Tennessee State University shooting

Everyone thinks more guns on campus will reduce shootings. Well this is what happens when students have guns on campus.

What it comes down to is this: people who want to carry guns around have a screw loose and are the very people everyone needs to be protected from.

 

Absolutely! Guns on campus aren't going to reduce gun violence and this latest incident proves it.

 

American public high schools and courthouses and airports have metal detectors and armed guards. Both seem pretty effective.

 

A gun ban on campus didn't stop this shooting.

Also, if you actually read the story, you would realize that the shooters did not know the students who were shot. he was shooting at the people who he thought were cheating at dice.

From the Nashville PD twitter feed quoted in article:

- - - Updated - - -

And a gun ban on campus isn't going to reduce gun violence, and this latest incident proves it. Tennessee currently has a gun ban on campus, which didn't help the non-student who was killed, nor three student bystanders who were injured.

 

Scenario: Tell us which one you prefer:

1) Crazed shooter is in public with a firearm he stole. He starts shooting everyone. Cops have been called but are 8 minutes out. How many people can he kill in those 8 minutes? Who knows. There are no armed citizens there because of gun control.
2) Crazed shooter is in public fires off one shot and is immediately shot by a citizen with a firearm.

1, or 2?

 

Almost no public high schools have metal detectors in use at the doorways. Armed guards are effective.

 

I know guns on campus

What a combination - immature teen brain plus diminished parental control plus experimentation with alcohol and drugs plus peer pressure plus easy access to firearms

I am just very happy there is the entire pacific ocean between us and that particular experiment

 

Is it really that simple? Let's imagine it is in a mall with hundreds of people. It is legal to carry. Someone starts shooting and all the people with guns start pulling them. How would that play out? Random people shooting each other because no one has any clue who the original perp is? What about when police arrives on the scene? How many of the "good" guys with guns will be shot?

 

The only dice games I have ever seen outside of Vegas were in the hood.

 

How many people are you under the impression carry a firearm legally? Say 1,000 people are at the mall. How many are you under the impression are armed?

You're being over dramatic about this.

Also, please answer my original question or move on. Deflections are useless.

 

Here's the problem with your scenario. The citizen with the firearm is the nut who's doing the shootings. Anyone carrying around a firearm is already half-crazy and delusional, or a coward who thinks they need a gun for protection.

 

Well its us too in Canada and I think its a damn shame. The attacks in schools and universities are ridiculous. Some argue mental cases in Canada still were able to get their hands on guns and we have gun control. Look all I know it would probably be worse in Canada if we did not have gun control but I know people in Canada just as adamant as Americans that they should have guns. I sympathize with people in rural areas that need rifles to hunt for food and protection from say coyotes or rabid animals. I get that. I myself detest hand guns unless they are on and remain on a gun range. That is where they belong if anywhere. I hate hand guns.

Me I want our police to have a fighting chance and reduce the likelihood of someone shooting them whether they be a nut, by mistake or in a domestic call.

Today a call went out in Toronto where I live that a kid had a gun. The police took down two kids that looked just like him before they took that kid down with his gun. No one was shot. Thank God. A kid, a damn kid I think he was 15 had a gun. He could have got himself and others killed. Because he is a minor he will end up with a slap on his hand.

He needs to be placed in the army. You want to learn to use a gun go in the damned army and learn respect for it. Its not a toy. Its not a right. Its a damn weapon. If you are not willing to be disciplined and learn to respect it, don't tell me its your right to have one. I could care less. I never met an untrained person with a gun I trusted. Any soldier I know never loved their gun, they respected it. Its not something to love. Its a bloody weapon you hope to hell you don't have to use. I have seen grown men freeze trying to use one-its not a toy/ Excuse me if I think only armed forces and police should have them. The rest of us-well learn martial arts.

 

We are equally grateful for that ocean.

 

So you prefer option 1 is what you're saying?

 

I don't know how many. I hear a lot of Americans advocate that everyone should be allowed to carry.
If there are a 1000 people in the mall? 50? 100? I don't know. Depends on the state, city, the laws. Your example is very vague?

Am I being dramatic? If everyone is allowed to carry and there are 1000 people in the mall. Would 100 people carrying be a lot? I imagine 100 people with guns would create immense chaos.

 

They weren't very effective at Columbine. In fact they were worse than useless.

 

I'm not advocating everyone to carry a gun. In fact, I support stronger background checks.

With you now knowing this about me. Please answer my original scenario.

 

More Americans overeat themselves.
I care much more for liberty and freedom than a false sense of security.

 

Even 1 is incorrect in that you assert he's using a stolen gun. Most mass shootings (75%) are committed with legally obtained firearms.

But to answer your question I'd prefer that no non law enforcement people be running around with guns. Not the insane people who think they need guns to protect against mass-shootings or the more insane people who go on the shootings. There really isn't a difference is what you don't get. The people who claim to need to carry guns are the very people who are crazy enough to use them inappropriately.

 

Did Columbine have metal detectors and armed guards?

 

Sorry............cannot resist posting this

 

Here's a good example of your average responsible gun owner who carries to protect society. Trying to kill a shoplifter. Yeah that makes the world safer.

 

I think anyone with human empathy would pick number 2 in that scenario.
My fear is that it is very seldom that simple.
I know this is something Americans and Europeans just can't agree on. But more guns can logically only be worse for society.

 

There are no easy 'either/or' answers to what is a fundamentally broken society where a pathological obsession with guns and an unhealthy reliance on anachronistic 'rights' results in the weekly carnage we read about in America.

- - - Updated - - -

Armed guards, yes. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html

 

I find it extremely scary to see metal detectors and armed guards at schools. It does not make me feel that I am watching a free society. And yet for many Americans the fact that they do have them means they are more free than us because they have guns. Bizarre.

I wonder what effects it has on kids minds growing up in such environments. Popper was so worried about violence in TV. I wish he was alive to see this.