Texas to allow guns on college campuses.

[Jesus Christ]

Thank you! If you live in a CIVILIZED society, there is NO need for a gun in a civilian's home. The infrastructure is there so that the local and federal police can quickly aid you. Army is a different situation since we are talking about handguns, and no matter what some of the dreamers on here think, but a handgun per family won't protect you if the 'government turns against you.' Wow some of the ideas here... where do they come up with it?

why do you put so much trust in your govt or in that others will help you? i prefer to be my own first line of defense. even if it isnt much defense its certainly better than nothing.

i have a gun to protect against certain situations like home invasions and as a general deterrent. ive had people come to my house with the intent of causing me harm and a reach for the hip stops that everytime

violence in america is more prevalent than in canada, england, or any other 1st world country. common sense would say that there is more guns. i live in ny and frequent some bad areas of nyc, hell i was raised in one of the worst areas and even the not so bad guys have guns to use on innocent people. They will also carry them regardless of the law, so id rather get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time with a gun than to be running in serpentine patterns to not get hit.

its real easy to condemn guns when nobody has them where you live, whats the worst you run in to in canada or england? an angry french canadian? a soccer hooligan? im only adapting to the reality that even the pettiest of criminals have deadly fire arms here and i want to stand a chance that i could never with out one.

now if i lived elsewhere where violent crime is almost non existent like canada or similar then i would not see the need for a fire arm but that isnt the case.

[NegativeCamber]

Thank you! If you live in a CIVILIZED society, there is NO need for a gun in a civilian's home. The infrastructure is there so that the local and federal police can quickly aid you. Army is a different situation since we are talking about handguns, and no matter what some of the dreamers on here think, but a handgun per family won't protect you if the 'government turns against you.' Wow some of the ideas here... where do they come up with it?

are there pink clouds and lollipops growing in the grass where you live too? get real. there are countless cases where people have been killed because the local police cannot get there in time. local police departments are laying off officers all over this country because of our economic crisis. calling 911 so that they can "quickly aid you" is more of a gamble then a stated fact.

would you have liked to read in the paper that this woman had got killed, or at the least, raped and beat to a pulp because the police couldn't get there in time?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ26XdTPIY0"]YouTube - Woman Shoots Intruder During 911 Call[/ame]

[kartikeya]

violence in america is more prevalent than in canada, england, or any other 1st world country. common sense would say that there is more guns.

its real easy to condemn guns when nobody has them where you live, whats the worst you run in to in canada or england? an angry french canadian? a soccer hooligan? im only adapting to the reality that even the pettiest of criminals have deadly fire arms here and i want to stand a chance that i could never with out one.

now if i lived elsewhere where violent crime is almost non existent like canada or similar then i would not see the need for a fire arm but that isnt the case.

So, chicken or egg?

[jared1988]

Hypothetical situation... Imagine the US government goes tyrannical on us for some reason. Is it really reasonable to think that the US citizens, armed with some basic hand guns and hunting rifles, will be able to protect themselves from the hands of the US government, Police force, and US army?
That concept made sense when the armies were armed solely with muskets and cannons, but I don't see it adapting well to a time when the government/army is heavily trained and armed with high end weapons, vehicles, air force, and bombs.

Arming our citizens with some minor guns will allow them to put up a bit of a fight when the first riots were to break out, but once the army is called in to enforce the tyranny they don't really stand much chance fighting back.

*The obvious exception here is that the Army might not agree with or work with the tyrannical government, but for the sake of the hypothetical situation, this exception doesn't address the second amendment rights*

uhh, ever heard of a militia and gurilla warfare? military is not going to just start dropping bombs on its own people knowing there are innocent people around, so unless all the rebels move to a consolodated location, bombs will most likely not be dropped.
the military kinda has to do what the gov't says, stupid chain of command crap. why do you think we are in iraq? i bet 90% of the troops would say fuck it and pull out, leave the middle east alone to handle their own problems

[Kielan]

uhh, ever heard of a militia and gurilla warfare? military is not going to just start dropping bombs on its own people knowing there are innocent people around, so unless all the rebels move to a consolodated location, bombs will most likely not be dropped.
the military kinda has to do what the gov't says, stupid chain of command crap. why do you think we are in iraq? i bet 90% of the troops would say fuck it and pull out, leave the middle east alone to handle their own problems

You say this, but have you been paying attention to what is going on in Libya?

[jared1988]

You say this, but have you been paying attention to what is going on in Libya?

no i dont pay attention to the news or politics, (but your in the military, you should!) yeah i know w/e. i was refering to the USA

[Rally]

no i dont pay attention to the news or politics, (but your in the military, you should!) yeah i know w/e. i was refering to the USA

You'll find that Libya has been doing exactly what you were explaining.Innocent people were being bombed in response to the uprising. Worth reading.

I agree that it's nearly impossible to imagine the US ever doing that, but I have a hard time believing that our government would ever become tyrannical, either. Anything is possible though, and if the Army does enforce the tyranny as ordered by the government, our right to carry some small hand guns isn't gonna help us fight for our freedom.

[Kielan]

You'll find that Libya has been doing exactly what you were explaining.Innocent people were being bombed in response to the uprising. Worth reading.

I agree that it's nearly impossible to imagine the US ever doing that, but I have a hard time believing that our government would ever become tyrannical, either. Anything is possible though, and if the Army does enforce the tyranny as ordered by the government, our right to carry some small hand guns isn't gonna help us fight for our freedom.

This.

[mihneagabriel]

Has anyone thought that when the second amendment was written they had guns that took about a minute to reload and aimed horribly?

Second, I have seen many of the people at college campuses and people with CHL's and some shouldnt even be allowed to carry a pencil much less a loaded weapon.

Just out of curiosity, what if some crazy person takes a gun from someone who is licensed to carry one?
Dont get me wrong I'm not saying give up your freedom or anything close to that nature, all I'm saying is that even if someone has a CHL doesnt necessarily mean they are mentally sane to carry it, now law enforcement officers have more potential threats when coming to a scene at a college campus because anyone can have a gun on them. If guns arent allowed, law enforcement has one target, the guy with the gun..

just my 0.02

[ChrisVRsix]

wtf?

i didnt read the article and i just skimmed but am i the only one to bring up this:

gun + alcohol = ???

college partys all the time, people getting drunk and stupid, now throw a gun in the mix and their will be shootings every weekend

Let's solve the gun problem with more guns... Yeah there ya go. The mental abilities of people in this country never cease to amaze me.

how fucking dumb.

21 mass shootings since 1999 suggests that letting more people have guns is a fucking stupid law.

In australia, there has been 0 mass shootings since the gun laws were radically changed in 1996.

in sorry Americans, but your gun laws are fucking retarded, and all of this "right to bear arms" is a fucking farce.

I can't believe the responses in this thread! Most American members are in favor while members from the rest of the world read on in shock. IMO this is a fucking disgrace and this is why you have the problems you do. When will the US learn that more guns isn't the answer...

All of this i agree with.

I was not expecting one person to agree withthis article. I thought you posted it because of how wrong it is...

Canada <3

[JSanders]

Just out of curiosity, what if some crazy person takes a gun from someone who is licensed to carry one?

The same thing that would happen off a college campus?

[iliescu]

are there pink clouds and lollipops growing in the grass where you live too? get real. there are countless cases where people have been killed because the local police cannot get there in time. local police departments are laying off officers all over this country because of our economic crisis. calling 911 so that they can "quickly aid you" is more of a gamble then a stated fact.

would you have liked to read in the paper that this woman had got killed, or at the least, raped and beat to a pulp because the police couldn't get there in time?

No, but I don't live in a country where I fear walking down the street without a weapon (apparently?). More guns = more violence. Period.

Your government WANTS you to kill yourselves with more guns. The others they'll kill off with pills, supersized meals, and debt.

All of this i agree with.

I was not expecting one person to agree withthis article. I thought you posted it because of how wrong it is...

Canada <3

100%

They agree with it... they ACTUALLY think this is good policy. I guess that's why everytime a kid doesn't get picked for baseball he shoots up the cafeteria. Go USA!

[trism]

violence in america is more prevalent than in canada, england, or any other 1st world country. common sense would say that there is more guns. i live in ny and frequent some bad areas of nyc, hell i was raised in one of the worst areas and even the not so bad guys have guns to use on innocent people. They will also carry them regardless of the law, so id rather get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time with a gun than to be running in serpentine patterns to not get hit.

its real easy to condemn guns when nobody has them where you live, whats the worst you run in to in canada or england? an angry french canadian? a soccer hooligan? im only adapting to the reality that even the pettiest of criminals have deadly fire arms here and i want to stand a chance that i could never with out one.

now if i lived elsewhere where violent crime is almost non existent like canada or similar then i would not see the need for a fire arm but that isnt the case.

are there pink clouds and lollipops growing in the grass where you live too? get real. there are countless cases where people have been killed because the local police cannot get there in time. local police departments are laying off officers all over this country because of our economic crisis. calling 911 so that they can "quickly aid you" is more of a gamble then a stated fact.

This all comes back to the argument of solving violence with more violence.
You license people to buy guns. You can buy guns anywhere. Therefore they are more prevalent. theres more around. more for people to steal. more for people to buy for serial killer friends.

its easy to walk into a store and buy ammo, and stockpile it up.

Then you say "oh noes people have guns, better let more people have them, and take them more places"

So now theres even MORE guns around the place.

Its just compounding the problem.

If you destroyed all the guns, thered be none for people to use, and therefore there'd be less of a problem of people being worried, and needing to carry guns everywhere.

It doesnt help that some people are still stuck in the 1800s, trying to kill "yankees" and "niggers"

it doesnt help that the government doesnt give a fuck about its citizens.

Its almost like they want another civil war.

Its almost like they want the population to destroy itself.

[JSanders]

Whoa, that was unnecessary.

Have you ever been to Texas, or the US for that matter?

[Jesus Christ]

This all comes back to the argument of solving violence with more violence.
You license people to buy guns. You can buy guns anywhere. Therefore they are more prevalent. theres more around. more for people to steal. more for people to buy for serial killer friends.

its easy to walk into a store and buy ammo, and stockpile it up.

Then you say "oh noes people have guns, better let more people have them, and take them more places"

So now theres even MORE guns around the place.

Its just compounding the problem.

If you destroyed all the guns, thered be none for people to use, and therefore there'd be less of a problem of people being worried, and needing to carry guns everywhere.

It doesnt help that some people are still stuck in the 1800s, trying to kill "yankees" and "niggers"

it doesnt help that the government doesnt give a fuck about its citizens.

Its almost like they want another civil war.

Its almost like they want the population to destroy itself.

you have no idea what you are talking about and have totally discredited yourself on the subject.

I personally wont carry a concealed weapon on a college campus but just because i wont do it doesnt mean a responsible adult trained in the use of fire arms cant carry one.

sorry to be cliche but this is the land of the free and though sometimes it is debatable, this subject is a perfect example. Until it is a unanimous vote againt banning fire arms, i will support a capable citizens right to own one even if it is just one person against the entire country.