SpudFiles

Like I said in this thread on Theopia, I'm against it.

Being a psycho isn't something you're born with, and you can develop mental issues long after you've completed the required paperwork/tests.

Frankly, I still don't trust "innocent" people, no matter how much text they have pointing to the contrary.

Anywho...just my 2 cents.

even if there was a bigger chance of some nut pulling out a gun or a drunk getting trigger happy they sure as hell wouldnt get to far if their classmates were armed and you would have to be toatally SLAMMED to not think twice if half the class was ready to give you the dirt nap.Im all for it any assf**k who has the stupidity to murder students deserves to die at the hands of those who he was trying to kill.

ant wrote:Serious this posting is so lame!! You dont carry a gun where ever you. In my country is not allowed to carry a gun. I dont c the point of bringing one to parties or to schools. It makes me think about all the shootings that happend. If you would bring it to school other ppl will as well; thus raising the chance of a big shooting. Serious I sometimes dont get americans with all their guns etc. I like making bb guns and everything but not to kill or to hurt ppl!!!!

See that's the thing, if you're not American you really can never understand an American.I go to Kenya and people ask me why I need a gun when they don't need one,all the while gangsters are blowing people away, but hey they are safer without guns.Everyone sees their country through the eyes of their culture.

In America it is foremost a right and later a long standing tradition that we retain firearm ownership.To deny that right opens up the discussion of whether or not the world's longest standing constitution is even valid anymore.A very dangerous political situation.A "free" society based off of the goodwill of its leaders is not free.Tyranny can happen at any time in any society, the ability of a populace to defend itself separate of a military is the only way people can be free.No government can provide freedom from itself. Being at the mercy of politicians and military leaders is never good.

As an American and specifically a South Carolinian I have every right to carry a firearm around with me. What requires a permit is to conceal it. In rural America having a gun in your car or strapped to your side is normal. I walk around town and people have handguns holstered,gun racks in the back of the truck, doesn't bother me.The gun is not brandished in a manner implying harm so no need to get worried.I can not stress it enough, a gun is a tool, guns are not the evil. Men will always find ways to cause harm, taking away the means(in this case firearms) will only cause more destructive means to be thought up.

goathunter wrote:I can not stress it enough, a gun is a tool, guns are not the evil. Men will always find ways to cause harm, taking away the means(in this case firearms) will only cause more destructive means to be thought up.

This is the point that most people seem to miss - by introducing gun laws, you might limit access to the tools, but you cannot legislate against human aggression, which is as much a part of our nature as it is to be able to love and care.

goathunter wrote:To deny that right opens up the discussion of whether or not the world's longest standing constitution is even valid anymore.

The American Constitution is far from the longest standing.

Because, although not specifically called a constitution, a few elements (Clauses 1, 9, and more importantly, 29, which detailed a right to due process) of the 1297 version of the Magna Carta - are still in force in England and Wales - and many of the rulings, including habeas corpus, although no longer strictly governed by the Magna Carta is still at the core of the legal systems of just about any democracy you can name.

The charter was first created in 1215 and it was only 624 years later that a a clause was specifically repealed. More clauses have since been removed and replaced with more recent reworkings in other areas of law, but what is laid down in many parts is still integral today.
To date, elements of the Magna Carta have been in force for 793 years - compare that to the American constitution, which has only been in force for 220 years.

If you really want to look further back, the Charter of Liberties 1100 set down the precursors to the Magna Carta. Also worthy of note is the English Bill of Rights 1689, which has been at the core of law over a century longer than the US Bill.
The effects of the Charter of Liberties, the Magna Carta and English Bill of Rights can easily be seen in the US constitution and it's amendments.

The longest constitution is the Indian one, at 117,369 words in the English language version...

Well considering the other standing documents, never specifically called themselves "constitutions" America does have the distinction of having the oldest "constitution" in its original form.

That's a fair enough point, it may be the oldest thing to specifically use the now common term "constitution", but just using a new name for something that has come before doesn't then make it the first example of whatever phenomenon.

I can't go and make what is essentially a car, then come up with a new name for it and claim it's the first ever example.

Things that came before might not have been called constitutions, but that doesn't mean they didn't set down similar rights and laws to what was later seen in the US constitution.

Actually, the UK is one of only three states/nations (the other two are Israel and New Zealand) that has an uncodified constitution - i.e. not contained in any single document like the US constitution is - although several documents (like the Magna Carta, Petition of Right, Habeas Corpus Act 1679, Bill of Rights 1689 and Human Rights Act 1998) are considered to be "constitutional statutes" - defining rights and law in a similar manner, if not all in one place.

paaiyan wrote:Police sharpshooters will take down a gunman when they are absolutely positive they can get off the shot and take the criminal down, while not endangering civilians. I don't know any police sharpshooter who would be willing to take a shot in an environment like we're talking about, not a chance.

There's a reason for that though isn't there? If a trained marksman with a rifle and scope isn't confident of hitting only the per with no "collateral damage" then what hope has a shit scared student got when one of his classmates starts blazing away.

BigGrib wrote: Wow I really dont know what to say. I'd love to sit here and insult you, but I've been getting in trouble by MrCrowley for being mean. Screw it. ......

I think you meant to say "I really don't know what I'm saying". I'd also love to sit here and tell you how stupid you are.. but hey I think your reply already showed everyone, so why bother? Instead I'll just point out some of the facts that apply outside Kennewick, WA.

Obtaining your permit: did you not notice where I posted about training and vetting? Obviously not, go look again.

Age: two words Alaska, and Vermont, go look it up, if I can know this and I'm in France, how come you can't and you're in the US?

Metal Detectors: hundreds of kids all coming into college at the same time, through a few doors and a few metal detectors, and the security guards have enough time to look at your CPL? and then enough time to check it's real and not a copy? Hell if people can't tell whether a driver's licence is real or a copy, how will they tell for a CPL?



Safe Storage: So where'd you put your gun when you have a shower? (maybe you don't shower and just smell?) or what about when you go to a bar, or court, or the airport, or a school, or an outdoor music festival, or out of state, or even... Canada?

Nuff said.

Ok, tell me what facts we included in that post?? None that I can see. No what is this about Alaska?? Talk to me about Alaska you miserable little puke. Tell me about Alaska buddy. I was born and raised in Alaska you jack ass, so tell me something about Alaska I dont know. Simply for the fact that my first CPL was issued in Alaska when I was 21. I do now reside in WA and it was the same process I went through in Alaska.

As far as safe storage, my post on page 2 of this thread you will see what I do when I can't carry and I have a gun with me. I lock it in my lock box mounted underneath the dash of my truck. What the hell does me taking a shower have to do with safe storage?? I have a gun safe at home in which I keep 90% of my guns when not in use. It also contains all of my ammunition. In my night stand I keep 2 pistols which I use for night time home defense.

As far as training, I have no formal training. I have never taken a hunter training course. I have never had to do any kind of training. And yet the US Government has felt that I deserve a CPL.

Oh yeah and if you can't tell I'm pissed off.

I can't see we need to get hot under the collar here. This discussion can be settled in a calm manner. We'll get a lot further if we're polite to each other.

If you curse at each other, this will become an argument, then a flame war, then it will get locked, and then all we've got are annoyed members that hate each other.

Now, if we can be rational and polite human beings who respect that other people are entitled to their own opinions, then maybe this can go somewhere useful instead of the deleted topics section.

I agree Ragnarok. I just get really mad when some guy who doesn't know what he is talking about, doesn't have a CPL, and lives in a country where guns probably arent even allowed (I'm too lazy too look it up) pipes up and tries to tell me a guy who has one what the deal with them is, I lose what little respect for that person I had. I respect a persons opinion but when that person is talking to hear themselves talk screw that

It appears that some students don't feel that they need a permit to carry on campus.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/20/cnnu.guns/index.html

People are allowed to carry concealed weapons now, thats a given yes? So really this all boils down to letting them carry the same weapons on a school ground. Which I am confused as to why people are getting so riled up. Its not like we are giving out guns to everyone, the same people would now be able to go onto school campuses with their gun. Thats it right? Am I missing something here?

ShowNoMercy wrote:People are allowed to carry concealed weapons now, thats a given yes? So really this all boils down to letting them carry the same weapons on a school ground. Which I am confused as to why people are getting so riled up. Its not like we are giving out guns to everyone, the same people would now be able to go onto school campuses with their gun. Thats it right? Am I missing something here?

My point exactly. The same people carry the same guns virtually everywhere else.

Ragnarok wrote:I can't see we need to get hot under the collar here. This discussion can be settled in a calm manner. We'll get a lot further if we're polite to each other.

You see the point, if we were all in a room having this discussion with the knowledge that people might or might not have a concealed pistol on their person, the discussion would remain civilised