TexasCHLforum.com

JALLEN wrote:

C-dub wrote:.... but what's the risk of being in a lab where some maniac comes in with a gun to kill someone else and you could be armed, but have disarmed because the school is afraid your gun will spontaneously go off and break a beaker filled with acid?

What are the odds of you sitting in a Luby's Cafeteria with your parents, your pistol in the glove box of your car, when a lunatic drives his truck through the wall and begins executing everyone he can while you watch, helplessly?

I watched that lady's testimony, and I'd say that ought to be a prerequisite viewing for all anti-2A idiots.

AJSully421 wrote:With MRI machines and magnets, it is not the danger of a discharge, it is the fact that a steel pistol will forcibly rip itself form any holster and fly across the room, or take the person carrying along with it. There are videos of MRIs doing crazy things to ferrous items.

I had to check this out

Then, this exposes a whole new discussion subject, namely, why would there not be armed guards at the entrance points to facilities that have MRI's capable of producing these effects?

It may mean that every hospital, school lab etc. would need armed guards in front of MRI (if it is this powerful).

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010 ... qus_thread

Pardon the simpleton answer, but prohibiting guns from any of the 1-4 above does nothing to protect the innocent and it does everything to infringe upon law abiding citizens right.

It also gives criminals areas where they can strike with impunity, hedging their bets that calamity will be great as people will be unarmed.

Just say no to usurpation of your right, especially when based on logical and statistical fallacy that guns in those areas in hands of good guys have promulgated disaster.

You wouldn't tell cops to disarm prior to entering science lab to go after active shooter, right?