BreezyLimbo
Banned
If Utahs law doesn't allow for Metal Detectors or anything of that sort...and has to resort to pat downs...yeah, that is an odd thing.
Sarkeesian cancels speech after mass-shooting threat due to cop refusing to ban gun
- Thread starter massoluk
- Start date
- Status
If Utahs law doesn't allow for Metal Detectors or anything of that sort...and has to resort to pat downs...yeah, that is an odd thing.
Zoe
Member
I know what your point is, but the law is contentious enough without linking it to the highly contentious open carry debate.
Pat-downs aren't allowed either. The law does not allow them to identify people who are concealed carrying.
The Librarian
Banned
Zoe
Member
No, it didn't.
The Librarian
Banned
Zoe
Member
Which has nothing to do with open carry.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
The issue was concealed carry Dax.
Important enough for people to be pedantic about to avoid focusing on the fact that someone was censored by threat of gun violence!
Important enough for people to be pedantic about to avoid focusing on the fact that someone was censored by threat of gun violence!
The Librarian
Banned
From NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/t...html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0
Probably one of the dumbest laws I've ever heard. Why would they write it like that?
Whats the point of a concealed carry permit if you .. cant actually carry concealed?
The Librarian
Banned
Because it's a risk of danger to everyone else at the event?
Do you have any actual facts to back that up or is just emotion?
The Librarian
Banned
John Kowalski
Banned
How is it not applicable? Isn't the prohibition on disclosing individuals carrying a concealed weapon a law related to gun control?
So you're saying that you don't believe the threat enough to think the attack would occur, but enough to believe that if it did it would not deviate from its original plan?
Oh you mean the note that implies weapons unable to be concealed will be used, and cites a "hero" in which the shooter (Canadian) approached a building with a rifle in the open and opened fire?
It sure doesn't seem to be related to gun violence.
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
If the law doesn't allow an event threatened by gun violence to check people for guns, then there is something seriously wrong with that law. It's a strange and frightening world that would value a person's 'right to conceal a firearm' over the safety of hundreds of people.
The sole reason you would carry a gun in public would be because you feel threatened by the public at large, someone might just try to harm you and you will need to stop them. So when someone else feels unsafe as a result it's rather hypocritical to tell them "tough shit" especially when you, the gun toting person, have over-reacted to statistical improbability.
I understand that sometimes reading is hard but you are still encouraged to read the damned OP before you post, bro.
There was a mass shooting threat. It's even in the thread title.
Why don't you believe her?
The threat wasn't just sent to her, it was sent to multiple people at the university as well. See here.
Is the university lying about the threat as well?
But, but... she might have sent it herself!
I don't believe it is a credible threat. People send threats all the time and we don't hear about them. What makes her so special that every time she gets one she feels the need to make a big deal about it.
I'll stop now, because I think I should just ignore any threads with her name.
Zomba13
Member
Why would she be lying when we've been linked to the threat? Unless you are saying she made it herself? why would she do that? Because she's a woman? Because she is a woman she is less trustworthy than a man? What if it was a man who cancelled the speech after a threat of mass shooting? Would he most likely be lying too? Nah, because he's a man right?
Cancelling a speech because of a threat of violence not just on you but everyone in the audience isn't making mountains out of molehills and thinking that way just because she is a woman is disgusting. What has she said in the past that has you thinking she is lying? Do you not believe she gets death threats?
Who said anything about her being a woman? I'd say the same thing if it were some guy
I'm out though.
I find it difficult to take seriously the position that this was not a terrible application of the law.
We can argue forever about responsible gun owners gone bad and how to prevent it. That's not the issue here. The issue here is a law meant to allow concealed permit holder to carry weapons in public (a sensible thing to do given the right to bear arms)was horribly applied in this case and brings into question the wording and wisdom of the law.
We can argue forever about responsible gun owners gone bad and how to prevent it. That's not the issue here. The issue here is a law meant to allow concealed permit holder to carry weapons in public (a sensible thing to do given the right to bear arms)was horribly applied in this case and brings into question the wording and wisdom of the law.
Human nature plays a strong part when you are on the other side ideologically speaking, we tend to be skeptical in those situations.
I don't even have to speak about this incident with my relatives to know their reaction. They are not familiar with gaming culture but are strong conservatives. A combination of an outspoken feminist playing a major part in the story that is related to gun control after an anonymous threat....lol. That's not going to play well.
The university is involved, the police is involved, NYTimes... your point is surreal, to put it lightly.
A mass shooting threat is hardly a mole hill, and that's what this thread is about. I find it hard to believe anyone would suggest her to ignore the threats and risk her and everyone's life.
She is eventually going to have to learn to ignore threats. Now that the immature shits online know how to get her silenced and how to force her out of the picture it wont stop.
If a mass shooting at a school is a "mole hill" to you, what exactly would you consider an actual problem?
I'm going to quote the first sentence of the article for you:
The university was the one that received and reported the threat; not her.
Consider why you don't believe that there are evil fucking people out there. Why do you immediately jump toward "she lied" when it wasn't even her that reported the threat? Get some perspective on why your immediate reactive was so unreasonable.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Or they could stop making threats
Or get popped for the ones they do make
But victim blaming's cool too
Zomba13
Member
Maybe but at public events that she receives threats in the future (hopefully she won't get any but ass holes seem to hate her) hopefully she will have the cooperation of security and law enforcement to make the venue as safe as possible for herself and any attendants unlike this case where she had to cancel due to gun laws.
Victim blaming? really?
I'm simply pointing out the reality of her situation. 4chan etc. are not going to stop ever. They swat people for fun and all other sorts of horrible shit for giggles. The only thing she can do is be as cooperative with law enforcement as she can and hope they can catch punks which might help diminish the actions
smokeandmirrors
Banned
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
No person should have to ignore threats that deal with inflicting real bodily harm to them, their loved ones, and other bystanders. That's too serious a thing to ignore even if there's a chance it's just a hoax.
Yep, she's just going to have to accept that as her fate and put her guard down while people threaten to murder her and those around her:
Isn't Utah about half the size of California, as well as having 30x less the population? California is the most populated state in the US so of course there is going to be more murders in CA than in Utah.
FO-totality
Poet Centuriate
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
Secondly, does not really measure mass shootings, of which Australia seemed to have gotten rid of with their gun reform.
Ah, my mistake.
I wish we would do what Australia did in gun reform. I don't know why it's such an issue for a country like the US to not learn some things from other countries and implement it as well themselves. Is it false pride or something?
There is a marked difference between being unable and refusing to do something.
Zoe
Member
It is in Utah.
Spaced Harrier
Member
This version of america while ostensibly being a mondern first world country is more alien to me than just about most places on earth.
In fact it's the similarities to a modern European state juxtaposed with gun laws and threats rtf that make it so jarring.
Tl;dr: What?
In fact it's the similarities to a modern European state juxtaposed with gun laws and threats rtf that make it so jarring.
Tl;dr: What?
Zoe
Member
Identifying people who are concealed carrying.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
Not if it's a secured zone. Whilst it is true that the school is only, ridiculous though it may be, allowed one secured zone for the sole purposes of disciplinary hearings, that restriction is about the school board instituting a secured zone. Law enforcement on the other hand, does not appear to be subject to any such restriction and could conceivably establish a temporary secured zone if they felt the threat merited it. Furthermore, and this is a question which likely would have to be litigated, but the mere establishing of a checkpoint to this event (assuming law enforcement did not establish a secured zone) to check for the presence of firearms but not to actually reject those who may have them, would not necessarily violate the law (but it would likely come down to how courts would interpret the word 'inhibit'). I think law enforcement would be within their rights to actively screen and then segment by seating or otherwise monitor those who brought guns for security purposes. I don't know if I would see that as enough, and I'm not sure Anita would either, but it beats law enforcement doing nothing at all.
- Status