I figure we'll keep this thread seperate from the other....


How many times will this need to happen before we figure out that hanging out a sign saying "We're defenseless in here" is not working?

I'm reminded of a story my uncle told me from his hippy days when a guy was trying to start a fight with him, he responded that he was non violent, and the next thing he knew, his head was being slammed on the curb.

You have a valid point, I don't see how anyone could think a no firearms zone could ever be effective.

------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all. Some ran the other way.

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 04-16-2007).]

I doubt the perpetrator gave a thought to the fact it was a no firearms zone. I suspect all rationality had left him.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I doubt the perpetrator gave a thought to the fact it was a no firearms zone. I suspect all rationality had left him. John Stricker

This person was obviously incapable of any thought other than what ever revenge he was seeking.

------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all. Some ran the other way.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I doubt the perpetrator gave a thought to the fact it was a no firearms zone.

Was there any kind of enforcement of this zone? I suspect not.

You would suspect wrong. I'm not going to go back and look it up, but it wasn't long ago that at least one student was expelled for having a firearm inside the zone. Students are expelled from school all over the US for having something as innocuous as a BB Gun inside a school's gun free zone Patrick.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Was there any kind of enforcement of this zone? I suspect not.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: You would suspect wrong.

Fine. I'll be interested in finding out how this gunman slipped through campus security then.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Fine. I'll be interested in finding out how this gunman slipped through campus security then.

Unless the campus is completely fenced in with only a few entrances, all equipped with x-ray machines and metal detectors, there's no way security could enforce the gun free zone. Even then, it's debatable as to whether it would be effective. There have been instances of people getting prohibited items past similar setups at airports. Laws like this rely on people voluntarily following the law, rather than brute enforcement. When people are caught in violation, (i.e. AFTER a gun is already in the gun free zone), they are punished. But rarely is there an active attempt made to prevent guns from entering the so called free zone.

Which proves the fallacy of these zones, and gun control laws in general. Law abiding people for the most part would attempt to obey the rules, thereby leaving themselves defenseless. Someone bent on murder would either be ignorant of the law, or would outright ignore it. To make laws like this effective, you need either 100% law abiding folks (which means the law wouldn't be needed), or you need strict, overbearing, totalitarian security and enforcement.

The middle ground is what we have now--a country where we have a large number of firearms, but a fairly low amount of crime relative to the amount of firearms we have. But this does mean that on occasion, firearms will be misused with tragic consequences. But that's true of anything in a "free" society. I would imagine almost everything, from a paperclip to a wrecking ball, has been misused at one point to cause harm to someone else.

[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 04-16-2007).]

quote Originally posted by GT86: Laws like this rely on people voluntarily following the law, rather than brute enforcement.

Great, I've seen how well that works with low-lifes (not) paying fares on our mass-transit system here.

Back in the '90's, Florida had a problem with convenience store robberies. They couldn't be everywhere at once, so they implemented a stakeout program. They'd pick a random convenience store and stake it out. Pick the wrong one to rob, and you'll probably get shot, or at least arrested.

The big signs in the windows of all convenience stores notifying you that the store was participating in the stakeout program probably did more good than the program itself.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: The big signs in the windows of all convenience stores notifying you that the store was participating in the stakeout program probably did more good than the program itself.

Much like the alarm company signs on people's front lawns.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Great, I've seen how well that works with low-lifes (not) paying fares on our mass-transit system here.

Well, if you think about it, all laws rely on people voluntarily following them. There is absolutely nothing to make you follow the laws, you have to decide to abide by them or ignore them. You don't get busted for breaking a law, you only get busted if you get caught breaking a law. The threat punishment deters most people, but not all of them.

yup....I think the old saying is
"in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king"

a gun is a VERY simple machine. I would expect everyone here could make one, or at least has a good idea how to make one. heck, I'd expect theres a few here who could make a plexiglass/resin/plastic one that would go thru metal detectors. a staight tube, a good grip & a sharp impact. and, for the really adventerous - theres the 50 yr old plans that have gone round the world for the fully automatic grease gun & bedspring gun. these simple facts make it IMPOSSIBLE to actually claim anywhere as "gun-free". and, the most important part - guns are not the only weapons.

If any one of the individuals was "allowed" to carry a gun..

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: If any one of the individuals was "allowed" to carry a gun..

C'mon Bill, we can't allow people to play a role in their own safety. Everyone knows guns are evil, and that the government can protect us better than we can protect ourselves

quote Originally posted by 84Bill: If any one of the individuals was "allowed" to carry a gun..

good point. is there a lawsuit here, being that the victims were FORCED to be defensless?
maybe they should just wear signs saying "take my stuff - I cant stop you"

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: good point. is there a lawsuit here, being that the victims were FORCED to be defensless? maybe they should just wear signs saying "take my stuff - I cant stop you"

I don’t believe it, we agree.

Why is it that people from countries that don’t allow the private ownership of guns always feel that if no one is allowed to have guns, everyone will be safer?

Safer from what?

Better yet safer from who?

Private gun owners can protect themselves from this type of crap.

If only one teacher, or student had been carrying the numbers could have been a lot less.

Gun control is what makes this sort of thing happen, thieves and murders like this nut are always able to find guns, in any country. Even those that don’t allow private ownership.

I own many guns, seldom carry, but if I have to protect myself I am not at the mercy of, waiting for the police to arrive, or the attacker.

------------------
Technology is great when it works,
and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't.
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.

quote Originally posted by 84fiero123: I don’t believe it, we agree. Why is it that people from countries that don’t allow the private ownership of guns always feel that if no one is allowed to have guns, everyone will be safer? Safer from what? Better yet safer from who? Private gun owners can protect themselves from this type of crap. If only one teacher, or student had been carrying the numbers could have been a lot less. Gun control is what makes this sort of thing happen, thieves and murders like this nut are always able to find guns, in any country. Even those that don’t allow private ownership. I own many guns, seldom carry, but if I have to protect myself I am not at the mercy of, waiting for the police to arrive, or the attacker.

It's a common fallacy--if we outlaw something, it will go away. History is full of examples to the contrary, but people don't seem to learn. Or maybe more to the point, people are afraid to make the realization that there are things we simply cannot control, no matter how hard we try. The bottom line is, gun control would only work if you could get rid of every single gun. Since you can't, gun control laws only serve to disarm the law abiding among us. And even if every single gun blinked out of existence tomorrow, along with the knowledge to make them, it would do nothing to deter someone bent on murder.

quote Originally posted by GT86: And even if every single gun blinked out of existence tomorrow, along with the knowledge to make them, it would do nothing to deter someone bent on murder.

But the person wouldn't have been able to murder nearly as many without the gun.


Things are way out of whack. We have governments that forcibly disarm people. That leaves them defenseless against this kind of criminal.
Wisconsin has refused to pass a concealed carry law. They believe that law abiding citizens with guns are more of a threat than criminals being the only ones having guns. Well, that pus the responsibility on them to provide a police force that is able to deal with these criminals. But they can't. So they are derelict in duty.

The gunman who did this shooting was from South Korea and the guns he used had filed off serial numbers. The law was of no use in this case as it seems he had planned to do something like this for a while. He even chained and padlock the buildings from the inside so people could not escape. The only thing that might have stopped him is if someone had reported any knowledge about his illegal gun possesion.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: But the person wouldn't have been able to murder nearly as many without the gun.

Perhaps. If the shooter did not have a gun, he could have inflicted as much or more carnage with a bomb (a few minutes on Google will tell you all you need to make a highly effective device), or by simply chaining and padlocking the doors and setting the buildings on fire. Guns are convenient, but they are hardly the only means of killing a large number of people. Anytime there is a large group in a relatively small area, the potential for mass destruction is there.

Because we are a free and open society. As a rule, when security measures such as would be required for the gunman NOT to "slip through" are proposed or enacted, people begin to scream bloody murder about their constitutional right to privacy being violated (amongst others).

In a nutshell, the US relies on their citizens to act responsibly, we only punish people after that fact that do not act that way.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Fine. I'll be interested in finding out how this gunman slipped through campus security then.

quote Originally posted by GT86: Perhaps. If the shooter did not have a gun, he could have inflicted as much or more carnage with a bomb (a few minutes on Google will tell you all you need to make a highly effective device), or by simply chaining and padlocking the doors and setting the buildings on fire. Guns are convenient, but they are hardly the only means of killing a large number of people. Anytime there is a large group in a relatively small area, the potential for mass destruction is there.

if you look at his post - he was being sarcastic.
I almost did the same thing....

and yes, the chaining & padlocking - then setting building aflame would have been SSSSOOOO much uglier.
gotta remember that for when I seek revenge on society.....damn you all.....

So, there's always the assumption that making something illegal, or an act illegal will prevent it from occurring. That's never the case. DUI is illegal, people do it, Rape is illegal, people do it. Bringing a gun on a college campus is illegal, yesterday someone did it. The world is becoming increasingly more violent, not less. Actually the opposite of banning firearms would be more helpful, allow professors and eligible students to carry if they can be qualified to do so. If only one other person had been armed how many others could have been saved. Please not that the police and other authorities can not be everywhere all the time. Yesterday they had TWO HOURS to react and yet the carnage continued. Either we are going to have to live in a police state or learn to protect ourselves from an increasingly hostile world. But also remember, -- Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."—Benjamin Frankin

Even IF (highly debatable) making all the guns magically disappear would put an end to this type of MASS murder, murder and rape along with countless other crimes would increase exponentially because the rest of society would no longer be able to use fire arms for personal protection.
I do not have any links to stats handy on this but countless lives are saved every day by the use of legally owned and carried weapons. It is just plane not reported much.

Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have them. Pure and simple.

I by no means am saying this is not a tragedy! but it is interesting that just because 30 people were killed at the same time it is more tragic than thirty people that were killed over say the last few weeks. It will be disturbing (as always) to watch the anti gun crowd glom onto this unfortunate incident to further their misguided cause.

I might get a good flaming for this but here it goes! This guy was good! I have in the past been amazed that some of these guys go into their killing spree armed to the teeth and only manage to take out just a few people.Yes I truly believe that teachers should be fully trained in the use of fire arms and be required have one (school supplied) in a safe and reasonably easily accessible location. YES one Prof. with a side arm could have and should have put an end to that bastards life as soon as the situation started to unfold. It is beyond me that parents to not demand this! Police cannot protect the population from these psychopaths whether it be at a school, a bus stop, at the park, in your home or just walking down the street, not anywhere! It is up to everyone!,,,, all of us! to look after ourselves and the others around us! let's start playing like a team!

Yes I am licensed. Yes I carry. Yes I am well trained. Yes I have used my weapon to protect myself and others from harm.

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

"A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly."

"Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.""

http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

Pretty much speaks for itself.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Pyrthian:


if you look at his post - he was being sarcastic.


QUOTE]

Correct. But not sarcastic toward YOU.

As far as I can tell, it boils down to a sizable portion in government who do not trust you, the citizen. "Well, YOU won't know how to handle a gun responsibly, and so we can't let you have that right. So you just let US take care of you with our police force. And if you don't trust us and TRY to protect yourself, we will arrest YOU."

Some woman in Milwaukee got money from an automated cash machine. 35 years old. She had her children with her. She then drove to her sister's house. In the drive way, 2 men pulled up and robbed her. They had been staking out the automated teller and then were going to follow a person and rob them. After hearing that incident, MY WIFE, who is tough but far from a vigilante, wanted to get a gun to carry in her purse. And she knows that Wisconsin does not allow concealed carry.

Why? Because she isn't fooled by the government. She KNOWS they cannot protect you when you need them. Some of that is their fault. Some of it isn't. But she isn't looking for government to be her "mommy". She wants to take care of herself--in this area and in others.

I haven't heard any statistics. But has it been a "blood bath" in states with concealed carry laws?

In MN hasn't gone up or down

This from our local uber lib rag.
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1089112.html

Additional licensed handguns have neither increased nor decreased violent crime in Minnesota, a state report shows.

quote Originally posted by blackrams: You have a valid point, I don't see how anyone could think a no firearms zone could ever be effective.

It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

If you want to create a area of easily controllable sheep, its rather effective.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: I haven't heard any statistics. But has it been a "blood bath" in states with concealed carry laws?

No. The anti-gun groups predicted it would lead to a rash of vigilantism and painted pictures of every street corner becoming an OK Corral. But it hasn't happened. 48 states have some form of concealed carry, 39 of which are "shall issue" (meaning if you apply and meet the requirements, the state must issue the permit). While statistics can be twisted or interpreted to fit an agenda, it's clear the doom sayers were wrong. You rarely hear about a CCW permit holder being arrested for misuse of a firearm. Nationwide, permit revocations are about 0.5%, meaning approx one in every 200 holders has their permit revoked.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: Springs and ammo still kick off the metal detectors. and the other types of sensors in use today would find the 'plastic'. Not that ive tried getting past the detectors but i have done the research The only problem with making your own in a 'gun free zone' is it raises the stakes if you get caught with one. They also tend to stand out more. ( But, that said, if that was my only choice to protect my family, id choose to take the risk )

yes, as do many other common metal objects.
there is no system that cant be circumvented.
as what started this thread shows. how did the weapon end up where it was?

and, the weakest point of just about any system put in place: low payed security guards.

if someone wants to kill - someone will die.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: Because we are a free and open society. As a rule, when security measures such as would be required for the gunman NOT to "slip through" are proposed or enacted, people begin to scream bloody murder about their constitutional right to privacy being violated (amongst others). In a nutshell, the US relies on their citizens to act responsibly, we only punish people after that fact that do not act that way.

John, you stated in no uncertain terms that I was “wrong” to suspect that this “no firearm zone” isn’t (effectively) enforced. Your post above only seems to confirm my suspicions.

The “no firearm zone” at this campus appears to be a joke, much like the “gun control” laws up here.

Criminals and nutcases pack guns, law abiding sane citizens don’t. (EDIT: I'm referring to the “no firearm zone” on the campus and up here in Canada where we have very strict gun laws.)

Why do so many people not feel safe I wonder? (EDIT: This is a reference to the situations in which "criminals and nutcases" are packing guns in locations where it's illegal for "law abiding" citizens to be doing so.)

quote Originally posted by 84fiero123: Patrick you have college campuses up there. Are they surrounded by barb wire fences, metal detectors, armed police? No, neither are ours.

My initial question in this thread concerned the supposed “no firearm zone” at this campus. I had (and continue to have) no idea how this zone could be effectively enforced. I suspected the campus could not be “surrounded by barb wire fences, metal detectors, and armed police”. See my response(s) to John.

EDIT: I added a couple of notations for clarification purposes as numerous people were misinterpreting what I had stated.

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 04-17-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick: John, you stated in no uncertain terms that I was “wrong” to suspect that this “no firearm zone” isn’t (effectively) enforced. Your post above only seems to confirm my suspicions. The “no firearm zone” at this campus appears to be a joke, much like the “gun control” laws up here. Criminals and nutcases pack guns, law abiding sane citizens don’t. Why do so many people not feel safe I wonder? ... .

there are MANY MANY law abiding citizens who "pack guns". there are quite a few right here on the forum.
"why do so many people not feel safe?" mostly because they eat up the media and the media thrives on scaring people. if you based your life on "the news" - you are doomed to a life of fear. the news never opens with "560 airplanes landed safely today, and 44,567 motorists reached their destination safely"
it opens with something locally that will kill your children if you dont stay tuned for the next 25 minutes

do you not know anyone who own/carries a gun? is that person a criminal?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: there are MANY MANY law abiding citizens who "pack guns".

Ummm.... maybe you need to step back and re-read my post. I was referring to law abiding people in the "no firearm zone" on the campus and up here in Canada.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Criminals and nutcases pack guns, law abiding sane citizens don’t.

I have a CCW, along with almost 87,000 other people in Arizona. I carry my gun daily, and I am not a criminal. Other than the fact I own a Fiero, I consider myself to be sane Why do I carry? Precisely because of the criminals and nutjobs.

edit: I read your post above this one and realized I misunderstood your point. My apologies.

[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 04-17-2007).]

Patrick,
Many very sane, law abiding citzens carry every day here in the states. Most states treat their residents as full citizens instead of subjects and recognize their God given right (Bill of Rights doesn't give you any rights, it denies the government the ability to take away those that pre-existed our constitution) of self defense.

Persons with a concealed weapon permit have an even lower rate of crime than sworn law officers.

quote Originally posted by GT86: I have a CCW, along with almost 87,000 other people in Arizona. I carry my gun daily, and I am not a criminal. Other than the fact I own a Fiero, I consider myself to be sane Why do I carry? Precisely because of the criminals and nutjobs.

quote Originally posted by 88 Formula: Patrick, Many very sane, law abiding citzens carry every day here in the states. Most states treat their residents as full citizens instead of subjects and recognize their God given right (Bill of Rights doesn't give you any rights, it denies the government the ability to take away those that pre-existed our constitution) of self defense. Persons with a concealed weapon permit have an even lower rate of crime than sworn law officers.

We are not in disagreement. Please read my previous post.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 "A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly." "Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."" http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658 Pretty much speaks for itself.

There you have it. Guns were prohibited. So I guess there couldn't have been a shooting after all.
\SARCHASM

A perfect, if terrible, example of how effective prohibition is.
\NOT SARCASM