Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sdgla who wrote (203538)	4/21/2007 5:06:35 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793853

"arming a large community" Again we get the extreme exaggeration of being able to legally carry a concealed weapon. I doubt the whole community is going to arm itself. I expect things would continue as they do today, where carrying a concealed weapon is lawful.. only a few decide to carry a weapon and it would only have taken one to stop this massacre. we will get the Brady folks screaming everyone will meet at "High Noon" , on campus. where as in reality everyone would be in class doing what they came to school for,to develop skills without threat of some nut coming into class and killing everyone and not having any defense. I elect to not carry a weapon however the right to carry a weapon should never be taken away. It appears laws should be tighter in some states, for back ground checks etc. but let's not take our rights away.

To: Sdgla who wrote (203538)	4/21/2007 7:38:20 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793853

I have mixed emotions about concealed weapons permits for juvenilles. Its a known fact that teenagers have much "hotter blood" then adults and often dont have the emotional skills to know when to walk away from confrontation. On the other hand, if they are of an age that they can be recruited for the military and put in "harms way" it would seem perhaps they have earned the right to be considered at least for permitting. Maybe the SOLUTION would be to add ANOTHER requirement for those under 21. How about this: Age 18, HS graduate, with at least a "C" average. This would kill a couple birds with the same stone. jdn

To: Sdgla who wrote (203538)	4/21/2007 11:12:36 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793853

Well, the greatest error being made here is that every one is assuming I am against guns and that I am trying to take away yours and everyone else's right, which isn't at all what I have said. But when you are dealing with a community-- 26000 students- it presents a very different set of possibilities than those existing in a normal population. One should never, in the aftermath of such a such a traumatic event, emotionally disregard the alternatives, and that is what seems to be happening here. All I have done is brought up the question of the wisdom of allowing on a campus of young people who statistics show are very prone to emotional rollercoasters and poor judgment to have guns. And instead of someone saying, well, yes, but perhaps we could arm teachers, or perhaps we could have far more stringent requirements for carrying on a campus, I get told I have chutzpah for bringing up anything that isn't the party line here. I grew up in Va., not far from Blacksburg and my brother got his undergraduate degree at Tech. I spent many weekends on that campus and have many friends who graduated there and some whose children are still there. So you and the chutzpah can take a hike.