Guns serve no purpose on the college campus.
The same thing over and over. But guns could indeed have a purpose on the college campus to stop assualts, rapes, robbery, etc. These things DO occur on college campuses across America.
That is false.Guns are used for self defense.
What if I rode a skateboard everyday? When I take my seat, can't I just put it out of the way?
Sure, absolutely. The car's purpose is for something outside of the classroom, but we need to bring it with us in order for it to be available when we're not in the classroom.
Not needed on campus. Nothing to defend yourself from. There is no real threat on campus.
.
.
.
.
First, those don't happen to any real degree. The rapes are off campus, at parties and such. Not in the classroom, not in the library. You're making a problem where there isn't one. So no, it is not needed on campus.
That's been addressed already. One, it is extremely rare. Second, most experts don't believe students being armed woudl have stopped it. Someone on side of the argument mentions that above. Fear makes people do stupid things. Increasing the risk because your afraid is neither wise or safe.
That's still YOUR OPINION. For the love of all that is holy, you keep saying this, but it's nothing more than you're opinion. And then you have the gall to claim there is no assault, robbery, or rape on campus. Why the hell do you think they put the emergency police contact stations all over campus? Because there was no violent crime there ever and they just wanted something to look good? I think there is a need for guns on campus. There. Now why should your opinion win out over mine? What right do you have to tell me how and where I can exercise my rights without courts, without due process, with nothing more than your opinion, no data, supposition, assumption, and hyperbole to back up what you claim. Why is any of that good enough to infringe upon rights?
Guns are needed on campus.
Not needed on campus. Nothing to defend yourself from. There is no real threat on campus.
Really? Are you such a anti-2nd amendment partisan you have to resort to lying?
http://www.arsafeschools.com/Files/ViolentCrimeBP.pdf
Criminal Offenses - Aggravated Assault
Criminal Offenses - Forcible Sex Offenses
First, I not against guns. Just against them on campus.
Second from your own link:
Yet the crime rate is over two times less on college campuses than for the entire United States. For the other violent crimes, the U.S. crime rates are exponentially more than the college crime rates. What this shows is that the college campus is a safe place for students to be living and receiving their education when compared with off campus.
Third, your other two links are vague and not something we can examine close enough. They could include a large number of seriously minor offenses,
not somehting any reasonable would use a gun to address.
I said anti-2nd amendment. I am well aware that you like to use a hunting trip you did 30 or 40 years ago to somehow prove you like guns.
It is still false to say there is nothing to defend your self against.
You don't think rape and assault are something a reasonable person would use a gun to defend themselves against?
Leave it outside, off campus preferably.
Actually we're free to bring them in...the skateboards, that is....even though they have no purpose in the classroom. We bring a lot of things on out person which do not serve an immediate purpose in a given classroom, including textbooks of other classes, so really the whole notion that something doesn't belong if it's not for that class is just silliness.
Not anti-second amendment either.
It just isn't as absolute as some think it is. Some restriction is allowed.
No, not in the context I use it. The risk is not great enough to warrant having a gun on campus, which would likely represent a larger risk.
Rape is more easily defined; however, your source uses something less specific. We need the term defined as to what they mean in their numbers. Did I insult someone sexually, which might require a slap in the face or a formal complain, but not a gun. I suggest you're using the numbers to say something they are not saying.
Have you guys been on a college campus recently? Specifically a non-commuter school with a large student population living on campus? Maybe this comes as a shock to some people, but college students like to drink alcohol...a lot. And at that age, they're often relatively new to alcohol and don't know their limits. Do you really want people to have guns in close proximity after they've just consumed 8 beers and are acting belligerent?
Not anti-second amendment either. It just isn't as absolute as some think it is. Some restriction is allowed.
There are some restrictions. However, you somehow got it in your skull that because there are restrictions, you can now place further restrictions WITHOUT CAUSE. That's the end all be all to this. But to keep and bear arms is still a RIGHT. Which means that if you want to infringe upon it, you have to have JUST CAUSE. You have to have DATA, you have to have PROPER ARGUMENT. But you have none of that. You have opinion, that's it. Even the links and quotes you provide are OPINION. None of it is based in fact or measurable data.
So why is it that YOUR opinion is right and mine is wrong? Why do we have to listen to YOUR opinion on the restriction of rights without proof? You keep saying they're not needed, but that's not true. There could be many situations on campus where they could be needed. You keep saying it's a risk, but that's not true. I've already given you REAL WORLD DATA that shows that there is no increase to the overall, aggregated risk. You have no proof, you have no data, you have no quantifiable variable by which you can make a proper argument for restrictions of a right. Just because there are restrictions does not mean you can place restrictions without cause. You must still provide PROOF. Until that point it is only opinion. And in this country, only opinion cannot be used to infringe upon the free exercise of a right.
You want to say that my statement that guns are needed on campus is an opinion. OK, well let's start there and look at the reality of our arguments. They're both opinions. But you want to use your opinion to elicit government force against the free exercise of a right. I want to use my opinion to remove government force against the free exercise of a right until proof can be shown to properly argue for the restriction. That's where we're at, whether you want to accept it or not. Rights are to be upheld to their highest, it is the way in which we maximize freedom; freedom being the goal. You cannot infringe upon the exercise of a right without proof. Not justly, not properly, and not without the use of tyranny. I will not support tyranny. If you think it's such a risk, you should be able to prove it. Not all Universities allow guns on campus, but a non-zero number do. So from that number, which University has a much higher risk of gun violence on campus? Can you even answer the question.
Yes, you're going to have to think about it. Yes, you're going to have to do a bit of research on it. But burden of proof is on YOU because you're the one looking to restrict a right. So gather the numbers, come back and tell me what you found.
That is a lie.
What kind of restrictions? Waiting periods, licenses/permits, registrations, . . . . taxes and etc?
The risk is not great enough to warrant having restrictions on the 2nd amendment, but yet you people seek to impose all sorts of restrictions that violate the 2nd amendment.
Again do you think rape and assault are something that one should be able to use a gun to defend themselves with?
As this restriction has been here, there is no further restriction. It's not a new one.
And no, I have no problem with opinions. It's not a bad word to me. However, I gave specific information that related to my opinion. College campus are actually safer than the rest of the nation on the whole, but a good margin. And little to nothing dangerous is going on in the classroom to require the need for guns. Actual rape is not happening in the classroom during class. No gun is needed.
Bring one to the classroom where one wasn't before has to increase the risk just as introducing cars where there were nto cars before increases the risk. Without a specific and demonstative reason for the risk, the risk has to be viewed as needless.
And no risk. Keep in mind the two point arguement. Needless risk.
You haven't demonstrated this risk, therefore it doesn't exist.
In fact, according to the mountain of evidence myself and others have provided, the lack of firearms is the risk. You haven't justified why you support this public hazard.
You keep saying this, but have proven no risk. Did you do what I asked you since you're the one against the free exercise of a right? Did you look up the statistics for Universities with gun policies (allowing)? What did you find? Can you quantify the risk or are you still on the side of restriction without cause?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?