NY Gov Gun Laws...

[biggie]

31 were other which include...
shopping malls - All the ones I know of are GFZ
Restaurants - All that serve Alcohol in NC and many other states are GFZ
government building - Never seen one that wasn't GFZ

The arguement is that mass murderers choose gun free zones is faulty. Packed stadiums arent attacked. Yet they are gun free. They are personal vendettas or pshycological issues not choices to go to gun free zones. Nothing, guns included will stop Mass murderers from happening. All we can do is prevent as much damage as we can when it occurs. Adding trained officers to school and limiting access to high cap mag as well as mental health treatments are all steps.

Not completely faulty, in most cases it seems these 'people' do not want resistance of any kind (at least not until they have caused huge damage). For school shooters and the Aurora psycho they knew they had a large amount of time that they were in no danger of being shot back at. They want that control and God like feeling it seems.

Much like one other school shooting in MS (I believe), when the person was confront with an armed person they gave up without a fight, I believe most of these type shooters would as well. But most haven't heard of that case where a principal with a gun in his car stopped the kid with a rifle before he went in (though he'd already killed 2 at another school).

[appdaze]

8 million views. Here is some conspiracy for you guys to munch on.

[ASUPATCH]

The vast majority of them fight until they are killed or kill themselves. Very few of them survived so I doubt they are afriad to die. I am in no way supporting getting rid of all guns as I live in Avery County NC and would gladly shoot a Meth head that tried to harm me or my family. But Japan has a murder rate of .4 people per 100,000 compared to our 4.8. That is 1/12th of our murder rate. Every time they have killed 1 person per 100,000 we have killed 12. What gives? Japan has a ban on all firearms. Only law enforcement in Japan is allowed to own firearms. I have heard the Australia arguement so save your breath. Just simply letting you see the other end of the spectrum as well.

[ASUPATCH]

8 million views. Here is some conspiracy for you guys to munch on.

You go tell the famlies of the kids and teachers this a conspiracy. Im goona puke. This is disrespecful and disgusting. 9/11 was fake as well huh? Cause we wanted all the people in new york that day to die to substantiate a war. Gross.......please delete this crap.

[biggie]

2nd Ammendment was written to keep the public as well armed as the military/govt. Its already been watered down quite a bit as true assault weapons and higher are either completely illegal for the public or very hard to get the paperwork to own (along with more taxes on them and the federal govt having all your info and the right to come to your house and inspect them at any time).

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

No where does this say be armed as well as the military. But enough to regulate. If you think AR are enough to regulate then you need to look at the difference between an AR and a nuclear weapon. No one is diallowing you to own a gun. Its simply an outdated wording. We only had single shot muskets. We dont maintain legitimate militias. The founding fathers also added in these little things called ammendments. If your a constitution stickler then please tell your wife she can no longer vote and any minority friends you may have. Its what the founding fathers said. Oh wait....thats outdated to.

ARs vs Nuke, Musket vs Cannon. Public has always and will always be at a disadvantage, except in numbers. Those numbers would sway even bigger if the govt starts attacking its own people and those in the military/LE/etc don't agree with it.

I'm fine with my non-exsistent wife and my black friends not voting (they probably wouldn't like it though).

Still comes down to the govt trying to restrict law abidding citizens of the rights and ability to defend themselves and their family.

Politicians and others get scared by a gun that is black, with a pistol grip, and a flash suppressor. When there are plenty of other non "assault weapons" that shoot the same or bigger ammo, at the same rate and just because it has a wood stock it doesn't scare them.

Taking away law abidding citizens rights just allows criminals more power. They seem to not follow the laws. If they did maybe we should make murder illegal, problem solved.

[biggie]

The vast majority of them fight until they are killed or kill themselves. Very few of them survived so I doubt they are afriad to die. I am in no way supporting getting rid of all guns as I live in Avery County NC and would gladly shoot a Meth head that tried to harm me or my family. But Japan has a murder rate of .4 people per 100,000 compared to our 4.8. That is 1/12th of our murder rate. Every time they have killed 1 person per 100,000 we have killed 12. What gives? Japan has a ban on all firearms. Only law enforcement in Japan is allowed to own firearms. I have heard the Australia arguement so save your breath. Just simply letting you see the other end of the spectrum as well.

Most wouldn't want to die before carrying out their act.

Japan is a completely different culture. Look at their suicide rate for instance.

The UK also have basically no guns, want to look at their violent crime rates? Especially after the gun bans.

[ASUPATCH]

2nd Ammendment was written to keep the public as well armed as the military/govt. Its already been watered down quite a bit as true assault weapons and higher are either completely illegal for the public or very hard to get the paperwork to own (along with more taxes on them and the federal govt having all your info and the right to come to your house and inspect them at any time).

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

No where does this say be armed as well as the military. But enough to regulate. If you think AR are enough to regulate then you need to look at the difference between an AR and a nuclear weapon. No one is diallowing you to own a gun. Its simply an outdated wording. We only had single shot muskets. We dont maintain legitimate militias. The founding fathers also added in these little things called ammendments. If your a constitution stickler then please tell your wife she can no longer vote and any minority friends you may have. Its what the founding fathers said. Oh wait....thats outdated to.

ARs vs Nuke, Musket vs Cannon. Public has always and will always be at a disadvantage, except in numbers. Those numbers would sway even bigger if the govt starts attacking its own people and those in the military/LE/etc don't agree with it.

I'm fine with my non-exsistent wife and my black friends not voting (they probably wouldn't like it though).

Still comes down to the govt trying to restrict law abidding citizens of the rights and ability to defend themselves and their family.

Politicians and others get scared by a gun that is black, with a pistol grip, and a flash suppressor. When there are plenty of other non "assault weapons" that shoot the same or bigger ammo, at the same rate and just because it has a wood stock it doesn't scare them.

Taking away law abidding citizens rights just allows criminals more power. They seem to not follow the laws. If they did maybe we should make murder illegal, problem solved.

The fact you are fine with women and minorities not being able to vote says all I need to know about attempting to have a logical conversation with you.

[ASUPATCH]

The vast majority of them fight until they are killed or kill themselves. Very few of them survived so I doubt they are afriad to die. I am in no way supporting getting rid of all guns as I live in Avery County NC and would gladly shoot a Meth head that tried to harm me or my family. But Japan has a murder rate of .4 people per 100,000 compared to our 4.8. That is 1/12th of our murder rate. Every time they have killed 1 person per 100,000 we have killed 12. What gives? Japan has a ban on all firearms. Only law enforcement in Japan is allowed to own firearms. I have heard the Australia arguement so save your breath. Just simply letting you see the other end of the spectrum as well.

Most wouldn't want to die before carrying out their act.

Japan is a completely different culture. Look at their suicide rate for instance.

The UK also have basically no guns, want to look at their violent crime rates? Especially after the gun bans.

African countries have no gun laws at all and are constantly at war. I am simply stating wether it is Japan UK Africa or Australia. When people try and use one country to explain us it doesnt work without looking at all the countries. You cant just pick and choose the one that helps your arguement the most.

[appbio91]

Does anyone else see the big breasted women that claim they want me adds all over this message board. How did I get so popular. Also who picks the adds on here.

[GlassOnion]

How about the government just abide by the Constitution. It makes no sense for the President to swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and to then completely circumvent it whenever he feels like it.

If he wants to change the Constitution, the founding fathers set up a way to do that.

[bcoach]

When all is said and done it will have been the Republicans that will cause more restrictive laws. If they had any kind of intelligent leadership they would have been out front on this. Instead they sat back and just waited till the President did his thing and started fighting him. He now has the majority of the public behind him and that is all it takes. You think he is done? Not a chance. He is going to executive order this thing to death. You need to know when you are going to lose and the nit wits that run the Republican party have NO CLUE. If they had come out and said that we don't need 30 round mags and done something about assault type rifles this would be over. Now it is FAR from over. Throw in the idiots from the NRA and your gun rights and the Republican party are about to become a distant memory. It is a very sad day in America.

[TheMoody1]

Obama's executive orders can only pertain to existing laws. Instead of jumping the gun with these executive orders, which will basically change nothing, he should express leadership and try to work with congress on something meaningful. He is more interested in putting on a show for the cameras by using children as props than actually getting something done. Every move he makes is made only because he perceives it will strengthen his legacy and help him in the next election cycle.

[bcoach]

Obama's executive orders can only pertain to existing laws. Instead of jumping the gun with these executive orders, which will basically change nothing, he should express leadership and try to work with congress on something meaningful. He is more interested in putting on a show for the cameras by using children as props than actually getting something done. Every move he makes is made only because he perceives it will strengthen his legacy and help him in the next election cycle.

And so far he is winning every battle.

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

Everyone is"assuming" the concealed carry person would kill innocent people? I can show many situations where they did shoot and kill the bad guy.

More guns is just not the answer in my opinion. I hate to think that my kid needs to be surrounded by guns at school to be safe.

Nothing is going to fix this problem overnight. The toothpaste is out of the tube. But most reasonable people agree assault weapons ban and magazine size restrictions are a start. Keep in mind this will only affect you and I, in other words legal purchases. Criminals will find a way. But over time hopefully a ban would make a difference. After all the aurora and newtown incidents were carried out with legally purchased guns.

I know this is going off in a different angle but the 2nd Amendment was written so that the people could protect themselves against the government if needed. You don't have to like it or may think it's silly but that is exactly what it was written for. If the government restricts it's people to small arms and the government has "auto" rifles then we have a problem. If is against the Constitution for the government to take away these rights. Period.
We can go off on a tangent about the government having tanks etc, but at least the people has "semi equal" weapons in these rifles. If anyone thinks mass shootings will stop or slow down with this bill they are fooling themselves. The world we live in is getting crazier every day and will continue to do so until then end of time. No laws will ever stop the evilness in this world...

I asked this a few weeks ago on a different part of the internet. I never really got an answer.

When was the last time our gov't came after its own citizens with guns a-blazing? I know it can happen and has a few times in the last 200+ years but it is very limited and rather rare. In my lifetime I can think of Kent State. The reality is that I am a hell of a lot more worried about my neighbor killing me than the gov't. And there are decades of stats to prove my point. I am willing to bet good money that in the time it took me to type this reply there has already been a gun death in the country and I bet it was not at the hands of the gov't trying to keep its citizenry down.

If we have para-military and military that respect the Constitution then we don't have as much to worry about. If we have enough Bradley Mannings that know right from wrong and are not just yes men then we will be ok. And like it or not there is no way an assault rifle is going to stop a tank or a bomb being dropped. The days of having fire power to stop a gov't is long, long gone. At this point we need to worry about stopping the proverbial guy next door.

I would be happy to pull up some gun death stats not at the hands of the gov't and you can pull up some stats where the US gov't has gone after us as citizens. I gave you Kent State as a starter -see I am even helpful to your side. I don't need any help finding all the slaughters from citizen to citizen, we average a few a year. Shall we come back in a week with our research? I need about 45 seconds and Google and I will have a long list. But I am willing to give you a week, you will need it, and you may need longer than that. You will not even come close to may list in the number of events nor the number killed, and I will give you back to either the adoption of the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution, your call. I will not go back before the year 2000. Though I may not need to go back more than 2010 to best your list. Are you up for this?

[biggie]

African countries have no gun laws at all and are constantly at war. I am simply stating wether it is Japan UK Africa or Australia. When people try and use one country to explain us it doesnt work without looking at all the countries. You cant just pick and choose the one that helps your arguement the most.

Ok let's use this country. Chicago, one of, if not the most gun controlled city in the US. Over 500 murders last year, over 400 of them by guns.

[biggie]

The fact you are fine with women and minorities not being able to vote says all I need to know about attempting to have a logical conversation with you.

The fact that you took that seriously Says all I need to know about you.

[AppGrad1]

Everyone is"assuming" the concealed carry person would kill innocent people? I can show many situations where they did shoot and kill the bad guy.

More guns is just not the answer in my opinion. I hate to think that my kid needs to be surrounded by guns at school to be safe.

Nothing is going to fix this problem overnight. The toothpaste is out of the tube. But most reasonable people agree assault weapons ban and magazine size restrictions are a start. Keep in mind this will only affect you and I, in other words legal purchases. Criminals will find a way. But over time hopefully a ban would make a difference. After all the aurora and newtown incidents were carried out with legally purchased guns.

I know this is going off in a different angle but the 2nd Amendment was written so that the people could protect themselves against the government if needed. You don't have to like it or may think it's silly but that is exactly what it was written for. If the government restricts it's people to small arms and the government has "auto" rifles then we have a problem. If is against the Constitution for the government to take away these rights. Period.
We can go off on a tangent about the government having tanks etc, but at least the people has "semi equal" weapons in these rifles. If anyone thinks mass shootings will stop or slow down with this bill they are fooling themselves. The world we live in is getting crazier every day and will continue to do so until then end of time. No laws will ever stop the evilness in this world...

I asked this a few weeks ago on a different part of the internet. I never really got an answer.

When was the last time our gov't came after its own citizens with guns a-blazing? I know it can happen and has a few times in the last 200+ years but it is very limited and rather rare. In my lifetime I can think of Kent State. The reality is that I am a hell of a lot more worried about my neighbor killing me than the gov't. And there are decades of stats to prove my point. I am willing to bet good money that in the time it took me to type this reply there has already been a gun death in the country and I bet it was not at the hands of the gov't trying to keep its citizenry down.

If we have para-military and military that respect the Constitution then we don't have as much to worry about. If we have enough Bradley Mannings that know right from wrong and are not just yes men then we will be ok. And like it or not there is no way an assault rifle is going to stop a tank or a bomb being dropped. The days of having fire power to stop a gov't is long, long gone. At this point we need to worry about stopping the proverbial guy next door.

I would be happy to pull up some gun death stats not at the hands of the gov't and you can pull up some stats where the US gov't has gone after us as citizens. I gave you Kent State as a starter -see I am even helpful to your side. I don't need any help finding all the slaughters from citizen to citizen, we average a few a year. Shall we come back in a week with our research? I need about 45 seconds and Google and I will have a long list. But I am willing to give you a week, you will need it, and you may need longer than that. You will not even come close to may list in the number of events nor the number killed, and I will give you back to either the adoption of the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution, your call. I will not go back before the year 2000. Though I may not need to go back more than 2010 to best your list. Are you up for this?

Your challenge is laughable... I'll tell you what. Let's look at gun deaths on innocent citizens vs gun deaths dealing with criminals and suicide. You'll find out that the gun deaths on innocent citizens is much lower than one would think. How bout that?

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

Everyone is"assuming" the concealed carry person would kill innocent people? I can show many situations where they did shoot and kill the bad guy.

More guns is just not the answer in my opinion. I hate to think that my kid needs to be surrounded by guns at school to be safe.

Nothing is going to fix this problem overnight. The toothpaste is out of the tube. But most reasonable people agree assault weapons ban and magazine size restrictions are a start. Keep in mind this will only affect you and I, in other words legal purchases. Criminals will find a way. But over time hopefully a ban would make a difference. After all the aurora and newtown incidents were carried out with legally purchased guns.

I know this is going off in a different angle but the 2nd Amendment was written so that the people could protect themselves against the government if needed. You don't have to like it or may think it's silly but that is exactly what it was written for. If the government restricts it's people to small arms and the government has "auto" rifles then we have a problem. If is against the Constitution for the government to take away these rights. Period.
We can go off on a tangent about the government having tanks etc, but at least the people has "semi equal" weapons in these rifles. If anyone thinks mass shootings will stop or slow down with this bill they are fooling themselves. The world we live in is getting crazier every day and will continue to do so until then end of time. No laws will ever stop the evilness in this world...

I asked this a few weeks ago on a different part of the internet. I never really got an answer.

When was the last time our gov't came after its own citizens with guns a-blazing? I know it can happen and has a few times in the last 200+ years but it is very limited and rather rare. In my lifetime I can think of Kent State. The reality is that I am a hell of a lot more worried about my neighbor killing me than the gov't. And there are decades of stats to prove my point. I am willing to bet good money that in the time it took me to type this reply there has already been a gun death in the country and I bet it was not at the hands of the gov't trying to keep its citizenry down.

If we have para-military and military that respect the Constitution then we don't have as much to worry about. If we have enough Bradley Mannings that know right from wrong and are not just yes men then we will be ok. And like it or not there is no way an assault rifle is going to stop a tank or a bomb being dropped. The days of having fire power to stop a gov't is long, long gone. At this point we need to worry about stopping the proverbial guy next door.

I would be happy to pull up some gun death stats not at the hands of the gov't and you can pull up some stats where the US gov't has gone after us as citizens. I gave you Kent State as a starter -see I am even helpful to your side. I don't need any help finding all the slaughters from citizen to citizen, we average a few a year. Shall we come back in a week with our research? I need about 45 seconds and Google and I will have a long list. But I am willing to give you a week, you will need it, and you may need longer than that. You will not even come close to may list in the number of events nor the number killed, and I will give you back to either the adoption of the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution, your call. I will not go back before the year 2000. Though I may not need to go back more than 2010 to best your list. Are you up for this?

Your challenge is laughable... I'll tell you what. Let's look at gun deaths on innocent citizens vs gun deaths dealing with criminals and suicide. You'll find out that the gun deaths on innocent citizens is much lower than one would think. How bout that?

Laughable or not, and that is fine, there will still be more citizen-citizen deaths and events that gov't-citizen. I was not even thinking suicide or armed robbery related deaths. I was just thinking mass murder rampages at this point. I was not trying to overwhelm you with numbers.

So give me one event where our gov't has been after the citizenry with guns and weapons, besides Kent State in your life time, or mine, and I was born in the late 1960s. I did my 45 seconds research already and found 3 or 4 events SINCE Newtown that totaled 5 or 6 deaths and a dozen or so injuries, JUST at schools, not counting malls, or other public spaces. Yes 3-4 events since early December just at educational institutions. You are going to be hard pressed to name 3 or 4 events of the gov't going after us citizens in the last 200 years. Really go ahead and educate me in case I am wrong. I gave you one event to get you started. I'll give you another hint. Look into some labor history, there will be a few there I am sad to say. But that is all the help you get from me to prove your case. Bring on the facts, please. I would love to be proven wrong. Because that would mean we are not killing each other in the numbers that we are in this country.

[appbio91]

Here's one
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Aulaqi

[1ASU78]

I consider myself one of the highly trained as I have completed both a police academy and correctional officer basic training. From 25 yards I can safely hit 95% of the time in the kill zone.(upper torso) When I was put through a live action simulation with (blanks being fired back that % dipped to roughly 10-15% and that was all from 15 yards and in. Hell half of my shots hit the damn dirt and the targets werent moving. I consider myself a far superior shot to the average citizen and can ony image the additional injuries and possible deaths in such a scenario. Unless you have actually been in a firefight you have no idea how bad your aim becomes. Hell I was in a simulated version and shot like total crap.

Still anyone shooting back at the gunman probably saves lives. Better than laying there just waiting to be shot.

Exactly Thats why those freaking fools go to gun free places. No one can shoot back. When was the last time a fool walked into a gun show and started firing.