74 school shootings since Sandy Hook. More dead today.

Yep. But morons who pass the written test can carry anywhere. In fact, if you have a CHL, you don't have to pass metal detectors at the Texas Capitol.

If anything, this minimal AA class bullshit is empowering dipshits, not discouraging them.

In fact, if you have a CHL, you don't have to pass metal detectors at the Texas Capitol. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Crazy but true!

Yep. But morons who pass the written test can carry anywhere. In fact, if you have a CHL, you don't have to pass metal detectors at the Texas Capitol.

If anything, this minimal AA class bullshit is empowering dipshits, not discouraging them. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

That is unusual. But every State is different. In Louisiana no one is going to enter the Capital or any Government building or court house wearing a firearm, unless of course you're a Law Enforcement agent. How often do you notice or have you ever noticed people around town carrying concealed weapons in Texas? Like what appears to be the imprint of a holstered weapon through a shirt or if someone opens their sport coat to get out their wallet and you happen to notice a holstered weapon on their waste band anything like that? Not that I look for that,but I personally never have noticed where it's obvious someone carrying a concealed weapon.

Jim

That is unusual. But every State is different. In Louisiana no one is going to enter the Capital or any Government building or court house wearing a firearm, unless of course you're a Law Enforcement agent. How often do you notice or have you ever noticed people around town carrying concealed weapons in Texas? Like what appears to be the imprint of a holstered weapon through a shirt or if someone opens their sport coat to get out their wallet and you happen to notice a holstered weapon on their waste band anything like that? Not that I look for that,but I personally never have noticed where it's obvious someone carrying a concealed weapon.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

You obviously aren't looking closely enough.

I see it all the time. Waistband mostly. Lots of "heavy" purses and laptop bags. government compartments? Yeah, a few.

Lots of concealed handguns in Texas. You don't even need to holster a small .22. You can keep it in your pocket.

Louisiana is more civilized. You have to keep your squirrel gun in the back window rack.

And with some of those items listed a person is required to pass a test or undergo an instructional course before using or operating them -- automobile, heavy equipment, industrial chemicals. Almost all will come with some kind of warning label which alerts people to the possible danger involved with using them. Yet a person can purchase a handgun without demonstrating any knowledge of how to use it correctly or when and where the handgun is allowed to be used or carried.

With most of the items listed, injury can occur when used incorrectly. Handguns can kill when used incorrectly. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I was driving a car when I was 12, operated a back hoe with about 10 minutes
instruction, handling industrial chemicals (caustic soda ash) with all the instruction of (Don't spill it on yourself boy, it'll take the meat right off your bones) I've used cotton swabs before also.

You forgot to include that "stupid" people who develop a "stupid" list that includes a few of the "stupid" items found above, are also dangerous.

Especially when they have a "stupid" keyboard in front of them! Originally Posted by bigtex

Very good T-Rex. timely as always with the stupid.

Stay clear of the tar pits.

Yawn... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Yssup, the old backwater bimbo.

Proof that being wrong never goes out of style.

It's funny that people are stupid enough to actually believe there have been 74 school shootings, this is a complete and total lie. Practically every one of these were drug related, off school grounds. Just like the “childhood deaths” they had to include gang members up to 19 years old to make the statistic more dramatic.

These leftists blame the NRA for mass shootings, but they should blame themselves as the two recurrent themes are as follows:
1. They are usually democrats.
2. They are always in gun-free zones.

And as democrats created gun-free zones, it kind of makes you wonder if we need some democrat control?

Seriously, if guns cause crime, all of mine must be defective.

And as democrats created gun-free zones, it kind of makes you wonder if we need some democrat control?

Seriously, if guns cause crime, all of mine must be defective. Originally Posted by aFelationado

Seriously right back at you.

No, guns do not cause crime, but they make it MUCH easier to commit a crime.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/09/17/the-growing-myth-of-mass-shootings-and-gun-free/195927

The "gun-free zone" argument has become a favorite fallback position for gun advocates in the wake of deadly shooting sprees. Desperate to turn attention away from the epidemic of gun violence in America and shooters' ability to get access to firearms, conservatives insist that if everyone were armed, mass shootings wouldn't occur. (i.e. The "good guys" would stop the "bad guys.") And in terms of shootings on military bases, the universal right-wing truth now is that it's all Bill Clinton's fault because in 1993 he banned guns on military bases, making it impossible for soldiers to respond to eruptions of hostile gunfire. Bases are "unarmed" due to a "Clinton-era law," according to Rush Limbaugh, while killers "pick places where there are no guns."



In reality, the rules on military bases don't ban all guns, which is obvious since among the shooter's first victims were armed security personnel. And those rules were actually issued during the first Bush administration and survived the second, despite their alleged perfidy.


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/gun-free-zones-mass-shootings


Among the 62 mass shootings over the last 30 years that we studied, not a single case includes evidence that the killer chose to target a place because it banned guns. To the contrary, in many of the cases there was clearly another motive for the choice of location.

Or consider the 12 school shootings we documented, in which all but one of the killers had personal ties to the school they struck. FBI investigators learned from one witness, for example, that the mass shooter in Newtown had long been fixated on Sandy Hook Elementary School, which he'd once attended.

Or take the man who opened fire in suburban Milwaukee last August: Are we to believe that a white supremacist targeted the Sikh temple there not because it was filled with members of a religious minority he despised, but because it was a place that allegedly* banned firearms?

I reckon I'll get abused by this fact: We banned guns in the UK years ago. It's actually worked out quite lovely. Some criminals still have the ability to get guns but MP's have combated that with harsher penalties.

Quite lovely?

It works in most civilized countries. Quite lovely!

Not sure I get your meaning? You're for banning handguns? Or, against? Perhaps it was sarcasm...

I don't think it's a cure all mind you. I just think it's worked for the most part in Britain. Mentalist groups like the IRA and UDF will always be the exception.

Quite lovely?

It works in most civilized countries. Quite lovely! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Here we go again.

There have NOT been 74 school shootings since Newtown. Look at the particulars and it is easy to see how the data was massaged and should be insulting to any open minded individual.

This is for NYR, do you deny that most (yes, most) of the real shootings have been in "gun free" zones? Careful how you answer...

Are you willing to acknowledge the number of times a good guy does attempt to stop, mitigates a shooting, or successfully brings down a bad guy by death, wounding or intimidation? We post those all the time but only a fraction. In fact we post more "good news" stories than there are school shootings.

Imagine if self defense was more accepted in this country where a person didn't have to worry about being prosecuted for protecting themselves.

Careful how you answer...

Stern warning from JDIdiot. Someone whose actually had boobs on the ground.

Well actually, as I pointed out long ago in this thread, yes there have been 74.

Only people demented enough to ignore dead bodies for the sake of a political stumping diatribe can't count that high. Only if you somehow think playgrounds don't count, and think that if drugs or robbery wad involved then injuries and deaths are only games, or if suicides are somehow not shootings that matter, or if the shooter missed it coun's ad "no harm no foul".

Argue about gun control or whether 1st graders should be armed, but at least admit that when a bullet is expelled out of the muzzle of a gun that a shooting occurred.