Only criminals are against gun-free zones

[gipper]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That’s funny. You think a crook who plans a mass murder is concerned about another felony charge, for doing it in a gun free zone.

LMFAO!!!

 

[MrShangles]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That should make the dead people in the gun free zone feel better. Good thinking , liberals are way smarter than the gun toters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pismoe]

Gun free zones are a great idea. Someone planning a mass killing knows that there will be no guns around so they have no worries of being shot at.

Once you have decided to kill one or a number of people I really doubt that adding a few extra years on to a life sentence or death by lethal injection would tend to enter into the persons thought process.

The only thing that a gun free zone does is make some people feel better. While making a better target for those that have nefarious plans because it will be a longer reaction time.

An interesting thing...................after the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, a Republican said we need to end gun free zones.

GOP state rep calls for end to gun-free zones after Florida shooting

But, in this article about the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, there was an ARMED SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, who failed to do their job and stayed outside instead of going in and confronting the gunman.

Florida school shooting: School resource deputy stayed outside - CNN

So, even in places that are designated as gun free zones, there can still be armed people authorized to be there with guns. And, like I said, if you are going to arm someone to protect the students, make sure they have the stones to do the job and not puss out like the school resource officer did.

----------------------------------- another example of a government employee thinking about his RETIREMENT BSailor . GUNFREE Zones are stupid BSailor .

 

[pismoe]

Gun free zones are a great idea. Someone planning a mass killing knows that there will be no guns around so they have no worries of being shot at.

Once you have decided to kill one or a number of people I really doubt that adding a few extra years on to a life sentence or death by lethal injection would tend to enter into the persons thought process.

The only thing that a gun free zone does is make some people feel better. While making a better target for those that have nefarious plans because it will be a longer reaction time.

An interesting thing...................after the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, a Republican said we need to end gun free zones.

GOP state rep calls for end to gun-free zones after Florida shooting

But, in this article about the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, there was an ARMED SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, who failed to do their job and stayed outside instead of going in and confronting the gunman.

Florida school shooting: School resource deputy stayed outside - CNN

So, even in places that are designated as gun free zones, there can still be armed people authorized to be there with guns. And, like I said, if you are going to arm someone to protect the students, make sure they have the stones to do the job and not puss out like the school resource officer did.

So you want gun free zones that are not gun free zones? That's kind of screwed up. It is or it isn't. Kind of like a "stay off the grass unless you walk on it" sign.

Guy was probably thinking it was a cake job. Walk around looking self important. Nothing else to do. Probably never thought about what he might have to do. Not everyone is cut out to be a hero or even have a little guts.

--------------------------------------------------- as i said , School Cop or government employee was thinking of his government retirement and he was on schedule to retire Max Death . Also agree that school cop probably thought it was a Cake Job where he could be seen as Important Max .

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Schools are "gun-free zones." How's that working out?

Again....................because they are called "gun free zones", anyone caught with an unauthorized gun, or caught committing a crime in them has extra charges tacked on to their shooting charges. That law allows the courts to tack on even more time for crimes committed in places like schools.

Granted, it's not much solace if the gunman kills themselves, but if they are taken alive, they get an extra 5 to 10 years on top of their original charges.

Meanwhile law abiding firearms carrying people can not carry there so can not respond when a random shooting occurs. As was shown in parkland the gunman reloaded at least 5 times because no one as able to stop him.

The notion that the myth of ‘gun free zones’ facilitate gun crime and mass shootings fails as a confusion of correlation and causation fallacy.

 

[justinacolmena]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Hey, schools can make exceptions for the school officers, as well as school officials that they have. Only thing is, when the schools get an officer who is supposed to stop gunmen in the school, they need to make sure they get one that is capable of doing the job and not running off and hiding like that one officer did.

To own a firearm is a right, not an exception.

Biker gangsters and cops and the ladies on the streets and the tennis-shoe moms. Quite a bunch of lovers there. Guns are banned for everyone else of course.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

Of course, that depends on what constitutes a ‘gun free zone.’

Police stations and court houses prohibit the general public from carrying firearms as a matter of law, but neither are ‘gun free’ as there’s ample armed security otherwise.

That a private property owner might designate his shopping venue or other public accommodation a ‘gun free zone’ has no force of law. Citizens authorized to do so remain at liberty to carry concealed firearms regardless.

And if a private property owner should discover one of his patrons is carrying a concealed firearm, his only recourse is to ask the armed patron to leave the property.

I any event, the property owner won’t know one of his patrons is carrying a concealed firearm because the firearm is concealed – hence the myth of ‘gun free zones.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Gun free zones are a great idea. Someone planning a mass killing knows that there will be no guns around so they have no worries of being shot at.

Once you have decided to kill one or a number of people I really doubt that adding a few extra years on to a life sentence or death by lethal injection would tend to enter into the persons thought process.

The only thing that a gun free zone does is make some people feel better. While making a better target for those that have nefarious plans because it will be a longer reaction time.

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

There is no evidence whatsoever that a criminal planning to commit an act of gun violence ‘seeks out’ a venue designated as ‘gun free’ to commit his crime because he’ll realize no armed opposition.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That’s funny. You think a crook who plans a mass murder is concerned about another felony charge, for doing it in a gun free zone.

LMFAO!!!

No, what’s funny and idiotic is the moronic notion that a criminal spends the time ‘researching’ a venue to determine if it’s ‘gun free’ before committing his crime.

 

[pismoe]

some info on School Cop and his 'government retirement' pension Clayton . -------------------------- --- Scot Peterson, disgraced Parkland school cop, starts getting $8,702-a-month pension ---

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That’s funny. You think a crook who plans a mass murder is concerned about another felony charge, for doing it in a gun free zone.

LMFAO!!!

No, what’s funny and idiotic is the moronic notion that a criminal spends the time ‘researching’ a venue to determine if it’s ‘gun free’ before committing his crime.

Given the fact that most of these mass murderers do happen in gun-free zones, are you trying to say it was coincidence?

 

[12icer]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That’s funny. You think a crook who plans a mass murder is concerned about another felony charge, for doing it in a gun free zone.

LMFAO!!!

No, what’s funny and idiotic is the moronic notion that a criminal spends the time ‘researching’ a venue to determine if it’s ‘gun free’ before committing his crime.

It’s funny that you think they don’t, that means they are smarter than you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That a private property owner might designate his shopping venue or other public accommodation a ‘gun free zone’ has no force of law. Citizens authorized to do so remain at liberty to carry concealed firearms regardless.

And if a private property owner should discover one of his patrons is carrying a concealed firearm, his only recourse is to ask the armed patron to leave the property.

As a CCW holder in the state of Ohio, carrying in a gun-free zone by the decision of the property owner is against the law. In fact, even the property owner is not legally allowed to carry a gun on his or her own property.

It may be different in other states, but our program was modeled after most of the other states.

 

[12icer]

That a private property owner might designate his shopping venue or other public accommodation a ‘gun free zone’ has no force of law. Citizens authorized to do so remain at liberty to carry concealed firearms regardless.

And if a private property owner should discover one of his patrons is carrying a concealed firearm, his only recourse is to ask the armed patron to leave the property.

As a CCW holder in the state of Ohio, carrying in a gun-free zone by the decision of the property owner is against the law. In fact, even the property owner is not legally allowed to carry a gun on his or her own property.

It may be different in other states, but our program was modeled after most of the other states.

Yes in most of the states I go to it is the same, it means even a cop can’t come onto the property armed without the owners permission unless he is the subject of a warrant. So remember when you go boys and girls you are a sitting duck in a gun free zone.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Gun free zones are a great idea. Someone planning a mass killing knows that there will be no guns around so they have no worries of being shot at.

Once you have decided to kill one or a number of people I really doubt that adding a few extra years on to a life sentence or death by lethal injection would tend to enter into the persons thought process.

The only thing that a gun free zone does is make some people feel better. While making a better target for those that have nefarious plans because it will be a longer reaction time.

An interesting thing...................after the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, a Republican said we need to end gun free zones.

GOP state rep calls for end to gun-free zones after Florida shooting

But, in this article about the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school shooting, there was an ARMED SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER, who failed to do their job and stayed outside instead of going in and confronting the gunman.

Florida school shooting: School resource deputy stayed outside - CNN

So, even in places that are designated as gun free zones, there can still be armed people authorized to be there with guns. And, like I said, if you are going to arm someone to protect the students, make sure they have the stones to do the job and not puss out like the school resource officer did.

I would say officer Coward was the exception and not the rule. They probably put a guy at his age on that duty because they didn't expect any action; most schools don't.

You see that quite often in police forces. They let the younger guys take care of the dangerous physically challenging duties. The older ones they use for guard duty or sitting behind a desk.

This officer stopped a school shooter before anyone got hurt - CNN

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That a private property owner might designate his shopping venue or other public accommodation a ‘gun free zone’ has no force of law. Citizens authorized to do so remain at liberty to carry concealed firearms regardless.

And if a private property owner should discover one of his patrons is carrying a concealed firearm, his only recourse is to ask the armed patron to leave the property.

As a CCW holder in the state of Ohio, carrying in a gun-free zone by the decision of the property owner is against the law. In fact, even the property owner is not legally allowed to carry a gun on his or her own property.

It may be different in other states, but our program was modeled after most of the other states.

Yes in most of the states I go to it is the same, it means even a cop can’t come onto the property armed without the owners permission unless he is the subject of a warrant. So remember when you go boys and girls you are a sitting duck in a gun free zone.

Cops are allowed in, otherwise they would not be legally allowed to enter an establishment in the line of duty. We were taught in class that violating that law would likely mean the suspension or total revocation of our license.

When the program first started, over half of the businesses had NO GUN signs posted. As time went on, more and more began to take them down; some because of boycott, and others just didn't want the possible liability or realized having armed customers is not all that bad of a thing.

So when I read stories of these mass shootings in gun-free zones, I'm assuming it's like my state where such zones are rare and you'd really have to seek one out.

 

[BrokeLoser]

You know, the term "gun free zones" has been misused by the gun lovers. They will try to convince you that it means that because it is a gun free zone, that means criminals will go there more often to kill, because there aren't supposed to be guns there.

Only problem is, that is kind of a misnomer. Gun free zones means that if you are caught with a gun, or committing a crime with a gun in those places, they tack on another felony. Before they had the gun free zone law, a person who committed a shooting in a place like a school would be charged only with the shooting and the other charges that go with it.

But because of the gun free zone law, there is another felony tacked on top of all the other charges.

I like the idea of gun free zones, because if a person commits a crime in them with a gun, they can go away for an extra 5 to 10 years.

That all looks good on paper...BUT in the real world us sane folks know that DaShawn and Gustavo aren’t accountable, they never consider consequences. Like all gun laws, “gun free zones” keep the guns out of the hands of the good guys.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Gun free zones are a great idea. Someone planning a mass killing knows that there will be no guns around so they have no worries of being shot at.

Once you have decided to kill one or a number of people I really doubt that adding a few extra years on to a life sentence or death by lethal injection would tend to enter into the persons thought process.

The only thing that a gun free zone does is make some people feel better. While making a better target for those that have nefarious plans because it will be a longer reaction time.

Half these kooks end up killing themselves because they could never survive prison and they know it. So they fear anybody armed who could hurt them but not kill them. After they get out of the hospital, they would be jailed, charged and sent to prison. So they make sure they are the only one with a gun because when somebody does arrive with a gun, they kill themselves long before the other person with a gun can get to them.

 

[blackhawk]

What exactly is a gun free zone supposed to accomplish? The law abiding responsible gun owner is not going to take a gun in one and a person set on carrying out a mass shooting or any other gun crime in one won't give a dam if it's a gun free zone.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Schools are "gun-free zones." How's that working out?

Again....................because they are called "gun free zones", anyone caught with an unauthorized gun, or caught committing a crime in them has extra charges tacked on to their shooting charges. That law allows the courts to tack on even more time for crimes committed in places like schools.

Granted, it's not much solace if the gunman kills themselves, but if they are taken alive, they get an extra 5 to 10 years on top of their original charges.

If any school shooter is taken alive, he's already going to get life in prison or execution. Most states already have laws that automatically add more prison time for any crime committed with a gun. This is more liberal feel-good nonsense.

If just two or three of the Parkland teachers had been armed, many lives might have been saved.

Think about it: Which school will a killer choose as his target: a school where he knows that some of the teachers are armed or a school where he knows that none of the teachers are armed?

Again..................the schools can make exceptions for school officials or officers assigned to protect the school. And, if all schools put out that they had armed personnel (even if they didn't), it might make all shooters think twice about going there.

Besides.................if a school does arm their teachers, they generally don't make that public knowledge, nor do they advertise which ones are armed.

Correct, they would have no idea which teachers were armed which makes their uncertainty even greater. But any news organization would do a story on allowing armed teachers in their community.