Campus carry policy under review, restrictions pending

[oldguystudent]

13 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

 a very deadly mechanical weapon responsible for far more deaths than handguns every year.

 

Well, actually, the CDC begs to differ.

[UNT90]

11 minutes ago, oldguystudent said:

Well, actually, the CDC begs to differ.

That is a bit surprising, but the point still stands. They kill more than guns, but where is the outrage to raise the driving age? 

Abd you would need to ferrit out ACCIDENTAL gun deaths for this number. We are talking about accidents, after all. 

Maybe we should outlaw chemical companies, also. Looks like poisoning is outta hand! Seriously, poisoning?

Edited January 31, 2016 by UNT90

[oldguystudent]

18 minutes ago, UNT90 said:

 

Abd you would need to ferrit out ACCIDENTAL gun deaths for this number. We are talking about accidents, after all. 

 

You would then need to omit accidental automobile deaths.

 

Look, I don't think you've ever seen me argue against guns here.  I just like arguments with numbers to be accurate.

[UNT90]

3 minutes ago, oldguystudent said:

You would then need to omit accidental automobile deaths.

 

Look, I don't think you've ever seen me argue against guns here.  I just like arguments with numbers to be accurate.

No, the argument was ACCIDENTAL gun deaths, so you would have to eliminate intentional gun deaths (a lot) and intentional car deaths (some, but surely not more than 5 or 10%). That would skew the numbers greatly in my argument's favor, of course.

[oldguystudent]

I haven't been following closely enough to know which way you're trying to argue here, but:

Accidental discharge of firearms:  505

Intentional self-harm (suicide): 21,175

Assault (homicide): 11,208

Discharge of firearm undetermined intent: 208

Motor vehicle accidents (many codes listed for which I don't have a key): 35,369

Source

So maybe, your argument is that roughly 2/3 of firearm deaths are self inflicted, and one might reasonably surmise that those deaths would likely have occurred with or without guns.

[Green P1]

Our defensive backs should study this thread. Lots to be learned about backpedaling and changing direction!!21!

[UNT90]

5 hours ago, oldguystudent said:

I haven't been following closely enough to know which way you're trying to argue here, but:

Accidental discharge of firearms:  505

Intentional self-harm (suicide): 21,175

Assault (homicide): 11,208

Discharge of firearm undetermined intent: 208

Motor vehicle accidents (many codes listed for which I don't have a key): 35,369

Source

So maybe, your argument is that roughly 2/3 of firearm deaths are self inflicted, and one might reasonably surmise that those deaths would likely have occurred with or without guns.

66's big argument is some people shouldn't have guns because they aren't safe with them and accidentally kill themselves or others. So you say 505 deaths from ACCIDENTAL gun deaths, while there are 35,000 car accident deaths?

Obviously 66 will now come out in support of limiting driver's license to those are aren't good drivers (like anyone between 16 and 21)?

 

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

A comparison between guns and car deaths is ridiculous... Using a car is not really much of a choice.. I'm not riding a horse or bicycle to Dallas (350+MILES). ... Cancer kills more than either... want to toss it in.?? 

Don't say fly ... how do I leave the airport to where i need to go out of a motor vehicle.??

[Army of Dad]

1 hour ago, SCREAMING EAGLE-66 said:

A comparison between guns and car deaths is ridiculous... Using a car is not really much of a choice.. I'm not riding a horse or bicycle to Dallas (350+MILES). ... Cancer kills more than either... want to toss it in.?? 

Don't say fly ... how do I leave the airport to where i need to go out of a motor vehicle.??

The government would seem to disagree on not using a car is a choice. Driving a car is a privilege, not a right (keeping and bearing arms).

[UNT90]

2 hours ago, SCREAMING EAGLE-66 said:

A comparison between guns and car deaths is ridiculous... Using a car is not really much of a choice.. I'm not riding a horse or bicycle to Dallas (350+MILES). ... Cancer kills more than either... want to toss it in.?? 

Don't say fly ... how do I leave the airport to where i need to go out of a motor vehicle.??

A car and a gun are both mechanical devices. Take a bus to Dallas, driven by a trained, professional driver. You just want the convenience of a car so much that you don't care that it kills many many many more people ACCIDENTALLY than guns. Oh, and where is all that driver's license training? Not even a driver's Ed requirement anymore like when we were in school. 

So, ya, a very apt comparison, even though you really really don't want it to be. 

[Censored by Laurie]

2 hours ago, UNT90 said:

A car and a gun are both mechanical devices. Take a bus to Dallas, driven by a trained, professional driver. You just want the convenience of a car so much that you don't care that it kills many many many more people ACCIDENTALLY than guns. Oh, and where is all that driver's license training? Not even a driver's Ed requirement anymore like when we were in school. 

So, ya, a very apt comparison, even though you really really don't want it to be. 

ok.

car travel is essentially limited to confined areas specifically created to limit their potential danger...we call them roads...and governed and regulated heavily within those confined areas (speed limits, registration/inspection/licensing requirements) ...and their use or even presence outside of those confined, automobile specific areas, like say within a shopping mall or in the middle of a pedestrian walkway or at church is typically punished severely as it presents a danger to both the operator and more importantly those around them.

so seemingly if you want to continue this like-for-like comparison, you must then also be arguing for well-governed/regulated gun-usage and only gun-specific designated areas (say a range or hunting ground) and that their use outside of those areas constitutes a risk to others.

[Army of Dad]

46 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

ok.

car travel is essentially limited to confined areas specifically created to limit their potential danger...we call them roads...and governed and regulated heavily within those confined areas (speed limits, registration/inspection/licensing requirements) ...and their use or even presence outside of those confined, automobile specific areas, like say within a shopping mall or in the middle of a pedestrian walkway or at church is typically punished severely as it presents a danger to both the operator and more importantly those around them.

so seemingly if you want to continue this like-for-like comparison, you must then also be arguing for well-governed/regulated gun-usage and only gun-specific designated areas (say a range or hunting ground) and that their use outside of those areas constitutes a risk to others.

Roads were created specifically to limit the danger of cars?

That is an, uh, interesting position to take.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Army of Dad
Bold print

[Censored by Laurie]

6 minutes ago, Army of Dad said:

Roads were created specifically to limit the danger of cars?

That is an, uh, interesting position to take.

I'm not seeing where I said "created", no...but there is undoubtedly an aim toward public safety in having a structured and regulated infrastructure in place for the operation of such dangerous mechanical devices, wouldn't you agree?

I mean, I can't just bring my car into every post office, tavern or brothel that I frequent. this isn't the wild west anymore.

[Army of Dad]

15 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

I'm not seeing where I said "created", no...but there is undoubtedly an aim toward public safety in having a structured and regulated infrastructure in place for the operation of such dangerous mechanical devices, wouldn't you agree?

I mean, I can't just bring my car into every post office, tavern or brothel that I frequent. this isn't the wild west anymore.

I bolded the part I was referencing.

you can bring your car into those places or, maybe, a homecoming parade...

You shouldn't, but you can.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

3 hours ago, UNT90 said:

A car and a gun are both mechanical devices. Take a bus to Dallas, driven by a trained, professional driver. You just want the convenience of a car so much that you don't care that it kills many many many more people ACCIDENTALLY than guns. Oh, and where is all that driver's license training? Not even a driver's Ed requirement anymore like when we were in school. 

So, ya, a very apt comparison, even though you really really don't want it to be. 

Dr. Ed. was an option where i was but nearly everyone did .... now Austin has changed up graduation requirements so much so there is not  time to work it in**.  Bus accidents also contribute to traffic fatalities.  I am pretty sure even motorcycles are counted also ... The traffic death count we get here in the paper monthly always does.  Your suggestion doesn't really reduce the count much if any... those people are still dead just the accounting is different. Maybe not in Dallas or large cities so much because of slower traffic in town  but on the highways (I-20 for example ) quite a few fatal bus accidents happens.... more speed, tired drivers and trucks hitting them. One near Pecos last year killed a lot of people. I remember one in east Texas but can't remember where (head-on?). 

** most trade courses are gone as well.. usually expensive ... tough to schedule them any with graduation credits increased.... most of additions  do not help much .. but politicians in Austin  want to claim they do. Kids coming out of HS now are not near as good as 20 years ago. .... not the ones I see.  I blame passing kids that really should not passed on.... so thate kids that worked and made "75" see the kids that did near nothing passing with a 70 and then decide... "Why work, you get passed anyway (HS not college)".

[Censored by Laurie]

9 hours ago, Army of Dad said:

I bolded the part I was referencing.

you can bring your car into those places or, maybe, a homecoming parade...

You shouldn't, but you can.

ah...I think "specifically designed" would've been a better choice of words, as no I'm not claiming roads were invented for safety purposes. either way, we're bogging down in some ridiculous minutia and missing the point. 

90 wanted to make a car-to-gun comparison, so all I am doing is sarcastically laying out the logical arguments one or two steps further than clearly he had thought out...it leaves one of two options...either you accept that car-usage, and in his like-for-like comparison gun-usage, should be limited and heavily regulated and that reductions in either would make an already dangerous machine even more dangerous...or you believe that reducing limitations and regulations on both cars and guns is prudent, in which case I think I ought to have the 'murican freedom to drive an f-150 up and down the aisles at the local albertsons during my weekly grocery shopping.

or...I guess the third option could be simply that it's a stupid comparison in the first place 

[Army of Dad]

27 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

ah...I think "specifically designed" would've been a better choice of words, as no I'm not claiming roads were invented for safety purposes. either way, we're bogging down in some ridiculous minutia and missing the point. 

90 wanted to make a car-to-gun comparison, so all I am doing is sarcastically laying out the logical arguments one or two steps further than clearly he had thought out...it leaves one of two options...either you accept that car-usage, and in his like-for-like comparison gun-usage, should be limited and heavily regulated and that reductions in either would make an already dangerous machine even more dangerous...or you believe that reducing limitations and regulations on both cars and guns is prudent, in which case I think I ought to have the 'murican freedom to drive an f-150 up and down the aisles at the local albertsons during my weekly grocery shopping.

or...I guess the third option could be simply that it's a stupid comparison in the first place 

I suppose I could have addressed your meaning in the tortured logic of the car/gun comparison, but where's the fun in that?

[UNT90]

1 hour ago, Censored by Laurie said:

ah...I think "specifically designed" would've been a better choice of words, as no I'm not claiming roads were invented for safety purposes. either way, we're bogging down in some ridiculous minutia and missing the point. 

90 wanted to make a car-to-gun comparison, so all I am doing is sarcastically laying out the logical arguments one or two steps further than clearly he had thought out...it leaves one of two options...either you accept that car-usage, and in his like-for-like comparison gun-usage, should be limited and heavily regulated and that reductions in either would make an already dangerous machine even more dangerous...or you believe that reducing limitations and regulations on both cars and guns is prudent, in which case I think I ought to have the 'murican freedom to drive an f-150 up and down the aisles at the local albertsons during my weekly grocery shopping.

or...I guess the third option could be simply that it's a stupid comparison in the first place 

You chose the wrong argument. Your better argument are that all cars are required to be registered with the state government, so why aren't guns?

Of course, I'm sure you know my answer.

[UNT90]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/13/sources-fbi-investigating-ohio-machete-attack-as-possible-lone-wolf-terror-act.html

Wow, talking about wrapping all the political arguments in this forum into one story...

Just think how many injuries would have been avoided if any of the patrons had been carrying a gun. Also, should we now push to ban machetes? Maybe limit the lengths of knifes?

And it was another radical Islamic terrorist attack. In a deli named "Nazareth" that catered to both Jewish and Islamic customers and had a tolerance slogan in Arabic on it's wall.

Also, cops killed this guy after a taser deployment failed. Hands up don't shoot? Was it justified? Why didn't they just disarm him? I mean, it was only a Machete. Maybe cops need more training from Chuck Norris on how to disarm a suspect with a machete?

And, of course the biggest question that is still hanging out there... Is this guy black? Because that is the only time a police shooting bothers a certain crowd in this forum, although some are perfectly fine once they find out he is also a radical Islamist. Isn't anyone concerned about the white people getting randomly gunned down for no reason by police?

So so so much mileage in one story.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

This is why I oppose so many carrying around a gun ...... too many CARELESS, stupid,   and drunken  people ... more will be shot than saved by having one. .... I not anti-gun (own them)... and no... the Democrats (except a few very radical urban ones ) are not trying to take away your guns despite some claims... just reduce the number of felons and mental cases that can get one easily..  This was about a RABID pro carry woman... I do not want students in my classroom with them.   ( .locked in their car.. ok.) 

http://news.jammedup.com/2016/03/09/avid-pro-gun-florida-mom-shot-in-the-back-by-4-year-old-son/  

 

quote from article: 

 

Just the day before the shooting, Gilt had a heated debate about guns used for self-defense on Facebook, where she posted “Even my 4-year-old gets jacked up to target shoot with the.22,”   ----------- stupid person... note .. Facebook picture.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/texas-man-accidental-shooting

Above... In a Sulphur Springs Church (Jan)  ;;  

http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/367793781.html  

http://abc13.com/news/teen-boy-accidentally-shot-killed-by-step-brother/1161643/

Plus many more "accidents". (. just in Texas) 

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/tag/accidental-shooting/

 

Too many careless people...........................

 

 

[FirefightnRick]

14 hours ago, SCREAMING EAGLE-66 said:

 

Plus many more "accidents". (. just in Texas) 

 

Too many careless people...........................

 

 

Agree, too many accidents by careless people just in the DFW area alone...just in the past 48 hours...

 

 

 

^^^^ This tractor trailer ground up five other vehicles at the NB I-35 to east bound 121 split.  I'll give you ONE guess who was first on scene on this one,...??????

 

 

Rick

Edited March 11, 2016 by FirefightnRick

[UNT90]

I think 66 should decide who can have guns and who can't. I mean, he proudly claims to be a gun owner (of course he also claims to be a conservative despite not having a single conservative belief in his stable of political views, so I don't know that I believe him on the gun ownership) and he obviously is smarter than anyone who owns guns. Just ask him. 

I think he might just enjoy that roll. 

[Censored by Laurie]

6 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

Agree, too many accidents by careless people just in the DFW area alone...just in the past 48 hours...

just imagine how bad it would be if we didn't regulate traffic. 

[Army of Dad]

11 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

just imagine how bad it would be if we didn't regulate traffic. 

Considering that driving is not a God given and constitutionally protected right that makes perfect sense.

Also, it's not like guns aren't already heavily regulated in the country...