Arizona House Votes To Repeal Gun-Free School Zones
Source: Huffington Post
The Republican-controlled Arizona House of Representatives has voted to repeal the state's gun-free school zone laws, setting up a potential battle that only Gov. Jan Brewer (R) may be able to stop.
The House on Tuesday night passed a bill to end the prohibition of guns within 1,000 feet of schools. The measure would allow anyone licensed to carry a concealed weapon to have a gun within the buffer. The bill passed with only Republican support, with all the House Democrats and several Republicans dissenting. It still needs passage in the Republican-controlled Senate and Brewer's signature to become law.
Proponents said that the law would make it easier for parents who carry guns keep them in their car to drive children to school or attend meetings. The gun couldn't be brought into the school building.
"It makes a difference if I park next to a property or 1,000 feet away," said state Rep. Jack Harper (R-Maricopa County) in an interview with HuffPost.
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/arizona-house-gun-free-school-zones_n_1327811.html
These days the Right fights harder to get guns into schools, than prayer into schools.
They only worship their phallic fetish.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DrDan
(20,411 posts)"phallic fetish" is exactly right
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Not a peep out of these bozos about school funding.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)nanabugg
(2,198 posts)caarry guns is not a "right." But people gleefully ignore their own rules of established grammer just to be able to have gun and think they will be able to shoot those "others."
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)sikorsky
(96 posts)
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Your "rules of established grammer" aren't what you thought they were? 
Justice wanted
(2,657 posts)
What is the Goal of the GOP with all these gun laws repeal? Do they want more violence? Do they want to say Police-You know the socialist system of protection-is not needed? ARE they working with the for profit prison systems to get MORE people into the jails?
This just blows my mind.
Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)Nothing could possibly go wrong with this.
sikorsky
(96 posts)
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)That Arizona wants every kid to be packing.. If you want an education, try sitting in the middle of a gun fight in a class room... 
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)
BuddhaGirl
(3,608 posts)ugh!!!
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)everyone armed = no crime. And no one would ever be "sitting in the middle of a gun fight". Everyone will be participating!
The place is run by Jan Brewer and Sheriff Joe. You expect it to be civilized?
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)But not the contents.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)All those AZ parents that have had guns graphed to their bodies can go pick up there kids at school! What a relief.
AllyCat
(16,205 posts)Sending kids to school should not be a risk to life and limb any more than they already get hurt on the playground. Not to mention the bullying and intimidation. My boycott of going anywhere in AZ continues I guess.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Most obviously, anyone who can legally own a handgun in Arizona and who is over 21 years old can carry it concealed in public without any kind of license.
I must ask those who are worried about this whether or not they believe that the existing prohibition could possibly have prevented anyone who really wanted to bring a gun onto a school campus for some nefarious reason from doing so.
I think all it did was inconvenience honest people who want to obey the law.
lastlib
(23,259 posts)One more crime a violator can be charged with, one more tool to put him away.
Until we can get rid of the guns altogether, it's a step.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Yup.
lastlib
(23,259 posts)"Thou Shalt Not Kill."
(did it hurt when they peeled your foreskin off?)
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)Well thank god the murder rate was zero before there were guns around! hmmm...or was it...
We can abolish them and have a peaceful paradise like our gun free neighbors Mexico & Jamaica, who both have "abolished" guns....lol
deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)I mean that NEVER works, look at Japan and South Korea, England, Scotland, and so many more. Al lthese countries are just shooting each others brains out despite being "gun free" har har har! hmmm... or are they...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Wow, there's a looooooooot of countries under us on that list. But I'm sure they're all doing it wrong, we're on the right track. More guns will probably make us MORE safe!
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)....shows that all the top countries have outlawed personal firearms like Mexico and Jamaica so they must be murder free!
deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)Clearly the countries at the top are doing it wrong, whatever they're doing. Gun crime is clearly too high in the top few and they should figure it out like us! If only all those people getting shot ALSO had guns they could shoot the other people BACK and pretty soon there'd be no one to shoot. More guns = more safe! It's simple math... attrition maybe, but math.
Better that we ignore everyone else on the list and focus on the two that you THINK make your point, regardless of how many more make mine.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Obviously, with no guns, those countries must have no murders, right?
deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 9, 2012, 02:22 PM - Edit history (1)
let's go with that! 
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)Poe's law. Some people make such insane claims that can hardly tell what to take seriously.
......(I end up talking to Humblebum a lot.... if that's any indication)
saras
(6,670 posts)I suppose if you have a really good sniper rifle, 1000 yards is close enough. But you can't concealed carry a sniper rifle.
Of course, this assumes that the police actually ENFORCE the law.
krispos42
(49,445 posts)
Not that any of this matters, really. If somebody is going to launch a sniper attack on a school, an unmarked, arbitrary line certainly isn't going to stop them. Of course, neither will laws against murder, or bringing a gun into a school building, or discharging a firearm within city limits.
Generally speaking people that can get a concealed carry permit are far more law-abiding than the politicians that make the laws. Now, Arizona is a bit different; you don't need a permit to carry concealed there any more, so that does not apply.
But the proposed law would retain the prohibition on carrying guns into the school building itself, from what the article says. If you carry concealed, you'd have to leave the gun in your car before entering the building. But if you're walking or driving or biking past a school and you get pulled over, you won't become a victim of the prison-industrial complex.
Remmah2
(3,291 posts)Hint: Every rifle from a .22 LR rim-fire on up has the ability to propel a projectile well over 1760 yards (5280 feet).
So what exactly is a "sniper rifle"?
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Arizonans do not need a gun to go to the school.
Gun totin' policy would not increase public safety.
*or fucked premises
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)tools to learn....
Oh, gotta love the term "prohibitionist" used by gun nuts against folks who want common sense... pretty slick, yeah man.
MattPavo
(1 post)I sit here amazed at the ignorance I have seen in some of your responses. To begin, the government does NOT have the authority to regulate property that it does not own, which includes anywhere outside of school property in this case. What Arizona is considering is nothing new. Here in my state of Tennessee, parents with a handgun carry permit are allowed to keep their gun, yes loaded, in their car while they drop their kids off. No violence or mania as suggested, but such is always the case: there's always a bunch of talk when a "radical" gun bill is introduced that "kids will be in danger and how can those damn right wingers be so stupid", then the bill passes and nothing exciting happens. After that, nobody seems to talk about it anymore, then when another bill is introduced the chatter starts again. It has happened here MANY times. For example, in 2009 when handgun carry permit holders were allowed to carry guns into state parks and many local parks, there were loads of mayors, park rangers and police chiefs who predicted violence and all sorts of fanciful things that never happened. Tennessee parks are just as safe and family friendly as ever, and I wouldn't see why anyone would expect them to be any different, the states that legalized carry in parks before us didn't experience any such mayhem either. But I do know why this pattern occurs, people like to have opinions on subjects and most often they form them without any research into the matter at all. They just come up with things like, "guns and education just don't mix", but I really don't see how a gun in a glove box on the street 500 or 1000 feet away interupts anyone's education. If someone unauthorized carries a gun into a classroom or school building, it's still as illegal as ever, but anti-gunners will make it sound like the bill will make it legal for just anyone to bring their firearm onto school property, WHICH IS NOT TRUE. Only those with a permit can bring their gun within 1000 feeet or to the parking lot, which is a far cry from some pedophile being allowed to walk into a classroom with a gun. Just because you can voice your opinion doesn't mean you should. When ignorant people go vote on things they know nothing about, then we start to lose our rights and gain nothing as a result, so shame on to all of you that try to restrict my second amendment right while knowing nothing on the topic whatsoever.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)"When ignorant people go vote on things they know nothing about, then we start to lose our rights and gain nothing as a result, so shame on to all of you that try to restrict my second amendment right while knowing nothing on the topic whatsoever. "
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Smilo
(1,944 posts)know and understand we live in 2012 and not 1812.
The shame is on so many, ill-educated, small penis endowed men wanting to prove their manhood and swagger around town with a gun strapped to their thigh.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)Who come here to post a wall o text full of half-truths demonstrating you know little about us here.
Stick around and learn while you work on notions like paragraphs, capitalization of sentences and many liberals also own firearms. But the reality is that a rant like that makes me wonder how long you will last.
In general we are pretty fond of all the amendments here.
we have many groups on this site and you might find this one interesting if you're concerned about the 2nd amendment - http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172
Remmah2
(3,291 posts)nt
Ian David
(69,059 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Afterall if no one is shooting their guns in state parks there is no need to bring them in...
In Minnesota, the GOP tried to expand a "Castle" law to make it easier to shoot someone if you felt threatened not just in your house, but in your car, boat, tent, etc. What sane person would make it easier to murder another person? Why all these laws to faciltate shooting people?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I stopped when I read that part, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Paladin
(28,268 posts)Honestly, there's a thread down in Gun Control/RKBA right now, with an attached artcicle favorably equating guns with civilization.
Hey, you can't make up shit like this.....
onehandle
(51,122 posts)As far as I know, it doesn't exist.
I like DU3.
Smilo
(1,944 posts)........ when will they secede from the Union?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I am thinking I was being too kind
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)
drynberg
(1,648 posts)you watch for Mr. Gun Toting Citizen to come into the school for a meeting or whatever, then open his car (easy) take the gun and have some "Gun Fun", oh yeah, these Arizona GOPers are so smart...until somebody or somebodies are found...then plead denials of responsibility and finger pointing at the shooter as the guy to get. Meanwhile the bodies ain't breathing any more and it's a sad day...
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)MURDER, would stop your scenario how?
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)that shows that the 1000 foot law made a difference in the number of shootings?
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)I would expect
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)And the repeal is upsetting some of them. Some are tossing around the usual catchprases like "Republicans", "uncivilized", "want guns in schools",
et cetera. Which leads to a question of my own for those perturbed DUers:
In your own words, can you explain why "gun-unfriendly" Chicago has a murder rate twice that of "uncivilized" Phoenix?
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)The law only affects the people who are least likely to pay attention to it. It's feel-good window dressing.
RussBLib
(9,027 posts)The Republicans won't allow guns inside schools?!?! Why, that's un-American!! The pussies!!! Kids need to be able to defend themselves!!
sakabatou
(42,165 posts)Ian David
(69,059 posts).... either holstered or in the glove box.
I don't think licensed carriers should go to jail because one day they forgot to take the gun out of the car before dropping their kid off at school.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)And seriously if schools become free-fire zones like most of AZ, there will be lots of prayers needed
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Joe McCarthy might well have triumphed in the 50's. And if these crazies think McCarthy, Roy Cohn, Walter Winchell and their political offspring would let them have arsenals on their persons, their stupider than I think. The gunsters' motto: Everything I need to know about US history I can learn from the NRA and Hate Radio
sikorsky
(96 posts)respect 'bans'. Could you be the first?
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Gun bans are not based on the concept that no gun can ever get past the perimeter of the ban, but on the premise that fewer guns equal fewer deaths by guns. People can and do get killed daily, by firearms, by accident. It is inargueable that there will be less death and injury by firearms in a given space if there are fewer firearms within that space. The concept that a space will be safer if more people were allowed to bring weapons into that space is fantasy.
I expect you will want to tell me about how safe you are personally with your own weapons, you are most likely right. Truth be told, that space is probably safer with an armed you in it. But you are not even close to representing the entire population. There are a lot of idiots out there and every single one of them work against your side of the discussion.
If you feel the need to attack me personally, you should know that I own and shoot several firearms, including a handgun. However, I have never felt the need to have one of them on my person or in my vehicle while going to a school. I acknowledge that I don't represent the entire population either, but I do believe for every instance where a crime could have been successfully prevented by a law abidding person carrying a weapon, there are multiple deaths and injuries caused accidently by firearms.
sikorsky
(96 posts)"support"..which is just wrong. But your nice little soliloquy didn't answer my query, in fact it didn't even address it at all. I would never ever in a million years think to attack you personally, why would you even contemplate such an awful thing? You began your treatise by proposing a utopia of sorts which contains no guns and 2 short paragraphs later express your own expertise and ownership of firearms. So the issue seems to come down to the fact that you (who has guns but poses no threat to regular folks) and me (who has guns but according to you poses no threat either) think nobody else ought to have the right. I think I get it.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Guns Bans are not created to do that, as no onr believes that a magic curtain can be raised which would turn back the weapons of people intent on doing harm. Asking for an explaination on how that would work is just a specious as assuming that no one has ever been killed accidently by a firearm. Notice that I asked you if you supported that notion, I didn't state that you did.
I proposed no utopia, merely explained that bans are enacted to reduce the number of weapons in an area, as that undeniably will reduce the number of deaths and injuries by firearms in those areas. More weapons = more deaths (remember those idiots) The thought that I envision any sort of uptopia, is merely an assumption that you know what I am thinking. There's some irony there somewhere...
I believe that people should have rights to own weapons. they are tools that have their uses in their proper arenas. I own a chainsaw, but have never felt the need to bring that to a school or into a church either. I use that out in the woods, the same place where I use my firearms. I do not understand the need that some have to be constantly armed. Maybe I'm just overly optimistic (my friends would be laughing their asses off at that) or just live in a very safe area, but I feel no need to be armed in public.
If people were consistent enough to never make a mistake, never have an off day, we could all walk around armed to the gills and make the people bent on evil tremble in their shoes. But none of us are perfect. There are times and places for firearms, schools don't enter that picture.
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)weapons for "protection" doesnt work either imo as there was still murder, robbery and rape in the west back in the 19th century when people carrying guns was more common than today.
sikorsky
(96 posts)Also your statistics are very wrong...the old movie genre of the "wild west" is still mostly fiction. In the 1800s a tiny percentage of Americans carried guns, even if you include the combatants in the Civil War in the 50s.
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Maybe you could explain how have 120 armed students would have made the Northern Illinois U massacre (suicidal nut firing away in a lecture hall) better?
Kurska
(5,739 posts)Yeah, it doesn't work and it only keeps people from practicing their constitutional rights.
Dr_Scholl
(212 posts)A lot of kids in rural areas would go hunting before school, then stick their gun in the trunk and go to class. My dad said people would keep pistols in the coat room at his high school (he's 63). I have no problem with people who are licensed to carry concealed carrying on school property.
Besides, an ordinance that basically amounts to misdameanor trespassing isn't going to stop mass murder anyway.
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)If it did then there should have been almost no cases of murder or robbery in the west back in the 19th century.
The fact is with or without weapons people will commit crimes like murder and carrying a weapon either concealed or out in the open provides a false sense of security.
Dr_Scholl
(212 posts)Most of what people believe about the Wild West is nothing more than a myth perpetuated by Hollywood.
[url]http://www.unpopulartruth.com/2009/04/myths-of-old-west.html[/url]
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)carry a gun or not?
Odin2005
(53,521 posts) DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)And I agree, this is crazy.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)It's a sign of a character defect to want to carry a gun everywhere you go, fantasizing about one's chance to "waste a perp" or whatever phrase is popular with knuckledraggers these days.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)
I'll let you do the math.
underpants
(182,851 posts)and that is hard to do
minavasht
(413 posts)How a "No Guns" sign at the front door will stop a potential killer.
Is there a special magic that is embedded in sign, or is it the pentagram under the sign? Does it turn the bad guy into ashes, or just renders all firearms inoperable?
Get real, people, it means zero in the eyes of somebody determined to hurt and kill. Even more, it means that nobody else will be able to return fire when it happens.
Sure, carrying will not prevent somebody to start shooting. It will be a much faster way to stop him than calling 911 and waiting for the cops to arrive thou.
It may work, it may not - but it gives you a chance. And that is all that matters.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but all the recent school shootings happened in gun-free zones. How did that work out for the dead kids? Anybody wants to go and tell their parents- yeah, sorry for your loss, but it is such a good thing that nobody could have shot the killer and stopped him, right? Don't you feel warm and fuzzy knowing this? Again, my condolences.
Remmah2
(3,291 posts)Well up yours then cowboy.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)the AZ baggers to get some. Afterall the shooting of Gabriel Giffords has left the box. Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc get mentioned only on anniversaries and for academic purposes/studies. They apparently want their share.
