Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Some corporations DO have armed guards.
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
No, I don't have to go AFTER anyone. This is a FREE country. If you want to be armed, you should have that right. If you do not, then you don't have to.
Ah you aren't very serious about this then. Or you only go after places that don't fund the Republicans.
I don't go "after" anyone. I've got no idea what you are talking about.
It is a right to carry or to have your business be armed, or to run a business and be armed yourself if you so choose. It is a CHOICE, get it yet?
Shouldn't the workers have the right to be armed? I mean it is a right and there are lots of shootings at work.
Without a cartoon to depend on some people wouldn't have an opinion.
doesn't relly matter Brian , corporations are private property . USA is the 'public property' or taxpayers property and is owned by the people rather than the government .
I don't think you should go after them. But if you were really as serious about it as you pretend you would be. Way more people are disarmed at work than any other gun free zone. I don't think you guys are very serious about this. That is the BIG gun free zone.
I don't think you should be disarmed at work....depending on the job and the safety requirements of the job.....for example...the Dr. at the hospital....the hospital was a gun free zone but he broke that rule and brought a gun to his work place.....and a killer also brought a gun to that work place gun free zone...and the Doctor..who brought a gun to his work place stopped him....dittos the construction company owner who brought a gun to his workplace when the guy came back to kill people...dittos the work place owner when the muslim came back to work and cut the womans head off and the owner, who brought his gun to his work place and shot the guy....dittos the Minister who brought the gun to his work place, during a meeting and when the janitor they fired came in and tried shooting people, the minister, who brought a gun to his work place shot and stopped him....dittos the city councilman..who had a gun with him at his work place during a meeting when a disgruntled guy got into a gun fight with the police in the lobby of the building, you saw the video of this councilman who brought a gun to work draw it and protect his fellow councilmen until it was safe....
You mean like those cases of people bringing guns to their work places....?
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
No, I don't have to go AFTER anyone. This is a FREE country. If you want to be armed, you should have that right. If you do not, then you don't have to.
Ah you aren't very serious about this then. Or you only go after places that don't fund the Republicans.
I don't go "after" anyone. I've got no idea what you are talking about.
It is a right to carry or to have your business be armed, or to run a business and be armed yourself if you so choose. It is a CHOICE, get it yet?
Shouldn't the workers have the right to be armed? I mean it is a right and there are lots of shootings at work.
Yes they should...if you can't violate civil rights in other areas in a work place you shouldn't violate the right to self defense....however...you don't have a right to freedom of speech at work...so you could make an argument that you wouldn't have a right to 2nd amendment protection either.......
Regardless, people who want to kill a bunch of people are going to go to gun free zones. They are NOT going to go to a place where there are armed people because then they wouldn't be able to kill as many people. Common sense.
Places like where most people work? Most corporations don't allow employees to carry. Those are probably the biggest gun free zones in the country.
Some corporations DO have armed guards.
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
Actually, the two Fort Hood shooters targeted the areas of Fort Hood where the soldiers were unarmed.....they weren't stopped until the Military Police showed up with guns......
Are the military police not armed guards?
doesn't relly matter Brian , corporations are private property . USA is the 'public property' or taxpayers property and is owned by the people rather than the government .
I don't think you should go after them. But if you were really as serious about it as you pretend you would be. Way more people are disarmed at work than any other gun free zone. I don't think you guys are very serious about this. That is the BIG gun free zone.
I don't think you should be disarmed at work....depending on the job and the safety requirements of the job.....for example...the Dr. at the hospital....the hospital was a gun free zone but he broke that rule and brought a gun to his work place.....and a killer also brought a gun to that work place gun free zone...and the Doctor..who brought a gun to his work place stopped him....dittos the construction company owner who brought a gun to his workplace when the guy came back to kill people...dittos the work place owner when the muslim came back to work and cut the womans head off and the owner, who brought his gun to his work place and shot the guy....dittos the Minister who brought the gun to his work place, during a meeting and when the janitor they fired came in and tried shooting people, the minister, who brought a gun to his work place shot and stopped him....dittos the city councilman..who had a gun with him at his work place during a meeting when a disgruntled guy got into a gun fight with the police in the lobby of the building, you saw the video of this councilman who brought a gun to work draw it and protect his fellow councilmen until it was safe....
You mean like those cases of people bringing guns to their work places....?
I mean the workplace is the largest gun free zones in the country. Why aren't you going after corporations?
I do find it funny you mention the minister since the concealed carry armed janitor would be one used to argue against armed employees.
Places like where most people work? Most corporations don't allow employees to carry. Those are probably the biggest gun free zones in the country.
Some corporations DO have armed guards.
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
Actually, the two Fort Hood shooters targeted the areas of Fort Hood where the soldiers were unarmed.....they weren't stopped until the Military Police showed up with guns......
Are the military police not armed guards?
They weren't at the location at the time the shooting started...Fort Hood is like a small city....lots of areas where soldiers are unarmed and unprotected by police...
For example....I went to Fort Benning, home of the infantry is a land mass of 5 counties...3 in Georgia and 2 in Alabama....or vice versa....so there are lot's of places without police protection on the Fort grounds....
No, I don't have to go AFTER anyone. This is a FREE country. If you want to be armed, you should have that right. If you do not, then you don't have to.
Ah you aren't very serious about this then. Or you only go after places that don't fund the Republicans.
I don't go "after" anyone. I've got no idea what you are talking about.
It is a right to carry or to have your business be armed, or to run a business and be armed yourself if you so choose. It is a CHOICE, get it yet?
Shouldn't the workers have the right to be armed? I mean it is a right and there are lots of shootings at work.
Yes they should...if you can't violate civil rights in other areas in a work place you shouldn't violate the right to self defense....however...you don't have a right to freedom of speech at work...so you could make an argument that you wouldn't have a right to 2nd amendment protection either.......
Well obviously I think employers have the right to have no firearms. But you guys really should be going after them.
doesn't relly matter Brian , corporations are private property . USA is the 'public property' or taxpayers property and is owned by the people rather than the government .
I don't think you should go after them. But if you were really as serious about it as you pretend you would be. Way more people are disarmed at work than any other gun free zone. I don't think you guys are very serious about this. That is the BIG gun free zone.
I don't think you should be disarmed at work....depending on the job and the safety requirements of the job.....for example...the Dr. at the hospital....the hospital was a gun free zone but he broke that rule and brought a gun to his work place.....and a killer also brought a gun to that work place gun free zone...and the Doctor..who brought a gun to his work place stopped him....dittos the construction company owner who brought a gun to his workplace when the guy came back to kill people...dittos the work place owner when the muslim came back to work and cut the womans head off and the owner, who brought his gun to his work place and shot the guy....dittos the Minister who brought the gun to his work place, during a meeting and when the janitor they fired came in and tried shooting people, the minister, who brought a gun to his work place shot and stopped him....dittos the city councilman..who had a gun with him at his work place during a meeting when a disgruntled guy got into a gun fight with the police in the lobby of the building, you saw the video of this councilman who brought a gun to work draw it and protect his fellow councilmen until it was safe....
You mean like those cases of people bringing guns to their work places....?
I mean the workplace is the largest gun free zones in the country. Why aren't you going after corporations?
I do find it funny you mention the minister since the concealed carry armed janitor would be one used to argue against armed employees.
He was breaking the law at the time...he was a criminal...the minister wasn't and he was at his place of work....
Some corporations DO have armed guards.
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
Actually, the two Fort Hood shooters targeted the areas of Fort Hood where the soldiers were unarmed.....they weren't stopped until the Military Police showed up with guns......
Are the military police not armed guards?
They weren't at the location at the time the shooting started...Fort Hood is like a small city....lots of areas where soldiers are unarmed and unprotected by police...
For example....I went to Fort Benning, home of the infantry is a land mass of 5 counties...3 in Georgia and 2 in Alabama....or vice versa....so there are lot's of places without police protection on the Fort grounds....
That would be the case anywhere with armed guards.
Ah you aren't very serious about this then. Or you only go after places that don't fund the Republicans.
I don't go "after" anyone. I've got no idea what you are talking about.
It is a right to carry or to have your business be armed, or to run a business and be armed yourself if you so choose. It is a CHOICE, get it yet?
Shouldn't the workers have the right to be armed? I mean it is a right and there are lots of shootings at work.
Yes they should...if you can't violate civil rights in other areas in a work place you shouldn't violate the right to self defense....however...you don't have a right to freedom of speech at work...so you could make an argument that you wouldn't have a right to 2nd amendment protection either.......
Well obviously I think employers have the right to have no firearms. But you guys really should be going after them.
As I pointed out, the First Amendment has no guarantee at your place of work...so that would likely be the outcome at the Supreme court for the 2nd at work.......and again...that would be because it is private, not public property...
However, public buildings should be required to respect the 2nd amendment....
Military bases have armed guards. That didn't stop shooters. If you are really serious about this no gun free zone thing you need to go after the big corporations.
Actually, the two Fort Hood shooters targeted the areas of Fort Hood where the soldiers were unarmed.....they weren't stopped until the Military Police showed up with guns......
Are the military police not armed guards?
They weren't at the location at the time the shooting started...Fort Hood is like a small city....lots of areas where soldiers are unarmed and unprotected by police...
For example....I went to Fort Benning, home of the infantry is a land mass of 5 counties...3 in Georgia and 2 in Alabama....or vice versa....so there are lot's of places without police protection on the Fort grounds....
That would be the case anywhere with armed guards.
And a reason to carry at work.........even in the military....
And if gun free zones are killing zones why is there relatively few shootings at work according to ChrisL?
And if gun free zones are killing zones why is there relatively few shootings at work according to ChrisL?
Actually, there are a lot of killings at places of work...that is where most people come into conflict...and mother jones tried to show that killers do not target gun free zones because these guys do target schools where they go, and job sites where they work...
But again, since they are anti gunners, they are wrong....of the killers with no connection to their target sites, they specifically targeted places that were gun free zones...in fact, even in Canada, the guy who attacked their parliament made fun of gun free zones on his facebook page before the attack....
Actually, the two Fort Hood shooters targeted the areas of Fort Hood where the soldiers were unarmed.....they weren't stopped until the Military Police showed up with guns......
Are the military police not armed guards?
They weren't at the location at the time the shooting started...Fort Hood is like a small city....lots of areas where soldiers are unarmed and unprotected by police...
For example....I went to Fort Benning, home of the infantry is a land mass of 5 counties...3 in Georgia and 2 in Alabama....or vice versa....so there are lot's of places without police protection on the Fort grounds....
That would be the case anywhere with armed guards.
And a reason to carry at work.........even in the military....
I've never had a chance to look into it. Did the military have lots of shootings which brought about the rule? Something must have triggered it.
And if gun free zones are killing zones why is there relatively few shootings at work according to ChrisL?
Actually, there are a lot of killings at places of work...that is where most people come into conflict...and mother jones tried to show that killers do not target gun free zones because these guys do target schools where they go, and job sites where they work...
But again, since they are anti gunners, they are wrong....of the killers with no connection to their target sites, they specifically targeted places that were gun free zones...in fact, even in Canada, the guy who attacked their parliament made fun of gun free zones on his facebook page before the attack....
Well what the heck, ChrisL was wrong? Impossible.
The parliament guy was shot at and stopped rather fast.
Are the military police not armed guards?
They weren't at the location at the time the shooting started...Fort Hood is like a small city....lots of areas where soldiers are unarmed and unprotected by police...
For example....I went to Fort Benning, home of the infantry is a land mass of 5 counties...3 in Georgia and 2 in Alabama....or vice versa....so there are lot's of places without police protection on the Fort grounds....
That would be the case anywhere with armed guards.
And a reason to carry at work.........even in the military....
I've never had a chance to look into it. Did the military have lots of shootings which brought about the rule? Something must have triggered it.
I think the first Bush implemented it, and clinton reinforced it.....a mistake in both their parts......since they trust soldiers to at the age of 17 to carry military grade rifles, with 30 round magazines, full sized handguns, and fully automatic heavy machine guns and 20mm grenade launchers...and yet can't carry a pistol when they get home to protect themselves from criminals and terrorists....
And if gun free zones are killing zones why is there relatively few shootings at work according to ChrisL?
Actually, there are a lot of killings at places of work...that is where most people come into conflict...and mother jones tried to show that killers do not target gun free zones because these guys do target schools where they go, and job sites where they work...
But again, since they are anti gunners, they are wrong....of the killers with no connection to their target sites, they specifically targeted places that were gun free zones...in fact, even in Canada, the guy who attacked their parliament made fun of gun free zones on his facebook page before the attack....
Well what the heck, ChrisL was wrong? Impossible.
The parliament guy was shot at and stopped rather fast.
Because he attacked a building....with armed security...unlike our schools......that is why he was stopped so fast...too bad Sandy Hook didn't have armed people right there......right?
