And what exactly would conceal and carry laws have to do with it? Crime has dropped in states that don’t have such laws as well.

As tragic as what happened at VT was, by all accounts the campus and surrounding community were quiet and largely peaceful over the last 100+ years. So let’s arm this small, insulated community of barely-post-adolescents just in case another massacre happens within the next 100 years.

Maybe we’ll get lucky and nobody will pull out a weapon when drunk, pissed off at a cheating boyfriend, or depressed over a failing grade.

Maybe the total number of suicides, accidental deaths, and homicides over the next 100 years or so will be less than 33, so we can justify those deaths when the next Rambo wannabe is stopped in his tracks by a history professor with an AK-47 stashed under his desk.

You know just saying that doesn’t make it so. Do I need to point out that if so many lives have been saved by armed citiznes you’d have actual real numbers too?

Again, 20 years of states enacting “shall issue” concealed carry laws. Obviously the rewards have outweighed the risks.

If the would-be Rambos you claim are gunning down innocents in ill-fated attempts to thwart crimes, you would have a host of statistics to back up your claims.

Again, what evidence do you have to support this? Since 1987 when Florida enacted its concealed carry law, over 20 other states have followed suit. If there was such a situation wherein so many innocents were being killed, don’t you think we would have heard about it by now?

But Jay, I’mnot the one advocating we “take the risk” of passing conceal and carry laws. You are.

We have 20 years of that risk being taken Frame. If all that carnage was going to take place as you suggest, it would be easy to locate that data.

Dude, that’s just it. You can’t prove that they’ve made the average citizen more safe or that they’ve actually saved any more lives. You don’t have any numbers, just anecdotes.

How is it just as likely? What evidence do you have to support that assertion?

If you’re so positive that it is “just as likely” then why can’t you support the assertion with verifiable evidence?

Because of all these reasons it is ridiculous to use the Virginia Tech incident as fodder for pushing conceal and carry laws, which you are in fact doing.

Whatever. Prove that concealed carry laws have made the average citizen less safe or has resulted in more innocents being killed.

Jay, there is no connection between the numebr of right to carry states now and the argument that you are making which is that conceal and carry laws save lives because they allow citizens to protect themselves.

But how could it be worth the risk if for every life saved, a life is lost? Where’s the benefit to sociey then?

Of course you can’t give anyone actual numbers, just more and more stories, carefully cherry pikced by gun advocates for precisely the purpose of creating a false impression of what the risks really are.

So if you think it’s worth the risk, don’t you have to first be able to accurately measure the risk if you’re going to enact this risk taking into public policy? Of course I’ve already asked you this and you demurred by suggesting that I was the one who had to come up with the numbers. But Jay, I’mnot the one advocating we “take the risk” of passing conceal and carry laws. You are.

How many times are you going to repeat yourself? Nobody is denying this so stop saying as though somebody was.

A policy of conceal and carry is just as likely to lead to more innocent deaths as not, is it not?

The evidence doesn’t show that. Look at the number of states that now have “shall issue” concealed carry laws on the books. If you’re so certain of your position, then support it with evidence, not your opinion. Look at this map. Look at the number of states in the last 20 years that went from “may issue” to “shall issue.”

Now causing more innocent deaths is not exactly a policy that works is it?

Back it up with the evidence. If you can show that more innocent lives have been lost as more and more states have enacted concealed carry laws, then I’ll reverse my position. The fact is, I won’t have to because you cannot prove it.

Because, dipshit, it’s just as likely that an armed student or professor might have killed an innocent student, got themselves killed by the killer, or been killed by the cops or otherwise slowed the official police response as the cops wasted time trying to figure out who OUT OF UNIFORM was or was not the killer.

Why do I say it’s “just as likely”? Because forever anecdote you can come up with in which someone killed a criminal, I could come with another story in which a citizen with a gun was killed by a criminalor killed an innocent bystander while attempting to stop a crime. Or are you suggesting that these never happen?

Because of all these reasons it is ridiculous to use the Virginia Tech incident as fodder for pushing conceal and carry laws, which you are in fact doing.

Jesus chirst jay don’t you get it, do you? There are also examples where it hasn’t worked. A policy of conceal and carry is just as likely to lead to more innocent deaths as not, is it not?

Now causing more innocent deaths is not exactly a policy that works is it?

Um, no you didn’t. Quote it dude. Link to the comment. You know how to do that don’t you?

You are clearly misrepresenting what I said in utter hypocritical fashion. Here’s what you mist be referring to:

If there were other students wandering the halls of VT with guns yesterday, how can you be sure that we wouldn’t be reading stories about cops killing innocent students out of mistaken identity? The fact is, you couldn’t as there would be a high probability of deadly cases of mistaken identity given the chaos of the situation.

So anyone suggesting that giving some students and/or teachers guns would have de facto helped the situation deserves to be fucking mocked. The idea is ludicrous unless you want to tell me how the cops are supposed to react to a shoot out between two students in a dorm hall. Ask them which one is the crazy person? Then trust the answer?

Suggesting that students with guns might get killed by the cops or other students with guns is a long way from suggesting that students with guns would never be able to save lives by killing a criminal.

So go ahead and plese provide the direct quote where I said that would never happen.

Uhhh…Your statement would be false because it HAS WORKED before.

Idiot.

I already did. Several times. You said quite clearly that anybody who suggested that an armed professor or teacher could have prevented or lessened the damage this killer did “deserves to be mocked.”

Question: Why would they deserve to be mocked if there’s a chance they could prevented it or lessened the damage?

My only crime, apparently, was in pointing out that sometimes citizens with guns get killed or shot trying to prevent crimes. This simple statement triggered a flood of anecdotes and name calling from you. Go back and look at the thread, Jay.

No your crime was to state that anybody who said an armed professor or student might have prevented the killer or lessened the damage “deserves to be mocked.”

Again, why should we not mock people who only present one side of thing as if it defines entirely the issue

Actually, you said that anybody who said an armed professor or student might have prevented or lessened the damage “deserves to be mocked.”

Jy, there is also ample anecdotal evidence that people with guns who try to stop crimes get killed and shot. That’s a fact too.

Ok, and? Nobody is denying that. There are risks. There always are when it comes to firearms.

But again, this is not about me. It is about you saying that that anybody who said an armed professor or student might have prevented or lessened the damage “deserves to be mocked.”

So, here is the thing:

Q: Have citizens protected themselves or others in the past with firearms?

A: Yes

Q: Have citizens protected themselves and others with firearms in situations at schools?

A: Yes

Q: Could have an armed professor or student prevented or lessened the damage done by the killer at Va Tech?

A: Yes

So here is the question again Frame:

If an armed professor or student could have prevented or lessened the damage by the killer at Va Tech, why do the people suggesting it, in your words, “deserve to be mocked”?

But Jay, again, what about all the times when citizens with guns have ended up getting themselves killed for intervening to stop a crime? I even gave you a story for the NY Times about how the NYPD had to revise its off-duty policies because a string of armed cops were killed or shot trying to stop crimes while off-duty.

IN other words, by taking my own examples i could just as easily write with confidence: “To say that such a policy would help is just wrong when one considers when it hasn’t worked before. It’s as simple as that.”

See what I’m saying? No, of course, you don’t becsause you’re a fucking moron.