8 dead in Texas high school shooting

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peebo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Theo520 said:
No,
the middle ground is the middle ground, it won’t be claimed by either side.
THAT IS THE POINT of what a proper survey reveals. The middle ground has remained the majority since they’ve been checking. This explains why states have been making modest gains in reducing the allowed conditions but not dramatic gains.

The PEW survey indicates we have two diametrically opposing views fighting a win/lose battle. Real data shows the polar views on both sides remain a minority and that the majority definitely want compromise, they want some degree of restrictions but not to make it illegal.
Click to expand...
OK - I’m convinced. Gallup is the superior poll.

So how do you account for the failure of either extreme to move the center in their direction? Clearly, something about the rhetoric from both sides is failing to resonate.
 
MonteRCMS said:
In 1990 Joe Biden pushed through the Gun Free Zone legislation.

AND guess what … more than 90% of school shootings take place in GUN FREE ZONES.
Click to expand...
This old saw again? Give it a rest! Gun Free Zones do not increase shootings. (They probably don’t decrease them either, but that is another story.)

For those of you who have no heard this argument before (goodness knows I’ve posted it multiple times), the reason shootings are taking place in gun free zones is the same reason why those areas (schools) were made gun free zones - vulnerable targets are concentrated there, and schools are often the place where the social discord leading to the violence occurs. The shooter “blames” the school and/or the other students for their problems.

The argument that removing the gun free zone designation would “scare off” would be shooters is silly. Removing the designation does not guarantee that well-meaning CC citizens will patrol the school grounds. No, the school grounds would be just as vulnerable as they are now. The only real deterrent would be regular (not sporadic) presence of armed guards. But that is already allowed by the 1990 act.

The only thing removal of the Gun Free Zone designation would do is lessen the penalties for those up to no good of being caught with a gun on school property.
 
Every time I see more news about another school shooting, it makes me less and less likely to send my son to school when he is older. I am seriously considering homeschooling him when he is older. That said, I wonder how many of these school shootings have occurred in public versus private schools? Is this something that is only affecting public schools or is it affecting both public and private schools equally?
 
jagged said:
And you are comparing 3rd world countries with the US.
Click to expand...
Mexico is not third world. Nor is Chile, which also has a higher homicide rate.
jagged said:
But that is only 1 country. The only other listed in the article that ‘bias’ their numbers down is Argentina. So, basically you are making the argument that one country which is listed as very, very low isn’t so low, but still would be much lower than the US. Good argument.
Click to expand...
Demonstrate for us that all statistics kept in the various countries are done in the same way. England was merely an example of the fact that different countries count homicides differently.

So you really do want to ban all guns? Speak plainly.
 
Inisfallen said:
I know I don’t want someone from Wyoming who’s never been in New York City before in his life wandering around carrying a loaded gun.
Click to expand...
You would prefer someone from New York City wandering around carrying a loaded gun? Hasn’t DiBlasio prohibited “stop and search” by police?
 
Inisfallen said:
Sounds like states’ rights go out the window when it comes to guns, then.
Click to expand...
Some states, including mine, have “passing through” laws that allow people who are “just passing through” to possess firearms that would otherwise be illegal in that jurisdiction.
 
Last edited:
You can check this site:

http://www.capenet.org/facts.html

Somewhere on there are some stats, but apparently private schools are a lot safer.

Also, states that have fewer guns are less likely to have gun deaths, there is a direct correlation. The more guns there are per capita,the higher rate of gun deaths. There are a few outliers, like Hawaii, which has a higher ownership rate but a low occurrence rate. There was a Mother Jones article on this, with stats.

States that have more extensive background checks for gun purchases have fewer school shootings.
 
Last edited:
No, I don’t want anyone carrying guns on the streets of my city. I’m pretty happy with the current state of the law here, which forbids the carrying of concealed weapons unless one can demonstrate a compelling need to do so. I don’t want that law weakened by overriding federal law that requires us to honor the laws od, say, Vermont, which does not require any kind of permit to carry a weapon.

Yes, Mayor DeBlasio did sharply curtail (although not entirely prohibit) the awful stop and frisk policy of the NYPD. You know what? We’re still doing pretty good when it comes to crime.
 
Inisfallen said:
I don’t want that law weakened by overriding federal law that requires us to honor the laws od, say, Vermont, which does not require any kind of permit to carry a weapon.
Click to expand...
I think Ridgerunner said the pass-through law was a state law, not an “overriding federal law.” I don’t think anyone is suggesting that. So as long as your state doesn’t pass such a law, you won’t have to put up with such an outcome.
 
I was thinking you two were too far off topic, but then it occurred to me that you really aren’t. This rejection of the middle ground is endemic. It is why these shootings continue. The fear of “slippery slope” leaves the NRA and their side completely in knee jerk reaction to any control of guns. The left’s call for bans and an end to pretty much all firearms except for hunting hardly eases this concern. Our country is in dire need of moderates and people of compromise.
 
No, the proposed “Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act” is federal, and would override state and local laws.
 
MonteRCMS said:
In 1990 Joe Biden pushed through the Gun Free Zone legislation.

AND guess what … more than 90% of school shootings take place in GUN FREE ZONES.
Click to expand...
Classic example of post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy. Of course gun free zones will have more shootings because of the increase in school shootings. You might as well draw the conclusion that since places where Algebra is taught is more likely to be a target of a shooter, we should quit teaching Algebra.
 
We also did not have the internet, video games, social media, cell phones, and MTV. Violence on television was much more tame and movie ratings were taken seriously. Prayer was still common in school, and we did not yet know what “New Coke” was. Schools were different in many ways, as were the life that children lived.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Whoa! Let’s hope that doesn’t pass.
Click to expand...
It probably won’t, in the long run. But the NRA is a big fan.

www.nraila.org

NRA-ILA | Search

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms...
www.nraila.org www.nraila.org
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top