Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
A blade in the home makes you at least twice as likely to be cut or stabbed than a home without knives. Idiot blade buffs.
Knives should not be allowed in public! They,re dangerous! You blade buffs are all so irresponsible. How many of you keep them locked up out of reach of children?
Knife owners need regulation NOW! Nobody should own a knife without a background check, safety course, and certification. We,re not trying to regulate knives, just dangerous and irresponsible owners. Its a public safety issue.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
When May I Shoot a Student?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/opinion/when-may-i-shoot-a-student.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
By GREG HAMPIKIANFEB. 27, 2014
BOISE, Idaho — TO the chief counsel of the Idaho State Legislature:
In light of the bill permitting guns on our state’s college and university campuses, which is likely to be approved by the state House of Representatives in the coming days, I have a matter of practical concern that I hope you can help with: When may I shoot a student?
I am a biology professor, not a lawyer, and I had never considered bringing a gun to work until now. But since many of my students are likely to be armed, I thought it would be a good idea to even the playing field.
I have had encounters with disgruntled students over the years, some of whom seemed quite upset, but I always assumed that when they reached into their backpacks they were going for a pencil. Since I carry a pen to lecture, I did not feel outgunned; and because there are no working sharpeners in the lecture hall, the most they could get off is a single point. But now that we’ll all be packing heat, I would like legal instruction in the rules of classroom engagement.
At present, the harshest penalty available here at Boise State is expulsion, used only for the most heinous crimes, like cheating on Scantron exams. But now that lethal force is an option, I need to know which infractions may be treated as de facto capital crimes.
I assume that if a student shoots first, I am allowed to empty my clip; but given the velocity of firearms, and my aging reflexes, I’d like to be proactive. For example, if I am working out a long equation on the board and several students try to correct me using their laser sights, am I allowed to fire a warning shot?
If two armed students are arguing over who should be served next at the coffee bar and I sense escalating hostility, should I aim for the legs and remind them of the campus Shared-Values Statement (which reads, in part, “Boise State strives to provide a culture of civility and success where all feel safe and free from discrimination, harassment, threats or intimidation”)?
While our city police chief has expressed grave concerns about allowing guns on campus, I would point out that he already has one. I’m glad that you were not intimidated by him, and did not allow him to speak at the public hearing on the bill (though I really enjoyed the 40 minutes you gave to the National Rifle Association spokesman).
Knee-jerk reactions from law enforcement officials and university presidents are best set aside. Ignore, for example, the lame argument that some drunken frat boys will fire their weapons in violation of best practices. This view is based on stereotypical depictions of drunken frat boys, a group whose dignity no one seems willing to defend.
The problem, of course, is not that drunken frat boys will be armed; it is that they are drunken frat boys. Arming them is clearly not the issue. They would cause damage with or without guns. I would point out that urinating against a building or firing a few rounds into a sorority house are both violations of the same honor code.
In terms of the campus murder rate — zero at present — I think that we can all agree that guns don’t kill people, people with guns do. Which is why encouraging guns on campus makes so much sense. Bad guys go where there are no guns, so by adding guns to campus more bad guys will spend their year abroad in London. Britain has incredibly restrictive laws — their cops don’t even have guns! — and gun deaths there are a tiny fraction of what they are in America. It’s a perfect place for bad guys.
Some of my colleagues are concerned that you are encouraging firearms within a densely packed concentration of young people who are away from home for the first time, and are coincidentally the age associated with alcohol and drug experimentation, and the commission of felonies.
Once again, this reflects outdated thinking about students. My current students have grown up learning responsible weapon use through virtual training available on the Xbox and PlayStation. Far from being enamored of violence, many studies have shown, they are numb to it. These creative young minds will certainly be stimulated by access to more technology at the university, items like autoloaders, silencers and hollow points. I am sure that it has not escaped your attention that the library would make an excellent shooting range, and the bookstore could do with fewer books and more ammo choices.
I want to applaud the Legislature’s courage. On a final note: I hope its members will consider my amendment for bulletproof office windows and faculty body armor in Boise State blue and orange.
Greg Hampikian is a professor of biology and criminal justice at Boise State University and a co-author of “Exit to Freedom.”
A version of this op-ed appears in print on February 28, 2014, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: When May I Shoot a Student?. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
As a part-time college professor myself, I have to wonder just how effective laws are that prohibit disgruntled students from illegally bringing weapns to school and unjustifiably shooting people?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
So making it "legal" will help make the situation better?
How?
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
I didnt say it would make it better.
I dont think it will have an effect one way or another.
Its just puzzling to me how it is that otherwise reasonable, intelligent people suddenly become irrational and publish such a sh#t show of contempt and utter bullsh#t. The otherwise normal prof there seems to think legalizing firearms on campus will lead to bizarre and criminal acts that wouldnt otherwise be committed, as if such allowance will suddenly deteriorate the minds of those students and/or staff who legally choose to exercise that newfound ability.
But then, he may have a point- after all, look how its affected his sudden change in rationality?
Our campus policy prohibits weapons. So does my regular employer. Both of them basically say hide/duck/cover/call cops. The college additionally says prepare to fight back. Because you,re likely to be a victim. Nice. So if I get an active shooter, what- throw a f*#king book at him? Love my odds.
And no, Philo- thats an example of a f*#king idiot gun owner. Its only your PERCEPTION that the majority of gun owners act that way.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
Hey JRig did you know there is a thread for appreciating gun huggers and gun nutters?
That's not my perception at all. It was sarcastic because the "responsible" part of gun ownership is an argument that is endlessly spewed to justify the gun market free for all.
And JRig your knife argument is weak as water.
No one ever stabs themselves in the brain giving a drunken knife safety demonstration. Not even when drunk.
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
What, you dont like my opinion?
You could, say, tell me your perception then...
Dont tell me you took the knife argument seriously. I am satirizing the anti-gun argument.
People DO cut their own wrists. Often while drunk I bet.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
Well if I post on that thread I am told Not to because I don't understand the lingo and so don't have a valid point of view.
This thread was started to mourn and rationally discuss the horrific slaughter of children.
It was immediately polluted and derailed by gun adherents arguing about what weapon, magazine and ammo was best for killing school kids. Then they derided people who were arguing for rational gun control because those fools didn't know the lingo or the difference between assault rifles and semi automatic hunting rifles.
It was repugnant!
And as far as lame ass counter arguments go someone recently posted about a gun guy who posted a story how he left his loaded shotgun in a wheel chair on his porch and left for 10 hours. He came home to find his gun hadn't killed anyone or gotten into any trouble what so ever thus proving guns were not the problem.
So is leaving a loaded shot gun untended for 10 hours on the front porch of his house the mark of a "responsible" gun owner? And should we all believe his opinion because HE is "responsible"?
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
Fair enough. You get as#@&%es on both sides. Shootings are tragic. School shootings more so.
People use that to jump off the deep end irrationally though, and make unreasonable assumptions and statements as a result. People are incontent to simply mourn, and rational discussion rarely happens.
I suspect your posts are not appreciated on that other thread because you seem so anti-gun.
By the way- what a sensational and horrific thing that so many were killed and injured in a knife attack. Now tell me, rationally, how that could have been stopped or prevented?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
More often than not it is the gun huggers who go off the deep end with their "coming to take all guns away" asinine insanity when ever any one suggests universal background checks or limited capacity magazines.
Just imagine if that knife mob had had high capacity assault weapons.
The death toll would have been in the hundreds and the wounded in the thousands.
Get the difference?
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
Thats your opinion. My better half associates with people of the liberal persuasion, and boy do they hate me. Just because i own some guns and hunt. Makes absolutely no difference to them that I would support universal backgrounds and some other regulations. They cant get past their own contempt. Tell me how rational that is?
Wow. Thats predictable. Imagine how much worse the movie theatre shooting would have been had Holmes gun not jammed? Or what would have happened if someone with a permit had shot him after, say, ten rounds? In the latter case i bet it would have been ignored. Nobody cares about justified self defense when an attacker gets stopped. You just see another gun nut.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
Is that like moving in next to an aiport then bitching about the noise?
|
|
jonnyrig
Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
|
|
Questin Philo-
do you even believe there IS such thing as a non-gun nut gun owner? What type of firearm exactly do you think it is reasonable to own?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
I live no where near this trail head and can avoid it if I choose. The point is Coexisting through information. A good thing I think.
But if the NRA and the gun huggers get their and we see guns in every school, church, hospital, shopping mall, theater, bar and restaurant then the only safe place to take your kids will be the big gun shows because they at least are smart enough to get all the gun owners "responsible" or otherwise to check their weapons at the door. Hmmm wonder why they do that.
And yes I know many gun owners who are not gun nuts they ARE responsible gun owners who don't seem to require combat weapons to feel free.. I also know too many who are and shouldn't have any.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
Nothing like GUN FREE ZONES to encourage bare do well activities.
I have no idea if this is the proper thread to post this to as I have only been skimming this thread. Last night I saw this post from Ron and wondered what people say to the fact that some countries have very restricted gun ownership and thus there are few guns around, yet there is a much lower rate of murders committed with guns, or even crimes committed with guns. If what Ron says is true, and I have heard this from other people who like guns, then wouldn't that mean that the criminals would flock to own guns and use them. I don't really want to look this up right now, feeling lazy, but I do believe this is true. So what say you, is my understanding false? How is this explained?
|
|
feynman
Trad climber
chossberta
|
|
More like hiking by/under a scrambling/climbing route where occasional rocks release.
The equivalent argument would be to regulate scrambling/climbing equipment to prevent the loss of life that deranged people could/do cause when trundling rocks or other people non-intentionally cause (like what might happen when a drunk climber teaches an unwise friend how to scramble).
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
It's unlikely that a drunk scrambler would take out dozens of school children when falling. In fact trundling rocks and falling drunk scramblers are not often the weapons of choice for deranged mass killers.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|