FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
Actually as a regular civilian you never go into where all the inmates live, all you do is see them behind a glass wall.
Bill would abolish gun free zones.
- Thread starter Owen Sparks
- Start date
- Status
SO There is a place!!!!!
You have admitted to favor restricting the carrying of firearms to at least one place, "Jail". This decision was made by the "State" for safety reasons. This then admits the "States" authority to restrict the carrying of firearms for safety reasons to be determined by them. The fix to the determination where they cannot be carried is to revise the law not repeal it.
You have admitted to favor restricting the carrying of firearms to at least one place, "Jail". This decision was made by the "State" for safety reasons. This then admits the "States" authority to restrict the carrying of firearms for safety reasons to be determined by them. The fix to the determination where they cannot be carried is to revise the law not repeal it.
Mike1234567
member
^^^ It used to be that the Sheriff made that decision... not the State. BIG difference. The State and Fed are WAY overstepping their boundaries.
It would be nice if I could actually carry onto my collage campus. You know, the place I spend 40 hours a week. I also doubt it will pass but thanks for the effort Congressman Paul.
Just to share my story, there still are high school rifle teams out there. We just use air rifles instead of .22s. Now my school had its JROTC building on one side of the school and the rifle range on the other. The thing is that the range was set underneath our schools football stadium (on the visitors side) where they used to store track equipment. So there is no permeant AC down there (keep in mind that this school is on the gulf coast so humidity is a problem). The roof is also not very good and it leaks every time it rains. Plus animals and insects are always finding their way in there. So in case y'all couldn't take the hint we could not store our rifles and equipment there because it would rust, get wet, mold, or similar. What does this mean? We had to carry our rifles (without cases) a little over 1/4 mile through the middle of our school (there were plenty of kids there for after school activities). We did this 3 times a week almost every week of the school year plus special occasions. Plus during our meets we would carry our firearms through other people's schools. The reason for saying this is I find the anti's statements odd because if they are to be believed there should have been a shootout every week at my school but strangely enough in the 4 years I was on the team I don't remember a single shootout.
Just to share my story, there still are high school rifle teams out there. We just use air rifles instead of .22s. Now my school had its JROTC building on one side of the school and the rifle range on the other. The thing is that the range was set underneath our schools football stadium (on the visitors side) where they used to store track equipment. So there is no permeant AC down there (keep in mind that this school is on the gulf coast so humidity is a problem). The roof is also not very good and it leaks every time it rains. Plus animals and insects are always finding their way in there. So in case y'all couldn't take the hint we could not store our rifles and equipment there because it would rust, get wet, mold, or similar. What does this mean? We had to carry our rifles (without cases) a little over 1/4 mile through the middle of our school (there were plenty of kids there for after school activities). We did this 3 times a week almost every week of the school year plus special occasions. Plus during our meets we would carry our firearms through other people's schools. The reason for saying this is I find the anti's statements odd because if they are to be believed there should have been a shootout every week at my school but strangely enough in the 4 years I was on the team I don't remember a single shootout.
scythefwd
Member
snubbie - Nope. You misunderstand my intentions and reasoning. I don't want carry in jails except for employees because the other people in the jail are still being punished for their crimes. Once they are released, and here is where my opinion is unpopular, they get their carry rights back unless they were in for a violent offence.
Mike1234567
member
^^^ I agree that not "all" freed felons should have their 2A rights revoked... only violent offenders and/or those with certain mental illnesses... not "all" mental illnesses.
Resist Evil
Member
Your statement appears to be quite a reach in logic. To say that since the State has made a single restrictive decision about firearms, you seem to imply it then has exclusive jurisdiction regarding firearms and safety. The State is not a magical monolithic repository of wisdom and knowledge resulting in well-reasoned laws, rules, codes, and regulations to benefit us all. This is clearly not the case in real life.
Repealing a bad law is a very good way to revise it. Most emphatically, laws restricting carry on a school campus should be repealed. There has been zero logic or proof that such laws have mitigated any violence at such places. In recorded history, there are no instances where the concentration of arms in the hands of "Only Ones," the ruling "elite," and criminals has proven to be a benefit to society. The Gun Free School Zone Act is simply unConstitutional. If someone wants the act to be legal, change the Constitution first.
As society seems to have become less civilized during the decades that I have lived, it appears more prudent to have access to the means for self-defense at more locations; not fewer. More guns demonstrably equals less crime. "An armed society is a polite society."
Secure locations with controlled access. Places where every single person entering save for sworn law enforcement must enter via a manned metal detector. That's it. This would mean places like jails, prisons, courthouses, commercial airlines, nuclear facilities, etc etc.
Schools: Used to be legal all over, currently legal in at least Utah. No different than anywhere else no reason to be off limits.
Colleges: Currently legal in many states. No different than anywhere else no reason to be off limits.
Bars: Currently legal in several states. Not a problem, even in the ones where you can carry and drink. Personally I would say you cannot carry at a bar AND drink, but history says even this is not a necessary law.
Jails are controlled access. If you want to say that jails being okay as an off limits place means schools are okay then schools must be controlled access. It must be impossible for anybody to enter the premises without going through the guards and a metal detector with a valid reason for being there.
I agree. I'll even take it further...if they are released back into society they get all of their rights back, including the RKBA. Let's think about this...how in the hell does it make sense to say that a person is too dangerous to have a gun because they might go commit a crime with it BUT they are safe to be free in society. They can buy power tools, chainsaws, knives, swords, cars, baseball bats, they can walk through your neighborhood, they can walk up to your children's daycare or school, they can do just about anything...
...if a person has proven themselves untrustworthy to the point that we think they will go rob a convenience store and/or murder somebody if they had a gun they should still be in prison. It's that simple. De-criminalize marijuana (regulate similar to alcohol), get rid of a bunch of other stupid/silly laws, get those people out of jail/prison and use that freed up space to keep the true criminals...violent offenders and the like...behind bars where they belong.
Law enforcement shouldn't have guns there either...how are people to protect themselves from the law enforcement officers with guns if they have none themselves?
It has been proven time and again...wearing a badge does not make someone trustworthy.
Access
You are starting to catch on. The key is access. Whether this access is restricted, controlled or prohibited is a question that only the "State" can determine. Yes the State & Feds are the controllers of policies and rules for public safety. They control almost every aspect of our lives. I am not saying this is right or the way it should be only the way it is.
You are starting to catch on. The key is access. Whether this access is restricted, controlled or prohibited is a question that only the "State" can determine. Yes the State & Feds are the controllers of policies and rules for public safety. They control almost every aspect of our lives. I am not saying this is right or the way it should be only the way it is.
Mike1234567
member
And, besides that, individuals who retain criminalistic habits will simply acquire firearms illegally anyway. I still say proven/convicted violent offenders should be denied.
scythefwd
Member
Warp - Ive found that violent offenders tend to be repeat offenders. No need to enable them to carry something impersonal as a gun legally. If they carry illegally (which they will) that is one more charge to keep them from roaming the streets that much longer. I did say my opinion wasn't popular. I understand both sides of the argument... but I feel that human nature must trump equality in this one case (it's one of the few where places in reality where you can argue both for and against and have a valid point... it these cases I tend to believe that humans are creatures of habit and will continue doing what they are known for and that the past is a good indicator of future actions... hence once you F!@# up, you loose the right permanently). Non violent crimes, such as tax evasion, possession of drugs (which addiction can be broken and will be with a long enough stint in jail), etc do not establish that the person is a danger to anyone but themselves and therefore should have their rights completely restored (though I'd be all for continued drug testing for certain physically addicting narcotics like cocaine, herion, morphone, opiates, or anything else that really can cause a physical need vs. a mental need)
Shooting someone is personal, but it's not near as personal as stabbing a person.
Shooting someone is personal, but it's not near as personal as stabbing a person.
TexasBill
Member
In my experience, nobody carries a firearm into the inmate area of a jail. Cops check their weapons upon entering and the jailers do not carry firearms. This is all done to prevent inmates, i.e., those already incarcerated for a crime, from being able to get guns.
What jail rules have to do with school-zone carry is frankly beyond me. While some may disagree, students are not inmates and staff members aren't jailers.
Anyone using Columbine as a reason for gun-free zones is deluding themselves. Klebold and Harris were literally suicide bombers (except the bombs didn't work); they went in knowing they had nothing to lose because they didn't intend to come out alive. Fear of legal sanctions isn't going to deter people who can't be punished.
What jail rules have to do with school-zone carry is frankly beyond me. While some may disagree, students are not inmates and staff members aren't jailers.
Anyone using Columbine as a reason for gun-free zones is deluding themselves. Klebold and Harris were literally suicide bombers (except the bombs didn't work); they went in knowing they had nothing to lose because they didn't intend to come out alive. Fear of legal sanctions isn't going to deter people who can't be punished.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
I have seen what they do on documentaries about jails during a shakedown. They all wear body armor, have rifles and shotguns, and have them all the inmates come out and lay down like they are being arrested while being covered by long guns while their cells are searched.
MikeNice
Member
Because that is the way it is does not make it right. It is our right and our duty to say that a law is incorrect and petition for change.
I find it interesting that you have turned away from making any sound argument. Now you rely on that old saw, it is what is so we just need to live with it.
Just because the government can restrict your carry in one place doesn't mean they can in all. The government can restrict your right to scream fire in a theater. They can't stop you from having a discussion about controversial matters in a public place. The restricition must serve the purpose of increasing public safety. There is no evidence that concealed carry on compus is a threat to public safety.
scythefwd
Member
snubbies - jails are state or federally run. Colleges aren't for the most part. Jails are restricted acces where there is hope of controlling the guns brought it...schools, no matter how loced down you think they are... Aren't. Especiaaly colleges.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
I think that after a felon gets out of jail that if he has 5 years of good behavior and doesn't even commit a misdemeanor that he gets all his rights back if it wasn't for a violent offense. Alot of criminals like auto theft go right back to stealing once they get out, they should be able to prove that they want to be within the law.
JN01
Member
The State of Illinois has determined that for safety reasons, no one is allowed to carry a concealed handgun anywhere. Do you not want that law repealed? By your definition, would the adoption of a CCW system not be a repeal? If, instead, you consider it a "revision", then why can't laws prohibiting concealed carry by a permit holder on school property be a "revision"?
The law doesn't affect just schools. I work at a pool, but since it is technically on the adjacent highschool's campus and owned by the school district, it is a gun free zone. I'm OK with not being able to carry at work, but I find it anoying to have to dissarm before I get out of the car, just to run in and grab something.
I also have a tendency to ride my bike to work, so unless someone here has a really sneaky legal loophole, I can't carry during my commute if I bike there.
When I go to classes at the junior college, I would like to be able to carry on campus - not because I anticipate anything happening during my lecture class, but because I usually have to park roughly half a mile away, and one of the houses I have to walk past has a doberman thats not too friendly, and every now and then gets out. So far, no problems, and I'll probably never need a gun, but that one time I do need it, I'll need it real bad.
Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
