OKLAHOMA: Fallin signs CareerTech guns bill

Another small victory for gun rights. They can't carry on campus yet but at least they can carry to and from campus.



Includes more than just the tech schools.

I guess nobody learns anything, except to be afraid, the criminal will get you.

Of course, the criminal is going to have a gun too, since there are so many. The more you have, the more likely they will have one also.

The people who loose out are the ones who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when the shooting starts.

I would prefer to live in a society where I didn't need a gun. Unfortunately, the gun crowd is working on making that an impossibility.

"No Guns" really kept the guns out of VT didn't they? /sarcasm

That part was sarcasm ^

It's hard to keep control over guns when the entire rest of the country is loosing it's mind. I'm a cowboy with my gun! Bang! Bang!

Phear!

Oooo, knife crimes in the UK...

I wonder if a guy with a knife ever took out 10 people in the span of a few minutes?

http://www.knifecrimes.org/uk-knife-crime-victims.html

Maybe all the victims should have had a gun.. that would have solved everything! Of course, then the guy would have been not only dead, but the person mourning him would have been dead also. Because a criminal is always armed with a bigger gun.

China school slayings..

"murdered eight children with a knife in an elementary school in Nanping"

"stabbed 28 students, two teachers and one security guard"

"killed seven children and two adults and injured 11 other persons with a cleaver"

"slashed more than 20 children and staff with a 60cm knife, killing 3 children and 1 teacher"

I know that's not what you said, just figure someone from the gun lobby will try it one of these days.

But funnily enough, nobody who's pro-RKBA ever does. Nor can anyone provide a cite to someone saying such.

Personally? I think it's just something to try to ridicule your interlocutor.

That they seem to want guns everywhere, courthouses and bars. Smart idea.

Nice elidement over to bars..

Slip, slide, it's the electric boogaloo..



Speaking of places that serve alcohol.. you do know that it's been permissible in 42 states for quite a while now, yes?



TN was just changed last year, as well as VA changing from open carry required to concealed okay. OH has a measure in the leg this year.


Not allowing concealed carry in places that serve alcohol is the exception, not the rule.

http://www.sunjournal.com/our-view/story/1020062

The laws specifically allow it in bars, which is different then a restaurant. You're not going to a bar to do anything but drink.

In TX, I can't carry in any establishment that makes 51% or more of its income via sales of alcohol for on-site consumption.

In other states, I can carry in the restaurant portion, but not the bar area.

In yet other states, it depends on the 'class' of food and beverage license.



That might be you, but it's certainly not me. I'm frequently the designated driver, or I go to see a band (that was especially true when I lived in Austin.)

In the 42 states that currently don't disallow or explicitly allow the carry in places that serve alcohol, there haven't been a rash of shootings by concealed carry holders.

And again, varying by state, all states that I'm aware of make it a crime to a) drink at all while carrying, or b) be above the legal BAC limit.

In TX, at least, CHL holders tend to be rather scrupulous about following the law. Here's a chart comparing the rate among themselves of the general public >21 to CHL holders for convictions:



re statehouses- it's legal in TX, as well as a couple of other states. Hasn't been a problem so far.

I also have known people who didn't drink alcohol but would go to bars to socialize.

We aren't just beasts in the wilderness.

We want the ability to PROTECT ourselves, nothing more.

The only ones that EVER say that are the anti-gun folks, such as yourself.

I am worried about me being number one. Usually a knife guy only kills one, then escapes. I don't intend to be any easy #1. My gun is to protect ME.

Mass shooting are extremely rare. More people die of lightning strikes and any particular year then die in mass shootings. So I don't worry about mass shootings.

He's going to have a gun. I'm in Arizona, gun crazy land. Giffords and 9 other people still got shot. The guy had to be tackled.

...the guy routinely has a knife. Your assertion that guns are used in 100% of crimes (and yes, that is EXACTLY what your assertion is) is completely false. Also, did you ever happen to look at the stats for multiple homicides and how rare they actually are? Yeah, you should probably do that. Not exactly the sort of thing we need to be basing major policy decisions on. Not when we can put our efforts to REAL solutions to the crime problem.

Is false. If he can get a knife, he's probably more then likely to have a gun.



Just so you know, I was one of those people this year. A 40 caliber through the leg.

Any comment?

From your post #1. Of course, the criminal is going to have a gun too, since there are so many.

My point was that disarming me is NOT going to disarm the criminal. He is a criminal. He will not pay attention to laws. That is what criminals do.

You have not provided any details of how you got shot. Absent any information on the circumstances I can not make an intelligent comment.

And I put so much work into so you would see it, too.

I carry a gun to be able to protect myself if some thug decides that I will be his next victim.

Do you know anyone who has? Not family related, some stranger who decides to pull something with you?

My wife, about five years ago, prevented herself from being victimized by having a gun on her. She would have likely been killed if she had not been armed.

I am a senior citizen. By this point in my life I certainly do know people who have been victims, some who have been murdered, and some who used a gun against their attacker.

I have had thugs think they were going to try something on me but then they discovered that I was ready to deal with them. They ran away. The key is situational awareness. Spot the trouble coming, be ready. Usually the thugs will spot that you are ready (Without you having to draw your gun.) and will retreat.

Murder suicide. Her husband shot her then himself. He was a cop

I wonder what the fuck they use the other 92% of cases?

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 15,517 murders in 2000 were committed with firearms.

I'm sure those crime statics include jaywalking. Do they compare? No.

Though thankfully I was not injured personally (my car was not so lucky). My comment? There is no evidence linking guns to an increase in the crime rate. That's my comment. You are obsessed with an implement instead of combating the actual problem. Poverty, poor education, the war on drugs. THESE are the reason why we have such a high crime and homicide rate. NOT because we have guns.

But it's easy to pick up a gun and shoot someone.

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 15,517 murders in 2000 were committed with firearms.

...but apparently that ease doesn't contribute to an increase in crime. No causal relationship can be established. We take care of those other factors, and you will see the crime rate plummet. You will fail to see a similar result from further gun control laws.

Fewer guns does not make the crime rate go down, but more guns do?

Trying to rob armed victims is very hazardous. Trying to rape an armed woman isn't very safe for a rapist. You seem to deny that guns can and are used for self-defense.

A window by a little 18 year old, who shouldn't have had one in the first place.

Of course, since I live in a complex, if I had shot back, I could have ended up putting a bullet into another apt. and killing someone.

a .44 magnum with non bullets designed for deer hunting maybe. Your typical self defense pistol, not likely unless your walls are made of rice paper.

...its the building material of the future!

Sorry, I'm really tired and the thought of a rice paper building made me laugh. :P

How will taking mine away from me help in that situation?

If you will search you will find that it is extremely rare for a person firing in self-defense to actually hit an innocent person.

The advisability of returning fire would depend upon more variables than you have posted so I can't comment on that.

I have never claimed that at all, as there isn't enough evidence to support such a suggestion. The fact is that the evidence as it stands points to firearms being a non-factor in crime rates. Those of us that support things like concealed carry, for the most part don't support it because we think it will somehow lower the crime rate. We support it because we believe people have a right to defend themselves from those who would do them harm should the need arise, and because allowing such a thing has so far not proved to be any detriment to society. There is also the fact of how much political capital has been expended on this issue for almost no gain whatsoever. Political capital that could have (and should have) been spent attacking the root causes mentioned earlier.

Gun control is a distraction from the real issues we need to be tackling.

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

We can play with the statics. Those places with higher gun ownership have a higher per capita murder rate then those without.

More guns, less crime

6.5 million hits google.

If there were three murders next year and two were committed with guns, that percentage would be the same as this year.

We've seen an increase of 125M gun sales since NICS came online in 1998- yet at the same time, the murder rate has plummeted to levels not seen since the 1960's.

If there were a correlation between the two (murder rate and the number of guns), you wouldn't have that precipitous drop.

....that those murders would not have taken place with some other implement had a gun not been available. Yes it stands to reason that some may have not occurred, but there is no evidence to suggest the rate would have been significantly different.

But given that you can't just "poof" guns out of existence anyway, speculation about such things is not really a worthwhile venture, which is why we are better served discussing gun control laws, which have in fact proven ineffective at reducing the crime rate.

EDIT: Dude, it's really lame to totally change the text of your post well after the fact. You removed the statements you made that I was replying to entirely, and instead replaced them with a link to a book, a statement backed up with literally nothing, and a reference to how many hits a google search generated. What was the point? You could have just added on that junk to the end of your post and kept the rest as it stood.

Rates for the United States 5.4, England and wales with gun control 1.04.

The entire academic community must have missed that one! IT'S SO OBVIOUS!!

Or maybe there are other factors at play as well, and all you found was a simple correlation without causation? Did you ever look at what England and Wales crime rates were prior to the gun control measures? Maybe you should take a look. You'll see they have ALWAYS been well below the US.

You should also look at Switzerland. High ownership rate and few gun control laws, with a homicide rate well below even England.

"Booyah" indeed.

If you claim causation- that strong gun control caused their murder rates to be low, what was their rate before and post-implementation?

Surely, you can graph one country's murder rate and notice one of the below trends, right?



Hint.. good luck with that. From 1880-1910 when neither had substantive gun control, NYC still had a murder rate five times that of London.

Gun owning Norway 0.7
Machine gun toting Switzerland 0.6
lax gun control Austria 1.0

gun free UK 1.04
gun free Japan 1.1
strict gun control South Africa 37.5
strict gun control Mexico 16

Like the economist who takes money from the Joyce Foundation to say just the opposite. Criminologists say both are wrong. We take the Criminologist on this subject.

Many criminals prefer knives because they are not so loud as a gun, cheap to buy (A Wal-Mart "Old Hickory" butcher knife will do nicely. Seven inch blade is under $10. Under $20 if you want the 14 inch blade model. At close range a knife cut can be more disabling than a bullet wound. One slash with a knife can open your abdomen up from side to side.

But if you want to claim that criminal never use knives, go ahead.

A gun is more likely to kill. You don't even get to see the person.

No always, but usually.

You were the one who claimed that the criminal would always have a gun. From your post: In america, the guy ain't gonna have a knife

He's going to have a gun.

I didn't create a strawman, I merely responded to a claim that you made.

And I am not worried about mass shootings. They are too rare to worry about.

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 15,517 murders in 2000 were committed with firearms.

Being unarmed merely gives the criminal a certain easy victim.

etc, etc.

I suppose you have stats to back that up?

Something along the lines of numbers wounded:numbers killed?

We'll wait....

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 15,517 murders in 2000 were committed with firearms.

But hey, nice try though!

I can't help. A bullet will tear through bone. A knife, not so much.

Just that your post did not address the question you were asked is all.

I can't help. Your question is a common sense question. Which you seem to want to ignore.

Anything else? Would you like me to answer if water is wet?

If you don't know what percentage of shootings are fatal, vs knife crimes, just say so.

If you wanted to say it was "common sense" you could have just done that instead of provide a stat totally unrelated to the question yet framed somehow as an answer to the question.

I don't think you actually know much about weapons, their effects, or the human body.

I got a 40 caliber through the leg.

You got shot once. That is unfortunate but it does not make you a weapons expert. It just makes you a previous victim.

I was lucky he wasn't using hollow points, which would have ripped up my leg.

If guns could be vanished instantly society would go back to the strong preying upon the weak. Old folks can't fight off young male thugs.

I'm 42 years old. Never had a gun. Used a board to smash the little pricks head in when he tried to rob me a month before. He probably still had a headache and was pissed. So he got a gun.

Even if he had been of age it would have still been illegal. Criminals break laws. That's what they do. They will get guns anyway, if they want them. Or they will use other weapons, depending upon what they are doing.

A gun is the best general purpose self-defense weapon that there is. As the old proverb goes: "God created men. Sam Colt made them equal." With my gun and proper situational awareness I am a match for most young street thugs.

Was it from a legal gun owner? Person with previous criminal record? Self-inflicted? Were you engaged in criminal activity? (O.K., that last probably fits under "Self-inflicted"...) Engaged in self-defense?

And, back on topic, a single gunshot wound does not make you an expert in the field.

I smashed the little pricks head in with a board as he tried to crawl in my window. A month later he came back to get a little revenge. Put 7 bullets through my plate glass apartment window, which is pretty large, hitting me in the leg.

( It was dark outside and I couldn't see him until he started firing.)

they got him after a 7 hour standoff, with the SWAT teams, bomb squad, and 30 cops and they closed off two main roads around my complex.

Been here 8 years, now the complex isn't renewing my lease because of the little prick, and he fucked up my semester cause I couldn't walk.

He shouldn't have had a gun, but he got one. 10 years in jail for him.

He could have thrown a brick followed by a Molotov cocktail through your window.

He could have watched to catch you outside your apartment.

How would taking my guns away from me make your situation better? How does denying people self-defense tools help you?

And I already proved I was ready to beat the shit out of him. It was real bravery to stand outside my window and shoot into my apt. Much, much easier too.

Oh, I'm a skinny guy, lost pretty much every fight I was ever in as a teenager.

He definately was not being brave in his method of attack. In fact, he would have chosen a cowardly method if he had chosen a different method. That a criminal attacked you with a gun is no reason to want to take mine away from me.

You may wish to learn to shoot. You would be able to make better decisions regarding guns if you were better informed. What state are you in?

every generation has had at least one person serve in the military since the civil war. I live in Arizona.

I'm bitter about two things. One, being shot, and two, feeling like I'm being forced to own a gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KICias1vqko&feature=grec_index

At 2:30 minute mark he hacks through beef ribs on a side of beef. The knife severs several ribs with each chop.

Go to the 3 minutes mark to see it chop though a simulated hand. Glove stuffed with meat with bones.

At the 5:30 marks he demonstrates it against 2 1/4 inch bamboo.

At close range, a knife is extremely deadly.

Can a 5 year old do it?

Can a 5 year kill if they pull the trigger on a gun?

Although it makes the news, in reality small children are rarely injured or killed in firearm accidents. On the basis of those rare events you seem to want to take away from me and my wife our ability to defend ourselves against violent crime, if it happens to us.

If a toddler has a gun, will it kill if he pulls the trigger.

http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

Last year, for all children 5 or under 25, out of a population of 25 million that age, 25 were killed by firearms accidents. So it is a one in a million event. Making law based on rare but emotional events does not generate good law.

Last year there were well over a million incidents of violent crime reported in the U.S. And it is just guesswork at the violent crimes that were not reported. I choose to be ready to defend myself against violence.

can a 5 year break through bone with a knife?

can a 5 year old break through a bone with a gun?

So what is your point about harping about toddlers with guns? No one here advocates arming small children. And it is extremely rare for a toddler to be injured by a gun accident.

I carry a gun for adult thugs, not little kids.

much easier then a knife will.

Of course guns can kill, and easily too. That is what made the mugger afraid of my wife. She is only 4' 10" but with a gun she was able put real fear into him. In another thread here a woman uses a gun to kill a rapist who was armed with a knife. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=419534&mesg_id=419534

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/cold-steel-gurkha-kukri/148f5af827053b139b66148f5af827053b139b66-854777725604?q=cold+steel+kukri&FROM=LKVR5>1=LKVR5&FORM=LKVR23


Of particular note, at 3:15 of the video , see a knife cut through ribs.

and it was Mayberry. What is your point?

A username of a rational wise person posting irrational absurdities.

"I wonder if a guy with a knife ever took out 10 people in the span of a few minutes?"

09/11/01 ring a bell?

so that they won't feel that they need guns?

I'm betting... not.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Republicans are ever so dreamy.