Dildos descend on UT Austin in 'Cocks Not Glocks' protest of guns on campus - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50942725]Limiting your scope to "mass killings" is a manipulation of statistics. A shooter is likely to take more lives if unimpeded (e.g. if a CHL holder or LEO is not there to stop them). This skews the numbers. If I did a study on fires in buildings, only considered buildings which were 80% or more destroyed by fire, and drew the conclusion from this data alone that fire sprinkler systems are ineffective (even though older buildings that don't have them are more likely to burn completely and will therefore be over-represented in a study which only considers fires with significant damage to the structures), I would be laughed off the stage. Considering only incidents in which CHL holders were not likely to be present, then concluding that CHL holders can't help during shootings, is stupid and it is a misuse of statistical data. The FBI's study isn't about determining the effectiveness of CHL holders. Here's an editorial which includes a list of some incidents where CHL holders stopped shooters: [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/?utm_term=.2057188ea401[/url] It's a topic that's very heavily obscured by information manipulation and politics, but these things do happen. I think letting law-abiding citizens carry weapons defensively is fine. I also don't want to cite anecdotal evidence as a headlining argument, but I have personally used a firearm in a home defense situation. I didn't have to fire (for which I am very grateful), but I'm glad that I had it, because it was the sight of the gun that sent the intruder running. I don't really want to go back in time and find out what might've happened had I not come around the corner with a shotgun.[/QUOTE] Then the FBI are the ones manipulating statistics, not me. They are the ones who defined 64 of those incidents as mass killings. Judging from your source, it's fair then to say that 8 (#10 was National Guard and #6 was a Marine) mass shootings (3 or more people injured/killed) were stopped by regular civilians in a pretty lenient time frame (they use incidents from 1997 and 1998). I know that this list isn't exhaustive, but it's what you've given me so I'm working with it. But 8 mass shootings is literally a drop in the bucket. MST (which I linked earlier) claims 310 mass shootings in 2016 so far.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;50942783]Then the FBI are the ones manipulating statistics, not me. They are the ones who defined 64 of those incidents as mass killings. Judging from your source, it's fair then to say that 8 (#10 was National Guard and #6 was a Marine) mass shootings (3 or more people injured/killed) were stopped by regular civilians in a pretty lenient time frame (they use incidents from 1997 and 1998). I know that this list isn't exhaustive, but it's what you've given me so I'm working with it. But 8 mass shootings is literally a drop in the bucket. MST (which I linked earlier) claims 310 mass shootings in 2016 so far.[/QUOTE] It doesn't really matter how many - the point is you can't use a scenario in which a CHL holder was not present or was not even allowed to exist as evidence that CHL holders cannot have a positive impact on the outcome of a crime. That's ridiculous. Cases in which CHL holders stop crimes number, at the lowest estimate, at [B]80,000 per year[/B], and again potentially up into the millions depending on how data is interpreted. Recorded cases in which a present CHL holder stopped a crime outnumber those in which a present CHL holder did not stop a crime or decided not to intervene.

Pretty glad this happened. CC on campus, that is. I doubt it'll get enacted in VA any time soon, but if/when I end up going to school, it'd be nice to not have to leave my gun in my car for no good reason. Never going to need it, realistically. But the safest place to have it would be on my person, not locked up a mile away from me.

Campus carry went in effect on August 1st and is state wide. Every college in Texas must not restrict lawful carry on campus, but each university can have their on rules. (On campus residents must store guns in a locked safe, and can't carry in certain facilities at Texas A&M, for example. (Science and nuclear reseach labs, iirc)) [editline]24th August 2016[/editline] Taking your gun out at all as a LTC holder is a nono. And the campus carry rule is limited to conceal carry which you must follow proper guidelines to do. If it's too obvious then it's not concealed. If you whip your gun it in the library you're gonna be fucked 6 ways till sunday. Off campus, the same lisence permits you to open and conceal carry. Open carry must be in a proper holster. Again, no whiping it out without reason.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50942789]It doesn't really matter how many - the point is you can't use a scenario in which a CHL holder was not present or was not even allowed to exist as evidence that CHL holders cannot have a positive impact on the outcome of a crime. That's ridiculous. Cases in which CHL holders stop crimes number, at the lowest estimate, at [B]80,000 per year[/B], and again potentially up into the millions depending on how data is interpreted. Recorded cases in which a present CHL holder stopped a crime outnumber those in which a present CHL holder did not stop a crime or decided not to intervene.[/QUOTE] You're assuming that the incidents in the FBI report took place in places where CCers (or even just normal civilians with guns in general) weren't allowed but I can't find anything in the report that explicitly says that. Some of them were, certainly, like Aurora, but the incidents took place in "40 out of 50 states and the District of Columbia", as well as a pretty wide range of environments. The "active" part of active shooter also is defined as meaning that civilians could have done something about them. That one mass shooter stopped by a regular civilian with a gun, to me, is more indicative that even though it is possible for mass shooters to be dissuaded by armed civilians, it doesn't happen very often. If you ask me, the fact that someone was able to take body armour, tear gas, and 3 guns into a "gun-free" zone is also a huge problem but that's an argument for another time. I did look up into defensive gun use, but the fact that estimates range from 80,000 a year to 4.7 million a year means that basically I have no idea how helpful any data given on defensive gun use actually is, how many of these cases stopped mass shooters? The only stats I'm interested in right now are mass shootings because that would be the most plausible threat on a university campus if someone with a gun wants to start trouble. Your article sources 8 mass shootings that were stopped by a civilian with a gun, and the MST sources 310 mass shootings that have happened in 2016 so far.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;50942892]You're assuming that the incidents in the FBI report took place in places where CCers (or even just normal civilians with guns in general) weren't allowed but I can't find anything in the report that explicitly says that. Some of them were, certainly, like Aurora, but the incidents took place in "40 out of 50 states and the District of Columbia", as well as a pretty wide range of environments. The "active" part of active shooter also is defined as meaning that civilians could have done something about them. That one mass shooter stopped by a regular civilian with a gun, to me, is more indicative that even though it is possible for mass shooters to be dissuaded by armed civilians, it doesn't happen very often. If you ask me, the fact that someone was able to take body armour, tear gas, and 3 guns into a "gun-free" zone is also a huge problem but that's an argument for another time. I did look up into defensive gun use, but the fact that estimates range from 80,000 a year to 4.7 million a year means that basically I have no idea how helpful any data given on defensive gun use actually is, how many of these cases stopped mass shooters? The only stats I'm interested in right now are mass shootings because that would be the most plausible threat on a university campus if someone with a gun wants to start trouble. Your article sources 8 mass shootings that were stopped by a civilian with a gun, and the MST sources 310 mass shootings that have happened in 2016 so far.[/QUOTE] 310 mass shootings, which the definition is close to "four or more people selected indiscriminately killed" im willing to say that half of those are probably gangers shooting up eachother, probably even more than that. I wouldn't call that a mass shooting

What is the statistic for LTC holders having a mass shooting on campus in Texas?

tbh the only real concern I'd have over campus CC it has a pretty good potential to cause overescalation of situations.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;50943078]tbh the only real concern I'd have over campus CC it has a pretty good potential to cause overescalation of situations.[/QUOTE] I think most holders are pretty well aware of how bad of a legal shitstorm we would get if anyone of them overstepped their bounds.

[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;50941489]A dildo won't help you protect yourself from a mass shooter.[/QUOTE] What about a dildo that shoots bullets?

My friend managed to snag one. [t]https://puu.sh/qNw1g.jpg[/t] Everyone I've talked to at UT Dallas thinks it's hilarious

[QUOTE=code_gs;50943787]My friend managed to snag one. [t]https://puu.sh/qNw1g.jpg[/t] Everyone I've talked to at UT Dallas thinks it's hilarious[/QUOTE] If I was a TA with an office, I would use that as a paperweight. Or leave it sitting in the only chair in the room. Quiet office hours...

[QUOTE=Kyle902;50943078]tbh the only real concern I'd have over campus CC it has a pretty good potential to cause overescalation of situations.[/QUOTE] Campus carry is allowed in a large chunk of States. Texas is actually pretty far behind in allowing CCW on campus. None of those other states have seen such things as far as I'm aware. Which you know the media would jump on it if they could.

Holy fuck it's amazing to see the "liberals are obsessed with gun owners and their penises" stereotype but with an interesting twist at play, though I never liked using "liberal" as a slur since I consider the expression of rights a liberal position. Seems odd to say "it's the liberals who want to take away your guns!" No, we have other and more appropriate names for those people. Still, thoroughly hilarious and I had a hearty chuckle. Keep Austin Weird indeed. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=RB33;50941576]I'm speechless. The weird looks you would get saying that in Europe. I prefer my gunless society, truly makes me feel safer.[/QUOTE]Yeah I'm sure it does make you feel safer and if feelings are all you care about then I suppose that's more than adequate. I need something more substantial because feelings of safety are an illusion.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944316]Yeah I'm sure it does make you feel safer and if feelings are all you care about then I suppose that's more than adequate. I need something more substantial because feelings of safety are an illusion.[/QUOTE] [url=https://mic.com/articles/103932/two-thirds-of-americans-still-believe-one-of-the-biggest-myths-about-guns#.1MWLV3azR]Feelings of safety go both ways.[/url] He feels safer because he is safer, though. Homicide rates are drastically lower in Sweden compared to the US.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;50944395][url=https://mic.com/articles/103932/two-thirds-of-americans-still-believe-one-of-the-biggest-myths-about-guns#.1MWLV3azR]Feelings of safety go both ways.[/url] He feels safer because he is safer, though. Homicide rates are drastically lower in Sweden compared to the US.[/QUOTE] how it is in sweden right now doesn't mean shit to how it is in the US. idealism is nice and all but you can't live your life as though you've already reached the ideal. the truth is criminals can get guns fairly easily, and until something is done to mitigate that i would rather be on equal level to them. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] it is great that sweden has lower homicide rates than the US, and they found something that works for them. that doesn't mean anything to me when i am considering ways to defend myself should the need arise. when dealing with something like that, you have to deal with the reality of the situation and not the ideal of what-ifs

[QUOTE=Samiam22;50944395][url=https://mic.com/articles/103932/two-thirds-of-americans-still-believe-one-of-the-biggest-myths-about-guns#.1MWLV3azR]Feelings of safety go both ways.[/url] He feels safer because he is safer, though. Homicide rates are drastically lower in Sweden compared to the US.[/QUOTE]No he isn't. I shit you not I could fly to Sweden right now and buy every single thing I need to build a pressure cooker bomb (though of course there are better options) and nobody would be able to stop me unless they had prior knowledge, there is [I]nothing[/I] that prevents me from doing this. There's nothing that's stopping you from doing the same either, I can do it here, you can do it here, he can do it here, all three of us can do it in Australia. We can kill tens, hundreds of people, it's not necessarily a difficult project and the knowledge is easy to get, the only thing that stops us is we find the idea morally reprehensible. That's just one thing too, building a gun is easy, mixing up a chemical agent is even easier, and incendiary devices are probably the easiest of them all, and it's all perfectly legal until you actually do it and even then do remember that the law only counts if you care. None of us are safe, we weren't in the womb and this condition persists throughout our lives and we will all die in a dangerous world. You can play pretend all you like, but it won't actually make you safe. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] If my post sounds like I'm annoyed and condescending it's because that's how I feel. People like you? You bop along through life thinking everything is hunky-dory but the moment reality puts a bag over your head and smashes your teeth in with a pipe you wonder why that happened and how it could have possibly happened to you. I know why, you weren't paying attention and you were busy pretending that reality is your friend. It isn't. Reality was never your friend. It's mean. It's full of terrible, terrible, awful people who do amazingly cruel things. That's why I have a gun because I know reality is not my fucking friend.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944480]No he isn't. I shit you not I could fly to Sweden right now and buy every single thing I need to build a pressure cooker bomb (though of course there are better options) and nobody would be able to stop me unless they had prior knowledge, there is [I]nothing[/I] that prevents me from doing this. There's nothing that's stopping you from doing the same either, I can do it here, you can do it here, he can do it here, all three of us can do it in Australia. We can kill tens, hundreds of people, it's not necessarily a difficult project and the knowledge is easy to get, the only thing that stops us is we find the idea morally reprehensible. That's just one thing too, building a gun is easy, mixing up a chemical agent is even easier, and incendiary devices are probably the easiest of them all, and it's all perfectly legal until you actually do it and even then do remember that the law only counts if you care. None of us are safe, we weren't in the womb and this condition persists throughout our lives and we will all die in a dangerous world. You can play pretend all you like, but it won't actually make you safe. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] If my post sounds like I'm annoyed and condescending it's because that's how I feel. People like you? You bop along through life thinking everything is hunky-dory but the moment reality puts a bag over your head and smashes your teeth in with a pipe you wonder why that happened and how it could have possibly happened to you. I know why, you weren't paying attention and you were busy pretending that reality is your friend. It isn't. Reality was never your friend. It's mean. It's full of terrible, terrible, awful people who do amazingly cruel things. That's why I have a gun because I know reality is not my fucking friend.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but just because that's possible doesn't make him not safer. He's safer because he doesn't have 10 million armed idiots running around.

[QUOTE=SataniX;50944528]Yeah, but just because that's possible doesn't make him not safer. He's safer because he doesn't have 10 million armed idiots running around.[/QUOTE] good for him. i do. with gun violence being such a problem, i would rather not leave my own immediate safety to a police force which has proven itself to not be the most reliable one on the planet.

This is what cognitive dissonance and poor reading comprehension looks like, I want everyone to take a long look at this post and remember that it's cool to stay in school:[QUOTE=SataniX;50944528]Yeah, but just because that's possible doesn't make him not safer. He's safer because he doesn't have 10 million armed idiots running around.[/QUOTE] No he isn't, objectively that claim is false because Minnesota is similar to Sweden in many ways and we're managing just fine. Sure, we fuck up from time to time, but going with your incredibly stupid line of thought there hasn't been a single grenade attack in Minnesota in the past fifty years. I can't find one. Therefore I am the safest. Meanwhile [url=http://www.thelocal.se/20150724/third-grenade-attack-in-a-week-rocks-malm]I[/url] [url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37161752]found[/url] [url=http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2015-06/21/content_21065026.htm]several[/url] [url=http://www.thelocal.se/20150813/more-officers-for-malm-in-bid-to-tackle-violence]such[/url] [url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-sweden-grenades-idUKKCN0QE09F20150809]attacks[/url] that happened in Sweden and I'm not even trying to search hard. I can provide more if you want. Your claim is unsurprisingly complete bullshit.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944480]No he isn't. I shit you not I could fly to Sweden right now and buy every single thing I need to build a pressure cooker bomb (though of course there are better options) and nobody would be able to stop me unless they had prior knowledge, there is [I]nothing[/I] that prevents me from doing this. There's nothing that's stopping you from doing the same either, I can do it here, you can do it here, he can do it here, all three of us can do it in Australia. We can kill tens, hundreds of people, it's not necessarily a difficult project and the knowledge is easy to get, the only thing that stops us is we find the idea morally reprehensible. That's just one thing too, building a gun is easy, mixing up a chemical agent is even easier, and incendiary devices are probably the easiest of them all, and it's all perfectly legal until you actually do it and even then do remember that the law only counts if you care. None of us are safe, we weren't in the womb and this condition persists throughout our lives and we will all die in a dangerous world. You can play pretend all you like, but it won't actually make you safe. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] If my post sounds like I'm annoyed and condescending it's because that's how I feel. People like you? You bop along through life thinking everything is hunky-dory but the moment reality puts a bag over your head and smashes your teeth in with a pipe you wonder why that happened and how it could have possibly happened to you. I know why, you weren't paying attention and you were busy pretending that reality is your friend. It isn't. Reality was never your friend. It's mean. It's full of terrible, terrible, awful people who do amazingly cruel things. That's why I have a gun because I know reality is not my fucking friend.[/QUOTE] "Anyone can make a pressure cooker bomb, so I need a gun to keep me safe" Maybe it's an American thing but I don't go day to day thinking how someone could go about killing me. Nowhere did I say (or imply) that reality is "hunky-dory", I just don't live my life thinking about how others could plausibly end it.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;50944655]"Anyone can make a pressure cooker bomb, so I need a gun to keep me safe" Maybe it's an American thing but I don't go day to day thinking how someone could go about killing me. Nowhere did I say (or imply) that reality is "hunky-dory", I just don't live my life thinking about how others could plausibly end it.[/QUOTE]You're implying that owning a gun is an unreasonable response to a (relatively) likely threat, so I went one above that and chose something [I]nobody[/I] can defend against to prove my point. I don't care how you live your life, I really don't, so you should extend us the same courtesy. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] Truthfully I have about as much chance of getting shot as winning the lottery, statistically I'm more likely to drown drinking a glass of water. I still own a gun, just like I own a fire extinguisher, have weeks of food on hand, and I have plenty of spare parts for just about everything I own. Statistically my house isn't likely to burn down either, and even though natural disasters [I]are[/I] a concern they're still largely a non-issue in my life. I'm not a complete fucking moron so I'll continue to be prepared in the off chance something does happen because reality is not my friend and I understand that.

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;50941480]Why not cocks and glocks?[/QUOTE] [t]http://i.imgur.com/uoEoPhJ.png[/t] [QUOTE=Revenge282;50943808]If I was a TA with an office, I would use that as a paperweight. Or leave it sitting in the only chair in the room. Quiet office hours...[/QUOTE] that would be the gayest paperweight in the universe

American campuses are like a whole new planet.

Oh you want gay? [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA2S4mhfdQQ[/media] [I]High-caliber tactical gay.[/I] [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] That keyholing is an issue though, you'd just wreck somebody's asshole if you shot them with that.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944684]Truthfully I have about as much chance of getting shot as winning the lottery, statistically I'm more likely to drown drinking a glass of water. I still own a gun, just like I own a fire extinguisher, have weeks of food on hand, and I have plenty of spare parts for just about everything I own. Statistically my house isn't likely to burn down either, and even though natural disasters [I]are[/I] a concern they're still largely a non-issue in my life. I'm not a complete fucking moron so I'll continue to be prepared in the off chance something does happen because reality is not my friend and I understand that.[/QUOTE] By this logic you would never drive a car because there's always a chance someone will slam into you while drunk driving. Arming yourself is not a matter of being a moron or not, it's just a personal choice. It's hardly something that's comparable to say, wearing a seatbelt.

[QUOTE=Anderan;50944725]By this logic you would never drive a car because there's always a chance someone will slam into you while drunk driving. Arming yourself is not a matter of being a moron or not, it's just a personal choice. It's hardly something that's comparable to say, wearing a seatbelt.[/QUOTE]Uh, no, I wear a seatbelt because there's always a chance someone will slam into me while drunk driving. I protect myself with the seatbelt, I proactively ensure my own safety with something designed to do that job. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] Your analogy is broken if I were to use your logic that you're pretending is mine then I'd never leave my house because somebody might "get" me outside.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50944594]good for him. i do. with gun violence being such a problem, i would rather not leave my own immediate safety to a police force which has proven itself to not be the most reliable one on the planet.[/QUOTE] Definitely. To make gun control effective over there would be a downright impossible task, I imagine. But his claim that make guns more readily available, increasing the number of people with them would make things safer is nonsensical. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944595]This is what cognitive dissonance and poor reading comprehension looks like, I want everyone to take a long look at this post and remember that it's cool to stay in school: No he isn't, objectively that claim is false because Minnesota is similar to Sweden in many ways and we're managing just fine. Sure, we fuck up from time to time, but going with your incredibly stupid line of thought there hasn't been a single grenade attack in Minnesota in the past fifty years. I can't find one. Therefore I am the safest. Meanwhile [url=http://www.thelocal.se/20150724/third-grenade-attack-in-a-week-rocks-malm]I[/url] [url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37161752]found[/url] [url=http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2015-06/21/content_21065026.htm]several[/url] [url=http://www.thelocal.se/20150813/more-officers-for-malm-in-bid-to-tackle-violence]such[/url] [url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-sweden-grenades-idUKKCN0QE09F20150809]attacks[/url] that happened in Sweden and I'm not even trying to search hard. I can provide more if you want. Your claim is unsurprisingly complete bullshit.[/QUOTE] And this is what poor education looks like. My claim that Sweden is safer is backed up by study after study on homicide rates and violent crime stats. Your claim is that you could possibly make a pressure bomb?? And that some people did therefore it's equally dangerous??

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944684]You're implying that owning a gun is an unreasonable response to a (relatively) likely threat, so I went one above that and chose something [I]nobody[/I] can defend against to prove my point. I don't care how you live your life, I really don't, so you should extend us the same courtesy. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] Truthfully I have about as much chance of getting shot as winning the lottery, statistically I'm more likely to drown drinking a glass of water. I still own a gun, just like I own a fire extinguisher, have weeks of food on hand, and I have plenty of spare parts for just about everything I own. Statistically my house isn't likely to burn down either, and even though natural disasters [I]are[/I] a concern they're still largely a non-issue in my life. I'm not a complete fucking moron so I'll continue to be prepared in the off chance something does happen because reality is not my friend and I understand that.[/QUOTE] This doesn't really speak to me as "I need a gun in case of emergency". I'm going to assume here but you can tell me I'm wrong in that you use your gun for more than just emergencies, you might use it to hunt or at the shooting range or even you just like how it looks on your wall, whatever. If any of those are the case, then the gun doesn't really fit into the "emergency necessities" like the other things like a fire extinguisher or canned food and what-have-you do. Even if you do only have your gun strictly for emergencies, though, you have to admit that not everyone is going to be as sensible as you. Not everyone is a responsible gun owner and not everyone is rational, and this causes problems. You are [I]significantly[/I] more likely to be murdered with a gun in the US than other Western countries (from 9x more likely than in Canada, to 15x more likely than in Switzerland, to 50x more likely than in Germany). I know you guys have the constitution where it says that everyone should be allowed a gun but that was probably a better idea 250 years ago than it is now.

[QUOTE=SataniX;50944769]Definitely. To make gun control effective over there would be a downright impossible task, I imagine. But his claim that make guns more readily available, increasing the number of people with them would make things safer is nonsensical.[/QUOTE]I specifically claimed that safety is an illusion, which makes this next part of your post even more hilarious: [QUOTE]And this is what poor education looks like.[/QUOTE]Amazing. [QUOTE]My claim that Sweden is safer is backed up by study after study on homicide rates and violent crime stats.[/QUOTE]I win again if we use that metric, and I'm sure I can twist the statistics to make it look like Sweden is a violent hellhole too. Actually I sort of did with the grenade attacks, so... whoops. [QUOTE]Your claim is that you could possibly make a pressure bomb?? And that some people did therefore it's equally dangerous??[/QUOTE]I don't know?????????????? What even is anything like really???????? Oh wait I already covered this:[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50944684]You're implying that owning a gun is an unreasonable response to a (relatively) likely threat, so I went one above that and chose something [I]nobody[/I] can defend against to prove my point.[/QUOTE]