Truth about gun free zones - General

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEbXuwDiUSo&feature=sub[/media] I like this guy. [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=18289994&postcount=95[/url] <-- Thanks

[QUOTE=YoMother;18262098]Dude is right about everything, we should all have guns and shoot everyone that shoots a gun. Talk about the domino effect.[/QUOTE] You really didn't listen to his message...

A well armed public is always more safe then a disarmed one

[QUOTE=YoMother;18262686]He's talking about the usual gun crap, where he fails to see beyond the issue and picks out the facts that fit his opinion.[/QUOTE] Because a gun free zone doesn't let bad guys with guns in. Also, give me some facts and opinions from your side of the 'argument.'

NutnFancy is right in this case, but all his other videos make me think of him as a big fat douche while he babbles "LOL GLOCK TRIUMPHS AGAIN BESTEST WEPON EVER"

[QUOTE=Guardian-Angel;18263025]NutnFancy is right in this case, but all his other videos make me think of him as a big fat douche while he babbles "LOL GLOCK TRIUMPHS AGAIN BESTEST WEPON EVER"[/QUOTE] I just think he favors a Glock because it's a well rounded weapon. Everybody has favorites!

[QUOTE=YoMother;18262098]Dude is right about everything, we should all have guns and shoot everyone that shoots a gun. Talk about the domino effect.[/QUOTE] He means that there shouldn't be "free fire zones" because if there is somebody with a gun, no body would be able to stop him. If they didn't exist, there would be someone with a concealed weapon every now and then, and that one person could save many lives. Not to mention, the gunmen just knowing that someone could have a gun (assuming he either wants to kill many, or doesn't want to die) would maybe stop them. Police aren't enough to protect, not always. Even if one of these concealed gun owners went crazy, there would be another that stops him.

[QUOTE=YoMother;18263210]He says gun free zones are killing zones for psychos, if they get their gun in there. So he's saying gun free zones don't work. Fair enough. He's just forgetting the whole human behavior part of things. And I'm not gonna explain human behavior to you, that would take forever. But it's basically this: With gun = primitive, without gun = reasonable.[/QUOTE] wut

[QUOTE=YoMother;18263210]He says gun free zones are killing zones for psychos, if they get their gun in there. So he's saying gun free zones don't work. Fair enough. He's just forgetting the whole human behavior part of things. And I'm not gonna explain human behavior to you, that would take forever. But it's basically this: With gun = primitive, without gun = reasonable.[/QUOTE] Explain further please.

[QUOTE=YoMother;18263259]read a book for fucks sake[/QUOTE] :(

I agree with YoMother, with guns carried by many people, more people are likely to use it. With guns restricted, less people are likely to use it. The "if someone wants to shoot around, gun free zones are useless" argument is completely irrelevant as zone or no zone, the psycho will do what he wants. Look at the latest amok-run in that military base, a whole base full of weapons and soldiers didn't do anything.

[QUOTE=Killuah;18263544]I agree with YoMother, with guns carried by many people, more people are likely to use it. With guns restricted, less people are likely to use it. The "if someone wants to shoot around, gun free zones are useless" argument is completely irrelevant as zone or no zone, the psycho will do what he wants. Look at the latest amok-run in that military base, a whole base full of weapons and soldiers didn't do anything.[/QUOTE] 1.) No, less people are likely to use it because they'd be scared of people that do good with their guns 2.) He wouldn't do anything nearly as bad if a do gooder was there with a gun to stop him, that alone might even scare him out of doing the killings 3.) They weren't allowed to carry weapons, if they could nearly no one would've died, if anyone at all!

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263604]1.) No, less people are likely to use it because they'd be scared of people that do good with their guns 2.) He wouldn't do anything nearly as bad if a do gooder was there with a gun to stop him, that alone might even scare him out of doing the killings 3.) They weren't allowed to carry weapons, if they could nearly no one would've died, if anyone at all![/QUOTE] That's not how people work. [editline]07:47PM[/editline] Wtf YoMother Also" if could, then would" arguments are no basis

Then how do they work

Instead of one big incident, there would be ten small incidents.

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263604]1.) No, less people are likely to use it because they'd be scared of people that do good with their guns [/QUOTE] That's not going to stop someone thats mentally unstable.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;18263788]That's not going to stop someone thats mentally unstable.[/QUOTE] But I'm just saying, you know? Still, they'd be killed/stopped before they do much anyway.

[QUOTE=Killuah;18263544]I agree with YoMother, with guns carried by many people, more people are likely to use it. With guns restricted, less people are likely to use it. The "if someone wants to shoot around, gun free zones are useless" argument is completely irrelevant as zone or no zone, the psycho will do what he wants. Look at the latest amok-run in that military base, a whole base full of weapons and soldiers didn't do anything.[/QUOTE] Fort Hood was a gun free zone. They had to call the police to take him down. One of my teachers was in the army and when he was on guard duty, he was allowed to carry a gun, but with no ammunition in it.

[QUOTE=AY LEE;18263810]Fort Hood was a gun free zone. They had to call the police to take him down.[/QUOTE] It was in a fucking office-building type structure.

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263805]But I'm just saying, you know? Still, they'd be killed/stopped before they do much anyway.[/QUOTE] by the time the person pulls out his handgun and fires off a magazine, people aren't going to be sure what's going on or whos shooting. when you have 12 different guys with guns looking for the original shooter it just turns into a shootout.

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263805]But I'm just saying, you know? Still, they'd be killed/stopped before they do much anyway.[/QUOTE] Implying killing or wounding people with a firearm is easy.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;18263828]by the time the person pulls out his handgun and fires off a clip. people aren't going to be sure what's going on or whos shooting. when you have 12 different guys with guns looking for the original shooter it just turns into a shootout.[/QUOTE] Not always, it depends on the situation

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263853]Not always, it depends on the situation[/QUOTE] All the shootings in OP were incredibly clustered places.

[QUOTE=Billiam;18263843]Implying killing or wounding people with a firearm is easy.[/QUOTE] It's easy and hard at the same time. Anyone who was fired a gun before knows this.

[QUOTE=Advancedrock;18263853]Not always, it depends on the situation[/QUOTE] ok, a guy walks into mcdonalds, pulls out a handgun, and fires a magazine into a crowd and runs out. one man thinks the shooter is still there and pulls out his gun looking for the shooter. another guy thinks the guy that just pulled out the handgun is the shooter, and fires at him. domino effect. withought a uniform (IE policemen) people won't know whos the shooter or whos the person trying to gun down the shooter.

This is just like a religious debate, no one will ever win. Either you grew up with guns, or you didn't.

[QUOTE=AY LEE;18263873]It's easy and hard at the same time. Anyone who was fired a gun before knows this.[/QUOTE] I'm not just talking about physically.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;18263882]ok, a guy walks into mcdonalds, pulls out a handgun, and fires a magazine into a crowd and runs out. one man thinks the shooter is still there and pulls out his gun looking for the shooter. another guy thinks the guy that just pulled out the handgun is the shooter, and fires at him. domino effect. withought a uniform (IE policemen) people won't know whos the shooter or whos the person trying to gun down the shooter.[/QUOTE] ok

[QUOTE=Billiam;18263896]I'm not just talking about physically.[/QUOTE] Neither am I. [editline]01:59PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;18263882]ok, a guy walks into mcdonalds, pulls out a handgun, and fires a magazine into a crowd and runs out. one man thinks the shooter is still there and pulls out his gun looking for the shooter. another guy thinks the guy that just pulled out the handgun is the shooter, and fires at him. domino effect. withought a uniform (IE policemen) people won't know whos the shooter or whos the person trying to gun down the shooter.[/QUOTE] Although I do think anyone with common sense would declare that they are not the shooter, or some people who witnessed it would identify the people. I do realize how this is a very possible situation though.

[QUOTE=PederPauline;18263894]Either you grew up with guns, or you didn't.[/QUOTE] Doesn't affect opinions about them, though. I've shot only a few gunshots in my life, not exactly growing up with them, and I still think that "gun free" (or as I call them, "criminal carry") zones shouldn't exist. Even though the video had some bad points with no consideration of human psychology (unarmed INDIVIDUALS ganging up on an armed man instead of the instinct of self-preservation? Don't think so), the main point of the video was good.