEN carry law, without permits. Always has. Utau allows permited carry in schools including Universities.. Always has. Isreal arms all its teachers. With good reason. We may soon have reason to as well.... and it goes on and on. The world ain't getting any safer. One thing is for certain... the criminals would love it if you could not carry a gun. Field day for them.

[Pneumagger]

IDK if i'm the first to say this (TL;DR) ... but I'd bet their admissions go up next year.

/serious

[geekwarrior]

You must have missed one of my posts. Over 2 million recorded instances of Legal gun owners protecting themselves with their guns against criminals. They happen every day. No one hardly ever reports them. Not so rare at all. In fact, quite common. And more common since passage of Personal Protection Act.

Has not happened... Since the passage of the Personal Protection Act there are literaly millions of people with carry permits already. Your assumption is the same logic used to try and prevent that passage of that act. It was commonly predicted by the apponents of the bills. And since then 10 years have passed and there have been litteraly only a handful of incidents where a CWP holder has improperly used his weapon. I can count them on one hand. In fact most of the detractors are completely at a loss as to why their predictions of "blood in the streets" and "Wild west shoot outs" has not occured. I can tell you why... because only the responsible and level headed bother to get properly licensed and go through the background checks. It is more extensive and so its likely to weed out more bad apples. It is mostly very responsible people. Typicaly made up of people that are more likely to avoid a situation than get into one. So... there is a good deal of historical data that proves that wrong. it just has not happened. As in this case, there is always that one though. One that slips though any crack. But overall its been a tremendous success. Which is why more and more states are issuing them. Almost all of them as a matter of fact. Very few do not. Vermont actual always has allowed carry WITHOUT any permit process. Always has. Virgina has an OPEN carry law, without permits. Always has. Utau allows permited carry in schools including Universities.. Always has. Isreal arms all its teachers. With good reason. We may soon have reason to as well.... and it goes on and on. The world ain't getting any safer. One thing is for certain... the criminals would love it if you could not carry a gun. Field day for them.

just to clarify, i am for carrying guns, but to me there should be some limitations, a college campus is one of them.

[edweird]

[wjr]

There are 3 types of Lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

You failed to produce a source for you statistic Phil.

And coming from a right wing crackpot organization making ridiculous claims that "handgun control incorporated would rather them" (2 million people) "die instead", it doesn't have much credibility.

And in response to a comment you made a few pages back... NO! I DO NOT NEED A GUN TO BE SAFE!!! Who are you to tell me that I do? Do you know where I live, or how I live?

[edweird]

And in response to a comment you made a few pages back... NO! I DO NOT NEED A GUN TO BE SAFE!!! Who are you to tell me that I do? Do you know where I live, or how I live?

And thats ok... we carry for you.

[wjr]

And thats ok... we carry for you.

Now I know why you guys carry guns...

It makes you feel special, doesn't it? Makes you feel like you're protecting everyone.

[Pneumagger]

If I weren't so addicted to paintball - I'd have a handgun to carry. There's just not enough money to feed a weapons addiction, yet.

[paintballfiend]

Mmmm, Propaganda.

[edweird]

Now I know why you guys carry guns...

It makes you feel special, doesn't it? Makes you feel like you're protecting everyone.

Im not going to play your silly games...

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
Eleanor Roosevelt

[CoolHand]

. . . And in response to a comment you made a few pages back... NO! I DO NOT NEED A GUN TO BE SAFE!!! Who are you to tell me that I do? Do you know where I live, or how I live?

And in response to you, I would say:

Who are you to tell me that I don't need a gun for self defence? Do you know where I live, or how I live?

Tit for Tat my friend.

It is quite simple.

You have fear (of many things, crime, criminals, the unknown, guns, people who know how to use guns, etc), and in your thinking, the only way to control that fear is to control everyone and everything from one central location so that nothing can slip past and make you afraid. You operate on the premise that if you are ever in trouble, the police will protect you, and anything you do yourself can only subvert that effort. You dislike the idea of CCP's because that removes some of your precious centralized control, and that leaves room for your fear. The only way you can control your fear is to force others (ironically, through threat of state sponsored force) to adhere to whatever rules you deem necessary.

Conversely, the right to carry folks realize they cannot control anyone or anything at all, except for themselves and their actions, so they rely upon no one but themselves. We realize that when the fit hits the shan, the only person you can depend on is you. The police will be there hours later to draw the chalk outline and maybe find the person who killed you after the fact (maybe). You could outlaw guns, bats, knives, rocks, stones, and really stiff paper, and criminals would still kill people by whatever means they care to employ. They are CRIMINALS, by the very definition of the term, they don't care about, laws, or rules, or regulations, or filling out the proper forms and waiting for processing and approval. They take and do what they please unless you are prepared to stop them right then and there.

From a standpoint of personal rights, you cannot force your will upon others simply because you feel uncomfortable.

If there is a choice between you being comfortable, and some other person having the ability to defend themselves should they need to, the choice should be for the person wishing to be personally responsible for their own well being, 100% of the time.

It is their right to defend themselves, if you are made uncomfortable by their being armed, you have the right to leave and not be around them. You do NOT have the right to deny them THEIR rights to suit your own wants.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Statistics? Well... they come from the USDOJ. Here is a section of a report from 87-92. Now mind you this is before Personal Protectin Acts were passed and no concealed weapons. I want you to note how small the percentage of Victims used a gun in self defense. Yet how large the number was. And also of note is how often criminals used guns against non armed victims and still shot them. Does not take very long to reach 2 million. Even THEN before personal defense (concealed weapons permit laws took effect). I love it how some of you are so easily baited into claiming propaganda when you don't even bother to go out and look for information before you make yourselves look like a fool. Because this just proves one thing to me... your not looking for information to decide. You already have decided and your minds are closed. You have already decided that YOU know what your talking about and that YOU can dictate to everyone else whether or not they can defend themselves. Makes me real confident in your ability to garantee my safety.

U.S. Department of Justice

ADVANCE FOR RELEASE AT 5 P.M. EST
BJS SUNDAY, MAY 15,
1994 202-307-0784



During the 1987-1992 period, offenders fired their weapons in
17 percent of all non-fatal handgun crimes, missing the victim
four out of five times. In 3 percent of the non-fatal crimes
committed with handguns, about 21,000 annually, the victim was
wounded. In addition, an average 11,100 were killed each
year.

During the same period an estimated annual average of 62,000
violent crime victims (approximately 1 percent of all violent
crime victims) used a firearm in an effort to defend
themselves. In addition, an annual average of about 20,000
victims of theft, household burglary or motor vehicle theft
attempted to defend their property with guns.

In most cases victims defending themselves with firearms
were confronted by unarmed offenders or those armed with
weapons other than firearms. During the six-year period,
about one in three armed victims faced an armed offender.


If You want me to shower you with statistic I can. Heck I can even provide you with some to protect your already preconceived conclusions. Because there is a study out there somewhere designed to prove you right. Thats how people get fooled. If you really had an open mind you would have found that their statistic can easily be complied. You won't see statistics like that put in the newspaper.

I want to bring up one other point here. And it deals with not over reacting to isolated incidents (however horrific they are) and how its not a good idea to blame inanimate objects for the actions of one Pshycotic person. For one that relieves him of responsibilty. And it then affects the many who might be safer as it stands. You should always hold people accountable for their actions. Not some inanimate object.

Secondly we live in an increasingly hostile world. We, here in America, also may live in a society that is just prone to violence. Particularly in some areas. We repeatedly score badly on some violent crime statistics. We may NEED guns in the hands of citizens now more than ever. Why is this. Why is it that some of the areas with the toughest gun laws repeatedly score the highest. Why is it some countries where EVERY household has a gun do not score as badly? Can't be the inanimate object causing it can it?

Thirdly...We may some day face an invasion of hostile extemists. This is very real. We have, in the past, discouraged such by the thought that behind every tree might be an american with a gun (Japan WWII). This has worked to our advantage in the past. How many lives did it save back then? We can hardly say.

I am just saying there is no sense in over reacting and perhaps putting more in harms way. I don't believe you can reduce such incidences by banning honest people from gun ownership. Its an oversimplistic knee jerk reaction that will solve nothing. I believe you can do more harm than good particularly at this time. Its evident that we need to figure out WHY some people are prone to this sort of rampage, And we also need to determine why criminals chose to be violent in the first place. In a perfect world we would not need guns at all. I wish for that world.... but until it comes... I will defend myself with whatever tools I can lay my hands on. And they had better be equal or better than my enemy.


Put the fault where it really belongs. It's on peoples actions.