Post by dburkhead on Jan 16, 2009 17:29:21 GMT -5
www.indystar.com/article/20090115/OPINION08/901150382/1291/OPINION08
The usual "blood will run in the streets" if we allow law abiding adults, properly licensed to carry handguns, to actually do so on campus.
My response (limited to 1000 characters so I had to be relatively brief):
Every time someone suggests expanding the right to carry, there are always predictions of death, destruction, and blood running in the streets. The anti-gun folk always predict it. And they are always wrong. It keeps not happening.
Allowing law-abiding citizens to own and carry guns for the protection of themselves and others just does not lead to greater violence and bloodshed.
We do know, however, that mass shootings happen almost always at "gun free" zones. Out of 15 mass shootings since 1966, 9 of them were in "gun free" zones, 4 were in "guns extremely unlikely" zones, and only two were in "guns permitted" locations--and those two were in circumstances where the shooters were able to assess whether they would meet any resistance or not. In those shootings 157 people died in places where law abiding citizens in general could not carry guns for self defense. Only 18 where people could defend themselves.
"Gun free zones" don't work.
The usual "blood will run in the streets" if we allow law abiding adults, properly licensed to carry handguns, to actually do so on campus.
My response (limited to 1000 characters so I had to be relatively brief):
Every time someone suggests expanding the right to carry, there are always predictions of death, destruction, and blood running in the streets. The anti-gun folk always predict it. And they are always wrong. It keeps not happening.
Allowing law-abiding citizens to own and carry guns for the protection of themselves and others just does not lead to greater violence and bloodshed.
We do know, however, that mass shootings happen almost always at "gun free" zones. Out of 15 mass shootings since 1966, 9 of them were in "gun free" zones, 4 were in "guns extremely unlikely" zones, and only two were in "guns permitted" locations--and those two were in circumstances where the shooters were able to assess whether they would meet any resistance or not. In those shootings 157 people died in places where law abiding citizens in general could not carry guns for self defense. Only 18 where people could defend themselves.
"Gun free zones" don't work.
Needless to say, I don't waste much time with the Banner.