A Thug Pulled a Knife on Students in the UNO Library Today...

[BigBL87]

I approve of the right to carry, but in some respects, your best defensive weapon is the camera on your cell phone, in your car, in the bank lobby, store parking lot etc..

If I was ever in a situation, I'd remind the perp of all the cameras recording everything and hope they have a quick change of mind. When people realize they are being filmed, it does tend to be pretty powerful in changing their state of mind instantly.

Working with criminals on a daily basis, I have to say you are grossly exaggerating the effectiveness of a camera. You'd be better off laying on the floor and doing what you're told during a robbery than recording the perpetrator and informing them of it. Good way to get your phone taken/destroyed and yourself injured or killed.

 

[bomber89]

2nd Amendment is very clear, "The right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed."

 

[puddinhead0404]

2nd Amendment is very clear, "The right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed."

Why is this particular amendment so infallible? Why is it so rock solid that one need only state what it says and drop the mic? Amendments have been changed before and it would be my guess that the men who wrote it "seeming like problem solving types of dudes" are rolling in their graves at the lack of action going to to address an obvious problem.

The lack of ability to pass even basic background checks is baffling while many states go the other way allowing anyone to walk into a Walmart, buy a gun and legally carry it in public without any sort of license or training required. I get that criminals don't go through the "correct channels" but can we at least make them work for it a little bit?

 

[sports control my life]

No and No. What logic and evidence are you referring to? Yours? Well, you haven't given any evidence whatsoever. You have given your theories which, being an attorney, you would understand is not evidence. You have proposed that lots of confused people with lots of guns could cause a problem. I don't disagree with that, but I also don't think the scenario you have set out is one that would be common at all.

What happens is that the "bad guy" stabs someone or starts shooting. Those in the immediate vicinity are the most aware of the circumstances, who the "bad guy" is, and they deal with it. It doesn't involve dozens of armed people, fully unaware of the situation, rushing into a room and opening fire on the first person they see with a gun. It is situational awareness. There aren't 7 people standing up next to each other with guns and you have to pick out which one of them is the "bad guy." It is logical to believe that the circumstances of the situation will dictate quite clearly who is the "bad guy."

Well, here

2nd Amendment is very clear, "The right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed."

Hilarious that you left out the inconvenient "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" part of the Second Amendment. What does that mean to you? I have my thoughts. In any event, if the Second Amendment means we can't have background checks or prohibitions on magazine capacities, why can't I have my own nuclear weapon or carry around a grenade launcher around on the street? Obviously you agree with "gun control" at some level; it's just a matter of degree.

 

[TheBeav815]

I can just about promise that anyone calling themselves "Militia" these days would go INSANE if you tried to "well-regulate" them.

 

[suhnami]

Are you suggesting that a person who decides to go on any kind of murderous rampage is going to make a rational decision to cancel that rampage based on whether or not he thinks people there are armed?

My issue with prescribing handguns as the solution to armed crime is this: Have you MET the average person? We have to put warning labels on hair dryers to tell people not to take a bath with them. You want to give these people guns?

Some people are crazy, and nothing will ever stop that. But waaaaaaay more people are stupid. I don't trust stupid people to properly handle firearms.

Here's just one. I could post these all day. You own a gun and just keep it loaded in your purse with the safety off. REALLY?!?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/30/woman-shot-with-own-gun/21062089/

Beav i never underestimate stupidity, even yours. (Joking abt you). But when you blatantly misconstrue my words i have to wonder. The anti-gun bias is media perpetrated by fear. Just ask yourself why you're so against guns but there is no campaign against removing cars from the road.

The record is pretty clear about what happens when assailants choose gun free type areas vs areas where people are armed and willing to defend themselves. If you want to form your opinions based on outliers thats up to you.

 

[suhnami]

You are right, no law abiding citizen would ever kill an unarmed man if they carried a concealed weapon.

http://gawker.com/the-subway-slaying-that-wasnt-a-crime-1697565926

Again, I'm not anti-gun. I also don't believe everyone carrying weapons will make the world safer.

I didnt say everyone should carry a gun. You and Beav are either not reading the posts or making up stuff to respond to.

 

[puddinhead0404]

Beav i never underestimate stupidity, even yours. (Joking abt you). But when you blatantly misconstrue my words i have to wonder. The anti-gun bias is media perpetrated by fear. Just ask yourself why you're so against guns but there is no campaign against removing cars from the road.

The record is pretty clear about what happens when assailants choose gun free type areas vs areas where people are armed and willing to defend themselves. If you want to form your opinions based on outliers thats up to you.

The thing about cars is...society has guidelines and training in place to be able to drive to minimize the inherent risk. It's too bad that cars weren't around in the days of the founding fathers...then they could have been an inalienable right and we wouldn't have to go through all that pesky paperwork, charges, and you know...proving that we can see...proving that we know the rules of the road.

 

[SeaOfRed75]

Whats the big deal with everyone carrying? Anytime Im rolling with my P90 or AR and I accidentally unload on some guy with a blue name, nothing happens. No friendly fire. Only the bad guys with red names get hurt. Easy peezy lemon squeezy.

 

[suhnami]

The thing about cars is...society has guidelines and training in place to be able to drive to minimize the inherent risk. It's too bad that cars weren't around in the days of the founding fathers...then they could have been an inalienable right and we wouldn't have to go through all that pesky paperwork, charges, and you know...proving that we can see...proving that we know the rules of the

Many many people take gun safety courses, practice shooting at the range, etc. The guns, mostly have safetys on them. The inherent risk has been minizied.

 

[JohnRossEwing]

Imagine if some guy used his car to subdue this crazy knife guy in the library!

 

[TheBeav815]

Beav i never underestimate stupidity, even yours. (Joking abt you). But when you blatantly misconstrue my words i have to wonder. The anti-gun bias is media perpetrated by fear. Just ask yourself why you're so against guns but there is no campaign against removing cars from the road.

The record is pretty clear about what happens when assailants choose gun free type areas vs areas where people are armed and willing to defend themselves. If you want to form your opinions based on outliers thats up to you.

Firstly, I don't agree that there is any anti-gun bias in "the media" when you understand that term factors in ALL outlets, not just The Daily Show.

I gave you an actual academic study in gun ownership, I don't know how much more objective anyone can try to be.

I don't have a problem with the idea of guns, if that makes sense. My problem is that we've seen about how well this goes. The proverbial "bad guys with guns" are waaaaaay ahead on the scoreboard. And the problem with thinking you're going to arm the good guys is that a lot of people don't want a gun, and out of the those "good guys" a lot of them are more danger to themselves and those around them than they are help.

I'd be a great person to own and carry. I have a deep respect for safety and believe it or not, I'm a pretty decent shot. But I don't want one. I'm not willing to live my life constantly scanning for who I might wanna shot, why and how.

We can do the whole "let's compare guns to cars" thing if you really want to, but the short answer is that cars are intended for transportation and guns are intended to kill things. Also, I'd be 100% fine with guns if they were REALLY comparable to cars. Let's start with a few easy ways that guns are not at all regulated like cars are. Imagine a world where:

A nice, new gun costs upwards of $40,000 and the REALLY fun ones will run you a bout $100,000 (now that's not a law, but it's sure a reason guns aren't the same as cars)
If you kill somebody with it, it's probably also completely ruined and you're going to have to buy a new one
No drinking and carrying
You have to go take a written test and a demonstration test that proves you know how to properly use the gun
You have to have insurance on your gun
You have to carry a license on you at all times while carrying the gun (this does exist in some places)
You have to renew your registration on the gun annually
You may have to bring the gun in for testing every so often to ensure it's in proper working order (as some places require with emissions testing)
The gun has hundreds of safety features on it (rather than just one) that are for the sole person of preventing injury/death