Mick, I think you need to have another cup of coffee or something, because I have no idea what you mean by that statement.
Perfect! All of the Sorry Ass Liberals will have "Sorry Ass Liberal" printed on their T-shirts so you'll know who to shoot!
Just to clarify, if I was caring concealed and someone started shooting up the campus while I was on it... I'm going to go find a dark hole and hide. I am not a swat officer, a policeman or a trained professional in how to actively clear a room. In short, if you know I'm around you and expect me to come to you, you better hope that we are family, because I am not putting my life on the line for you.
However, if you are behind me or in the same room as I am... there's a good chance that I might protect you.
So Mick and all the liberal sheep, if your on Campus, unless your standing next to me, I am not going to save your sorry butt and risk my life for you... so get over your self righteous pompous attitude that I want to be John Wayne, I don't and I won't...
The flaw in your logic. Thinking the law preventing said BF from bringing a gun on campus will also prevent her murder. What MIGHT prevent her murder is someone that can protect her with a lawfully concealed firearm. Murder is already against the law. Gun free zones do not work as they only disarm those they obey laws.
Oooohhhhh.....I know the answer !! It's actually quite simple. Liberals just base their opinions and actions on emotion rather than rational thought. If it FEEEEEEELS good, they're all for it. Also, liberals are much more concerned about how their intentions are viewed, rather than the results of their actions. You can see this in effect every day - just look at this argument, Obamacare or pretty much every other liberal initiative ever. (I will admit that, on the rare occasion, they get lucky and one of their well-intentioned and feel-good plans actually works. That, of course, is the exception and not the rule).
What are you liberal 's smoking. You make up answers to arguments you think you are having.
Why is HOW a person decides to defend themselves offend you so much? Why do you care if I as a: FBI background checked, local Sheriff approved, resident of the United States, law abiding citizen, that has a license to carrying a concealed handgun upset you so much?
You do realize that people with concealed carry permits are 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public? Meaning if you go into a business the has a sign that says "No Guns Allowed", a place where I refuse to do business as a concealed permit carrier, you are 5.7 times more likely to have a violent criminal do something to you than if you were to go somewhere where people carry guns?
Why are you so scared of us? We don't threaten you with violence, but you sure threaten everyone else that we will be violent, and yet the facts have not proven that at all, in fact quite the opposite.
God & Guns will set you free! God is Great! Allahu Akbar! Kill all the infidels. You and the Taliban have a lot in common. So, if God's Self Defense Gun Law is the basis for your right to be armed, why isn't it OK for you to carry an AK and grenades attached to your belt when you are feeling especially paranoid? As for me, I own a few guns and I've used guns in 2 wars and I've had concealed carry permits. And I may get a permit again if I feel the need, but I'm not Dumb enough to Worship Guns or believe that God gave humans guns to defend themselves from non believers.
No, Mick... that is not what we want... that's what YOU think we want. But you never bother to listen to us... you just assume. You know what that is called, BIGOTRY. Yes, you are a bigot, just the sort of person that you claim to not be, but you are. Because you are so close minded, and the mere thought of a GUN makes you run and change your underwear. It's a tool, like a hammer. It is designed for equalizing the force needed to protect oneself, like a grandma in her house when a thug breaks in. Or a women that might be raped.
But here is the scary truth...
I do not want you to carry a gun or even have one, if you DON"T WANT TO!. See, if you don't think you have the self control, and the will power to legally own and carry a firearm, with out shooting someone when you get mad or somone use's a cellphone in the line at subway, then I don't want you to have one.
I don't want to force you to carry one... you would probably shoot yourself or you dog or cat trying to figure out that that little lever is in front of the handle.
I only want the ability to protect and defend myself wherever I may be. Which the constitution of the US clearly protects my right to do that. My GOD given right.
Crackpot, paranoid Gun Worshipers seem to have a stranglehold on Idiot Politicians at the present time. Soon, Gun Nuts will get a law passed that requires all able body U.S. Citizens to Pack heat, making the U.S. the safest society ever. Makes perfect sense to Gun Worshipers.
Dislike? Really? What is it that was said that you don't like, the truth?
I suppose if you don't like the truth and really believe that the law fairy will protect you from your made up safety, you can dislike what was said.
You don't have to carry a gun, or even want to carry one... but why are anti-gun people to intolerant? Why the bigotry towards those that want be able to protect themselves? Why the discrimination against those that hold a different view of protecting themselves that you have?
Kinda feels like it's ok that you a have those feelings but it's not ok for someone to be against BLT type people?
Why is it when the vocal minority yell, that the media thinks that they represent the majority?
While 200 confused BLT people tried to get a hearing, how about the thousands of us that called our state legislators and said. NO... we don't need special rights for BLT people.
Then on the other hand, when a group of people that do represent the majority speak up, the media calls it bullying. The NRA represents the Majority of Idaho law abiding gun owners, and we have spoke. We don't feel a need to yell and shout, we voluntarily join the NRA to represent our voice. They do it quite well, and the NRA is ME, not some out of state corporate entity.
Sad and tragic story yesterday at Ft Hood. My heart goes out to those affected. But I have to ask those here in Idaho that feel the way this author does why he feels so safe around places that ban the carrying of guns?
Ft Hood was a military base, and by all account, every soldier that has been trained in the use of firearms should be carrying one. Why is it we only give our solider guns when they go over seas, but refuse to let them protect themselves at home? But that's beside the point.
This person that carried out the shooting, was not a law abiding citizen carrying concealed in a lawful manner. By all accounts he was mentally ill. Mentally ill means he can't buy a gun, so what failed to let him get it. He also shot a bunch of people; we have laws right now that say you can't do that, what failed in the law that allowed him to shoot people? He killed 3 people; what is it about the law that failed that didn't stop this man from killing 3 people.
And last but not least, he did all of these illegal acts, in a place that is specifically posted as a NO GUN ZONE. That's right, he broke the law that said he couldn't have a gun there, let alone killing and injuring people which is just as illegal.
If you read the story he was only stopped when confronted with a GUN by police.
How many times does this have to happen for us to put 2 and 2 together, gun free zone's insure that the only people that are armed are the criminals.
I quote ""It'd be like the gunfight at the OK Corral," really? because that's pretty much what this looks like, except nobody was shooting back, and all the good guys are dead because they were following the laws, and the bad guys were not.
Let me start with some facts instead of ignorant ramblings...
Fact: People with concealed carry permits are:
5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public
13.5 times less likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the general public
Heartfelt story, almost brought a tear to my eye, too bad it's fictitious.
The current law abiding citizen that carry's a gun everywhere else in Idaho, does not feel the need to kill anyone. So why, can you explain to us, would being on a college campus change what happens with law abiding citizen's that are carrying concealed, that doesn't happen when they cross the street off campus?
The truth is, you think the new law does something that it doesn't. For an educator you are the most ignorant person I have heard talk about this.
Learn what the law is and allows, and how law abiding citizen's that carry concealed are not a problem on campus, in Boise, in Idaho, in the United States...
IF what you said was true... then you should be able to provide example's of this happening elsewhere in the United States, because Idaho is not the first to allow campus carry. So please, anyone, please point out where in the US that campus carry has been allowed that someone with a CCW that was legally allowed to carry on campus, starting killing people because they "lost control". If it's such a problem, you shouldn't have any issue coming up with an example.
Wow, just flew in from Portland, and was having a little dinner downtown and read your paper. Oh, shit, I've landed in a red state. How can I help?
While this paper was so concerned with this issue of special rights for special class of individual you lost sight of our freedom and liberty in the following bill.
Guilty without trail to fund the government.
"The House Transportation and Defense Committee, on a voice vote, has approved legislation that would significantly broaden the role of the Idaho National Guard. House Bill 367 seeks to amend existing law to allow for circumstances when the Idaho National Guard and the Idaho Military Division could be utilized as a state law enforcement agency."
"The proposed expansion of state law enforcement authority to to the Idaho National Guard for asset forfeiture participation purposes poses grave danger to property owners in Idaho as this law will intensify the predatory search for valuable real properties that are the incidental site of criminal activity. Indeed, the defense of a recent, highly-publicized federal asset forfeiture against the Motel Caswell in Massachusetts indicates that these counter drug investigations often begin when special agents comb through arrest and property records, looking for opportunities to raise revenue through strategic forfeiture proceedings. It is also worth noting that Idaho's forfeiture laws provide very poor protections to property owners. As the Institute for Justice notes in its "Policing for Profit" report:"
"Based on limited data, while Idaho appears to only modestly pursue forfeitures against property owners, its civil forfeiture laws still put the property of ordinary citizens at risk. To forfeit your property, the state only needs to show that it was more likely than not that your property was used in some criminal activity—the legal standard of preponderance of the evidence. "
"To recover seized property, an innocent owner bears the burden of proving his innocence. Moreover, law enforcement in Idaho reaps all of the rewards of civil forfeitures—they keep 100 percent of all funds and face no requirement to collect or report data on forfeiture use and proceeds. "
Idaho Repulsicans Rulers, Less than Worthless Kleptocrats.
What else can a retired, depressed pseudo-intellectual Lit Major do but ruefully search his life for bits of meaning and satisfaction, shovel his driveway and ski a few runs?
The freedom to form and join a union is core to the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights signed by the U.S. and is an "enabling" right--a fundamental right that insures the ability to protect other rights. Amusingly, your knee jerk hostility toward Unions and ignorance of Fundamental Human Rights is shared by most 1 party dictatorships like Idaho, China, North Korea and Cuba.
Every week, I look forward to your column in The Weekly. It always fails to disappoint. Or, should I say, it never disappoints. (Please don't correct my comment. I know you want to.) Just keep writing that column.
© 2014 Boise Weekly
Website powered by Foundation