Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > Texas > Austin > The Sandbox - Austin
The Sandbox - Austin The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 645
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 398
Jon Bon 385
Harley Diablo 373
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 263
sharkman29 251
George Spelvin 247
Top Posters
DallasRain70407
biomed160524
Yssup Rider59914
gman4452927
LexusLover51038
WTF48267
offshoredrilling47522
pyramider46370
bambino40312
CryptKicker37079
Mokoa36486
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
The_Waco_Kid35341
Mojojo33117

Thread Closed
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-02-2015, 05:48 AM   #61
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Dante, very boring posts, especially the first one. I'll say it again -- it simply does NOT matter one iota how you interpret the 2nd Amendment or how I interpret the 2nd Amendment. What matters is how the individual states interpret the 2nd Amendment and enact gun control laws and, when challenged, how the court system, and ultimately the Supreme Court decided on their constitutionality, Sometimes gun control laws are over-turned and sometimes they are upheld. Personally, I think the court systems, for the most part, have done their job well.

Regarding James Holmes choice of a movie theater in which to do his killing. First off, I consider John Lott to be an idiot. With that said, there were exactly 2 movie theaters closer to Holmes' home than the Cinemark. One was a theater that showed movies in Spanish. The second was a dinner theater. It has been proven that the Cinemark was a theater that Holmes had visited a number of times so he would have been very familiar with the layout.

There was an interesting discussion a while back on the "The Political Forum" on the sign issue. I went to the Lakeline Mall looking for a sign and there was one at the main entrance stating that handguns asking patrons not to carry them. Sign was not official by Texas law. Sign did not say you could not carry a handgun, simply asked that you don't. So is the Lakeline Mall a gun-free zone? Not in my opinion. When I brought this up to the other forum, our resident gun law expert said a sign can never legally ban handguns from an establishment, I first told him he was wrong in that a sign can ban handguns in the state of Texas. I then asked him if a sign can't ban handguns, was the Cinemark in Colorado REALLY a gun-free zone? No response.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-02-2015, 05:42 PM   #62
Mike Vronsky
Valued Poster
 
Mike Vronsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 7, 2011
Location: Calling out the Bullshit!
Posts: 1,921
Encounters: 44
Default

The second amendment is clear. It is already settled and that is why Chicago and DC laws are getting overturned. States are NOT allowed to deny anyone their 2nd amendment right.

Regarding James Holmes I suggest you do better research. You used the closer theaters as to why he didn't go there. You apparently missed the other information I posted. I will post it again so you don't have to go back an read it.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing “The Dark Knight Rises” on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn’t the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

“There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the “home of Colorado’s largest auditorium,” according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.”


Below are the signs required to prevent a CHL from entering the premises making everyone a target.

30.03.jpg

51.jpg


Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
Dante, very boring posts, especially the first one. I'll say it again -- it simply does NOT matter one iota how you interpret the 2nd Amendment or how I interpret the 2nd Amendment. What matters is how the individual states interpret the 2nd Amendment and enact gun control laws and, when challenged, how the court system, and ultimately the Supreme Court decided on their constitutionality, Sometimes gun control laws are over-turned and sometimes they are upheld. Personally, I think the court systems, for the most part, have done their job well.

Regarding James Holmes choice of a movie theater in which to do his killing. First off, I consider John Lott to be an idiot. With that said, there were exactly 2 movie theaters closer to Holmes' home than the Cinemark. One was a theater that showed movies in Spanish. The second was a dinner theater. It has been proven that the Cinemark was a theater that Holmes had visited a number of times so he would have been very familiar with the layout.

There was an interesting discussion a while back on the "The Political Forum" on the sign issue. I went to the Lakeline Mall looking for a sign and there was one at the main entrance stating that handguns asking patrons not to carry them. Sign was not official by Texas law. Sign did not say you could not carry a handgun, simply asked that you don't. So is the Lakeline Mall a gun-free zone? Not in my opinion. When I brought this up to the other forum, our resident gun law expert said a sign can never legally ban handguns from an establishment, I first told him he was wrong in that a sign can ban handguns in the state of Texas. I then asked him if a sign can't ban handguns, was the Cinemark in Colorado REALLY a gun-free zone? No response.
Mike Vronsky is offline  
Old 06-02-2015, 07:51 PM   #63
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dante0322 View Post
The second amendment is clear. It is already settled and that is why Chicago and DC laws are getting overturned. States are NOT allowed to deny anyone their 2nd amendment right.

Regarding James Holmes I suggest you do better research. You used the closer theaters as to why he didn't go there. You apparently missed the other information I posted. I will post it again so you don't have to go back an read it.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing “The Dark Knight Rises” on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn’t the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

“There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the “home of Colorado’s largest auditorium,” according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.”


Below are the signs required to prevent a CHL from entering the premises making everyone a target.

Attachment 422472

Attachment 422473
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Do YOUR research. I never said that there were less than 7 movie theaters showing the Batman movie on that particular night. I never said that the Cinemark Theater was the closest theater to Holmes' home. I did say that the Cinemark theater was the 3rd closest to Holmes' home and in the opinion of many the most logical theater in which for Holmes to kill the most people and it was the theater that Holmes was most familiar with.

As stated in the following website:

"The Cinemark Century would have been “his” theater. You know what I mean. We all have one. The local theater megacomplex where you see most of your movies.
If you lived where Holmes lived in Aurora (A), that’s where you’d go to see a major motion movie. Not a Spanish theater. Not a dinner theater. A major movie cineplex."

Source: http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/04/aurora...e-zone-theory/.

Regarding the 2nd Amendment. I have no idea what you are referring to when you say " States are NOT allowed to deny anyone their 2nd amendment right."

The right to do what??? In the state of Texas you can't carry a concealed handgun without a CHL. You can't carry specific weapons. You can't carry a weapon into places that ban them. The list goes on and on as to laws that have been enacted that limit gun rights. Live with it. The only thing that was decided in Chicago v. McDonald and District of Columbia v. Heller is that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of an individual to to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

The Supreme Court, in D.C. v. Heller also issued this statement:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-02-2015, 07:52 PM   #64
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Oh, and BTW, the signs you posted, of which I am very aware, are only valid in the state of Texas. Requirements in Colorado are much less strict.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-03-2015, 10:23 AM   #65
pussycat
Valued Poster
 
pussycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 31, 2011
Location: Memorial area Houston
Posts: 2,067
Encounters: 39
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GneissGuy View Post
Uhhh... Crockett was an undercover cop playing a drug dealer, neither of who was likely to open carry.



Uhh... "Only" detectives?????

I don't think detectives are exactly just desk job paper pushers. They do go to dangerous locations and deal with dangerous people. I suspect they may go to active crime scenes in some police departments.

I wonder if any police detectives were on the scene before the Waco biker shootout started?

To use your example, Sonny Crocket was a detective. He needed his gun a few times.
You're just wrong. Detectives show up at crime scenes after the crime is over LOL. Unless they're Sonny Crockett undercover they don't confront people on the street like uniformed patrol officers do which would create situations in which deadly force might be needed. If a Detective wants to carry I understand Maybe there might be that rare situation like any citizen encounters. But they shouldn't carry openly in their belt, a belt which carries no other tools like tazers or handcuffs or anything else. Detectives don't even carry handcuffs LOL. But they always want to have the gun on their side so they can show off. And my point is that in the dayz of Wyatt Earp lawmen didn't carry openly because they were real men and not pussy ass showoff wimps like today's cowardly LE "officers."

Real men don't carry openly.
pussycat is offline  
Old 06-03-2015, 05:27 PM   #66
Mike Vronsky
Valued Poster
 
Mike Vronsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 7, 2011
Location: Calling out the Bullshit!
Posts: 1,921
Encounters: 44
Default

Your contradicting yourself!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
So is the Lakeline Mall a gun-free zone? Not in my opinion. When I brought this up to the other forum, our resident gun law expert said a sign can never legally ban handguns from an establishment, I first told him he was wrong in that a sign can ban handguns in the state of Texas.

It has to be one of the above signs that I posted.

I then asked him if a sign can't ban handguns, was the Cinemark in Colorado REALLY a gun-free zone? No response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
Oh, and BTW, the signs you posted, of which I am very aware, are only valid in the state of Texas. Requirements in Colorado are much less strict.
Mike Vronsky is offline  
Old 06-03-2015, 05:49 PM   #67
Mike Vronsky
Valued Poster
 
Mike Vronsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 7, 2011
Location: Calling out the Bullshit!
Posts: 1,921
Encounters: 44
Default

Amendment II
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.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...ranscript.html

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/h...cond-amendment

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Do YOUR research. I never said that there were less than 7 movie theaters showing the Batman movie on that particular night. I never said that the Cinemark Theater was the closest theater to Holmes' home. I did say that the Cinemark theater was the 3rd closest to Holmes' home and in the opinion of many the most logical theater in which for Holmes to kill the most people and it was the theater that Holmes was most familiar with.

As stated in the following website:

"The Cinemark Century would have been “his” theater. You know what I mean. We all have one. The local theater megacomplex where you see most of your movies.
If you lived where Holmes lived in Aurora (A), that’s where you’d go to see a major motion movie. Not a Spanish theater. Not a dinner theater. A major movie cineplex."

The above is an opinion not based on FACT!

Source: http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/04/aurora...e-zone-theory/.

Regarding the 2nd Amendment. I have no idea what you are referring to when you say " States are NOT allowed to deny anyone their 2nd amendment right."

The right to do what??? In the state of Texas you can't carry a concealed handgun without a CHL. You can't carry specific weapons. You can't carry a weapon into places that ban them. The list goes on and on as to laws that have been enacted that limit gun rights. Live with it. The only thing that was decided in Chicago v. McDonald and District of Columbia v. Heller is that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of an individual to to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

The Supreme Court, in D.C. v. Heller also issued this statement:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
Why did James Holmes pick the Cinemark's Century 16 Theatre in Aurora, Colorado, to commit mass murder on July 20, 2012? You might think that he chose the closest theater to his apartment. Or, that he chose the one with the largest audience. Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead the Cinemark theater seems to have been chosen because it was the only one that banned guns. Out of all the movie theaters showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the one theater within convenient driving distance where guns were banned.

In Colorado, individuals with permits are allowed to carry concealed handguns in the vast majority of malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But just as they can deny service to those without shoes or shirts, private businesses can impose their own rules and disallow gun carrying in their establishments.1

Most movie theaters have no problem allowing permit holders with guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the one that had a sign posted at the theater’s entrance at that time. A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing "The Dark Knight Rises" on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris Street, Aurora, Colorado. At four miles and an eight minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn't the closest.2 Another theater, Aurora Plaza 8 Cinemas/Cinema Latino de Aurora, was only 1.2 miles (three minutes) away.3

There was also the Harkins Northfield 18, which was just slightly further away 5.1 miles (10 minutes). It billed itself as the "home of Colorado's largest auditorium," according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters, Aurora Movie Tavern, The Movie Tavern at Seven Hills, Landmark Theatre Greenwood Village, and UA Colorado Center Stadium 9 and IMAX, were 10 miles (18 minutes), 10 miles (19 minutes), 13 miles (19 minutes), and 9.7 miles (20 minutes) away.4

So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans permitted concealed handguns? The answer should be obvious, disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks.

Concealed carry is much more frequent than many people believe. With over four percent of the adult population in Colorado having concealed handgun permits, a couple hundred adults in Cinemark’s Movie Theater #9 means that there is an extremely high probability that at least one adult would carry a gun. Unfortunately, some have still not figured this out. A manager at the Harkins Northfield 18, located five miles from the killer’s apartment, confirmed the theater changed its policy and started banning concealed handguns following the Cinemark attack.5

The recent Colorado and Sikh Temple shootings are by no means the first times that killers targeted gun-free zones.6 We have witnessed mass public shootings in such places as the Westroads Mall in Salt Lake City, Utah.7 In both cases, guns were banned at those particular malls, while almost all the other similar malls that allowed guns were spared. With just one single exception, the attack in Tucson last year, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S., in which more than three people have been killed, has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.

The movie theater attack raised a lot of comparisons with the 1999 Columbine massacre of 13 people. But few appreciate that Dylan Klebold, one of the two Columbine killers, strongly opposed Colorado legislation then being considered to allow concealed handguns.8 The law then being considered would have allowed concealed handguns to be carried on school property. Presumably, he feared being stopped during his planned attack by someone with a weapon. In fact, the Columbine attack occurred the very day that final passage was scheduled.9

All the mass public shootings in Europe have occurred where guns were banned. Remember last year’s shooting near Oslo, Norway, with 69 dead and 110 injured. And Germany has experienced two of the three worst K-12 public school shootings.10 Even Switzerland, a country with extremely liberal concealed carry laws, has faced a couple large public mass shootings. But, just like the 2001 massacre of 14 members of the Zug cantonal parliament, they have occurred in the rare places where guns have been banned.

If one of the hundreds of adults at the theater had a concealed handgun, possibly the attack would have ended like the shooting at the mega New Life Church in Colorado Springs in December 2007. In that assault, the church’s minister had given Jeanne Assam permission to carry her concealed handgun. The gunman killed two people in the parking lot — but when he entered the church, Assam fired 10 shots, severely wounding him. At that point, the gunman committed suicide.

Similar stories are available from across the country. They include shootings at schools that were stopped before police arrived in such places as Pearl, Miss., and Edinboro, Pa., and at colleges like the Appalachian Law School in Virginia.11 Or attacks in busy downtowns such as Memphis; at a mall in Salt Lake City, or at an apartment building in Oklahoma.12

The ban against non-police carrying guns usually rests on the false notion that almost anyone can suddenly go crazy and start misusing their weapon or that any crossfire with a killer would be worse than the crime itself. But in state after state, permit holders are extremely law-abiding. They can lose their permits for any type of firearms-related violation at hundredths or thousandths of one percent.13 Nor have I found a single example on record of a multiple-victim public shooting in which a permit holder accidentally shot a bystander.

When attacks occur at colleges or other places, the response is often to hire more law enforcement. But as Israel has learned the hard way, simply putting armed police and military on the streets didn't stop terrorist attacks. Even if you have openly armed police or military on a bus, the terrorist has the option to either wait for them to leave the scene or to kill them first. With CCW, the attacker doesn't know who is able to defend themselves, and he doesn't know whom to attack first.

Bill Landes and I have examined all the multiple-victim public shootings with two or more victims in the United States from 1977 to 1997.14 We found that when states passed right-to-carry laws, these attacks fell by an astounding 67 percent. Deaths and injuries from multiple-victim public shootings fell on average by 78 percent. And to the extent that these attacks still occur in states with right-to-carry laws, they overwhelming occur in those few places where concealed handguns are not allowed.

Similar results were also obtained using data collected by the New York Times from 1977 to 1999. The results implied that the number of attacks declined by 71% and the murders and injuries from what they called “rampage killings” dropped by 94%.15

Some other recent research is relevant. Bouffard, et al., provide survey evidence for Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas that if permits were allowed on campus at least 30% of classes will have at least one student in class with a permit and who is carrying a gun.16 No estimate is provided about the probability that a permit holder will be carrying a gun in a building. However, these estimates might be low for most states because Texas, with a permit fee of $140, a ten hour training requirement, and a 21 year old age limit, is one of the more difficult states to obtain a permit.17

Gun-free zones are a magnet for those who want to kill many people quickly. Even the most ardent gun control advocates would never put “Gun- Free Zone” signs on their home. It is about time that researchers start question why we so readily put up these signs in so many other places.

Notes

1 From the Colorado law: “18-12-214 Authority granted by permit - carrying restrictions. Nothing in this part 2 shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.”

2 The Century Cinemark Theater was located at 14300 East Alameda Avenue, Aurora, CO 80012.

3 As of August 14th Movies.com listed the theater as Aurora Plaza 8 Cinemas. Its address is 777 Peoria St., Aurora, CO 80011. The films at this theater are shown in English, though there are Spanish subtitles.

4 Aurora Movie Tavern 18605 East Hampden Avenue, Aurora, CO 80013-3533. The Movie Tavern at Seven Hills is at 18305 E. Hampden Ave., Aurora, CO 80013. Landmark Theatre Greenwood Village, 5415 Landmark Place, Greenwood Village, CO 80111. UA Colorado Center Stadium 9 and IMAX, 2000 S. Colorado Blvd., Denver, CO 80222.

5 The manager, Erin Griffie, indicated that the policy had been changed since the Cinemark attack. I talked to her on August 14, 2012, at 720-374-3118.

6 The media almost never reports whether these attacks are occurring in gun-free zones. One exception is for the Sikh Temple attack in Wisconsin. Maxim Lott, “Temple Massacre Has Some Sikhs Mulling Gun Ownership,” Fox News, August 21, 2012.

7 John R. Lott, Jr., “Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall’s Gun-Free Zone Status,” Fox News, December 6, 2007.

8 For example, even the New York Times notes that prior to the Columbine attack, “[Dylan Klebold and his father] had just spent five days visiting the Arizona campus where the teenager planned to enroll in the fall, and recently discussed their shared opposition to a bill in the state legislature that would have made it easier to carry concealed weapons.” Pam Belluck and Jodi Wilgoren, “Shattered Lives—a Special Report: Caring Parents, No Answers, in Columbine Killers’ Pasts,” New York Times, June 29, 1999, p. A1.

9 Doug Dean, the Majority Leader of the Colorado State House in 1999, invited me to address members of the state legislature the morning of the Columbine attack since the vote was scheduled that afternoon.

10 Zug, Switzerland, Sept. 27, 2001: A man whose lawsuits had been denied, murdered 14 members of a cantonal parliament. Erfurt, Germany, April 26, 2002: A former student killed 18 at a secondary school. Emsdetten, Germany, Nov. 20, 2006: A former student murdered eleven people at a high school.

11 For a discussion of several public school shootings that have been stopped by armed civilians see John R. Lott, Jr., The Bias Against Guns (Regnery Publishing: Washington, DC), 2003. For the Appalachian Law School note this discussion in The Washington Post: “Odighizuwa was subdued without incident by armed students.” Josh White, "Law School Shooter Pleads Guilty; Former Student Avoids Death Penalty in Deal on Va. Slayings," The Washington Post, February 28, 2004, p. B03.

12 John R. Lott, Jr., "Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall's Gun-Free-Zone Status," Fox News, December 6, 2007.

13 John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, 2010, third edition).

14 Using negative binomials, the results are statistically significant for two or more killings or injuries, three or more killings or injuries, as well as three or more killings. Because of the relatively few observations and all the fixed geographic and year fixed effects, the results are not statistically significant for four or more killings (Lott and Landes, 2003, p. 301, fn. 20). These cases are sufficiently rare that one cannot expect to find anything from such a small sample. Research by Grant Duwe, Tomislav Kovandzic, and Carlisle Moody do not find statistically significant results, but, unfortunately, they restrict their sample to attacks where four or more people were killed. They also do not separate out gang shootings from other types of attacks where the goal of the attack is simply to create as much carnage as possible. John R. Lott, Jr. and William M. Landes, “Acts of Terror with Guns: Multiple Victim Public Shootings,” Chapter 6 in The Bias Against Guns (Regnery Publishing: Washington, DC), 2003. John R. Lott, Jr. and William M. Landes, “Multiple Victim Public Shootings,” University of Chicago Law School Working Paper, October 19, 2000 (http://ssrn.com/abstract=272929). Grant Duwe, Tomislav Kovandzic, and Carlisle Moody, “The Impact of Right-to-Carry Concealed Firearm Laws on Mass Public Shootings," Homicide Studies, November 2002, pp. 271-296.

15 Estimates looking at those cases that were covered in the first section of The New York Times saw an 81% drop. John R. Lott, Jr. and William M. Landes, “Acts of Terror with Guns: Multiple Victim Public Shootings,” Chapter 6 in The Bias Against Guns (Regnery Publishing: Washington, DC), 2003.

16 Jeffrey A. Bouffard, Matt R. Nobles, William Wells, and Michael R. Cavanaugh, "How Many More Guns?: Estimating the Effect of Allowing Licensed Concealed Handguns on a College Campus," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, August 2011, pp. 316-343.

17 John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, 2010, third edition), pp. 256-258.
Mike Vronsky is offline  
Old 06-03-2015, 08:06 PM   #68
Ebony Jasmine Love Austin
Account Disabled
 
User ID: 5430
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,933
My ECCIE Reviews
Default

SRXXX and Dante are the type of hobbyists who are seriously better off considering switching the H for an L...

I mean you'd have plenty more money to spend on hookers.

I'm just sayin.
Ebony Jasmine Love Austin is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 05:45 AM   #69
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dante0322 View Post
Your contradicting yourself!
No contradiction at all. The signs you posted are in fact valid in the state of Texas for banning handguns. The other person said a sign can't ban handguns. I disagreed and cited the same signs you did.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 05:57 AM   #70
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dante0322 View Post
Amendment II
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.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...ranscript.html

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/h...cond-amendment

"The Cinemark Century would have been “his” theater. You know what I mean. We all have one. The local theater megacomplex where you see most of your movies.
If you lived where Holmes lived in Aurora (A), that’s where you’d go to see a major motion movie. Not a Spanish theater. Not a dinner theater. A major movie cineplex."

The above is an opinion not based on FACT!

What I posted is just as much facts as the long-ass response that you posted. Unless Holmes tells us whether or not he chose the movie theater he did to commit his killings, we can only speculate on why he did so.

I can't prove that the text in red is true and you can't prove that Holmes chose the Cineplex theater he did because it was the closest gun free theater. Pure speculation on both our parts. Just don't tell us that your scenario is correct because there is no proof that it is.


And you simply don't get it. I'll state it one more time and MAYBE this time it will sink in.

It simply does NOT matter one iota how you interpret the 2nd Amendment or how I interpret the 2nd Amendment. What matters is how the individual states interpret the 2nd Amendment and enact gun control laws and, when challenged, how the court system, and ultimately the Supreme Court decide on their constitutionality, Sometimes gun control laws are over-turned and sometimes they are upheld.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 11:12 AM   #71
pussycat
Valued Poster
 
pussycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 31, 2011
Location: Memorial area Houston
Posts: 2,067
Encounters: 39
Default

I don't care what the 2nd Amendment says. Everybody has the right to defend themselves and to choose whatever weapon they want. Everyone has the right to have a weapon with them at all times as long as it doesn't offend or threaten anyone else. In the past LE officers used to always carry concealed because of this simple principle. They never carried openly where it would offend anyone. But as LE became more aggressive and the public slowly conceded more authority to them they started brandishing weapons openly for no reason other then to intimidate others. For normal citizens to now follow their example is terrible.
pussycat is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 12:27 PM   #72
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,062
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pussycat View Post
I don't care what the 2nd Amendment says. Everybody has the right to defend themselves and to choose whatever weapon they want. Everyone has the right to have a weapon with them at all times as long as it doesn't offend or threaten anyone else.
Very nice OPINIONS. You do not have the right to choose whatever weapon you might want. No M-16. No AK-47. No hand grenades. Even without those weapons available to you, I'm sure you have enough firepower available to you to defend yourself effectively in any situation. In the state of Texas, the right to defend yourself with a handgun on the streets requires a CHL.

If you choose to break the law, that is certainly your right. But the rights you stated simply do not exist in Texas.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 05:39 PM   #73
The Allnighter
Premium Access
 
The Allnighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 24, 2015
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 259
Encounters: 35
Default I'd like to pose a semi-hypothetical...

...for the "open carry" advocates in the viewing audience.

It's Monday morning. You are at Austin-Bergstrom International airport, standing in line at the American Airlines ticket counter, waiting to purchase the tickets for your family's summer vacation trip to Walt Disney World. Your wife and three young children are standing next to you. The airport is very crowded.

You happen to turn around and notice that the last individual joining the ticket line has an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle strapped across his chest. The weapon in question has a 100-round drum-style magazine.

The gentleman in question is 50-ish, not apparently middle-eastern in appearance and wearing neither a keffiyeh (a middle-eastern headdress) nor an "I LOVE ISIS" tee-shirt.

What do you do?

A) Turn your attention back to the ticket agents, 'cause Mickey Mouse ain't getting any younger

B) Leave your wife to hold your place in line and step over to congratulate the gentleman in question on this gutsy public display of his 2nd amendment rights

C) Step to the counter and ask one of the ticket agents to get the nearest policeman or TSA air marshal over here...STAT!

D) Send your wife and kids over to the security line and tell them to get to the furthest gate they can find...fast

E) Something else (Fill in the Blank: ________________________)



I'm calling this a "semi-hypothetical" because I moved this scenario to Austin. It actually happened yesterday (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7505422.html) at Atlanta's Hartsfield International airport (the busiest airport in the world). In case you were wondering:
  1. The AR-15 in question was a working semi-automatic and the drum magazine was loaded to capacity with 100 live rounds
  2. The individual in question (a 50-year Georgian named Jim Cooley) felt he was exercising his second amendment rights. "If you don't exercise your rights," he said, "the government doesn't have any hesitation to take them away. People's fears are not my responsibility."
  3. Amazingly, as of this writing, he has not been charged with violating any state or federal law...although I am sure that task forces at both the FAA and DOJ are endeavoring to fix that

"Open Carry" advocates, I am honestly interested in your responses. Please have the courage to respond to the scenario as presented -- don't pontificate in the abstract about your constitutional right to bear arms, or the differences in "open carry" regulation of rifles vs sidearms.

Tell me:
  • How you would feel, standing there with your wife and children next to you
  • What you would do in this situation, if anything


P.S. In the interest of full disclosure, I am not an "open carry" advocate and I believe that your right to keep and bear arms should be subject to some rational limitations. Preventing the above scenario should be one of them.

To set the tone of this discussion, I'll let you know my answers to my little survey:
  • This scenario completely creeps me out, and I would not want my wife and children exposed to it. Right to bear arms aside, this individual is clearly at least 26 cards short of a full deck. I am flabbergasted that there are no laws or regulations to protect my family from this.
  • What would I do? After sending my wife and children to the security line double-time, I would voluntarily relinquish my place in line to the individuals behind me until I was standing next to this joker. I would then watch him without blinking, fully prepared to pummel him to the ground the second he laid a hand on his constitutionally-protected firearm. I'm pretty sure I could beat the assault rap -- you know, "stand your ground" and all that shit.
The Allnighter is offline  
Old 06-04-2015, 09:33 PM   #74
Ebony Jasmine Love Austin
Account Disabled
 
User ID: 5430
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 2,933
My ECCIE Reviews
Default

As I stated I'm not an advocate of open carry either but I will answer anyway.

I think it's quite vulgar to be in public in such a way.
Yes we should exercise our rights but most chose to do so tactfully and tastefully so not to offend or invoke discomfort to the general public.

We have the right to stand on a busy street corner and shout out the writings from any religious manual, in Austin I have the right to walk around with my breasts out if I wanted but what's the point?

I would feel so uncomfortable and way more offended by the scenario in question more so than the 2 I presented.
Ebony Jasmine Love Austin is offline  
Old 06-05-2015, 08:42 AM   #75
Luvdatpuddy
Valued Poster
 
Luvdatpuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 27, 2012
Location: Austin
Posts: 148
Encounters: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Allnighter View Post
...

You happen to turn around and notice that the last individual joining the ticket line has an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle strapped across his chest. The weapon in question has a 100-round drum-style magazine.

The gentleman in question is 50-ish, not apparently middle-eastern in appearance and wearing neither a keffiyeh (a middle-eastern headdress) nor an "I LOVE ISIS" tee-shirt.

What do you do?

Tell me:
  • How you would feel, standing there with your wife and children next to you
  • What you would do in this situation, if anything


P.S. In the interest of full disclosure, I am not an "open carry" advocate and I believe that your right to keep and bear arms should be subject to some rational limitations. Preventing the above scenario should be one of them.
Well, I'll go ahead an answer, at least for myself...and this may be the reason why I'm something of an open-carry advocate - it wouldn't bother me. If the rifle in question is slung across his back, or being carried in a non-threatening manner, then I'd turn back to the ticket agent and go about my business?

This is pretty consistent with my life philosophy, though - I'm one of those that wants the Patriot Act fully repealed (the Freedom Act was a good step in that direction, but not enough for me) as well. Why? Because I don't subscribe to the notion that we should live in fear. Someone, somewhere, right now is doing something bad to someone else, yes - that's the way the world works. But until there is evidence that the bad things are going to happen in my area, I choose to trust in my fellow man. Doesn't mean I'll be stupid about it - like go to Afganistan or Iraq with a "U.S.A." t-shirt on. But I generally trust my fellow Americans.

Now, if he was waving it around or taking a bead on my wife or daughter, I'm going to shove them behind the ticket counter and try to figure out if there's something I can effectively do about the situation - because at that point, I think I'm safe in assuming ill-intent.

How would I explain this to my kid? Depends on her age when this happens. It is either going to be a "I'll explain when you're older", or a quick civics lesson.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebony Jasmine Love Austin View Post
We have the right to stand on a busy street corner and shout out the writings from any religious manual, in Austin I have the right to walk around with my breasts out if I wanted but what's the point?
You know, I really wish more women DID walk around with their breasts out - anything the remotest bit sexual is so taboo in this country, we need to have it in our faces (please put it in our faces) so that we stop acting like a bunch of puritans and learn to go along to get along. That one is even easier to explain (in my mind) than the AR-15. What's tough to explain is why she doesn't see it on network TV (freakin' censors).

As for the religious manual - well, I fully support your right to stand on a street corner and pontificate, but you need to support my right to walk right on by without stopping.
Luvdatpuddy is offline  
Thread Closed



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved