"Han" wrote in message
...
"Attila.Iskander" wrote in news:jkvv8i$vf7$1
@dont-email.me:
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:24:05 -0400, "
wrote:
I don't think you understand. It would be insane to allow people
with
weapons entrance into the VA hospital in Manhattan.
Because you say so? You keep repeating the same nonsense, but have
nothing to
back it up.
I'm not going to do the research, but VA hospital do have a higher
concentration of crazies as compared to regular hospitals. Probably
because of the concentration of combat people that have been injured,
mentally and physically from a few tours in a war zone.
One would hope that the "crazies" are segregated
But again that is NOT a reason to disarm everyone.
Over the years, I have known quite a few Vets that had a beef with the
VA because of some shoddy treatment (real or perceived). A couple of
them I'd not trust with a firearm anyplace, let alone where they think
they were mistreated.
Oh, look, here is a VA hospital shooting
http://www.nbc12.com/story/16989990/...enter-shooting
What is this? Another VA hospital shooting?
http://www.nbc12.com/story/16989990/...enter-shooting
Even those nice people in North Carolina shoot up VA hospitals
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/122484/
So OBVIOUSLY banning guns is REALLY, REALLY EFFECTIVE..
You might want to think on this a bit more.
I would prefer that firearms would be carried only by professionals, but
you don't agree.
NOT when I compare the performance of the so-called "professionals" to the
"amateurs"
Let's see
The "Amateurs" aka law-abiding citizens manage to shoot more than double the
number of criminals as the so-called "professionals"
And yet at the same time, the so-called "professionals" manage to shoot
nearly 6 times as many innocent bystanders as the "amateurs'...
That's a REALLY, REALLY good argument, according to you, to rely on
so-called "professionals"...
Fine. It won't make me feel safer if I knew that any
or every Jill or Gerry in New York City would be carrying heat. But so
be it, hypothetically.
Too bad that you don't bother to get DATA to make such decisions and instead
you base them of "feelings' or whatever.
I prefer to look at the DATA and then make my decisions
A more rational approach by ANY standard
But in my opinion, inside (VA) hospitals, with their often frenetic pace,
and the influx at times of delusional people, there shouldn't be ordinary
citizens carrying weapons.
WHY NOT ?
The so-called ordinary citizens are NO THREAT TO ANYONE.
And that has been CLEARLY demonstrated by that data that comes out of States
like Texas and Florida, that required the State to provide statistical data
on the people who obtained carry permits.
In Florida, they found that the law-abiding permit holders are even more
law-abiding than the police
In Texas, they found that the law-abiding permit holders have 15% of the
number of contacts with the police than the rest of the population
Apparently you are unable or unwilling to distinguish between the "sick and
delusional" and the criminal from the law-abiding.
That tells us a lot more about you than anything else.
Note that not all crazies are locked up inside wards.
Some just come to get their medications, or other
treatment, or to visit their buddies. Why take the risk of aone or more
crazies doing the wrong thing?
So what ?
If they are legally considered "crazies" they are barred ANYWAY from owning
or possessing a gun
Tell us how well such a ban has worked ?
But disarming the Sane and the law-abiding has NO EFFECT on disarming your
crazies...
Frankly, I consider it stupid, crazy or insane enough to believe that
disarming the law-abiding will somehow magically have an effect on the
"crazies", the "insane" and the "criminal".
So in a way, I'm glad that you choose to be disarmed.
You self-qualified yourself into it.
Well done.
Now leave the rest of us alone, instead of trying to impose your stupid,
crazy if not insane views on us.