Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Action put off on guns-in-parks issue [View all]liberal_biker
(192 posts)40. Precisely the opposite
I'm well aware of where technology lies. Bear in mind, without some human involvement, all those scanners do is monitor - nothing more. They cannot stop a person who has committed the crime.
Safety isn't guaranteed on airplanes at all. You just think it is because the TSA has lied to you and said no bad people got on.
Whatever my reasons are for carrying, as long as I cause you no harm, why do you care?
See, that's the part I really cannot understand. I'm not harming you. You don't even see my gun. You just don't like the idea that I might have one and want it to be illegal. Why?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
95 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It looks like the idea to to make sure honest citizens do no have firearms in a park...
spin
Jan 2012
#2
I find it offensive that you put individual gun carrying above public safety.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2012
#31
My desire is to live in a world where nobody carries handguns in public.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2012
#57
Nice one. With distortions like that, I assume you don't belief in karma.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2012
#56
If it saves lives, we can hire every other person to be a cop and follow the other people around..
X_Digger
Jan 2012
#16
I think you're far too optimistic about this technology, and too cavalier about the BoR
petronius
Jan 2012
#30
"No, but [criminals] should." They will be blinded by the glare of your logic...
SteveW
Jan 2012
#88
If it's not firearms it'll just be something else. So really, a better solution would
petronius
Jan 2012
#92
And how is that surveillance going to stop someone from taking a gun into a park?
rl6214
Jan 2012
#80
So you support a surveillance state? Patriot Act didn't go far enough for you? nt
hack89
Jan 2012
#43
Which means that in public places citizens are been surveilled by the government
hack89
Jan 2012
#65
Yesterday's SCOTUS decision must have caused your authoritarian streak to squeak, eh?
X_Digger
Jan 2012
#74
"secure in their persons" - ring a bell? -- fuck that anti-4th amendment noise.
X_Digger
Jan 2012
#81
If you can not see the difference between a camera (and I oppose those, by the way)....
PavePusher
Jan 2012
#93
How many crimes do you think get committed in those parks now? Not many and certainly not enough
Hoyt
Jan 2012
#44
Oh, God, the "we can't afford it" arguement . . . . . .so often used by right wing obstructionists.
Hoyt
Jan 2012
#45