Gun free zone

[gyverlb]

45 seconds is a hell of a lot better response time than the 5, 15, or even 45 minutes it takes the cops to get there.

Way to ignore arguments and change the subject. I've wasted enough time with you, welcome to my ignore list.

[myrkul]

45 seconds is a hell of a lot better response time than the 5, 15, or even 45 minutes it takes the cops to get there.

Way to ignore arguments and change the subject. I've wasted enough time with you, welcome to my ignore list.

An honor, I'm sure.

I was responding specifically to this:

I don't know about you but 45 seconds to think about reaching for a gun doesn't seem anything like an appropriate response to a rampage shooting.

If anyone has a better response to my argument than "NO U!" I'm willing to entertain it.

[deadweasel]

This is not a gun problem, it's a mental health issue.  If he can't get a gun he'll put epoxy in the locks and mix bleach and 409 in a bucket.

This is the wrong argument.  We should focus on recognizing these people when they're young and getting them into the (admittedly barely existent and over-priced for poor people) programs that can help them.  

This has been the issue since Reagan closed the state run mental health facilities in the 80's.  

[FirstAscent]

This is not a gun problem, it's a mental health issue.  If he can't get a gun he'll put epoxy in the locks and mix bleach and 409 in a bucket.

This is the wrong argument.  We should focus on recognizing these people when they're young and getting them into the (admittedly barely existent and over-priced for poor people) programs that can help them.  

This has been the issue since Reagan closed the state run mental health facilities in the 80's.  

I certainly don't disagree that we can do better. Blame the libertarians and Republicans. But guns are also the problem.

Next time, don't conflate your (admittedly good) interest in better government funded programs to help people with some sort of agenda you have for an ever escalating quantity of guns.

[FirstAscent]

45 seconds is a hell of a lot better response time than the 5, 15, or even 45 minutes it takes the cops to get there.

Way to ignore arguments and change the subject. I've wasted enough time with you, welcome to my ignore list.

An honor, I'm sure.

I was responding specifically to this:

I don't know about you but 45 seconds to think about reaching for a gun doesn't seem anything like an appropriate response to a rampage shooting.

If anyone has a better response to my argument than "NO U!" I'm willing to entertain it.

Do you have any response to the last question I posed to you?

[myrkul]

The best part of having you on ignore, FirstAscent, is if I don't feel like reading your posts, I don't have to.

Reckless and drunk driving kill more people than getting shot every year.

Nobody blames the cars. It's the people behind the wheels. And I know you're going to trot out the bullshit argument that guns don't have a purpose other than killing. Yes they do. Recreation, hunting, competitive shooting, and most importantly, self defense.

[FirstAscent]

The best part of having you on ignore, FirstAscent, is if I don't feel like reading your posts, I don't have to.

Same here. I just don't go on about it.

Reckless and drunk driving kill more people than getting shot every year.

Nobody blames the cars. It's the people behind the wheels. And I know you're going to trot out the bullshit argument that guns don't have a purpose other than killing. Yes they do. Recreation, hunting, competitive shooting, and most importantly, self defense.

You have not addressed the question I asked you. We're not discussing drunks.

[deadweasel]

My agenda is to help people before they believe they need to commit mass-murder.

Good bye, waste of time Re: Gun Free zone.  Two posts is all I needed to have my fill.

[cunicula]

This has been the issue since Reagan closed the state run mental health facilities in the 80's.  

+1
I'm willing to admit this is equally important. More important considering other issues as well.

[myrkul]

So, mr. obama, how the hell do you think stricter guns laws are gonna work?

Yeah, he broke something like 40 laws (if you count each instance). The answer: MOAR LAWZ!

That's like saying: "This man was going over the speed limit, and driving drunk, and caused an accident. Clearly, we need lower speed limits."

[Axios]

The best part of having you on ignore, FirstAscent, is if I don't feel like reading your posts, I don't have to.

Reckless and drunk driving kill more people than getting shot every year.

Nobody blames the cars. It's the people behind the wheels. And I know you're going to trot out the bullshit argument that guns don't have a purpose other than killing. Yes they do. Recreation, hunting, competitive shooting, and most importantly, self defense.

Again one of the most retarded arguments...... How many states have drivers without a license?

Wait for it...

0..

So WTF myrkul I owned you so many times already silly boy.

Now according to you let's force an insurance policy for each gun.. Woooaha....

Get lost.

[Monster Tent]

If you have a gun free zone the police shouldnt have guns either.

[Axios]

If you have a gun free zone the police shouldnt have guns either.

If you read the CT's law (not that I expect you), it isn't a gun free zone. Anyone with a proper license and the approval of the school could have a weapon on the school's ground.

Wow.... It's amazing.

[myrkul]

Now according to you let's force an insurance policy for each gun.. Woooaha....

No, I'm actually against licensing drivers, as well. Anarchist, remember? Forcible auto insurance is one of the more annoying government policies.

And running around in a circle with your dick in your hand yelling "I owned you!" doesn't make it so.

Grow up.

[Monster Tent]

If you have a gun free zone the police shouldnt have guns either.

If you read the CT's law (not that I expect you), it isn't a gun free zone. Anyone with a proper license and the approval of the school could have a weapon on the school's ground.

Wow.... It's amazing.

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of having a gun free zone and having armed police walking around  

[TheButterZone]

If you have a gun free zone the police shouldnt have guns either.

If you read the CT's law (not that I expect you), it isn't a gun free zone. Anyone with a proper license and the approval of the school could have a weapon on the school's ground.

Wow.... It's amazing.

Connecticut denies those licenses on a nearly 100% basis, and if they didn't, schools would deny approval on a nearly 100% basis (allowing only active and possibly honorably-retired cops) and claim sane, law-abiding adults background checked, psychologically evaluated, and trained up the wazoo, are too much of a liability. This is the case wherever gun control reigns supreme. If you support "gun control", it's time to stop rejecting reality and substituting your own.

[Monster Tent]

I think they should do a study on how many mass shootings happen in gun control areas as opposed to places where people can freely carry guns around. For example I dont know of any mass shootings in New Hampshire.

[fornit]

For example I dont know of any mass shootings in New Hampshire.

dont you need a mass for mass shootings? 

[myrkul]

I think they should do a study on how many mass shootings happen in gun control areas as opposed to places where people can freely carry guns around. For example I dont know of any mass shootings in New Hampshire.

Aurora, CO allows open carry. Cinemark prohibits firearms in their theaters. Consequently:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/54618459-82/aurora-gun-shooting-church.html.csp
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/us/colorado-theater-shooting/index.html

Doesn't get clearer than that, folks.

[FirstAscent]

I think they should do a study on how many mass shootings happen in gun control areas as opposed to places where people can freely carry guns around. For example I dont know of any mass shootings in New Hampshire.

You mean like in Japan where gun control is effectively enforced uniformly?