Offline
Joe Scarborough on his show this morning really ripped into “gun free zones” even as his liberal co-hosts guffawed and whined.
Offline
Actually, if you follow Scarborough, rather than just pulling one two minute segment out of the air, you'd find that Joe came out after Sandy Hook and demanded background checks, and several other great ideas about assault weapons.
I really wish that you were more honest, CS.
I wonder how much longer CS's tantrum about the executive actions will go on.
Offline
So you and Donald Trump favor simply eliminating gun free zones? I'm not sure where you are coming from on this issue, Common. We allow weapons in schools, airports and planes, college campuses, stadiums, churches, taverns, hospitals, courthouses, etc.? I don't think that would be a good idea.
Offline
Just Fred wrote:
So you and Donald Trump favor simply eliminating gun free zones? I'm not sure where you are coming from on this issue, Common. We allow weapons in schools, airports and planes, college campuses, stadiums, churches, taverns, hospitals, courthouses, etc.? I don't think that would be a good idea.
This is just part of a multi-day tantrum about Obama's Executive order.
Two days ago it was gloating about gun sales. Yesterday it was S&W stock prices.
Today it will be hysteria about Joe Scarborough.
I noticed that we didn't get a clip about Joe's reaction to Sandy Hook.
Offline
I may have posted this before....O well.
[img]” ”[/img]
Criminals--including terrorists, both foreign and domestic--see "No weapons" and think "target-rich environment".
Offline
Gun free zones only work if they are enforced.
Today you will see two gun free zones, aka NFL stadiums.
You won't be able to take a gun in there, and it will be enforced with metal detectors.
Same thing with the airport once you get beyond the screening area.
Inner city schools have been gun free zones for quite some time with largely good results.
Parks, etc, really kinda silly designating them as gun free zones as there is no way to control the flow of people.
Offline
Goose wrote:
Gun free zones only work if they are enforced.
Today you will see two gun free zones, aka NFL stadiums.
You won't be able to take a gun in there, and it will be enforced with metal detectors.
Same thing with the airport once you get beyond the screening area.
Inner city schools have been gun free zones for quite some time with largely good results.
Parks, etc, really kinda silly designating them as gun free zones as there is no way to control the flow of people.
Correct. The only way to make a gun free zone effective is a way to enforce it.
I wonder if Trump thinks making areas such as airports and NFL stadiums to take back their policy about guns ? He really panders to the audience, doesn't he ?
Offline
It is worth noting that security checkpoints are one of the favorite targets of suicide bombers in Israel.
Nothing like a helpless, disarmed population.
They can't fight back.
Offline
Tarnation wrote:
It is worth noting that security checkpoints are one of the favorite targets of suicide bombers in Israel.
Nothing like a helpless, disarmed population.
They can't fight back.
So, we abolish security checkpoints and just arm everyone in the stadium, or boarding area, or airliner?
Seriously?
That assumes that everyone with a gun is going to be sober, have decent judgment, and in a crowded environment is an excellent shot. If that’s your proposal I suggest that we do something to assess whether people who want to carry weapons around actually know how to shoot.
Right now, you can acquire an entire roomful of semiautomatic rifles without providing any indication that you can avoid accidentally blasting a person three feet away pushing a baby carriage.
In most states, you can get a license to carry a concealed weapon without demonstrating that you know how to fire it. In the others, the bar is generally below sea level.
Americans, who grew up watching action shows in which everybody is a good shot, tend to underestimate how much skill it takes to handle a gun. Hitting a moving target is hard. Shooting in a crisis is very hard. Hitting a moving target in a crowd, in a crisis, is so hard we would need a word way better than “very.”
There have been armed good guys present at a number of America’s horrific mass shootings. Sometimes they fired and missed, like a security officer at Columbine High School in 1999. More often they simply froze, which was probably all to the good. During the Arizona shopping center mass shooting that wounded Representative Gabby Giffords, an armed bystander tried to help and almost accidentally shot an innocent man.
Tarnation, I don't think this is a great idea.
Offline
Tarnation wrote:
It is worth noting that security checkpoints are one of the favorite targets of suicide bombers in Israel.
Nothing like a helpless, disarmed population.
They can't fight back.
I'm going to have to differ with you there Tarnation. Especially the 'helpless, disarmed population' part. Israeli checkpoints are heavily armed and manned by soldiers, tanks, and fortified with walls, turnstiles, and barricades. People are filed through a system of switch backed fences/walls until they finally reach the actual search point where they are required to show their papers and are scanned for weapons or other contraband. In the case of a motorized checkpoint, the same Israeli military presence with stacked, off-set concrete barriers to keep vehicles from building up speed. This detaining, searching, time consuming routine must be endured both entering and exiting Israeli designated areas by anyone traveling to and from the Palestinian or West Bank territories. The only unarmed people are non-Israelis who are not the targets of suicide bombers and other extremists. The only reason a checkpoint would be targeted would be to inflict harm on members of the Israeli military who are manning the checkpoint and they are heavily armed. The prospects of an extremist to attack a checkpoint and escape with their lives is slim and none . . . and slim just left town.