Do you have any numbers to disprove it? I can give you three examples of assaults where guns were known to be carried by the victims. One was Platt & Maddox, who specifically attacked target shooters so they could steal their guns and vehicles. Another was the recent attack on Kenneth Payne at the Ft. Gibson WMA range to steal his guns. There was also the incident where Lamar Moore entered a Detroit police station and opened fire in 2011.
In contrast, there are dozens of high profile shootings in "gun free" zones. All you really have to do is google "shootings in gun free zones". It's not rocket science to figure out that criminals and sociopaths target the weak and unarmed disproportionately. It's a given that you should stipulate to if you want to have an intelligent debate on the subject.
Wait - me asking for some evidence to back up someone's claim means that I'm not wanting to have an intelligent debate on the subject? Part of debate is backing up assertions such as "Gun free zones are where the majority of gun crimes are commited" with actual information, and anecdotal evidence is usually not a good way to do that. Also, calling for someone to disprove an assertion is not how real debate works. I'm not saying he's wrong in making the claim - I honestly don't know. But he made an assertion and some evidence would be nice to determine the veracity of that assertion.
Actually, legislation isn't holding ccl holders back from carrying on campus. It's the colleges decision on whether to allow guns or not. You can have your gun on campus as long as it's in a vehicle that's parked in a designated parking area. But we all know how good a gun is in a vehicle when you need it.
I agree with antigonus, if you're gonna make a claim you should be able to back it up with some sort of evidence. We bitch about the media making stuff up but when someone here spouts something pro gun we take it as gossipal? I think that most crimes are probably committed in gun free zones. Look at the amount of crime in Washington DC.
I agree with antigonus, if you're gonna make a claim you should be able to back it up with some sort of evidence. We bitch about the media making stuff up but when someone here spouts something pro gun we take it as gossipal? I think that most crimes are probably committed in gun free zones. Look at the amount of crime in Washington DC.
Do you honestly not know the sky is blue? Do you honestly not know that crime rates are lower where gun laws are less restrictive? If that's the case, you should elect to educate yourself before entering a debate on the subject. Don't expect others to had you data on a silver platter when you're questioning the obvious. Here, I'll help you get started. Google Dr. John Lott and settle in for some hefty reading.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him learn!
Ah yes, me asking for some evidence of an assertion is exactly the same as denying the sky is blue. Talk about trolling - at least I now know to completely ignore all of your posts in the future, as you are literally the only person to continually seek confrontation with me every time I post. It's seriously very childish but thankfully not representative of the vast majority of posters on this site, who are both knowledgeable and respectful when discussing these topics.
As 68Mustang said, I don't doubt that the assertion is true, I just prefer to read actual information before relying on my gut instincts to reach an opinion. If there is some good evidence to support it I'd like to have it ready so that in other discussions, if I make that same assertion, I can have info to back it up to people who aren't as pre-convinced as I am.
As 68Mustang said, I don't doubt that the assertion is true, I just prefer to read actual information before relying on my gut instincts to reach an opinion. If there is some good evidence to support it I'd like to have it ready so that in other discussions, if I make that same assertion, I can have info to back it up to people who aren't as pre-convinced as I am.
We could nit-pic forever as to what makes a good argument: passion or facts. That argument is as old as time itself. I agree that it would make sense that a who would person commit a gun crime would pick an area that is gun restrictive (doing the most damage with the least resistance). But if your goal is to change the mind of an academic type (legislators, college deans etc) then an argument that can be substantiated with something more than passion is required. We say that we have the right to bare arms because of the 2nd Amendent, not simply because we feel like we should. There is a reason we write things down and it is to reference them later.
Here you go: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats
Good luck getting any entrenched decision maker to pay attention to it.
