Comment: Don't worry, it's very simple. When seconds count, the police can be there in minutes, I'm tired of the false claim that the police "are there to protect you." It's a lie and it's not their legal obligation. Law "enforcement" is their job. Ipso facto, when the shooting starts the police have failed their responsibility/ Someone else is dead because they were prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment right to defend themselves,.
Comment: Might want to view the video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp senate testimony (the survivor of the Luby's massacre mentioned in the article) at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4948538901303259236
and Texas did in fact have a law banning concealed at the time and that was the reason folks left their pistols in the car.......not always very helpful.........
Comment: t seems as if too much emphasis is put on the object of the "gun." making them more or less present is wholly ineffective on the mind of the typical single-shooter multiple murder and subsequent suicide. it is simply the most handy tool to carry out their "final will" on the outside world. these people who commit these types of crimes are essentially committing public suicide, but not after performing non-rational and unspecific vandalism to humanity (viewed as the "counterfeit reality" and thought of as categorically problematic and having no intrinsic value.) these are usually highly intelligent and motivated people who know that the media will commemorate their death and that they will have achieved some type of immortality through the communication of their "own" historical event. if more people had handguns, their kill rate would go down, but it would not substantially deter these localized (yet becoming more numerous).
There was a statistical psychological test done on a group of college students from many different US colleges, of mediocre and also particularly high reputation and ranking. it showed a rough diagnosis that 50% of students exhibited more than 75% of the signs of either a depression-category illness or an anxiety illness, (which affect the psyche on a very deep level, but are usually not treated, as the symptoms reduce the chance of going out and seeking help)
This suggests that colleges are a veritable breeding ground for unguided imagination, coupled with an environment that allows radical action and planning to ferment unchecked. If you don't go out there and "play the social game" to make x friends that (ideally) keep you grounded, you will sometimes seek to change your reality radically, in some way to make up for your non-specifically insufficient reality.
There is rf technology (prototype) that works like a long-range super-sensitive metal detector, that can hone in on the specific radio signatures of weapons, and their parts. further research hopes to detect a loaded weapon (and distinguish it from an unloaded one) from a range of 1000m in a city landscape. These should become commonplace in high-risk areas, especially where the campus security/university police is completely unarmed (not even mace in DC) and sometimes completely worthless when confronted with intense situations outside their training.
this debate is hard when it is focused to this increasingly common single-shooter/suicide situation because more guns would mean more access, (they could be stolen or borrowed) and also more accidental shootings (drinking and drug use is extremely common).
Anybody here have an opinion on the best non-IIlethal or less-than-lethal weapons? Ilike the ultrasonic nauseating waves and LED disorientation/nauseating technology. both have been around for decades.
Comment: t seems as if too much emphasis is put on the object of the "gun." making them more or less present is wholly ineffective on the mind of the typical single-shooter multiple murder and subsequent suicide. it is simply the most handy tool to carry out their "final will" on the outside world. these people who commit these types of crimes are essentially committing public suicide, but not after performing non-rational and unspecific vandalism to humanity (viewed as the "counterfeit reality" and thought of as categorically problematic and having no intrinsic value.) these are usually highly intelligent and motivated people who know that the media will commemorate their death and that they will have achieved some type of immortality through the communication of their "own" historical event. if more people had handguns, their kill rate would go down, but it would not substantially deter these localized (yet becoming more numerous).
There was a statistical psychological test done on a group of college students from many different US colleges, of mediocre and also particularly high reputation and ranking. it showed a rough diagnosis that 50% of students exhibited more than 75% of the signs of either a depression-category illness or an anxiety illness, (which affect the psyche on a very deep level, but are usually not treated, as the symptoms reduce the chance of going out and seeking help)
This suggests that colleges are a veritable breeding ground for unguided imagination, coupled with an environment that allows radical action and planning to ferment unchecked. If you don't go out there and "play the social game" to make x friends that (ideally) keep you grounded, you will sometimes seek to change your reality radically, in some way to make up for your non-specifically insufficient reality.
There is rf technology (prototype) that works like a long-range super-sensitive metal detector, that can hone in on the specific radio signatures of weapons, and their parts. further research hopes to detect a loaded weapon (and distinguish it from an unloaded one) from a range of 1000m in a city landscape. These should become commonplace in high-risk areas, especially where the campus security/university police is completely unarmed (not even mace in DC) and sometimes completely worthless when confronted with intense situations outside their training.
this debate is hard when it is focused to this increasingly common single-shooter/suicide situation because more guns would mean more access, (they could be stolen or borrowed) and also more accidental shootings (drinking and drug use is extremely common).
Anybody here have an opinion on the best non-IIlethal or less-than-lethal weapons? Ilike the ultrasonic nauseating waves and LED disorientation/nauseating technology. both have been around for decades.
Comment: The response regarding the Luby's massacre in 1991 is full of inaccuracies. First, there was no concealed gun permit law in Texas at the time. The lady whose parents were killed by George Hennard did testify before the state legislature in honor of her parents' legacy and her testimony was instrumental in getting a concealed gun carry permit law enacted, but that didn't take effect until 1993. Prior to that, a licensed gun owner had to display his gun or rifle in plain view. And all that stuff about being able to stop her parents' murder if she hadn't left her gun in her car is just literary fiction. She wasn't even there.
Comment: I want to congratulate Newsweek.com for posting this interview. I hope that you publish it in your magazine as well. Common sense seems to be rare in the mainstream media.
Comment: They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That accurately describes the situation at most American schools when it comes to defending our kids. Rather than employ the one method that has proved successful, we persist in letting insane people with guns slaughter our sons and daughters, rather than allowing sane people with guns to protect them.
Well, enough is enough. The tantrum-throwing, anti-gun hysterics have had their chance, and they???ve failed miserably.
We need armed and trained personnel inside the school, people who are not easily identified by an attacker. And security guards aren???t enough; they???re too easily spotted. We need armed principles, teachers, office workers and other staff, and, in the case of universities, students who have handgun carry permits.
And we need them now.
The world has changed, and we need to change with it. If we don???t, one day soon we will most certainly be faced with carnage on the scale of the Beslan, Russia school massacre, when hundreds of men, women, and children were murdered by Muslim extremists.
[John Caile is Communications Director of the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, a grassroots gun rights organization in Minnesota]
Comment: They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That accurately describes the situation at most American schools when it comes to defending our kids. Rather than employ the one method that has proved successful, we persist in letting insane people with guns slaughter our sons and daughters, rather than allowing sane people with guns to protect them.
Well, enough is enough. The tantrum-throwing, anti-gun hysterics have had their chance, and they???ve failed miserably.
We need armed and trained personnel inside the school, people who are not easily identified by an attacker. And security guards aren???t enough; they???re too easily spotted. We need armed principles, teachers, office workers and other staff, and, in the case of universities, students who have handgun carry permits.
And we need them now.
The world has changed, and we need to change with it. If we don???t, one day soon we will most certainly be faced with carnage on the scale of the Beslan, Russia school massacre, when hundreds of men, women, and children were murdered by Muslim extremists.
[John Caile is Communications Director of the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, a grassroots gun rights organization in Minnesota]
Comment: You are now six times more likely to be mugged in London than New York. Why? Because as common law appreciated, not only does an armed individual have the ability to protect himself or herself but criminals are less likely to attack them. They help keep the peace. A study found American burglars fear armed home-owners more than the police. As a result burglaries are much rarer and only 13% occur when people are at home, in contrast to 53% in England."
Comment: When guns and those who use them overturn the poem and pen, the artist and the thinker, society is lost to fascism. The militarization of society, AND COLLEGE CAMPUS, is the "unlimited national emergency", the war on terror, the lunatics who manage to claim their victims in too quick a moment in order to stop them. Too many guns people. Not enough pens. The revolution will not be televised. Just look at your television...nothing there.
Comment: Your thoughts are confusing....If I get what you are saying then point your pen in the direction of a madman shooter...see who gets the raw end of the deal. If you manage not to get killed then let us all know how it turned out. Some ppl seem to be living in this delusional fantasy that if we make guns illegal to conceal and carry for the sane folks that we will all be safer....Well we practically have this law already and look where its getting us. Shootings of innocent law abiding citizens getting whacked in there everyday life,churches, malls, schools. We need to tip the odds in favor of us the innocents and not the criminals. If we had atleast the chance to fire back at the cowards that think they have the advantage then maybe they would think twice about attacking, knowing that a bullet could be returned across there noses. Its the ultimate sense of power, authority and terror they seek. If we take that away and put the thought of instant retaliation in there minds then maybe more of these senseless acts will be thwarted.
Comment: *http://www.concealedcampus.org/
http://www.concealedcampus.org/faq.htm
http://www.concealedcampus.org/arguments.htm
Comment: Wasn't the Wild West tried before? How did that work out? Not very well, if I remember history.
Kazmierczak was the ideal person everyone thinks of when they want to arm citizens. OOPS.
Comment: You forget, we are talking about concealed carry, this means that you release your rights to your medical record confidentiality, meaning that in order to get it your file must be reviewed over the 3 month waiting period. we are not talking about just saying sign up heres your gun, no we are saying go through the red tape and do this legally.
Comment: 1) Police are under no legal obligation to protect individual citizens. See the case Warren v. DC and Castle Rock v. Gonzales. In layman's terms, it means that you are responsible for your own personal security.
2)Mexico and Russia both have higher rates of violence committed with a firearm compared to the United States and those are places where you will be thrown in a kangaroo court if caught with a firearm.
3)The majority of crimes are predatory by their very nature. The perpetrator wants absolute control/domination over their victim(s). Even in cases of mass murder such as VT and NIU.
A crime short-circuited or prevented is a crime stopped. In the case of mass murderers such as Cho Seung-Hui and the New Life Church killer both of them killed themselves when they knew they were going to face someone who could defeat them.
Cho killed himself when the police FINALLY broke down the doors that he had chained shut.
When a volunteer security guard named Jeanne Assam shot the New Life Church killer, the murderer shot himself as he was on the ground to essentially end his life on his own terms. He had been a loser his whole life and with his final act he could still keep absolute power over life and death.
There is still that element of predatory behavior. A murderer/rapist/spree killer wants absolute control over his victims and will go to places/people where he perceives that disparity of power. Why should we give someone like that exactly what they want?
Comment: Seems there are way too many naive ppl out there who think if the average law abiding citizens have their right to arms taken away then the criminals will abide by the same laws also...What are they crazy?....If thats the case than why dont we have our rights to drive a car taken away to. Criminals use them to commit crimes and race through town and usually end up killing or harming others in there bid to get away. So if we cut transportation out of the equation then that problem is solved....Thats ridiculous! And isnt realistic, just like taking the ppls right to protect themselves because of a few mindless self destructing clowns . Maybe if those idiots out there even thought there was a chance that another citizen was carrying a concealed weapon they would think long and hard before carrying out there murderous plans. A concealed weapon would give a person a chance to defend themselves and save lives, as long as they are trained to an extent. Maybe training for certain school officials. So in the event that another incident occurs, then at least something can be done before more lives are lost. By the time police arrive the damage has been done. This way, theres an on campus response team of some sort.
Comment: Good post, I like to see these kind of things. Good work everyone keep this debate going strong. If you can join the group.
Comment: Congratulations to all Students for Concealed Carry on Campus For gaining 3,000 New members in only 3 days, 15,000 Members total nationwide and in some other various countries. I am proud to say that I am a member and I want to fight back on crime. For those interested check out these few links
*http://www.concealedcampus.org/
http://www.concealedcampus.org/faq.htm
http://www.concealedcampus.org/arguments.htm
Comment: If I wanted to participate in intelligent debate I would have. But frankly I was just plain sick and effing tired of scolling through hundreds of posts on gun propaganda while I was trying to read actualy debate... so back off before you assume crap. You think I'd feel more comfortable knowing that there are an unknown number of students in my lecture hall with guns on them? You think that would make me feel safer as a student?? F NO. So why don't you actually ask the people who ATTEND college before you think you are the king isht.
Thank GOD a democrat is going to be president next. Peace out NRA.
Comment: Gun owners take note of the liberal anti's out there who assume that a dem will be the next pres. We need to unite ourselves and protect our rights.. it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for some left wing candidate who has publicly announced his intentions to target law abiding gunowners and harrass with more useless legisation(obama-clinton) . it has already been made clear that they will attempt to renew the 94 crime bill as useless as it was. but this symbolic peice of legislation plays heavily to the liberal crowd and their method of useless but all encompassing psychological reassurance. All us 2nd amend RKBA coalition have to keep in mind that a REPUBLICAN is needed to continue our progress and fight against USELESS and HARRASSING anti gun legislation. I am so glad that there are students and parents who realize that they can not sit helplessly by as a crazy publicity seeking suicidal loser tries to kill you at random for the sake of Media immortality to reddeem his pathetic life. Obama's "change" is not a change for the better only one that will produce more restrictions on LAW ABIDING citizens who have a LEGITIMATE right to keep and bear arms. we must keep the momuntum going in the supreme court nominations which will further secure our individual right to keep and carry. Stay United
RKBA is an INDIVIDUAL right
Comment: How can you say it's all "gun propaganda?" If you actually read what we wrote you will see that we provide factual evidence. What have you brought to the discussion? Nothing but anger and what ifs. I AM in college! I have graduated from undergrad and am now in professional school, so try again.
Are you scared when you go to a movie? Are you scared when you go grocery shopping? People are already allowed to carry guns in these places and most other public places. Why would it be any different in a classroom? Read our arguments. They are based in fact, not opinion like your arguments and those of the other people opposing us.
Comment: Can we say ignorant.... How many more school shootings and other crimes do we need before we realize that GUN FREE ZONES are nothing more than cover words for DEFENSELESS VICTIM ZONES, with no right to protect them selfs from forced rape, kidnappings, muggings and assault. FEELING SAFE IS NOT THE SAME AS BEING SAFE !!!!!
Comment: I hate to to tell you sdave, but you ALREADY have an unknown number of guys in your classes with guns on 'em! The only thing is, none of the guys carrying there now are law-abiding citizens, nor have they been through the background checks etc. that the concealed carry guys have. And who knows what, if any kind of training they've had. HMMmmm... Wake up and have a nice day!
Comment: Well I respect you for your opinion, but i want you to realize that feeling safe is totally different from actually being safe. And frankly criminals will always get guns, so how are you to protect your self from them the criminal. Not to mention you can be a democrat with strong beliefs in Guns.
I wish you would look and see what the DC gun ban did. Great thought no doubt makes the city safer, but it did exactly the opposite that city is fighting with Chicago for the title homicide capital of America. Both have bans on guns, so please explain how that worked to better people because that is what the main goal is correct. Just realize as much as guns can kill people they can also save lives.
I want you to say to your self if I was looking down the barrel of a gun in a school shooting would I want to fight back or hope that god is in my side, or that the police will storm in immediately before this guy kills me. I hope you would want a gun to put him in his place.
Sincerely think about the issues you face, because gun control doesn???t work. Illinois was in the top ten for gun control based on the Brady campaigns rating system and this happened. I am saddened to say that States with the least amount of gun control are also the lowest in crime. That is a fact. Please realize what the facts point too. Feeling safe is not being safe it is only an illusion. I suggest you check out Fbi.com and DOJ.com they will correspond with the facts I am giving.
Comment: Congratulations to all Students for Concealed Carry on Campus For gaining 3,000 New members in only 3 days, 15,000 Members total nationwide and in some other various countries. I am proud to say that I am a member and I want to fight back on crime. For those interested check out these few links
*http://www.concealedcampus.org/
http://www.concealedcampus.org/faq.htm
http://www.concealedcampus.org/arguments.htm
Comment: You foolish Americans think that by outlawing guns you keep them away from criminals? Russia have very strict laws against guns, yet we have very much crime and criminals and organized crime have many guns. Maybe you should rethink your silly ideas before the government take away your guns and you like us in Russia, unable to defend ourselves against criminals and bad people!
Comment: sdave2,
Please scroll down and see my reply to your previous post.
Why not participate in intelligent debate instead of using harsh language or is harsh language the only way you no how to respond when you are faced with facts you cannot refute?
Comment: Shut the F up PROGUN and stop campaigning for your god damn guns.
Comment: I just want everyone to have an equal chance at protecting themselves, The choice to live. I think that people should be able to see the link for better understanding I hope that is not a problem. Maybe you to should look into it. Have a good day.
tm
Comment: If you don't like it, then go live in Communist Cuba or North Korea where you'll be comfortable living in a police state, you liber, communist son of a b___ch!
Comment: NIU campus security revamped their procedures after the VA Tech shootings. Yet, they still were not able to respond in time. Unfortunately, the NIU shootings are just another example of gun free zones that allow a shooter a target rich environment as resistence is non-existent.
------------
hi,i am a beautiful 40+ woman yasou ..i am single and mature..
I just want to find a mature gentleman for fun time here...
i also uploaded my hot and sexy photos under the name yasou11 on SeniorWoo.com..
come on to check them out.Waiting for you ~~~~~~
Comment: Check Out http://www.concealedcampus.org/ Maybe Join the group
Comment: A nonprofit organization called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus would like to change that. The group, whose 12,000 members nationwide include college students, faculty and parents, champions legislation that would allow licensed gun owners to carry concealed weapons on campus, in the hope that an alert and well-trained citizen could stop a deranged shooter before he or she could do serious damage. According to the National Conference on State Legislatures, 13 states are currently considering some form of "concealed carry" legislation aimed at campuses. Utah is the group's model; after a state Supreme Court ruling found that the state university had violated a law allowing permit holders to carry concealed weapons, the school agreed that guns could legally be carried on its grounds.
Comment: It is the site in which the artical comes from, or is talking about i suggest you look into it, it is the website with the facts in which media and i and a few others are using. and I just want to raise awareness
Comment: Interesting! What does your personal ad have anything to do with the subject of the article or the comments made thereto?
Just wondering.
Comment: Please Check Out http://www.concealedcampus.org/ Maybe Join the group
Comment: Brian Malte, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence should NOT be qouted and NOTHING that the Brady Campaign says should be listened to. WHY???? Because I was the person who reported information to the U.S. government, about the assassination attempt against President Reagan BEFORE IT HAPPENED!!! I GAVE THE GOVERNMENT THE NAME " JOHN HINKLEY" and the fact that he attended a Texas college for a while, etc. I ALSO told the government that Hinkley was not to blame for this, as he had been DRUGGED WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE AND HAD BEEN BRAIN WASHED BY A GROUP OF HOLLYWOOD SUBVERSIVES!!!
What is my point? The Brady Campaign has NOT EVER TRIED TO HAVE THE REAL CRIMINALS ARRESTED FOR THE TERRIBLE CRIME THAT THEY COMMITTED!! INSTEAD THE BRADY CAMPAIGN HAS LIED TO AMERICA FOR SEVERAL DECADES ABOUT GUN CRIMES!! IF THEY ARE NOT ETHICAL IN THE FACTS ABOUT THE SHOOTING OF JAMES BRADY, THEN WHY SHOULD/WOULD ANY OF YOU LISTEN TO THIS GROUP?? WHY DO YOU GIVE CREDIBILITY TO A GROUP THAT WAS FORMED TO INTENTIONALLY LIE TO ALL AMERICANS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONCEALING THE REAL CRIMINALS AND THE SICK, SUBVERSIVE MOTIVES OF CERTAIN HOLLYWOOD SUBVERSIVE ORGANIZATIONS?
I would like to add that I am also the person who supplied information to the government about the assassination attempts against President Ford, BEFORE THEY HAPPENED! It was this information that caused the FBI to question Sara Jane Moore the day before she attempted to shoot at Pres. Ford. IT WAS THE SAME HOLLYWOOD SUBVERSIVES WHICH TRIED 4 TIMES TO ASSASSINATE PRESIDENT FORD, AND HOLLYWOOD BRIBED DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS TO FORCE A COVER-UP OF THESE CRIMINAL CONSPIRACIES!
THE BRADY's AND THE ORGANIZATION NAMED FOR THEM IS PHONEY AND A FRAUD! THE NEWS MEDIA HAS KNOWN THIS, AND THEY ARE PART OF THE COVER-UP, AS HOLLYWOOD CONTROLS TOO MUCH OF THE NEWS MEDIA!!!
Comment: Okay Weird, but ill agree one thing is Brady Campaign is full of liars, who only want to see it there way.
Comment: I wish the reporter here would get the facts straight - "legislation that would allow licensed gun owners to carry concealed weapons on campus. By the way, who or what is a "licensed gun owner?" I've never needed a license to own a gun...
Comment: More than 200 years ago victim disarmament was known to have disasterous consequencs:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson`s "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
The following sound an awful lot like the hogwash our own government has been feeding us for years about gunownership:
"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State." - Heinrich Himmler, Hitler's SS leader
A NAZI "assault weapons" ban?
"All military type firearms are to be handed in immediately...The SS, SA and Stahlhelm give every responsible opportunity of campaigning with them. Therefore anyone who does not belong to one of the above-named organizations and who unjustifiably nevertheless keeps his weapon...must be regarded as an enemy of the national government."- SA Oberfuhrer of Bad Tolz, March, 1933
Comment: More than 200 years ago victim disarmament was known to have disasterous consequencs:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson`s "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
The following sound an awful lot like the hogwash our own government has been feeding us for years about gunownership:
"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State." - Heinrich Himmler, Hitler's SS leader
A NAZI "assault weapons" ban?
"All military type firearms are to be handed in immediately...The SS, SA and Stahlhelm give every responsible opportunity of campaigning with them. Therefore anyone who does not belong to one of the above-named organizations and who unjustifiably nevertheless keeps his weapon...must be regarded as an enemy of the national government."- SA Oberfuhrer of Bad Tolz, March, 1933
Comment: NIU campus security revamped their procedures after the VA Tech shootings. Yet, they still were not able to respond in time. Unfortunately, the NIU shootings are just another example of gun free zones that allow a shooter a target rich environment as resistence is non-existent.
Comment: Why won't anyone opposed to the message of www.concealedcampus.org answer my question? (Posted below....far far below.)
If you were looking down the barrel of a gun that is in the hand of mad-man "going out in glory", would you rather have someone on a cell phone calling the police to come save you or would you rather have a law-abiding citizen put a bullet in him before he pulls the trigger?
Comment: Iv mentioned this same comment, Would u rather have a telephone or a gun in that situation, because you can call , the police will come and they will photograph your innocent dead body, or you can chose to fight back and shoot him.
Comment: I think it is a bit disingenuous to keep focusing on the question of how allowing concealed carry licensees to carry on campus will make things safer, overall. It would probably make things safer by making nut cases choose somewhere else to go out in their "blaze of glory," but that's not the point. at all If overall campus safety was not increased at all by such a policy, it would still be a good idea. If someone has a Concealed Handgun License (CHL), it implies that they have taken steps to enable themselves to defend THEMSELVES more effectively. Anyone else on campus who may also benefit from the CHL holder carrying on campus is just an added benefit. The point is that policies that forbid it, deprive the CHL holder from defending him/herself! What rationale does anyone have for that? The one that seems to be proposed most often is that the safety of others will suffer from the presence of more guns on campus. Yet there is NO evidence for this. In fact ALL the evidence available, and there is a lot, suggests the opposite. If it were dangerous to have students keeping or carrying their guns on campus, why was there not a major problem with it before the 1970s when these laws started? There is no evidence that there would be drunken or rage-related shootouts, and all the evidence from the days when we had guns on campus, as well as the data from states that have passed CHL laws, clearly indicates that this is not a concern. If the mere presence of more guns is dangerous in itself, why are there not thousands of wrongful shooting incidents, or at least accidents, in Iraq and Afghanistan, where every American carries a loaded gun all the time and everyone is stressed out and "jumpy" ? Remember, many of those who want to carry on campus are our veterans. Why are less safe when they are carrying back here than they were overseas? How about, "All the crazies will be carrying on campus"? Hey, they are NOW, they already beak the laws. How about, "People will feel safer"? WHICH people, not ME! Only the totally uninformed would. How about all the innocent folks who'll get hit in the crossfire? The first mass shooting on a campus happened at UT Austin, in 1965, when a nut started shooting students from a clock tower on campus. According to the retired Texas Ranger who went up the tower (with the assistance of an armed civilian, by the way), and shot the "sniper," he never hit anyone after UT students started shooting back with hunting rifles in their trucks. No one was killed or injured in the "crossfire," but the shooter was kept pinned down by student fire until the Ranger was able to shoot him. I have a CHL and I feel safer when I carry. Why isn't MY right to feel safe as important as that of someone who doesn't even want to accept responsibility for his/her own safety?
Comment: You make excellent points! Great post!
Comment: One of the mass murder victims at NIU was over 30 and a 10 year veteran of the U.S. Army. The perfect candidate for a concealed carry permit if Illinois were like most of the rest of the US. But illinois is not. It has some of the most rectrictive gun laws in the country. Only police are allowed to lawfully carry weapons. It is absolutley ignorant to think that the Army veteran murder victim or someone else in that classroom, would not have been able to stop the shooter. The simple awful truth is maniacs often seek out "gun free" zones so they can be assured their victims will be unarmed. The City of Chicago is one huge "gunfree" zone, but that does not seem to keep it from competing as the murder capital of the US every year.
Comment: One of the victims killed at NIU was over 30 and a ten year veteran of the U.S. Army. It is absolutley insulting and ridiculous to think that she, and others like her who would qualify qualify for concealed carry permits, if Illinois had such a law (Under no circumstances are citizens in Illinois allowed to carry conceaed weapons) -- would not have been able to stop the shooter. The fact is maniacs seek out"no-gun" zones where they can be assured they will not face any real opposition.
Comment: We have police officers taking classes and veterans using their GI Bills in numbers not seen since WWII. These are the same people we depend on for security of our nation and local municipalities. Yet they are disarmed on college campuses. How does this make sense? I am willing to, and have, risked my life for our country overseas, let me protect myself and my peers so we can focus on an education.
Comment: I am not sure what state you???re in, in my state a police officer does not have to stop carrying because he is on a campus of any sort. Only when that officer is off duty and drinking alcohol does scrutiny take place, as it should be. As my earlier post for another pointed out, college security is for the majority of campuses a JOKE! Sure college police are around in some un-consistent numbers and generally only on university campuses, but for the violent crimes that occur and that could be stopped everyone needs to be able to adequately defend themselves. If there is some draconian law disallowing your officers from carrying on campuses that must surely be repealed. Of course, what needs to occur is all law abiding citizens who have passed background and training requirements to be legally allowed to carry anywhere! That should be the main focus, the police issue will follow.
Comment: Off duty is the key word Lubys Cafe sound Familiar, where the police officer was in there with her father for a meal and watched the shooter kill him, she said had i been allowed to carry my weapon off duty i could have stopped him, so as it should be? That is asinine and you should rethink what kind of comment you put on here, she is also the person responsible for the movement in Texas to get ccw.
Comment: "That is asinine and you should rethink what kind of comment you put on here, she is also the person responsible for the movement in Texas to get ccw."
Where did I go wrong? I think I touched upon that! I am pro police and personal safety all the way! I am pretty sure I had stated that if there is a law preventing offduty cops to carry, then that is asinine!
Comment: For more information about obtaining a concealed carry permit, you can visit http://www.usacarry.com
Comment: I also want to remind people that this debate is not only about school shootings but other types of victimization that occurs on campuses nation wide. These acts of violence can also be met with a concealed carry, Such crimes as Rape, Robbery, Assault, Kidnapping, and much much more. All when the police and security guards cant be to protect the weak and overpowered.
Comment: The very best thing we can do for this issue is to vote. . . Society needs to take a stand and fight back their governments dumb decisions.
Comment: I had to shake my head in disgust the other day as I read a sign posted on the door of a campus building at my school the other day. The sign was put up in response to the NIU massacre, and it outlined the school's policy for a "lockdown." As prescribed by the school administration, there are four actions to be taken in the event of a campus lockdown: First, lock all doors to the classroom, Second, turn off the lights, Third, take cover under desks or tables, Four, wait for police to give the "all clear." As I read these instructions, it was all I could do to resist the urge to take my pen and write, "Five, for God's sake, don't shoot back because somebody might get hurt!" I hold a valid Texas concealed handgun license, but state law prohibits carry in all schools even at the college level. How many more defenseless students and faculty members are going to be gunned down before the administrators and legislators stop perpetuating the fairy-tale of the "gun-free zone?" They ban law-abiding citizens from carrying their defensive firearms on campus, while at the same time boasting about how everyone can "feel safe" because guns are no allowed on campus. And yet, surprise surprise, the psychopaths and madmen continue to bring guns onto campuses across the country and wreak bloody havoc. When you deny a person the use of effective tools with which to defend themselves against violent, armed attackers, you effectively condemn them to either try to run away, or to cower under a desk and wait for a madman to decide the moment they will cease to exist with the pull of a trigger. Simple as that. "Gun-free zones" may as well have signs posted at every entrance reading, "Killers:All victims in this area have been disarmed for your safety and convenience. Rest assured that they will offer no effective resistance. Thank you, and enjoy your spree. Signed: The Management."
Comment: What? Having your a text to your cell phone won't protect you? Amazing, I thought these campuses politicans had it all figured out! Good information.
Comment: There is a lot of excellent debate going on here! Great job guys! And for the most part it is all very mature and intelligent discussion.
humbleopinion,
I understand and appreciate your desire to get to the true root of the problem. I think I see your point exactly as you intend for us to see it. It would be truly a great thing if we could discover what it is that makes people suddenly snap and go on a killing spree and find a way to prevent these terrible things from happening all together. I would love to live in a world where our safety is guaranteed and there is no need of firearms for self defense. The unfortunate reality is that despite our best efforts, it is extremely unlikely that this will ever happen. There always have been people who have mental illness and/or participate in violent acts and there always will be. There are people out there studying these illnesses and looking for new and better ways to deal with these kinds of people but the truth is if there is a cure for violence we are far far away from finding it. I agree completely with you that we should focus on prevention of violence. I don't think anyone can disagree with that. But while there needs to be some people working on prevention, others must think of ways to contain and minimize the damage that results from violence until a better long term solution can be attained. Everyone wants the problem to go away, but it isn't going to happen overnight and in the meantime we have to do the best with what we have now. It would be nice to put a security guard in every classroom, every building, every street corner but right now that is simply impossible.
........................Continue Below......................
Comment: I would also like to discuss your concern about people being scared in class if they knew that some of their fellow classmates, or students in your case, were carrying loaded firearms. First, why would you be less scared if it was a security guard with the weapon? If you put a security guard in every classroom you would most likely have the same amount of guns in the school building as if licensed students were allowed to carry based on the most current statistics I have found. Are adults that are titled "security guard" any less susceptible to the mental illnesses than adults that are titled "student" are? I think you are putting a little too much trust into the term "security guard." We aren't talking about security guards and students we are talking about adults who have passed the same state and federal background checks as any other adult you would call a "security guard." The only difference is a security guard may go through a little more training, but many concealed carriers, like myself, continue their firearms education beyond that of many security guards. Secondly, I don't know what state you live in but most states already allow licensed individuals to carry a loaded firearm concealed on their person in most public places. The public is aware of this and there has been no mass panic or paranoia. I have never heard of anyone being too scared to go to the bank or to a movie theater or shopping because they know that people may be carrying guns. Nobody has ever looked at me and rushed away because they thought I could be carrying a gun. I have carried a firearm legally for years and no one has ever even realized that I was carrying. Even close friends who I am around a lot neither know about my firearm or worry that I might be carrying one despite being aware that it is legal for me to do so. It certainly doesn't stop students in colleges that already allow concealed carry from going to class. My point is you should have no more reason to worry about teaching a class of students that are allowed to carry firearms than you do just walking down the street or in a bank on any given day. (Assuming you live in a concealed carry state.) ................Continue Below
Comment: I am studying medicine right now and I agree, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, etc are riddled with corruption and are not doing much to truly help the mentally ill. I took classes in psychology in undergrad and I agree that a lot can be done for these people in your department, but as a psychologist you probably realize the magnitude of treating all mentally ill patients to the point of being cured or at least to the point where they are stable enough to not go on a killing spree. Or even just detecting all the potential people who might do so. There is just not enough time/money in the world to put security guards in every classroom, reform the medical community, and treat every mental illness in order to prevent violent acts from occurring in the first place. It is a truly noble concept you have brought to this discussion, but (at least for now) I don???t believe it is a viable solution and I can think of no other viable and immediate alternative other than taking up arms (legally) and defending myself and those around me if such a situation were to present itself.
Everyone else,
Let me close by clarifying a little bit of information about concealed carry. We aren???t talking about giving guns to anyone and everyone. Those of us who carry (in most states) have taken a firearms safety course, passed a written exam, displayed appropriate control and use of a firearm, submitted fingerprints, passed state background checks, passed federal (FBI) background checks, and paid well over $100 in order to obtain a permit. This system, while not perfect, does a terrific job of screening individuals who want to carry a firearm and in most cases assures that the general public is in no more danger than they were before each applicant received their license.
I really didn???t mean for this to be so long! :) Thanks for reading!
Don???t forget to check out www.concealedcarry.com
Comment: This site really does not like apostrophes!
Comment: ------------
my name is jdoll, a beautiful 40+ woman from us.. internet is a good place to meet friends or even more, right? I just want to find a mature gentleman for fun time here... i also uploaded my hot or even n**ked photos under the name jdoll123 on SeniorWoo.com..maybe you want to check them out.
Comment: we must stop this!------------
my name is jdoll, a beautiful 40+ woman from us.. internet is a good place to meet friends or even more, right? I just want to find a mature gentleman for fun time here... i also uploaded my hot or even n**ked photos under the name jdoll123 on SeniorWoo.com..maybe you want to check them out.
Comment: Very interesting! What, may I ask, does your personal ad have anything to do with the subject discussed in the article and the comments in response thereto?
I was just wondering.
Comment: She obviously wants you to see her naked so you will be assured that she is not carrying a concealed weapon. LOL!
Comment: www.concealedcamups.org
Comment: He means www.concealedcampus.org :)
Comment: Finally someone gets it right. Thank you Lewis for helping to promote concealed carry on campus!
Ill make an analogy for some of you who just dont get it:
Many people that live in the states bordering the Gulf have supplies (i.e. water, food) so that in the case of a hurricane, they will have food and water. So are these people being paranoid and living in fear? No it's called BEING PREPARED!
Comment: Finally someone gets it right. Thank you Lewis for helping to promote concealed carry on campus!
Ill try to make an analogy for some of you who dong quite get it:
Many people that live in the states bordering the Gulf have supplies (i.e. water, food) so that in the case of a hurricane, they will have food and water. So are these people being paranoid or are they living in fear? No it's called BEING PREPARED.
Comment: How intelligent... put MORE guns on campuses so when some unstable frat boy who just found out his girlfriend cheated on him.... or some possessive girlfriend... can go and shoot up some people with his/her "concealed" weapon. Genius.
Comment: You clearly have no idea what we are talking about. Read the rest of the comments on this page and you may see why your comment sounds like it was written by someone who is very ignorant about the topic.
Comment: http://www.concealedcampus.org/
Comment: Thanks to 747 driver, progun1 and the rest of you for a spirited debate, but I am now bored with this topic. I'll sign out by saying that I think we all want one thing, and that is to live freely and without fear. Hopefully we will find a solution that works for everyone some day.
Peace.
Comment: Every American citizen has the ''right'' to return fire for his and his fellow citizen's safety..--------My name is wayland. Before, i was quite lonely, i was afraid of coming out. My past life was full of sadness. But since i met my bf on gaysinglehunt.com. My life changed. I have courage to come out. And i have many friends there now.
Comment: Confused on exactly what ur trying to get a cross here.
Comment: I think he is trying to say that he has taken a lot of shots in the rear end. LOL!
Comment: what a middle age discussion you guys in America are facing... like is it the solution? everybody carrying guns? why don't you see the root of the problem at once? why don't you seek for the real problem, instead of pretending you people are saver just because it happens that someone has a gun... so you people are going to live forever with a gun under your pillow?
Comment: Well the problem is people can be cruel and i just need to protect my self, what about those people who are crippled with ms who have home invasions they can not stand up for themselfs and are often beatin in a mockery of there disability. Except the one lady who had a 22 and shot her attacker dead after he attempted to beat her by the way she had ms. What a Sad World we live in
Comment: Notice that the psychos usually are not so crazy as to open fire in a police station or a gun store. They tend to like nice soft gun free zones replete with helpless targets. Nothing makes more sense to me than banning, or severly limiting the number of gun-free zones for screened,trained and tested civilians.
Here's what I think is a viable solution for a campus environment: Allow conceiled cary, but limit the pistols to over/under derringers. It would be virtually impossible to pull off a massacre with one of these, but very easy to stop one. ....Your welcome.
Comment: Uh, great idea. Can we see if the psycho who committs these slaughter fest will abide by that over under rule also? That is the point. That is not a compromise. We don't need to compromise anything. Daily we are comprmised by thinking like that. The real solution is to stop attacking law abiding citizens with antiquated laws and PUNISH those criminals as we had intended with the laws we have. We need to stop punishing law abiding citizens with these really well thought out ideas that controlling the guns in our hands will do the same for the criminals. I don't mean to belittle, but what you present was once the begining as to why we are where we are at now. Of course some other factors were in that as well.
Comment: problem is over under Derringers are not enough caliber/power to stop some idiot on sum lsd or coke or w.e drug of choice. but awesome approach to an issue.
Comment: Retract my statement, just saw a 45/70 derringer that would certainly put someone down. haha like your idea makes sense now
Comment: I have a question for everyone using the 2nd Amendment as justification to carry a weapon. How does "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Give individuals the right to carry a weapon under normal conditions? The 2nd amendment was put in place to ensure that the United States was prepared to defend itself against attackers at a time of war. How is this even remotely applicable to this discussion? It also uses the words "Well Regulated". That seems to work counter to most of the pro-gun arguments. Now granted...I'm sure plenty of the people on this board are in some sort of Militia, but I don't think that's what TJ and company were referring to. Thoughts?
Comment: As other colleagues have already stated. The 2nd Amendment does not offer new rights, it protects rights that had already existed. A fatal flaw of the anti-gun side is to look at the 2nd Amendment as a right granting document. It is not. It had already recognized citizens rights and aimed to protect them further from possible government tyranny (what is occurring now). If you were an English expert as I am not, you could evaluate the language use as many have done and find that the ???right of the people to keep and bear arms??? has been found to be an independent clause/statement. Thus giving no meaningful relationship to that clause and the clause of the militia. The amendment is a compilation of several independent clauses solely placed to protect the existing rights. Of course, the other side of the debate wishes to combine the clauses to make it a militia/wartime amendment. The simple solution is to make weapon charges more strict, enforce the current sentencing guidelines and allow law abiding citizens the already GOD given right to protect themselves. Anyone that challenges a person???s right to protect themselves needs to do some serious reflection. In the 1-3 seconds I have to make a lethal judgment between life and death, are the police going to be there to stop this violent action another brings upon me? If you were to choose to allow the police to protect you, you would be having family provide you an expensive funeral. No police agency in this nation can be there to protect its citizens in situations as described. Look to D.C. Police for this issue, they feel they have NO obligation to protect citizens. Whether they admit it or not, they (police departments) are primarily crime prevention and at that it is aimed at teaching persons how to secure personal belongings and real property from robbers and burglars. Last time I checked, when I got to Home Depot to get a new deadbolt, the customer service person there can tell me more than the police about how the lockset works and what it will protect me from. Police are real good at prevention (to an extent), stopping and citing traffic violations, arresting for crimes committed in their presence (rare), and investigating all sorts of crimes that already post facto. I don???t want to be a post facto statistic. It may happen, but I want to have the right to attempt trying to protect myself doing it. Good debate! Thanks for the views!
Comment: Actually the 2nd amendment is to protect the people from the government as well so we can fight back if they do something stoopid. Thomas Jefferson said "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." Jefferson, and all of the Founders, would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans form exercising their right and duty to keep and bear arms
Comment: OK...So I don't see a need to fight off invaders or overthrow the government right now, so by that argument there should be no need to take your guns out of the gun case under your bed right?
Comment: First, you have to understand that the Bill of Rights was not granting any new rights ??? it merely recognized the pre-existing rights. This goes to the essence of the inalienable rights. The right to life implies the right to self-defense ??? otherwise, the right to life would have no meaning.
Second. The Militia Act of 1792 defines the unorganized militia as all people (at the time, all white men 17-45 years of age -- at the time the normal active adult longevity) capable of bearing arms, who, if summoned for service, are to provide THEIR OWN guns and ammo. This tells you about the ownership of guns as well as about the Militia. (Thus, the National Guard is not the militia ??? they do not own their guns.)
Third. What does "Well regulated" mean? If you look into the literature of the period, regulated means well-drilled and well-prepared ??? it does not mean (tightly) controlled. The language does evolve.
Fourth. You get too short-sighted with the 2nd Amendment. You should start looking at the State Constitutions ??? they are not meaningless, you know. 44 out of 50 State constitutions recognize the right to bear arms. I live in PA; the right to bear arms is stipulated as explicitly INDIVIDUAL right; no reference to ANY militia.
Fifth. The anti-gunners, such as yourself, are looking at only one side of the equation ??? they refuse to see the life-saving aspects of gun-ownership. The Justice Department of Bill Clinton's ??? not a pro-gunner ??? authored a paper with statistics on legitimate use of guns for self-defense. Some 60-80,000 people a year use guns to defend life and property. Some criminologists put that number at ten times higher, but I'll go with Clinton's Justice Department. That is a lot of lives saved. So much for your idea of putting the gun away.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/hvfsdaft.htm
Please don't count on other people to always defend you & your family, whether it's the police or anyone else.
Regards,
James J.
Comment: Glad you have more knowledge about this and can explain it to these anti gunners, I would really like to see more of the supreme court challenge these unconstitutional laws that states and localities have implemented.
Comment: I agree. But, Bush's Justice Department labored mightily and brought forth mouse, if the amicus to the Supreme Court in WDC case is any indication.
It seems like my fellow Republicans have a hard time to get their ducks in order.
Btw, I see that the board software made my double hyphens into three question marks. That's annoying.
But the ignorant people -- quite overrepresented amongst the anti-gunners -- are definitely more annoying.
regards,
James J.
Comment: Yeah, Definitely, DC gun Ban was stoooopid to say the least, Obviously Supreme Court is just way f-in stupid too. We are talking about reducing crime how to save America, Wish people would get with it and stop being so ignorant. Good to have well informed people by my side,
Comment: Agreed, But if u allow them to take away ur rights to defend your self and they day something goes to *** with the goverment, This is theoretical but still what would you want to defend your self.
Comment: What everyone seems to forget is the criminals could care less about laws. A criminal could care less about a gun law. This has been proven time and again. All one has to do is watch documentary that highlights the criminal activites of gangs and criminals. All one has to do is look to the DOJ/FBI crime statistics to see how, when, where and who is committing these violent crimes and with what. It is not the gun bought in a legal gun store or at a gun show. It is the gun bought off of the street under illegal means. Sure there are these crimes that occur when a person legally purchases a gun and goes on a shooting rampage because they went off their medications. We will never stop these crimes with laws against legal, law abiding citizens with foolish antiquated laws aimed at disarming.Why would you not want law abiding citizens to be allowed to protect themselves and quite possibly others? I teach at a community college. Our 'safety' is a joke! They call it 'safety' because security is too hostile. The staff is generally students who need a job and can't even remember to open doors! I am going to depend on them to come to my rescue when a crazed person or student goes on a violent rampage? I don't think so. On any given day a student could be illegally carrying a weapon on campus! I want the law abiding students, faculty and citizens who have training and been cleared to be able to carry their weapons and protect themselves and others. I want strict laws against the students or persons who carry a weapon on campus without the permit to carry. These are the people we need to regulate! Fact: anyone can harm or kill anyone at any given moment! Do I want a fighting chance to come home to my family or do I want to go with the antiquated laws and possibly find myself in prison for weapons violation against carrying on campus or wind up dead! I know my answer. For those that oppose, please stand aside. I am a law abiding, legally permitted citizen exercising my 2nd amendment rights to carry and subsequently protect myself.
