Texas To Allow Carry On Campus

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Maccabee, Aug 4, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 6-eyed shaman

    6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

    Messages:
    10,378
    Likes Received:
    5,157
    Anyone with a clean record can buy a gun most places. But that doesn't mean they get to conceal it legally; that requires a permit with an exam and a firearm training course. The laws vary state by state too.
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. Irminsul

    Irminsul Valkyrie

    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    169
    Steers and queers in Texas..
     
  3. Mr.Writer

    Mr.Writer Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,286
    Likes Received:
    644
    I never said that; in my experience the vast majority of 21 year olds are not responsible, mature, or to be trusted carrying weapons.


    You are comparing posting on social media to having a lethal weapon capable of mass death in a school? You seem to know a lot about the "types" who apply for CCW; if you open the doors, bad types will come.

    Gun control is much more than a sign saying "No Guns"; it's an entire system of checks, controls, punishments, deterrents, regulations . . . why you would want to remove those from the ownership of lethal mass killing weapons is really baffling. You might as well say "Whats the point of regulating biological weapons, you really think if you put up a sign saying NO ANTHRAX that bad guys will follow it? Obviously we should keep big government out of anthrax regulation".


    It can be used in an argument to ban cars, an argument which will not be very persuasive, because of the results when we weigh the usefulness of cars vs their risks. Rather, it's a justification to control the use of cars, by doing stringent testing, background checks, and having vehicle operators undergo all manner of screening, routine traffic stops, red light cameras, radar traps, being under extensive traffic laws with public safety as #1 priority etc. The founding documents of the US also promise free unrestricted movement across the land, yet we don't see a conflict when we restrict the movement of someone in a motor vehicle who has shown that they are a danger if using vehicles.

    Your constitution may contain the passage "shall not be infringed", yet the constitution has been ammended 17 times. This is not a holy document. This is not a perfect document. If something in the constitution is not working, we can change it, and we NEED to change it. To say or think otherwise is to be chained to the letter of men long dead. I see a smarter way to live.
     
    1 person likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice