What exactly do you think the rationale for gun-free zones is? Do you think it’s a magic spell that people cast on an area to prevent guns from working in them?
Some people–not you, surely, but some people–are under the misapprehension that gun-free zones are targeted by mass shooters. There is no evidence whatsoever that points to this, and ample evidence suggesting there’s no such targeting happening.
There doesn’t seem to be one, except “it’s scawy”.
I wasn’t asking you for a cite for something no one in this thread said. I wanted a cite for what you said - that the shooter got his ideas from the Center for Medical Progress.
Regards,
Shodan
I think my reason is pretty rational and adult, unlike “it’s scawy”.
Enjoy my humble regards,
CarnalK
Well, that’s nice. If you don’t care to engage the issue, good on you.
That, however, is ridiculous. As I pointed out, CMP introduced this lie into the public discourse. Before CMP came along lying about this, nobody had talked about this lie. It’s totally possible that this asshole didn’t even know who CMP is–that doesn’t mean his delusion can’t be traced back to their efforts to mislead the public.
So, no evidence then.
Then perhaps you can show how making the PP clinic a gun-free zone helped, and then we will see how rational it was.
Regards,
Shodan
I guess you are failing to understand my plain English. I don’t think gun free zones are intended to help when a crazy guy with a gun comes running in shooting. Do you have some reason to think anyone suggests they would?
Enjoy my humble regards,
CarnalK
e=mc squared. You have exactly as much evidence that I’m basing my ideas on Einstein as I have that Dear based his on CMP.
Your request for more specific evidence is absurd.
This is also ridiculous, akin to arguing that making a school a drug-free zone is irrational given that drugs show up in schools anyway.
Yes. I thought by now everyone would be familiar with the statistics.
I’m familiar with it, but not everyone is, judging by the rhetoric. And your first sentence of that post contained a typo:
I wasn’t sure if you meant “is” instead of “in,” or if you meant “is” before “from,” or meant something else, and was looking for clarification from you. Thanks for providing it!
Sorry, my eyes are going.
I figure by now most people on the Dope ought to know which terrorists are actually responsible for more death. Off the Dope of course the ignorance abounds.
Did you have any response that made sense?
What was your rational, adult reason for something that doesn’t do any good? What other worthless, time-wasting ideas do you support?
Regards,
Shodan
What evidence is that, exactly? Your lack of personal recollection of the term?
I said in post 200 that I thought they were for stopping heat of the moment shootings, not pre-planned attacks. And yes for women going through an emotional time it probably makes it “less scawy”.
What other worthless, time wasting ideas do I support? Well, the idea that I can have a reasonable discussion with you. My support is fading though.
Gun free zones also give another criminal penalty they can apply to a person carrying a gun and committing another crime. So a person trespassing in a gun free zone, but who also happened to be carrying a gun, can be charged with an additional crime.
ETA: It’s like a drug free zone; get caught with drugs and you’re in trouble, get caught with drugs in the drug free zone and you’re in more trouble.
Absolutely, and my inability to find any cites of “baby parts” in the national media in reference to Planned Parenthood prior to the PMC videos.
But really, this is absurd and disingenuous cite-requesting. If you genuinely don’t realize that PMC invented and popularized this particular lie, then go do your own search for any mention of it prior to their videos.
I can’t prove the absence of cites; but you can go do your own search and see they’re not there.
edit: Here’s the best I can figure out how to cite an absence of discussion.
I played around with parameters a bit more. If you set the search to go through January 1, 2015, you bizarrely get one hit from July 2015. Separating “baby parts” and “PLanned Parenthood” into two separate phrases has no effect.
Exactly. It’s not a magical force field, it’s a tool for further prosecution when someone breaks the law.
One rationale for a gun-free zone is to identify a shooter before he starts shooting. In places where guns & open-carry are legal, you can’t identify (let alone arrest) a potential shooter until he actually starts shooting. For example, this incident where someone called 911 to report a suspicious person with a gun, but the dispatcher dismissed it because open-carry is legal there. The gunman went on to shoot and kill 3 people.
I’m perfectly willing to accept that PMC introduced the term into wider use. Your search seems to indicate as much. What I’m still curious about is what you think that proves and/or what we should do in light of our conclusion. The fellow who did the shooting seems to be a dangerously mentally ill fellow. Right now, I am comfortable blaming him and his personal demons for what took place. I am not quite so comfortable with trying to tie him to people whose politics I don’t like based on his having parroted a phrase they used. Crazy people fixate on things in crazy ways. Shall we blame Salinger for the number of whackjobs who obsessed over The Catcher in the Rye?
Last I heard that book is in the fiction section, the PMC claims that PP is a real criminal enterprise.
IMHO the PMC got into the “yelling fire in a crowded theater” section.