Friar Bijou wrote:
Let's recall that my argument has been exclusively about the concept of eliminating the gun free zones regulations as a method of reducing the rates of spree style shootings (specifically in schools).
In this entire thread that is the only
argument you made about guns vis-a-vis spree shootings? Do you reaaaaaly want to claim that as a fact?
I'm not going to let you frame the words of my own position for me. I've been very clear about which arguments I've made for which issues of the larger gun control issue. Let's not play word games, ok?
This is a long freaking thread. I can't remember all the possible posts I've made within it. However, specifically with regard to spree style shootings at schools, I've been consistent with my argument regarding removal of the gun free zones restrictions as a means to reduce the rates at which those kinds of shootings occur.
And yeah. This means that a school shooting which is *not* a spree style shooting (like say one where a kid shows up with a gun to shoot his ex) doesn't fall under that argument. Nor does a counter like "OMG! Your suggestion wouldn't have worked here" function as a sufficient counter to my argument.
I'm honestly not sure what point you're trying to make here. So if there may have been other discussions of other issues, with other arguments made, that somehow in any way invalidates the argument I'm making regarding one specific discussion of one specific issue? That doesn't make any sense.