Share
923
Super MemberSuper Member
923

PostFeb 21, 2008#26

Then why pass a law allowing it?


And that is the $64,000 question.



Really, there's no way to tell if someone has a gun, knife, hand grenade - whatever on their person unless they walk through a metal detector or you frisk them. Conceal carry permits, laws, buildings - whatever - are a joke. Seriously - they're a total 100% joke. It's totally unenforceable unless every building sets up metal detectors or has security guards wanding people like they do in Israel.



If you really feel you need an Uzi to defend yourself, are you going to give it up just cause some sign says no? It says no CONCEALED weapons. How the hell would they know? They wouldn't.



Why'd they pass the law? To placate terrified white americans who think that a gun makes them safer from the scary dark people that roam our streets in packs. It's like after the NIU and VT shootings - if people were allowed to carry a gun, they'd have shot the guy. THEY WERE ALWAYS ALLOWED. Just cause sign said no never meant someone would carry (see the shooters THEMSELVES. Funny how the criminals don't pay attention to stupid laws)! They didn't carry because they WERE IN FREAKING COLLEGE. Who is afraid of getting shot in Economics 101? No one! And if that's the fear we're starting to have to deal with - shootouts in class, shootouts on a train, shootouts in the mall - then EVERYONE is going to start carrying, whether a sign tells us we can or not.
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 21, 2008#27

migueltejada wrote:
Then why pass a law allowing it?


And that is the $64,000 question.



Really, there's no way to tell if someone has a gun, knife, hand grenade - whatever on their person unless they walk through a metal detector or you frisk them. Conceal carry permits, laws, buildings - whatever - are a joke. Seriously - they're a total 100% joke. It's totally unenforceable unless every building sets up metal detectors or has security guards wanding people like they do in Israel.



If you really feel you need an Uzi to defend yourself, are you going to give it up just cause some sign says no? It says no CONCEALED weapons. How the hell would they know? They wouldn't.



Why'd they pass the law? To placate terrified white americans who think that a gun makes them safer from the scary dark people that roam our streets in packs. It's like after the NIU and VT shootings - if people were allowed to carry a gun, they'd have shot the guy. THEY WERE ALWAYS ALLOWED. Just cause sign said no never meant someone would carry (see the shooters THEMSELVES. Funny how the criminals don't pay attention to stupid laws)! They didn't carry because they WERE IN FREAKING COLLEGE. Who is afraid of getting shot in Economics 101? No one! And if that's the fear we're starting to have to deal with - shootouts in class, shootouts on a train, shootouts in the mall - then EVERYONE is going to start carrying, whether a sign tells us we can or not.


Actually conceal carry permits are not a joke. It allows LAW-ABIDING citizens to carry guns. That's what we want, right? I was under that impression, but apparently I am wrong.



By the way, where are the mods when someone makes five posts in a row? Making the same argument over and over and misrepresenting what others said... Do they just come out when I say something remotely inappropriate?
1,510
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,510

PostFeb 21, 2008#28

I was responding as I read through. To different points.



And what did I misrepresent?
6,660
AdministratorAdministrator
6,660

PostFeb 22, 2008#29

drunkrusski wrote:Do they just come out when I say something remotely inappropriate?


Huh?
12
New MemberNew Member
12

PostFeb 22, 2008#30

it seems like those of you who carry concealed weapons think it's alright for you to break the law and ignore bans on weapons and that the law doesn't apply to you, how does this make you any different from other people who break the law
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostFeb 22, 2008#31

why are Hoosiers always so judgmental? :P
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 22, 2008#32

Hoosier wrote:it seems like those of you who carry concealed weapons think it's alright for you to break the law and ignore bans on weapons and that the law doesn't apply to you, how does this make you any different from other people who break the law


A) I don't carry.



B) I don't know ANYONE that carries who takes it where law prohibits.



C) Why is it OK to be calling people names and hoosiers and these posts are not getting erased when I did not call anyone anything and mine did in an eaerlier threat, admin?
12
New MemberNew Member
12

PostFeb 22, 2008#33

then my comment was clearly not directed at you and I am puzzled by your defensiveness, my comment was directed at people like migueltejada who implied that bans on weapons should just be ignored if you can get around it
6,660
AdministratorAdministrator
6,660

PostFeb 22, 2008#34

drunkrusski wrote:C) Why is it OK to be calling people names and hoosiers and these posts are not getting erased when I did not call anyone anything and mine did in an eaerlier threat, admin?


Am I missing something? Seriously.
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 22, 2008#35

Hoosier wrote:then my comment was clearly not directed at you and I am puzzled by your defensiveness, my comment was directed at people like migueltejada who implied that bans on weapons should just be ignored if you can get around it


Migueltejada does not say anything horrible and whoever you call a hoosier shows that your arguments are limited to insults on character...
12
New MemberNew Member
12

PostFeb 22, 2008#36

I am just as confused as you Matt. I can't figure out what he is talking about either.
6,660
AdministratorAdministrator
6,660

PostFeb 22, 2008#37

Moorlander wrote:why are Hoosiers always so judgmental? :P


That is the only hoosier calling I have seen on this thread. I think you missed something if that is what you were referring to.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostFeb 22, 2008#38

his name is "Hoosier," get over it
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 22, 2008#39

Moorlander wrote:his name is "Hoosier," get over it


Didn't realize that till now. Did I miss something with someone making five posts in a row? Or is that "normal" as well?
923
Super MemberSuper Member
923

PostFeb 22, 2008#40

Hoosier wrote:it seems like those of you who carry concealed weapons think it's alright for you to break the law and ignore bans on weapons and that the law doesn't apply to you, how does this make you any different from other people who break the law


Isn't it ok? Is it not the right of the citizen to break an unjust law? From a totally conservative perspective, CC laws prohibit people from being able to protect themselves (at least that's the perception) at all times. Remember the story of the woman who saw her parent get shot in a restaurant because she left her gun in her car cause the place said no CC guns. She said afterwards she'd never listen to it again. If it'd been me, I know I'd be ignoring it.



There's no harm or potential harm in breaking a law that 1. can't be enforced pro-actively and 2. does no harm when broken. A law abiding citizen who carries when he shouldn't isn't hurting anyone, unless they pull out the gun and shoots.



It makes us different (and keep in mind I don't own a gun or like guns) because breaking that law doesn't hurt anyone in any way and makes us safer. Name me one other illegal act that actually makes people SAFER - potentially?
12
New MemberNew Member
12

PostFeb 23, 2008#41

I don't think carrying around a gun makes you safer. I think it just creates the illusion of safety. But, now we have gotten away from the original discussion of safety on Metrolink to a discussion of gun rights, which is not the reason for this forum. Therefore, I will no longer post any comments about this.
399
Full MemberFull Member
399

PostFeb 23, 2008#42


Remember the story of the woman who saw her parent get shot in a restaurant because she left her gun in her car cause the place said no CC guns.


Very Important Correction.....



You are not preaking the law by carrying a concealed weapon into a place that posts signs noting that concealed weapons are not allowed per missouri law.



Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a** concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises.


It comes down to individual rights.



The woman in the story would not have broken the law by simply carrying her concealed weapon into the restaurant. She would have only risked being asked to leave if the gun were somehow discovered.



Not allowing concealed guns on the link or bus is not a law, its a policy.



[/quote]
542
Senior MemberSenior Member
542

PostFeb 23, 2008#43

One thing I've found is that the minute anyone says "gun" on the internet, the whole convo devolves into a gun control debate within 3 posts. Similarly, you can't talk about summer weather without an impromptu global warming discussion breaking out.



re: Metro, can anyone remember which thread has the stats where boardings at each Metro stop are listed?
399
Full MemberFull Member
399

PostFeb 23, 2008#44

I think the one titled metro ridership with new Cross County Line. Not 100% sure.



One thing I've found is that the minute anyone says "gun" on the internet, the whole convo devolves into a gun control debate within 3 posts. Similarly, you can't talk about summer weather without an impromptu global warming discussion breaking out.


How about some more buzz topics?



Abortion...



Stem Cells...



Religious Fanaticism...



Welfare...



Feel free to discuss.
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostFeb 23, 2008#45

throatybeard wrote:re: Metro, can anyone remember which thread has the stats where boardings at each Metro stop are listed?
Yes.
6,660
AdministratorAdministrator
6,660

PostFeb 23, 2008#46

drunkrusski wrote:
Moorlander wrote:his name is "Hoosier," get over it


Didn't realize that till now. Did I miss something with someone making five posts in a row? Or is that "normal" as well?


We'll take care of that on our own time. This isn't a job, it's done on our free time. If you have an issue with that, you can take it up with one of the mods privately.



Now let's get back on topic of Metro security, not gun control or anything else.
2,074
Life MemberLife Member
2,074

PostFeb 27, 2008#47

How about today, when a passenger started beating the sh** out of another guy who was doing nothing but minding his own business. The guy was on the ground getting kicked between Big Bend and Forsyth. The operator didn't answer the emergency intercom calls (at least 2). He was alerted to the problem in person and told to get the police to the next station (Forsyth) and stop the train. He did absolutely nothing. Passengers finally got the guy off the innocent bystander dude...and between Forsyth and Shrewsbury, the operator did nothing to help. He stayed on schedule, and the police or security never showed up the entire time. The perpetrator had gotten off and was yelling that he'd shoot anyone who called the police...nobody followed him, including myself.





Outrageous.
1,510
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,510

PostFeb 27, 2008#48

If you had a gun on you and showed it to him, I bet he would have stopped.
2,074
Life MemberLife Member
2,074

PostFeb 27, 2008#49

to the driver?

That may have opened another can of worms, but yea.
80
New MemberNew Member
80

PostFeb 28, 2008#50

That's outrageous! I would highly recommend making the folks at metro aware of this incident. The train operator clearly wasn't doing his job. If people think they can get away with crap like this they are bound to do it again, and train operators need to be taking responsibility to deal with the situation. I hope that the pressure for operators to keep their train on schedule is not deterring them from properly managing situations like this.
Read more posts (1086 remaining)
Share