Member since Feb 12, 2014



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Idaho Senate Republicans Push Through Guns on Campus Bill

Law enforcement who would respond to some kind of shooting situation are against this. The universities at which said event could take place are against this. Many of the people have spoken out against this. And yet it's getting pushed through legislature? Apparently Idaho Senate is forgetting about the DEMOCRATIC part of democratic republic. As our elected officials, it is your job to represent the people, the city, and the state. Not your own party's agenda. Although not really possible, this should be decided by vote exclusively by the cities in which there is a major university. Boise, Moscow, etc. Or better yet, voted on by the students and faculty of said university. That's who this really effects, why should a bunch of individuals who won't have to spend any time on these campuses be deciding? I went out of state for college and, unfortunately, Idaho has a national reputation for being a bunch of gun-toting rednecks who care more about the right to shoot a gun than the rights of equal treatment for all people. This bill is doing nothing but perpetuate that stereotype.

I think the most frightening part of this story is the fact that legitimate questions about the logistics of such a law were met with intentional silence. The question about whether permits will be checked before entering certain university buildings is a legitimate one. Because, if not, what's the point of the law in the first place if anyone can come on campus with a gun and not have to show proof of permit unless stopped?

Just an embarrassment to this state all around.

18 likes, 13 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/18/2014 at 2:14 PM

Re: “UPDATE: Idaho Senate Committee Pushes Through Guns on Campus Bill Without Hearing Testimony from U of I, Law Enforcement

Just as a general comment, this debate we're having in the comments is exactly what's wrong with our country right now. Conservatives will always try to extrapolate to give themselves more gun rights that they maybe shouldn't have, liberals will always mull over and magnify any doubt in these rights, even when it's not necessarily there. Both groups are firmly set in their beliefs and are not easily convinced otherwise. It's why nothing gets done in our country anymore, these stupid party lines and are tearing us apart.

2 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/13/2014 at 7:07 PM

Re: “UPDATE: Idaho Senate Committee Pushes Through Guns on Campus Bill Without Hearing Testimony from U of I, Law Enforcement

@ Brian Fendley
Nowhere in what you posted did it say individual right. But yes, it is an individual right... sort of.

And to anyone who brought up DC vs. Heller, there are some things you should know about that hearing. Yes they did say it was an individual right, but a right that was susceptible to scrutiny and limitation and that ownership was only allowed in connection to serving a militia or self defense in one's home. Second, that hearing was related specifically to having a gun in your home for your own protection, not in public. In addition, that SCOTUS decision is one of the most controversial in history because it was 1) heavy petitioned and influenced by the NRA and 2) was decided by a majority of republican appointees who were known to vote along party lines. So we're left with this. The court, which was potentially influenced by the gun lobby and was biased by party lines made a decision that referred to a specific situation and was clear that although it was an individual right was not an inalienable right that could avoid restriction. However, the right wing decided to yet again misinterpret that verdict as meaning, "We get guns all the time whenever we want." Which is not at all the case.

@PC Arroyo
I am most certainly up to date on the facts, but as usual, republicans have a dubious definition of what constitutes fact

2 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/13/2014 at 5:13 PM

Re: “UPDATE: Idaho Senate Committee Pushes Through Guns on Campus Bill Without Hearing Testimony from U of I, Law Enforcement

Yeah... See the problem with that 1791 argument is that, like I said in an earlier comment, modern right-wingers have misinterpreted the text of the constitution. Somehow they seem to think it says, "Individuals have the right to carry guns." That isn't at all what it's saying. It says, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." So tell me, when you buy a gun, what regulated militia are you buying it to be a part of? The gun issue was settled in 1791, but for some reason the right-wing seems to want to write their own version of the constitution rather than abide by the original text. The truth is that guns are "fun" and make people feel powerful, so they've tricked themselves into thinking they have a national right to have them when in fact that was never how the forefathers intended it.

14 likes, 24 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/12/2014 at 9:45 PM

Re: “UPDATE: Idaho Senate Committee Pushes Through Guns on Campus Bill Without Hearing Testimony from U of I, Law Enforcement

@Bradley Armstrong

Just so everyone else in this comment section knows, that article you posted was from The Volokh Conspiracy, a notoriously right-leaning blog. The examples given are sensationalized and worded in a way that supports an agenda, hardly a reliable source.

Just to play devil's advocate, you mentioned that a perpetrator chooses places with few armed individuals and that, if those individuals were armed, they would have picked another more vulnerable target. So, by your own logic, if colleges are armed, then shooters would move to high school where no students are armed. If we arm high school students/staff, they move to elementary schools, and so forth. You're creating a system in which the only vulnerable populations left are very young children. It won't stop. Shooters won't say, "Oh dang, I wanted to kill some college kids but they have guns now. Guess that's that." Do we really want the targets of these shootings shifting to younger and younger demographics by your hypothetical logic?

Also following your logic, they pick targets due to not wanting to get shot themselves. Why else would they avoid armed populations? This would mean they have some regard for their own life. When was the last time you heard of a mass shooting where the shooter made it out alive? Almost every time, they are killed by police or, more frequently, they take their own life. Shooters know this. They're not stupid. Irrational maybe, but not stupid. The only recent exception to this that comes to mind was the Giffords shooting. Do you honestly believe that, for a shooter who goes on a rampage, it makes any difference whether they die by their own gun, the gun of a civilian, or the gun of police as long as they get to kill some people, make the news, and create panic?

Finally, we can't operate in a system of widespread civilian justice and police justice. Say a shooter attacks a room with 5 armed individuals. All individuals take out their firearms to try to take down the shooter, but can't before the police arrive. The police show up with their assault rifles and enter a shooting scene that is still active. The police now are in a room with 6 active shooters. Who is who? Was the original shooter alone or is one of the other shooters with him/her? It creates a mess that does more harm then good and interferes with the activities of trained tactical units.

8 likes, 26 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/12/2014 at 6:08 PM

Re: “UPDATE: Idaho Senate Committee Pushes Through Guns on Campus Bill Without Hearing Testimony from U of I, Law Enforcement

As recent college grad, I would like to say that colleges being dominated by immature individuals and a drinking culture is indeed a stereotype, but an incredibly accurate one. I wouldn't trust 80% of my classmates with a concealed weapon. Not everyone who attends college is immature and a drinker, but many are.

While I feel badly that this psychology teacher fears for her life, it seems like there are much more appropriate avenues to address her problem. Get a restraining order. Have the student removed from her class. Approach law enforcement depending on the severity of the threats. I read her testimony and I think that if anyone should NOT have a gun on campus, it's her. Fear leads people to make inappropriate, rash decisions. What happens if she carries a gun, feels threatened, and then shoots an innocent student who perhaps is just anti-social or has a mental illness that effects social interactions? Allowing guns on campuses is such a slippery slope, where does it stop? Does it end when we've basically regressed to the wild west where police are insignificant and everyone carries a gun for a big shootout when something tragic happens? That's not a world I want to live in.

As a side note, I am SO SICK of people misquoting the second amendment like the Middleton man. The constitution does not in any way say that people can carry guns whenever they feel like it. It says, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." A well regulated militia is the key. Not just anyone who feels like carrying a gun wherever, whenever. It means an organized, regulated counter-military in the event of an authoritarian government. The whole point was to allow people the ability to rise up against an oppressive government if necessary. But it was written in the days of muskets. The forefathers never could have foreseen the weaponry we have now. With how far warfare has come, the idea that a bunch of people with hunting rifles or even assault rifles could overthrow the US government and military is a joke. Given that fact, I just assume keep close regulations on guns and keep them off campuses where we've seen that guns can be a major problem.

30 likes, 45 dislikes
Posted by forehandslam4 on 02/12/2014 at 11:09 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2017 Boise Weekly

Website powered by Foundation