Here is a new poll regarding schools and CHL's. Please vote. It's on the right side of the mail page.
Chas.
http://www.click2houston.com/index.html
New Poll
Moderator: carlson1
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17788
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
-
jbirds1210
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3368
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:36 pm
- Location: Texas City, Texas
Looks like a rigged poll to me. I voted shortly after Charles put the poll up, and it was 3892 to 5201 at that time. Now it's 3827 to 5201.spud wrote:Yes 3827 42%
No 5201 58%
I dont understand how people complain about things they dont want to change. Where is the logic behind voting no? I guess they think that a teacher will go postal on the school? Some how I doubt that.
Sheep... cant live with um.. cant kill um...
So how do you vote a negative number of times?
I'll tell ya', its exactly this type of shenanigans that make me oppose electronic voting systems without a paper ballot. It becomes all about who gets the hack in last & who controls the systems instead of how the votes are actually cast.
I just voted and we're still behind. I just can't figure out the no voters. How on earth can they feel threatened by having a CHL holder protecting their kids. They cannot be there to do it themselves, and most (all) of the no voters wouldn't have a clue about protecting anyone including themselves. Anyone with a lick of common since would know that our schools are now and have been targets for plenty of unsavory people.
"People cannot be effectually oppressed and enslaved, who are not FIRST DISARMED" Texas Supreme Court 1859 (Cockrum vs State)
"Son, you will die with the hammer down on that weapon." Jeff Cooper, Gunsite ranch 6/18/84
"Son, you will die with the hammer down on that weapon." Jeff Cooper, Gunsite ranch 6/18/84
For those who wonder how anyone can oppose this:
Generally the people who oppose this are
1) afraid of guns,
2) think guns can "just go off," or
3) think the kids will take the gun away from the teacher
A small percentage also think that the teacher will "just loose it" and start shooting up the kids, but I suspect that this is projection and am thankful that these people mostly don't own guns (they also use this same argument for why people shouldn't be allowed to have a concealed handgun).
Unfortunately, education will only help one of these groups. The other 2 can be addressed, but it's usually a very long and drawn out process that involves some desensitizing and reconditioning. So long as the media keeps using the tactics they have been employing and campaigns like the Brady's keep spewing their baloney, we'll have a long way to go.
We may have the legislators' support right now, but we don't have the media, and a huge portion of the people in this country are buying whatever the media is selling (no surprise there... the media has refined the technique over the last 75 years or so). We will have to win the support of the corporate controlled media for general gun ownership before we can possibly win the fight against the anti-gunners. THEY are the ones most afraid of us, and THEY are the ones I sincerely believe are behind the anti-gun movement.
Don't believe me? Look at a map. Where are most media companies located. Now compare that to where the most restrictive gun laws exist. It's surprising how well the two maps align. I realize that there are some oddities (like Wisconsin - a state that get's a significant part of it's revenue from HUNTING!
) but for the most part, they are almost the same map.
Generally the people who oppose this are
1) afraid of guns,
2) think guns can "just go off," or
3) think the kids will take the gun away from the teacher
A small percentage also think that the teacher will "just loose it" and start shooting up the kids, but I suspect that this is projection and am thankful that these people mostly don't own guns (they also use this same argument for why people shouldn't be allowed to have a concealed handgun).
Unfortunately, education will only help one of these groups. The other 2 can be addressed, but it's usually a very long and drawn out process that involves some desensitizing and reconditioning. So long as the media keeps using the tactics they have been employing and campaigns like the Brady's keep spewing their baloney, we'll have a long way to go.
We may have the legislators' support right now, but we don't have the media, and a huge portion of the people in this country are buying whatever the media is selling (no surprise there... the media has refined the technique over the last 75 years or so). We will have to win the support of the corporate controlled media for general gun ownership before we can possibly win the fight against the anti-gunners. THEY are the ones most afraid of us, and THEY are the ones I sincerely believe are behind the anti-gun movement.
Don't believe me? Look at a map. Where are most media companies located. Now compare that to where the most restrictive gun laws exist. It's surprising how well the two maps align. I realize that there are some oddities (like Wisconsin - a state that get's a significant part of it's revenue from HUNTING!
) but for the most part, they are almost the same map.This article may be what prompted the poll:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15142930/
(Funny that you should mention Wisconsin, Mithras61.)
They have a poll at the MSNBC URL, also, which seems even more skewed against us. I voted yes in both.
Mr Pochowski's statement about "freedom" at the very end of the MSNBC article seems very ironic since he is arguing against giving teachers permission (let alone the freedom) to carry tools for defending themselves and their pupils. I am not sure if he realizes his words can be turned around to mean that allowing folks to carry potentially dangerous/deadly weapons for self defense and defense of others is necessary to protect freedom and human life from those who do not respect those things.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15142930/
(Funny that you should mention Wisconsin, Mithras61.)
They have a poll at the MSNBC URL, also, which seems even more skewed against us. I voted yes in both.
Mr Pochowski's statement about "freedom" at the very end of the MSNBC article seems very ironic since he is arguing against giving teachers permission (let alone the freedom) to carry tools for defending themselves and their pupils. I am not sure if he realizes his words can be turned around to mean that allowing folks to carry potentially dangerous/deadly weapons for self defense and defense of others is necessary to protect freedom and human life from those who do not respect those things.
-
Charles L. Cotton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17788
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:31 pm
- Location: Friendswood, TX
- Contact:
Be sure to vote on this poll as well.yerasimos wrote:This article may be what prompted the poll:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15142930/
(Funny that you should mention Wisconsin, Mithras61.)
They have a poll at the MSNBC URL, also, which seems even more skewed against us. I voted yes in both.
Mr Pochowski's statement about "freedom" at the very end of the MSNBC article seems very ironic since he is arguing against giving teachers permission (let alone the freedom) to carry tools for defending themselves and their pupils. I am not sure if he realizes his words can be turned around to mean that allowing folks to carry potentially dangerous/deadly weapons for self defense and defense of others is necessary to protect freedom and human life from those who do not respect those things.
Chas.