Pro-gun article

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Really, a Yahoo poll???ok.

Reading comprehension FAIL. It says right there 'Pew' and 'Washington Post'.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Reading comprehension FAIL. It says right there 'Pew' and 'Washington Post'.

So if I hit your link does it ,or does it not take me to Yahoo news, you can't even spin your lies right?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So if I hit your link does it ,or does it not take me to Yahoo news, you can't even spin your lies right?

A Yahoo news writer wrote an article about a Washington Post Poll. He says that in the second paragraph:

On the surface, the poll released by The Washington Post and Pew Research Center made no sense. Only 47 percent of respondents said they were "disappointed" or "angry" that the Senate last week failed to advance a bill to expand background checks to gun shows and online sales.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So if I hit your link does it ,or does it not take me to Yahoo news, you can't even spin your lies right?

At 04-25-2013 01:04 AM you posted "Really, a Yahoo poll???"

Is that accurate or not?

My link is a link to a Yahoo News report of two polls, one by The Washington Post and one by the Pew Research Center.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So if I hit your link does it ,or does it not take me to Yahoo news, you can't even spin your lies right?

How in the hell do you figure RR is lying on this? I mean, we know that you're a liar from the other thread, and you've lied in this one. But what the ? This is so obvious!

[Giantone]

Oh look , the NRA version of the Pep Boys are all here.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Oh look , the NRA version of the Pep Boys are all here.

"Look over there!" isn't going to work.

Please explain yourself or admit you're wrong and go away.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Oh look , the NRA version of the Pep Boys are all here.

Why do you dislike rational responses to your posts so much?

[NC_Skins]

Email we received from the Chancellor today:

To the ECU Community:

I want to make you aware of a bill moving through the N.C. General Assembly that could have a direct and negative impact to the safety of our campus. I feel the need to state publicly my opposition to certain provisions included in House Bill 937 that would allow concealed-carry permit holders to keep their weapons in locked vehicles on college campuses.

Supporters of this bill say it will make our campuses safer. I don’t believe that to be true. In fact, it has the potential to create dangerous situations for our faculty, staff, students and visitors. For example, if an incident occurs on our campus, law enforcement arriving on the scene must be able to quickly distinguish suspects from bystanders. Allowing weapons on campus could hamper their ability to make split-second decisions while assessing the situation. The consequences could be tragic.

It is our obligation to provide a safe environment at ECU. And I believe the best approach is by relying on the expertise of our accredited police department. I share the concerns expressed by President Tom Ross, my fellow chancellors, and our campus police officers that this proposed change would create increased risk on our campuses. I encourage the General Assembly to reconsider the provision allowing weapons onto our campus.

Steve Ballard, Chancellor


The following is a link to House Bill 937:
North Carolina General Assembly - House Bill 937 Information/History (2013-2014 Session)

I on the other hand do not think it will increase risk on the campus.