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.
More Guns on Campus?
-
Posted By: josefeliciano @ 02/17/2008 10:43:29 PM
-
Posted By: nicol @ 02/17/2008 9:43:50 PM
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?
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 10:17:37 PM
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
-
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 12:15:04 PM
I feel like this 'arm the students' argument is just another part of the 'quick fix' obsession that is plaguing America. Let's throw medicine at a mental problem and hope everything gets better. Who wants to deal with the long and exhaustive therapy process? Lets take some more diet pills instead of changing our lifestyles to lose weight and be healthy. And while we're at it, let's just give students guns. The quick and easy solution isn't always the best. Maybe some sort of on-campus weapon policy could be the answer, but it's going to take lots of time and effort to figure out what the best solution is going to be. And ultimately, it's going to take a lot of trial and error. Where did all this impatience come from?
-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/17/2008 1:32:17 PM
The "trial and error" has already been done! 40 states have had "shall issue" concealed carry permits for many years now with an excellent track record of lawfulness and responsible firearms handling. A campus boundry does not suddenly make a person lose their mind and sink into drunken debauchery. Banks even allow concealed carry holders as customers in their businesses even though all it would take to stop them would be to post a sign on their door saying "no firearms". The impatience comes because this is a proven program that could be implemented immediately at no cost! The only thing standing in the way is some unfounded fears by uninformed people!
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 2:28:51 PM
You're missing the point. I'm talking about the impatience behind finding preventive solutions. How does bringing a gun to class prevent shooting incidents from happening in the first place?
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 3:16:30 PM
How do laws work in deterance, they don't, if i carry your life in my hands and you carry my life in yours dont you think im going treat u better, i don't wanna die to you? thats a big deterance for alot of people
-
Posted By: jtcollier @ 02/17/2008 8:37:44 PM
They do work to deter. They deter the law abiding citizen because they could wind up in prison for a weapons violation! What a joke! We need to strengthen the carry laws to make it stricter for the persons that do not have a permit and carry! This is one way we can start getting the criminals into the leagal system. Currently the only way they end up with a weapons violation is if they are a convicted felon, stolen gun, carry concealed without a permit, or carry into an unauthorized place. We strenghten the law abiding side by allowing carry everywhere, within reason, and make sure that a offender is given the max penalty and fine for not following the laws! Go 2nd amendment. Good post by the way!
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 4:46:45 PM
Really? I'm not talking about if students carry guns in class in general. I'm saying if students are allowed to carry guns in class, how does that stop a potential shooter from coming into class anyway? It clearly did not stop that church shooter in Colorado. Most shooters enter into the situation knowing they are going to ultimately kill themselves, so what's the difference if someone else shoots them instead? This really isn't that complicated.
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 6:04:40 PM
The difference is the number of lives lost. If you plan on killing 32 people such as VT and sum one stops you at the 3rd kill well now u lessened the lives that could have been taken commonsense.
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 6:23:18 PM
Actually, you're missing the big picture. I completely agree that it would have been incredible if there could have been a reduction in the lives lost at NIU. But allowing guns in the classroom is a short term solution. I'm talking about getting past the quick fix, looking at the long term, the real big picture. I'm talking about preventing this from happening at all. Is that not the ultimate goal? We're just getting into semantics here and this is looking like arguing for the sake of arguing and it's not getting anyone anywhere. These comments don't mean anything if people just sit in front of their computer screens and don't bother trying to enact what they are preaching.
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 6:42:54 PM
Please tell me what gun bans have done For DC. Highest Crime Rate. What about England Increase in violent crime since they have imposed the ban on guns, Same with Australia. I also want to talk a bout Kennasaw GA Where they require by law although not enforced to carry a handgun, virtually no Crime. States that lack gun control, they have the least amount of Crime. We have examples that everyone wants to follow but the fact is that arming people with a weapon to protect them does work. I???m not a big guy, I know that I can???t beat the crap out of someone at 230lb but I no damn sure a bullet can. But as you say, the big picture. There is no fix, Because certainly taking away guns wont work, But with a combination to stop gun shops, shows and private sellers from selling firearms illegally and allowing law abiding citizens to carry everywhere that does not have police present in the building It might work, Because imagine your mother Being beaten to death, what can she do to keep the attacker off. Mace, he???s high on drugs, now that jus pissed him off, Hmm looks like a gun does help. Just Look at Concealed Carry in coloration with Crime stats. Also Check Out www.concealedcampus.com
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 7:18:06 PM
Now I'm pretty sure that at no point did I mention anything about banning guns. But why does the solution HAVE TO BE guns? Does it really NEED to be guns? ONLY guns? That's what you're making it sound like. I"m not saying guns cannot or should not be incorporated into the long term solution, but guns are seriously not the end-all, be-all solution to everything! There is not just one easy answer to this problem. It's a clusterf--k of a ton of intertwined issues. Like I mentioned elsewhere (see below), why not toss a security guard with a gun into the classrooms. That way students aren't packing, but there is still someone there to protect them. So clearly there are students out there that feel they would be safer carrying a gun with them to class. What about those other students that might feel LESS safe knowing their peers are packing? How do you propose to make them feel safe? What about faculty that wouldn't feel comfortable knowing students are bringing weapons into their classrooms? What about the other staff on campus? Again, I'm not saying that a banning guns is the solution. I understand how having an individual there to protect the well-being of the students is important, but why is arming the students the only solution?
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 7:29:39 PM
It???s cost effective and these people haven't done anything to prove other wise. And the whole idea for concealed carry is that it is concealed meaning you don't know that its there. I mean when you go to the movie theater are you uncomfortable watching the movie because the possibility of a person carrying a gun. The reason that this is such a good idea is because 1. It???s Cost effective to tax payers because these people pay for the training and permits. 2. Its already being done with great success in Utah, Colorado, and some other no name schools. With no incident in the class room or outside of the class room, period. 3. It doesn???t disarm law abiding citizens. And Last but not least, because Concealed Carry does save lives, Police are not there to protect lives only enforce them. I also want you to think about what if someone like the Clock Tower Sniper was on campus, He wasn???t in class yet still a gun free zone, Now I can shoot back at that tool bag.
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 7:47:40 PM
First of all, should cost really be a concern if we're talking about safety and peoples' lives? Second, if you are implementing a NEW concealed carry policy that everyone would know about, you don't think that would make anyone nervous or uncomfortable? And you're still not even addressing how to prevent incidents like these from even happening. I have actually considered the merit to the short term idea for allowing students to bring guns into the classroom ... can you seriously not even consider any alternatives? It's this kind of closed-mindedness and lack of compromise that prevents progress. And, I'm curious ... what kind of gun are you carrying around that is concealed that is going to help shoot down a clock tower sniper?
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 7:57:43 PM
Not really thought at the long term, because i know that violence is apart of life, we are also forgetting the idea that Concealed Carry can also subdue the threat of rape or beatings, robberies ect. Police, security guards can???t be everywhere. And Honestly when students at UT found out they said they were no more afraid of people who know possibly carried a weapon. And a 9mm Bullet will still have enough power to take out sum one in a clock tower but its not limited to clock towers, what about the *** that went thru UNC Chapel Hill and was running people over killing 2. And I think the thought of being shot back at would do it enough that they might think twice. As for your thoughts on long term what do you suggest?
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 8:19:22 PM
If you see my long comment below, because a lot of these shooters have mental health issues, I think addressing how our insurance companies are failing us in terms of providing help with mental heath care would be a start. Stopping throwing medication at the problem without requiring therapy or monitoring progress could help stop some of these individuals before they decide to act. It might also help if the media would stop flashing these shooters pictures all over the media outlets. Some of these shooters are looking for notoriety, and it might prevent potential copy cats, though I'm not sure about the likelihood of such a thing. Considering other security alternatives at the university level could help. Have students swipe ids to get into class like they have to do at campus rec centers to ensure the only the students that belong there are getting in. Locking the doors once class has started might help stop people from getting in. I am well aware that a lot of these changes would be time and cost intensive, I think working on preventive long term solutions is just as important as implementing defensive solutions.
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 8:35:36 PM
Your still not addressing the huge issue of why people advocate the use of concealed weapons, yes school shooters are the big problem but what about Rapist on young women and sometimes men, what about brutal assaults and kidnapping and much much more that can be mitigated with the use of a firearm. And we also forget that these school shooters were students, and Iv seen the swipe n go locks in use in the dorms and kids being polite and unaware of who is entering the dorms willingly hold the door open for other so called students, I gained access to a friends dorm and I live off campus, so its most likely impractical even if we could some *** will get in once in a while.
As for using medical problems, it doesn???t address every instance of violence that could harm me you, family friends, like a gun does in the right hands. That gun represents a lot of power in a tiny package.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 7:53:48 PM
Oh and i forgot to address this comment "Police are not there to protect lives only enforce them" I just want to note that I suggested the use of a security guard, not a cop ... do you really think that if there was a Security Guard in the room when a shooter busts in, the Security Guard would just sit there and let kids get shot? That's insane.
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 8:17:58 PM
No I would hope this could happen but man think of the cost 103 classes go on at my university every hr and school is on from 8 am till 9pm 13 hrs x 103 classes thats 1339 hrs on duty time for security guard pay them 15.00 hr thats 20,000 dollars a day n maybe 300 days pay due to holidays and such thats 6.000,000 dollars a year for one campus, Sounds like tax payers are going to have to pay a lot.
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 6:44:41 PM
Fact is States are attempting to enact what people like me are preaching and the 12000+ Members Of Students For Concealed Carry on Campus. 13 States are currently looking at this issue in house and senate.
-
-
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 6:08:21 PM
And it doesn't stop that shooter from entering but it does stop him from continuing the massacre. Such as in the church in Colorado where concealed carry member shot and killed a man attempting to massacre some members of the church. your failing to look at the big picture. If u can save one more life we have accomplished something. imagine NIU 1 person dead not 5 Sounds a lot better to me
-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/17/2008 5:08:53 PM
Are you proposing that insanity can be elimated if we could only find out how, and that no other partial solution should be used until we cure the root cause? I say hogwash!
Further, the shooter at the church was well on the way to killing scores more people if the couragious woman hadn't stopped him. So, even if concealed carry won't prevent a mass murder, if can certainly reduce the number of people who would be killed.-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 5:30:10 PM
I'm not saying there isn't room for a partial solution. I just don't believe that arming students must be the answer. I will be teaching my first class in the Fall and I personally would feel LESS safe knowing that there would be students with guns in my classroom. I would rather see security guards in every classroom before that. I am happy to acknowledge that there are responsible young adults out there that would follow the rules, but there are also plenty of people that have no problem abusing those same privileges. How do I know a student wouldn???t take advantage of the situation and threaten me or another student? And don???t even bother arguing with this point. It is my own personal feeling that I wouldn???t feel safe and you???re really not going to change my mind.
In terms of the elimination of insanity ... I think the shootings are highlighting the fact that the nation/govt. is not doing its part to promote adequate care for individuals with mental health problems. The fact that it is nearly impossible to find insurance that will actually cover mental health care is ridiculous. This is circulating back to my original statement that we are a nation obsessed with the quick fix. That it's not enough to just throw medicine at the problem. And of course that is totally perpetuated by the drug companies needing to push the sale of their meds, but that is an argument for a different time.
And when you say ???Are you proposing that insanity can be elimated if we could only find out how??? ??? are you trying to tell me that you think psychology is useless? If that???s what you meant, as a psychologist, that offends me. Therapy would stand a much better chance if we would stop allowing primary care physicians to prescribe medications without requiring additional cognitive behavioral therapy or requiring that individuals??? drug usage is monitored.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/17/2008 4:19:32 PM
You're forgetting that almost all of these incidents are in "gun free" zones (AKA "easy prey" environments). These people choose areas where people can't fight back effectively. I'd even bet (even though there's no way to prove it) that the guy who did the shooting in the church in Colorado thought it was a "gun free" zone. The Israelis armed their teachers ofter the terrorist incident and they've had none since.
-
Posted By: humbleopinion @ 02/17/2008 4:42:49 PM
Actually I'm not forgetting that these are 'gun free' zones. I'm responding to suggestion that the solution would be to have these areas allow for those with concealed carry permits to bring guns to class.
-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/17/2008 5:24:36 PM
Then they are no longer gun free zone and more likely to be avoided by these insane shooters. They might get shot before the can complete their agenda.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: SCCC_CL_OUHSC @ 02/17/2008 2:35:09 AM
This is truly a highly debated topic. Before I give my opinion on the subject I would like to encourage everyone here, no matter which position you take, to take the time to research what you are fighting about. Don't just get on here and type up a bunch of emotionally charged comments that have no real value in the realm of debate. KNOW the facts about what you are discussing.
I recommend starting at www.concealedcampus.com
It is an organization of intelligent college students who are passionate about their mission and are dedicated to bringing factual arguments and information to the public.
For those of you opposed to this movement, I know it can sound absurd to reduce acts of gun violence by adding more guns, but I truly believe that if you open-mindedly investigate what Students for Concealed Carry on Campus stands for you will see that we all have the same overall goals in mind and there is a good chance that this movement could change the minds of criminals who decide they want to "go out in glory" like we have seen over and over again in recent history.
Really, the question that I think this entire argument comes down to is, "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?"
It makes no difference how many gun laws you enact or how many gun free zones you make. It makes no difference how many guns are made or sold. There are always going to be people who choose not to follow the laws of our country. The only way to reduce the number of violent criminals is to stop being "victims" and expecting other people to defend us and start defending ourselves and punishing those who do wrong.
This is my general take on the debate without getting into all kinds of facts and figures. Thanks for reading.
P.S.- I spell checked this before posting for those of you, like me, that are bothered when people get into debates and can't spell. It just ruins credibility in my opinion. :)-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 6:11:55 PM
Well put. Bottom line " More Guns, Less Crime".
-
-
Posted By: Rocket Scientist @ 02/15/2008 9:05:46 PM
This is ridiculous. You go to college to learn, not to worry about packing heat so you can stop some mentally disturbed person from shooting up your school. This group has been watching way too many Dirty Harry and Death Wish movies. What happens if your concealed weapon holder gets trigger-happy with someone who's wearing a black trenchcoat and looks a bit threatening? Or how about someone who just pissed them off and they want some instant payback? What if a backpack or a purse with a gun in it gets stolen? Great, now you have a criminal on campus with a gun.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that we already have way too many guns in our communities and they ultimately end up being used for what they're designed for - killing people!! This country needs real gun control similar to what's been implemented in Europe, otherwise you can expect similar or probably worse incidences occurring in schools or other public places.-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 5:09:11 PM
Neither DIRTY HARRY opr the DEATH WISH mivies is in any way what legal concealed carry is about.
It isn't the lawful gun owner who watched too many movies, it is the who cites Dirty Harry as a valid role model. -
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/15/2008 9:30:15 PM
LEts be reasonable, look at the facts, These people who carry concealed everyday do not go vigilanti on everyone who looks like a criminal, we do not fight over parking spaces, that is why we are law abiding, and as for guns being stolen, people carry these guns on there persons, except for a small few, and Europe, yeh they have gun control, and they have the highest rate of homicide by gun by any nation that says no to guns.
-
-
Posted By: Shrikant JP @ 02/16/2008 1:34:41 AM
I am staying in India, and incidents of guys shooting before killing themselves are rare here and have happened only in homes where young people have had access to their parents' licenced guns.
I know most people in US will not agree with this, but in my opinion, gun availabilty should be restricted, licenced and enforced strictly by all states.-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 5:04:11 PM
India, has zero violewnce... the nation that gave the world the word, THUG. Anation with ethic violence violence and border war, that was ruled by the British with an iron hand. Where Ghandi said the disarming of the people was one of the worst actions. That India?
-
Posted By: burbank @ 02/16/2008 2:40:53 AM
It all ready is
-
-
Posted By: vthokie @ 02/16/2008 7:59:07 AM
Allowing students to carry weapons is ridiculous (and I believe in gun ownership rights). Here are a few things to consider:
1. Suppose a shooting is happening somewhere, like a college campus. Police are called, but when they show up, there are a dozen individuals, firing away, potentially killing more people in the crossfire. How do the cops know who to take out? I think you'll end up with more civilian casualties.
2. Both the situations at NIU and at VT (where I am currently a student, and was during the events of April) are due to mentally ill individuals. Cho never got the help the court "forced" him to get; and the NIU student stopped taking necessary medications. Where was the oversight? How in the world were these individuals able to "legally" purchase guns?
3. Realize that college campuses are the sites of some of the most idiotic behavior I have ever witnessed, especially with the amount of alcohol that is readily available. I have seen fights erupt for no substantial reason. If firearms are around, these situations could easily escalate into murder. A bit far-fetched, I realize, but something to consider.
Just my $0.02.-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 4:49:10 PM
They guy dressed in all black or camo, with the AK47 or shotgun will be the obvious person of interest to the police when they arrive after 2-20 minutes.
The police are trained to identiufy criminals, they average college student is not dressed in combat clothes, maybe laws against clothes would be more useful at controlling violence? -
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/16/2008 11:55:19 AM
After a Shooting lasting at maximum 15 seconds which is the avg time for a shoot out. you are required by law to re holster your gun and conceal it. wait for police do the investigation. Look at the facts man your smarter than that.
-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/16/2008 10:57:59 AM
Gun control is not the answer! In fact, this is another case where a concealed-carry weapon holder at the scene might have reduced the horror! Concealed-carry holders in 40 "shall issue" states have proven their reliability and lawfullness over many years. Illinois is not one of the 40!
There have been several incidents fairly recently where concealed carry weaponholders have limited the amount of harm caused by rampaging lunatics. Recently a lunatic in a church was stopped by a church member with a concealed carry weapon before the lunatic could kill more people than he already had (which he was well equipped to do). There is the case where two armed citizens apprehended a gunman (preventing his escape) at the Appalachia (sp?) School of Law after retrieving their guns from their cars. There was another incident where an off-duty cop stopped a shooter in a mall. If there had been a concealed carry holder at Virginia tech in one of those classes (teacher or student), odds were good that the number of persons killed would have been significantly fewer! "what if" tales of CCW holders shooting the wrong person, or cops accidently shooting a CCW holder simply haven't happened! If a 21+ year old student (MANY students are older - ex: military vets, adults pursuing more education, etc.) has demonstrated that they have what it takes to get a concealed carry permit for off campus, then they have demonstrated that they can just as reasonably be trusted to carry a concealed weapon on campus! Utah schools were forced to allow this - Number of weapons incidents in Utah with concealed carry holders on campus: zero!
The notion that guards and metal detectors in universities is the answer is false. The guards will be the first targets as the shooter walks through the detectors. Further there are far more concealed carry permit holders in some states (incidently with much lower crime rates than Illinois or D.C.) and for no cost to the system. Psychos will think twice about using students for target practice if they know some students (and teachers) will be armed but he can't tell who. Remember - 40 states already have a superb track record with concealed carry weapon holders over many years and all the straw man "what if" scenarios proposed by the anti-gun crowd never happened! -
Posted By: rspock @ 02/16/2008 10:53:34 AM
Gun control is not the answer! In fact, this is another case where a concealed-carry weapon holder at the scene might have reduced the horror! Concealed-carry holders in 40 "shall issue" states have proven their reliability and lawfullness over many years. Illinois is not one of the 40!
There have been several incidents fairly recently where concealed carry weaponholders have limited the amount of harm caused by rampaging lunatics. Recently a lunatic in a church was stopped by a church member with a concealed carry weapon before the lunatic could kill more people than he already had (which he was well equipped to do). There is the case where two armed citizens apprehended a gunman (preventing his escape) at the Appalachia (sp?) School of Law after retrieving their guns from their cars. There was another incident where an off-duty cop stopped a shooter in a mall. If there had been a concealed carry holder at Virginia tech in one of those classes (teacher or student), odds were good that the number of persons killed would have been significantly fewer! "what if" tales of CCW holders shooting the wrong person, or cops accidently shooting a CCW holder simply haven't happened! If a 21+ year old student (MANY students are older - ex: military vets, adults pursuing more education, etc.) has demonstrated that they have what it takes to get a concealed carry permit for off campus, then they have demonstrated that they can just as reasonably be trusted to carry a concealed weapon on campus! Utah schools were forced to allow this - Number of weapons incidents in Utah with concealed carry holders on campus: zero!
The notion that guards and metal detectors in universities is the answer is false. The guards will be the first targets as the shooter walks through the detectors. Further there are far more concealed carry permit holders in some states (incidently with much lower crime rates than Illinois or D.C.) and for no cost to the system. Psychos will think twice about using students for target practice if they know some students (and teachers) will be armed but he can't tell who. Remember - 40 states already have a superb track record with concealed carry weapon holders over many years and all the straw man "what if" scenarios proposed by the anti-gun crowd never happened!
-
-
Posted By: HCgr8n08 @ 02/16/2008 12:08:50 PM
Why are we messing around, let's just issue a firearm in the hospital at birth with the birth certificate. Everyone can then live in fear knowing the other person is packing. Then it comes down to "can I out draw this guy?" just like the old west. This is the scenario every gunhead dreams about I suppose, It didnt work back then and it certainly won't work now. The last place we need firearms is in a institute of higher education ededucationedeeeducationeducationwh
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 4:40:13 PM
WE need a law requiring total public nudity, any person wearing clothing could be carrying a gun, knife or even a bomb. The Muslim terrorists have a cottage industry making explosive vests.
Even nudity isn't a sure thing, what if Rachel Welch's surgery was with C4 instead of inert silicone? -
Posted By: superlite27 @ 02/16/2008 1:03:07 PM
"The last place we need firearms is in a institute of higher education"
You're right. seems to me that the mass murderers are currently do it anyway. Too bad you only want the killers who ignore the law to be able to carry them.
"Everyone can then live in fear knowing the other person is packing".
Everyone is living in fear knowing the criminals are packing NOW. If people were legally allowed to defend themselves from the criminals who are IGNORING THE LAW ANYWAY they would live in LESS FEAR knowing they had the option of defending themselves.
Last time I checked, it was against the law to KILL PEOPLE. These mass murderers ignore this. What makes you think they'll suddenly start obeying gun laws? -
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/16/2008 12:24:18 PM
wild west, people respected each other i knew you carried my life in your hands and you knew i carried yours together it was peace based on that respect.
-
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 2:59:46 PM
A factual error, in the Luby shooting incident in Texas, Susan Gratia was not licensed to carry a concealed weapon because at that time Texas did not have a law allowinhg for permits to carry a firearm. After the shooting, where her parents died before her eyes she was one of the people who pushed for a "shall issue" concealed carry law in Texas.
As the article does point out, adult citizens in most states can now get a permit to carry a concealed weapon after training and background checks. Those laws don't allow totally unrestricted carrying of guns, one restriction that is universla is not drinking while carrying. Further, as part of the background check process ANY prior alcohol or drug problem will prevent issuance of a permit.
Gun Free Zones are just another name for Unarmed Victim Zones, just the place the mentally disturbed seeks for their twisted plans.-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/17/2008 3:36:28 PM
YEAH you are totally right, Lets just start calling them Victim Zones.... Because thats what they are, I see a Buncha people i can shoot that wont fight back, and when all of them die i will be famous.. Im literally going to go out with a bang!
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 4:36:02 PM
I left Illinois about 35 years ago, been in Kansas about 30 years. Kansas finally have a concealed carry law and so far over 10,000 permits have been issued. Kansas will honor out of state permits from about 24 other states. A Kansas permit is valid in about 24 states too.
But I feel like a "victim" anytime I cross the Mississippi River back into Illinois.
Part of the problem is that some of tyhe legislators who will vote for a concealed carry law to get votes don't eally trust the "idea" of citizens carrying weapons. So they add restrictions.
Kansas had to pass a revision after the law was first passed because many cities passed laws against carry weapons on any public property owned ny the city. The result was Kansas passed HB 2528 which requies any building that is posted with an AG approved sign is off limits. But thye Kansas League of Municipalities has told its members [as has the Kansas Banker's Assoc.] that they must post the sign. So there are place we don't go, it just means that the bank robbers know that the bank will be "safe to rob" since the banks do not have armed guards and non opf the honest citizens will be there. So far, several posted banks have been robbed, to my knowledge no unposted bank has yet been robbed.
-
-
-
Posted By: spiritguide @ 02/15/2008 8:29:09 PM
Note: The Illinois shooter was not a Criminal ( nor was the Va Tech shooter ). Neither had any criminal history. The Illinois shooter was a model student. These are evidently the same people gun advocates would encourage to arm themselves on Campus.
Both shot themselves, as did the Columbine shooters, at the end of their rampage. These people are not deterred by the prospect of being killed. Evidently they welcome death. And many might find the prospect of a wild shoot-out with other students even more exciting. Either way, they are going to get the publicity and notoriety the evidently seek.
Arming scores of students at random is not the answer. I've read that most gun related deaths are between individuals who know each other or who are family. Many are suicides. Many have no history of criminal behavior. Humans as a group are far too stressed and emotionally challenged to walk around armed all the time.
If each campus had a large number of known and well trained "undercover" armed students.. properly qualified, trained and tested, to act as protectors and deterrants, I might approve. They could receive compensation toward tuition. But even that has its risks.
Considering that there are millions of college students in the US, these occurrences, though extremely tragic, are still relatively rare. I don't think they would be if thousands of students would be allowed to arm themselves at will on campus.-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 3:58:49 PM
Most shootings that happen between people who know each other includes drug dealers, pushers and users. It is well known that crime and violence prone people,begin commiting crimes before they are 21. The youngster who snatches purses at 12, robs stores at 14 and hijacks cars at 16. By 21, they have a long record. What is proposed is not that every student carry a weapon and not even every adult, just ythose who will do all the things needed to pass a complet background check run bt the state and FBI, take training and follow the rules.
The rules are simple, you can read all about it in just a few dozen or hundred pages of law on leathal force, arrest, criminal statutes, felonies and misdameanors. start here www.geocities.com/ks2ndamewndmentsociety -
Posted By: charlesbronson @ 02/15/2008 9:01:34 PM
It's not about arming everyone, only those who want to, have been trained, are at least 21 years of age with no ciminal record. Concealed carry is not for everyone, just a select few. It is this select few that can possibly save your life the next time a madman decides to shoot up a school. Let's face it: schools are becoming just as dangerous as the subway or dark alleys so why not permit those who are fit to protect themselves and others? Why just be defenseless and let some else slaughter you? I would rather put up a fight than just lay down an die.
Yes, yesterday's and the Virginia Tech shooter were "regular" people with no criminal records. You cannot stop everyone from buying a gun and doing something stupide, but this is just a small percentage. We should not punish everone for just the actions of a few.
It's time everyone wake up and read the sylabus and realize that the world is not the same as it was 50 years ago. We had 9/11 and terrorism is rampant. If you were a student in the auditorium, and, to your surprise, a classmate pulls out a gun to help you, would you tell him/her to put it away or would you want your classmate to try to take out the perp? -
Posted By: charlesbronson @ 02/15/2008 8:56:42 PM
ddd
-
-
Posted By: bubbawheat @ 02/16/2008 8:33:32 PM
The last thing we need is a shootout in a lecture hall. How many people do you think would get caught in the crossfire? We need to take guns out of the schools not make them part of the culture.
-
Posted By: PROGUN1 @ 02/16/2008 8:37:23 PM
"What is worse than allowing an execution-style massacre to continue uncontested? How can any action with the potential to stop or slow a deranged killer intent on slaughtering victim after victim be considered ???worse??? than allowing that killer to continue undeterred?" We need to be able to even the odds. Live in the Real World
-
Posted By: bubbawheat @ 02/16/2008 8:40:27 PM
The killer should be deterred at the door with proper security. The days of the old west are long, gone.That's reality!
-
Posted By: bubbawheat @ 02/16/2008 8:45:52 PM
I love guns as much as the next guy, but, they have no place in the schools. The studies that have been done are biased and don't count on everyone carrying a gun. There are too many unstable people out there who would love to have the opportunity. Guns belong on the range and in the woods, not in society.
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 3:49:32 PM
The "bad guys" are already carrying guns. Like the line from the movie, "Badges, we don't need no stinking badges" the armed robbers, car jackers, or active shooter seeking their 15 minutes of fame [infamy] wants to have unarmed victims.
Only the law abiding and stable people will be obeying the gun free zone laws, the criminal and lunatic will seek them out because that is where the victims are. -
Posted By: Frankl1955 @ 02/17/2008 10:41:38 AM
Tell it to the Slicky Boys and GangBangers in my Cleveland hood. Really, you have no idea of reality . You would disarm all of the good People in the hope that we would finally reach the end of the rainbow, its been tried before, it does not work.
-
Posted By: E.VIIIman @ 02/16/2008 9:00:54 PM
and might I add armed criminals on the loose, intent on doing us harm dont belong in society either....but ohh wait, they are already part of our society, and always will be unless we decide to send them off to a secluded island.... hey why dont we send them off to a secluded island??
-
-
Posted By: flegeros @ 02/17/2008 2:42:51 PM
I have a question for bubbawheat. What is your opinion of the need to renew the FISA Act to allow our intelligence services to easedrop on foreign telephone conversations between suspected terrorists? Do you view that as an assault on our civil liberties, as many on the left do? If so, why don't you also have a problem with subjecting yourself to security screening every time you enter a building on campus?
Also, have you thought about how many additional cops would be necessary to implement such a plan? Who will pay for that?
The police response time at NIU was around 2 minutes. This is excellent performance, about the best that can be expected. And still, the madman killed 6 people and injured a dozen more.
The only thing that could have stopped him is if there were people already there who had the means to defend themselves.
Look at what happened at that church in CO a couple of months ago. A "volunteer security guard" (i.e. a church member with a concealed handgun license) used her gun to stop the shooter in his tracks. -
Posted By: Tuckerzz @ 02/16/2008 9:06:06 PM
The old west may be gone but a threat to one???s life in a gun free zone is a reality that several more people now have to deal with. The perception that a gun free zone protects lives is a false reality that has been tragically proved again. You may choose to believe gun free zones protect you but I choose to observe the evidence and act accordingly in protecting myself and my loved ones. As you so clearly stated, there are many unstable people out there and I choose not to ignore this fact.
-
Posted By: E.VIIIman @ 02/16/2008 8:58:34 PM
Who's gonna pay for that extra security? Are you? ohh sure maybe why dont we just raise the school tuition??
-
-
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 3:43:47 PM
When only the "active shooter" is shooting, everyone will be shot at the will of the active shooter. [active shooter is the term the police now use].
But if some of the students and faculty are armed, the active shooter will be distracted if not immediately stopped.
But more likely, the reason collewges have been targets is that they are a target rich environment, maybe the active shooter has a grudge against the school, maybe he did not get any dates, maybe he failed a class. But the policy of no self-defense allowwed, which is the result of no weapons allowed, means that the active shooter is drawn to that place. -
Posted By: flegeros @ 02/17/2008 2:36:39 PM
The only thing worse than a "shootout in a lecture hall" is what we have now - lunatics slaughtering people who have been denied the means of defending themselves. 40 states allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns almost everywhere they go. Why should a campus be any different? And why should anyone in their right mind think that simply declaring a campus to be a "gun-free zone" is going to stop a crazed killer from bringing guns on to the campus? All it does is ensure that the victims will be unarmed.
-
-
Posted By: tootieflootie @ 02/16/2008 8:47:08 PM
I am effectively bugged by reading more than one article regarding the NIU shooting suggesting that more could be done to prevent such events on a college campus. Does no one else see the more obvious problem here? This university shooting, and the last, which happened at Virginia Tech in April of 2007, both involved the legal sale of arms to individuals with diagnosed mental/emotional issues. Jan. 5, 2008, saw the passing of a marginally stronger measure regarding this issue in gun control, but obviously this measure doesn't go far enough. Perhaps its time to stop selling handguns to the mentally unstable? Duh?
-
Posted By: E.VIIIman @ 02/16/2008 9:08:44 PM
I am for passing laws to prohibit sales of firearms to mentally unstable people, or drug addicts, and in the past year, the shootings that have occurred in the USA have been carried out by drug influenced, emotionally disturbed. What I do have a problem with is when the anti-gunners try to disarm, normal, law-abiding citizens like myself. I think the victims should sue those anti-gunners, you know, since they've already taken our right to self defense away, along with our guns, so the responsibility is on them to protect us, so now I wonder, can they step up to the challenge?
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 3:38:18 PM
THose laws are on the books now. Illinois requires a Firearems Ownwers Identification Card just to buy a gun or ammunitrion or to possess same. Concealwed weapons permit background checks go even further, requiring that applicants waive their medical right to privacy.
All guns purchased from dealers require a "Brady" check for criminal and mental records.
Passing the same law, over and over may make some people "feel" like they've done something, but it is just a waste of time.
-
-
-
Posted By: Johnny36 @ 02/15/2008 11:15:04 PM
This young man is obviously sincere but poorly informed when it come to the deterrent effect of concealed weapons. Just a few years ago the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences did an extensive study of all the research that had been done on concealed weapons and they found that the NRA's line about concealed weapons cutting down on crime was not true. This definitive study by the the most respected academy in America is never mentioned by the NRA or people like this young man who wants to arm college students.
We obviously face an enormous problem and the solutions will not come easily. I would hope, however, that we don't rush headlong into a draconian fix that is based on blind fear and NRA propaganda. Let's also consider alternatives such as use of metal detectors, armed guards, mace, psychological profiling, psych and medical background checks, etc. And then, eventually we need to get at the root cause which is our proclivity for settling issues with violence. Cage fighting and slasher movies should be banned, and a little praying might not hurt.-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 3:21:40 PM
There are studies and there are other studies. If you read the studies cited by Kleck and John Lott, you will notice that they point out a shift in the pattern of crime. Property crimes increase, violent crimes against person decrease.
-
Posted By: disgustedamerican @ 02/16/2008 2:39:27 AM
If you were confronted by some crazy jerk with a gun or knife wich would you rather have? a. the National Research Council of the Acadamy of Sciences dossier? or b. a .357 magnum? College boy eh?
-
Posted By: Legendary @ 02/15/2008 11:24:21 PM
This would be nice but like I mentioned there have been what could be considered normal people who turn out crazy from reasons that you would not understand because they may not had a mental background! You have some people sying they was doing GODs work to satin telling them to do it! So how can you really tell?? You mention some good alternative though. That could be jobs that aid our service people here at home. Now knowing the students are protected would alarm the evil minded set people. Much like a robber being alarmed that a house is will protected so he ratter not go in. This would be better that giving a student a gun then say his girlfriend dumps him then he snaps then go crazy! Don't let a teacher fail the student! We can't tell what make break a person so I feel we better limit the violence.
-
-
Posted By: James Macklin @ 02/17/2008 2:59:24 PM
A factual error, in the Luby shooting incident in Texas, Susan Gratia was not licensed to carry a concealed weapon because at that time Texas did not have a law allowinhg for permits to carry a firearm. After the shooting, where her parents died before her eyes she was one of the people who pushed for a "shall issue" concealed carry law in Texas.
As the article does point out, adult citizens in most states can now get a permit to carry a concealed weapon after training and background checks. Those laws don't allow totally unrestricted carrying of guns, one restriction that is universla is not drinking while carrying. Further, as part of the background check process ANY prior alcohol or drug problem will prevent issuance of a permit.
Gun Free Zones are just another name for Unarmed Victim Zones, just the place the mentally disturbed seeks for their twisted plans.
-
Posted By: kdkapoor @ 02/17/2008 8:31:19 AM
Yes! We need more guns in the schools, colleges, hospitals, airplanes , Churchews and shopping Malls. Who knows when a crazy person might show up. A shootout would be the right thing. Small arms would not do. Becasue most crazies could buy Heavy-duty machineguns. To counter that we need bigger and faster guns for every man, woman and child.
-
Posted By: Frankl1955 @ 02/17/2008 11:02:35 AM
Calm yourself kdkapoor
-
Posted By: 747Driver @ 02/17/2008 12:32:53 PM
Another one who is obviously no longer taking his meds.
-
-
-
Posted By: Frankl1955 @ 02/17/2008 10:46:50 AM
If you won???t believe me, ask Tom:
???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
-
Posted By: virginian187 @ 02/17/2008 4:58:52 AM
it is estimated that legally owned and carried firearms are used 2.5 million times a year to stop a crime from happening. i'm a concealed carry permit owner from VA and had to pull my pistol once. that stopped the incident cold. for more information on such incidents go to: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/
-
Posted By: bvfd920 @ 02/17/2008 7:43:41 AM
My boss just finished up the court hearing on a guy who entered his house at 5:00am in the morning. He (the boss), stopped him at gun point with no shots fired. Police took 4 minutes to respond and graciously arrested the bad guy who had 30+ prior convictions under his belt. Basically, if it hadn't been for the gun, the guy would have gotten away and home invasions would not have gone down 30% like the local police chief claims.
And, i did get his story published for him in American Rifleman!!!!! Now we both carry daily at our job.
Without the 2nd, all the rest don't matter.........
-
-
Posted By: 747Driver @ 02/16/2008 8:43:37 PM
In view of the frequency of campus shootings, I fail to see the relevance of getting any ones ???permission??? to carry a gun to class. Ive always adhered to the adage: ???Better to beg forgiveness than ask permission???. This is why, as a college student I always carried a gun, despite the fact it was forbidden. And this is why I now advise college students to be armed. Where your safety is at stake; screw the regs.
-
Posted By: E.VIIIman @ 02/16/2008 9:02:13 PM
True.... there is this saying I have read on some forums:
"I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"-
Posted By: rspock @ 02/17/2008 12:32:38 AM
Ya, well don't forget the judgement of the 12 can get you carried by the 6 under the right circumstances! Also, if you get caught carrying illegally, you can lose that right forever and end up in prison for an intolerably long time!
-
Posted By: 747Driver @ 02/17/2008 12:46:01 AM
Actually, carrying without a permit is only a misdemeanor in CA and punishable by a $5,000 fine, which I can easily afford, assuming no priors. Id rather risk a fine than the alternative of risking my life.
-
-
-
Posted By: Tuckerzz @ 02/16/2008 9:12:39 PM
I agree with your taking responsibility for your defense but I hope you are working hard to make this a lawful act for everyone who accepts this responsibility and not force those who would be law abiding citizens to choose to break the law. The consequences for breaking the law are stiff and some might not be able to accept the risk such as loss of a job or education to take the path you have chosen.
-
-
Posted By: terrifiedbyAmericans @ 02/15/2008 8:29:08 PM
Thanks, Newsweek, for thisscreams fluff advocacy piece for the armed campus movement. Your efforts contribute toward the day when we can reenvision our lecture halls as 21st century OK Corrals where angry right-wing students can shoot up their fellows over frat house fights and apply a little gentle persuasion to troublesome lefty professors on grading ('did you know that I conceal carry, Professor X? Just wanted to let you know as you think about my midterm!'), etc. Date rape will get still more exciting for the thuggish male students, as their victims will wonder if their screams will bring a pistol to their head. Ah, but they can always pack their own pistols and shoot it out at the frat house! I'm so proud to be American...
-
Posted By: JonTheLibertarian @ 02/17/2008 12:02:47 AM
Armed females would certainly make date rape more 'interesting'.
I LIVE for the day when I read the headline 'Attempted rapist has testicles blown off'
Seriously, I challenge you to find me ONE case of a woman carrying concealed who was raped. -
Posted By: musicRx @ 02/16/2008 6:03:45 AM
Please re-read the article. Mr. Lewis repeatedly stated that his group advocates allowing those already holding concealed weapons permits to legally carry on state-owned college campuses. These individuals already carry weapons off-campus at banks, stores even on dates! Frat houses are usually located off campus, and as private property are free to establish rules as they see fit. Walking across an arbitrary but not psychosis-inducing line between the real world and a campus will not change these folks.
-
Posted By: musicRx @ 02/16/2008 5:51:15 AM
Please re-read the article. Mr. Lewis repeatedly stated that this law would only extend the rights of those already licensed to carry to include college campuses. These same folks are already carrying off campus in banks, bars even on dates! Frat houses are usually off-campus and of course are free to enforce their own rules. How would otherwise law-abiding citizens suddenly change completely change their behavior simply because they no longer have to take off their concealed weapon as they enter the arbitrary but not psychosis-inducing dividing line between the real world and the campus?
-
Posted By: jay1972 @ 02/15/2008 8:58:51 PM
threatening a prof like you suggest is a felony. Rape is a felony. lots of rapist are armed. they already are ignoring laws prohibiting rape and assault with a deadly weapon. they also wait till no police are around. what is so wrong with a woman protecting herself, with a gun if necessary. the police arrived on 120 seconds. the shooting was over in far less than that. in the u.k. crime went up after the people where disarmed
-
-
Posted By: bvfd920 @ 02/16/2008 8:59:03 AM
Think about this.....go work at a 7-11 as the night clerk. Keep your finger on the panic button that will automatically call the police when you get robbed. Then, when you get robbed and press the button, do you think the robber will be brought down in a hail of police gunfire before he shoots you? Or are you going to be wishing a simple guy like me just happened to be stopping to get a slurpy, and was there to protect you from the big bad robber guy before he shoots you?Try it one day and see what the response time is of the PD versus someone like me who is carrying a concealed weapon in your store.....see if you can place a bet on the correct situation. Remember that your life depends on it......
-
Posted By: gizmo6d9 @ 02/16/2008 10:05:41 AM
Yes, simple robberies MAY go down. But you must get over the idea that just because you have a gun doesn't mean that you will be the survivor. A robber comes at you gun drawn (cuz he will have one too)... are you really gonna have the balls to attempt to pull your gun?
Besides that, these campus shooters have the idea that they are going to die that day. The NIU shooter killed himself and the VT shooter, well, you don't get in a shootout with dozens of police officers and not expect to die eventually.
Have you ever been to a bar and senseless fights break out? Now give all these drunk people, who care nothing about consequence, a deadly weapon. The biggest downfall is if someone is confronting you and you see them itch towards their firearm you can then shoot them and claim self-defense... however you don't fully know if they were headed towards their gun. I know that most people in the same room I am in has a gun that I will be very on edge as to if I piss off anyone they can take my life. Then I am forced to carry a gun so that I feel safe and then everyone else is on edge. I would much rather live in a society with only authority figures carrying the guns.-
Posted By: JonTheLibertarian @ 02/16/2008 11:52:10 PM
I live in a state with concealed carry allowed in bars.
Been legal for what? 10 years I believe.
No drunken shootouts in bars.
No innocent bystanders killed in the crossfire.
One of the lowest homicide rates in the country... given the differences in how crimes are recorded, maybe as low as the UK.
Guns are already getting onto campus. The only question left is whether or not the crazies are going to have a monopoly on them. -
Posted By: rspock @ 02/16/2008 8:38:56 PM
Of course having a gun doesn't guarentee you'll survive! However, it improves the odds in your favor tremendously. Studies have comfirmed this.
As far as people having the gonads to pull a gun in defense against a robber or someone about to do you harm, there are numerous examples all over the place. NRA has regular examples from local and national media. Cam and Co has the "hero of the day" again taken from the media.
There are several examples where armed citizens have stopped mass murderers before they can complete what the started. The lastest example was the congregation member of a church with a legal concealed carry gun stopping a shooter before he could kill more than a few people.
As far as you being on edge around people with guns: Some people are afraid of cockroaches too but that doesn't make the fear rational. There is nothing that guarantees a person should be free of fear. There are too many irrational fears out there. Fear of guns is just one of them -
Posted By: bvfd920 @ 02/16/2008 10:14:05 AM
Authority figures only carry the guns???? Yeah, i want my "chocolate city" mayor responsible for protecting me after seeing him waving an M4 in the face of the police chief and laughing about it!!!! . And the big one, you need to be aware of your surroundings. Don't get yourself into a situation where someone can just walk in to a room and take you out. And do i have the balls to defend my life? Every damn second i am still here breathing!!!!!!!! Take my gun away and i will claw someones eyeballs out with my friggin toenails if i have to stop them from taking my life. You gonna ban my toenails now????????
-
-
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- Black Friday should unleash pent-up demand. Analyst Bill DreherNYT
- The task is to restore our conservative bona fides James Bopp Jr. on a 10-pt GOP checklist NYT
- Twenty five years feels right in my bones and right in my spirit. Oprah on ending her showCST
- It’s going to be a holy war Orrin Hatch on debate over the Senate health billNYT
- The nation and the world will see him for the coward he is Holder, on trying KSMAP
Discuss