E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSColorado University will no longer allow concealed weapons in undergrad dormitories, but will continue to allow them elsewhere on campus. KUSA's Meagan Fitzgerald reports.
Updated at 4:57 p.m. ET: The University of Colorado will segregate students who have concealed-weapons permits in special dorms, but their firearms will have to be locked up before bedtime, according to campus police.
University officials have amended their student housing contract at its Boulder and Colorado Springs campuses to accommodate students who are 21 years or older and have concealed-weapons carry permits, said Ryan Huff, public information officer with the University of Colorado's campus police in Boulder.
"If you have a permit, you can carry a concealed weapon on campus, as long as its hidden away from view, and you can even have it with you in class," Huff told NBC News. "What you can not do is have it on you at a ticketed event, such as football games, or in any of the residence halls on campus."
The university’s policy change comes after the Colorado Supreme Court upheld an appeals-court decision in March that struck down the university’s ban on guns.
“I believe we have taken reasonable steps to adhere to the ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court, while balancing that with the priority of providing a safe environment for our students, faculty and staff,” CU-Boulder Chancellor Philip P. DiStefano said in a statement on the university’s website.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
University officials say both campuses will establish a residential area for students with permits but will ban guns in all other dormitories, according to the new policy.
Huff said those who live in residence halls will have to lock up their firearms with police, but can check out their weapon before and after they go to their residence hall. For those living in family housing units, he said, safes will be established and supervised by the housing monitor.
Watch the Top Videos on NBCNews.com
"Ultimately, CU-Boulder and Students for Concealed Carry have the same goal in mind, the safety of campus patrons," David Burnett, director of public relations for Students for Concealed Carry, said in an email to NBC News. "We feel that CU's previous policy of expecting criminals to comply with 'no-gun' stickers on the doors was absurdly ineffective, and are happy they have made the change to allow campus carry."
The new policy, however, isn’t sitting well with James Manley, a lawyer for the Mountain States Legal Foundation, a nonprofit group in Lakewood, Colo., that advocates liberty and freedom.
"We still need to see the actual language of the policy before we make a decision on how to proceed," Manley told The Daily Camera in Boulder.
University officials say less than 1 percent of its staff, faculty and students have concealed-carry permits, according to the Boulder newspaper.
Under Colorado law, to get a concealed-carry permit, a person must be 21 or older, get a federal background check and demonstrate competence with a firearm, including through a class, or military or police service.
On July 20, a mass shooting occurred at a midnight screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" in the suburb of Aurora. James Holmes, a 24-year-old former doctoral student at the University of Colorado, is accused of killing 12 people and injuring 58 others in the spree.
Huff said there is no connection between the university's new policy and the Aurora shootings.
"The university wanted to make sure its new policy was in place before students returned for the school year," he said.
According to the university website, students will start returning to residence halls on Tuesday; classes begin for the semester on Aug. 27.
Do you have an education-related story or idea, contact NBC News' Sevil Omer at sevil.omer@msnbc.com
More content from NBCNews.com:
- 'No papers, no fear': Illegal immigrants declare themselves on bus tour
- Texas sprayed as West Nile Virus spreads
- Wildfire evacuees return to find homes gone
- Video: 3 people hurt after carriage horse breaks free in NYC
- Ex-butler who injected socialite in extortion attempt faces sentencing
Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
WHat progressive marxist crap, JUST because you have a CCW does not mean you have a gun on you, or in your possession! I have a CCW from two states and I do not carry. THis is just segregation and a form of racism of ideas and thoughts which we know is the base of the liberal agenda: segregate not on race, but on religion and philosophy! NEXT two different States, Universities, Countries!!!! That would be good send all of the progressive idiots and obamaphinatics to Indonesia where he is from!
Yes, the segregation is a bad idea and very prejudiced.. but the so-called "progressives" lost this one. At least now students can legally have their guns on campus instead of turning them into sitting ducks for another Virginia Tech like incident.
" the Colorado Supreme Court upheld an appeals-court decision in March that struck down the university’s ban on guns."
All this segregation and the lock-up of weapons does is create "criminal friendly zones".
Nothing like advertising that "Hey criminals! Come on in! Nobody here is armed!".
How long before some criminal is suing the University because they got shot where there wasn't supposed to be any guns and the student locked up for defending themselves?
This will be the arguably safest dorm ..... rofl
arguesforsport - I totally agree with you. They're really pointing out the vulnerable people by doing this. Although as a CCW permit holder myself I would be so amused to see this idea put into action all over the place. They could make no-gun sections in restaurants, and no-gun neighborhoods. I'd like to see how quickly the non-gun owners changed their minds once the criminals caught on to the unarmed places.
They should be happy that they're all nice and safe together. It's not like someone's going to go and steal that safe full of firearms. :)
James,
Thats exactly what I was thinking! If I was going to stay in a dorm at that college, it would be the one with the CCW holders.
Marxism? Please do explain how this policy is "Marxist." Racism? CCW carriers are not a race. Therefore, no racism involved. This is segregation on neither religion nor philosophy. It is based on being in possession of a weapon. With priviledge comes obligation. You want the priviledge of carrying a gun on campus, then you have the obligation to follow the guideline for doing so.
How, exactly, are the CCW holders who have to lock their weapons up while in the dorms "pointing our vulnerable people"? That is just absurd. Since no one else is permitted to have a gun on campus, those who have to lock their weapons away are no more vulnerable than anyone else.
The vast majority of Americans do not walk around with a gun on them. Probability figures would indicate that it is a much more logical conclusion to assume that someone is not armed, than to assume that someone is armed. Your logic leading you to the false conclusion that "criminals" will assume people are armed is faulty.
would you be safer? From the article:
"Huff said those who live in residence halls will have to lock up their firearms with police, but can check out their weapon before and after they go to their residence hall." (This staement makes no sense)
"What you can not do is have it on you at a ticketed event, such as football games, or in any of the residence halls on campus."
Typically shoddy writing by NBCLite reporters.
I guess if I am going to perform a VATech style assault at this university, I know to go to ticketed events and residence halls.
Segregated because they exercise their 2nd amendment rights? Where is the ACLU? Oh, yeah - silly me.
It is not a privilege. The university was not following the guideline i.e. complying with state law.
So, now psychopaths will know that if you want to shoot up a lot of students, just go to the dorm at night because all the guns are locked up. (rolls eyes)
Gun nuts are delusional. These posts prove it. Guns are banned on campuses in most states. They have no place there, except in the holsters of police officers. Guns on campus, won't it be a wonderful thing to have in the hands of drunken frat boys at their frat house parties. Oh, yeah, that will make me feel safer.
As a person who attended CU Boulder, I can honestly say that I'd never permit a child of mine to go there now - nor any school that allowed another student to walk into a classroom carrying a gun.
This is absolute insanity.
Marxist? Racist? Progressive? Liberal? Religious? Do you know what the words you use mean or are you a parrot? These concepts have nothing to do with gun control.
It's not a world of binary choices and black and white distinctions. You are not (1) either a red blooded American 100% in favor of unfettered gun ownership/carrying or (ii) a marxist/racist/progressive/liberal/atheist. That's not how it works. Reasonable people disagree, and--obviously--many reasonable people are going to disagree about whether a student (likely teenage) should be able to carry a loaded weapon in a college dorm with a bunch of other unarmed students.
Actually, now that I've said it...I regret describing your position as reasonable. Reasonable people cannot disagree about this. No. Your teenage child cannot carry a loaded firearm in the same college dorm where my teenage child is studying. That's crazy.
You've heard those in favor of abiding by the Bill of Rights say: "Get your god out of my government."? Well, "Get your guns out of my school."
Segregation? Really? Ths isnt segregation. Just like you have dorms for girls and dorms for men. you have dorms for eccentrics who find it necessary to carry a weapon at all times, and then you have the logical people.
Let the carnage begin! Pity they can't pack heat at their football games. Whats that about? Guess it would give the home team unfair advantage.
The one basic fact is that you are always safer when honest citizens have guns. It has been proven time and again but it's usually some loon that knows NOTHING about guns that screams about how terrible and dangerous they are.
When criminals go on campus, do they have to check their weapon?
Oh that's right. Criminals don't follow the laws. Feel safer now?
.
So the dorm with guns, I assume will be called the OK Corral.
I'm ok with this. Call it a social experiment. Stupid kids steal stuff from dorms all the time. I bet I know one dorm that will have much less theft than any of the others...
It's dumb that people get their panties in a wad over other people having a gun. I think this experiment will prove the old adage that "an armed society is a polite society". I know which dorm I'd want to be in.
what is it concealed carry permit holders are really afraid of? the smart students?
This is a pretty dumb idea. Maybe the rationale is "let's see which dorm ends up with the highest homicide rate by the end of the school year."
Also, notice to everyone: trying to use the word "progressive" in a perjorative way just makes you sound dumb.
I would be more impressed if they did something about physical assaults against women.
"Huff said those who live in residence halls will have to lock up their firearms with police, but can check out their weapon before and after they go to their residence hall."
Really? So, in other words, they can't protect themselves outside of the hall? And, you aren't going to recognize that their permit allows for them to carry ALL of the time. And I gather this is a new law? If not, I would love to see them try and defend this in court.
Huh... usually these polls allow one to make a statement about why you voted the way you did. I voted "NO" but only because I feel that if these individuals have their CCW permit and have complied with this silly segregation, then they needn't lock up their guns every night. If they can carry their weapons to class, why can't they keep them in their bedstand drawer? Either let them exercise their rights or don't. This half-assed middling BS isn't going to cut it.
@Rod_Father
Your comment reminded me of a quote, so I'll share it:
Gun Control: The premise that a woman found in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to allowing that same woman to defend her life with a firearm.
No idea who originally said it. Just sort of floats around on the net...
rlr, I have a CCW and I use it. I'm not afraid of anything!
Gonna sound off here. As someone that believes they are a bit liberal I think this plan is bad.
Because having the permit puts you in a special dorm. Not having the gun, having the legal right to carry one is reason to put you elsewhere. A separated area where at least from my read of this article you still will not HAVE the firearm to begin with. So to me this is not marxist/liberal/fascist. It is however a sure sign of bureacracy in action. Check this box to be stuffed into a specific catagory we mistrust.
From this article I trust those with the concealed carry permit more than I trust those that have never taken a course or had to carry a weapon. Why? Because I have yet to see an educated gun owner pickup a pistol and point it at someone pulling the trigger as a joke. I have seen an untrained person walk into an apartment and do that. Thank whatever god you wish that the weapon had been unloaded.
Sorry - ex-MP (Vietnam), proud Sharpshooter Marksman, raised as a member of the NRA (until my dad pulled us all out when that organization became political), hunter, and current gun owner.
The simple fact is this: school is a place to learn. Period. If you think it's a good idea to send your child to a place where any other kid can walk into an enclosed space legally carrying a gun, you have a very different set of priorities than I do - both as a former CU student, and as a parent.
I don't look at it as "segregating the students with ccw's away from the non-ccw holders." I see it as segregating the liberals away from the people who are smart and educated enough to qualify for a ccw! Believe me, they're doing the ccw holders a favor by keeping the liberals away!! :D
Soooo, CCW holders cannot be armed at home, ONLY when in public. And in order to go to sleep, they must surrender their weapons, to be locked in a safe where they cannot obtain them in an emergency. Personally, I just wouldn't permit them to know I HELD the permit. After all, the idea of concealed carry is for the gun to remain CONCEALED!!
Physicist retired- you are correct, we DO have different priorities. I WANT my kid in the class with the armed citizens, until MY offspring is finally considered old enough to carry a gun. An armed society is a polite (and much safer) society.
Personally I would not want to go to a school if I new that the students were allowed to carry a handgun.What ever happened to campus security.
I am really suprised at all the people saying they would never let their kid go to said college now. I wish you good luck with that seeing as most college students are at least 18 years old and are able to make their own decisions.
@One-Eyed Undertaker
A teenager carrying a gun is illegal you do know that right? Just so you know as it stated in the article above you have to be 21 to own a firearm and you have to be 21 to apply for a CCL. In order to get a CCL you have to pass a background check and demonstrate proficiency and when I got mine that ment getting 5 shots within a quarter at 25 yards.
I like this, this is very important. On Friday and Saturday nights in the CCW dorms the sober kids can protect themselves from the drunk partying kids who want to make noise or are just mean drunks. Smart move CU!! Hope you have a good supply of body bags.
I've seen it said that it's a "basic fact that you are safer when honest citizens have guns" ... and that there is proof.
Would someone kindly post some of that proof, I would certainly be interested in reading it.
First of all keeping and bearing arms is a right of the people which the governmental is prohibited from infringing upon, state of Colorado included, and therefore is not a privilege but one of the Constitutional rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. And segregation/retaliation based upon the exercise of a Constitutional right can be viewed as illegal discrimination.
Except that not true now is it? It's not that they're not permitted to do so, they just don't for reasons of their own, and apparently some of them feel "if I have to be vulnerable because I don't' exercise my Constitutional rights, I want you to be vulnerable too, even though you do exercise your rights".
Nicely put.
@ Beth, et. al., seeking proof of armed citizens safer:
Pick up any copy of "The American Rifleman" or "The American Hunter". Every issue has a full page of brief reprints of newspaper articles where a person protected themselves and/or family from criminal(s) with the use or by merely displaying a firearm.
I can't get past the first comment and its replies without seeing all KINDS off goodies to jump on! In order I read them...
Eric-913730- You offend me when you use the term "gun nut". My emotional health is excellent. Shall I refer to you is an elitist anti-rights nut? Yes...I think so. As for only police having guns, do research on people forced to protect themselves because, quite frankly, there are NOT ENOUGH POLICE.
Physicist-retired-As a former Marine (MOS 0317) your evaluations somewhat surprise me. A well trained, responsible individual should be allowed to protect themselves in ANY environment. With all the campus shootings in recent years things may (I am smart enough to say "may" not "would") have developed differently and with far less blood shed. As a retired physicist surely you must understand action/reaction? When a criminal begins shooting and is fired upon by a person defending him/her self...
tw for USA- troll much? Here's your scrap to feed on...I consider myself quite logical (and more than likely far more educated than you) and I carry a gun to work daily. We own and operate apartments and we've had people shoot at us, come at us with knives, scissors, and broken bottles, and have been swung at with baseball bats, tree limbs, 2+4s and various large metal tools (and we own what's considered the BEST complex in town). A very short time ago a young drug dealer we were attempting to eject from one of our properties charged at my wife with a 10 pound rock. He ignored repeated verbal warnings. He stopped when he saw me leveling a .45 at him. I may be considered "eccentric" for allowing myself the ability to defend myself, my wife, and others but I would dread being near YOU in a violent emergency...I doubt you'd share your hiding place.
rlr-570744- the ccw holders afraid of the "smart kids"? Hmmm...I hold a Bachelors in Journalism, a Bachelors in Engineering, a Masters in Fire Science, am a published author (and NO, by published I mean PUBLISHED, not blogging), own two successful moderate sized companies...AND I HAVE HELD A CCW FOR OVER 25 YEARS. Yeah, those smart kids make me quiver!
Rod-Father- they just did. They gave them the ability to take proper training, obtain a CCW, and protect themselves form the animals that pray on helpless women. I urge them to do so!
Barlow- Moron! NO GUNS IN THE RESIDENCE. What will they shoot the "loud, mean drunks" with? Rubber bands?
Florida Keyster- sorry for what happened to your friend. I lost a gun to a crooked cop. However thanks to the security footage from the gas station he pulled me over in he lost his job shortly there after. Like all things you get what you pay for. There should be a mandated definition of what can be sold as "gun safes". Having raised five kids with guns in the house we were ADAMANT about what we bought. Ours is 60" tall, 48" wide and weighs over 1800 pounds with a heat rating of 2800 degrees for 120 minutes. It's housed in an all concrete room with all steel doors in all steel casings with full piano hinges. What is sad at all is, though your friend TOOK precaution some CRIMINAL wound up armed. They can enact all the laws they want to take guns from US and as law abiding citizens we will comply, but criminals like the one that took your friends weapons will ALWAYS ignore them.
Oh, and as for those who like to equate intellect with gun ownership, I find it a fun fact the the posts with the WORST spelling, punctuation, and grammar are spouted by those who "apows gunn ownarshyp"!
Did One-Eyed Undertaker even read the article? Why is it okay to assume that having a CCW means that you must be of a lower intellect than those who do not feel a need to carry a weapon? Since when can a teenager get a CCW? Must you be a Republican to exercise your Article 2 right? Does anyone actually believe a criminal, or a criminally insane individual gives a fig about whatever the law might say? I am a highly educated individual with a Master's Degree in Computer Engineering and can demonstrably hold my own with a PhD in several subject areas. My IQ was tested at over 180. I also intend to vote for Obama, believe women have the right to choose, think there is far too much religion in our politics. I also exercise my Article 2 rights and have served both the US Military AND the local and federal police forces before an unfortunate injury sustained on duty put an end to my law enforcement career. Personally I can see no lawful reason to segregate a group of individuals because of their preference for acting on a right they have earned the right to. Simply having a rule requiring them to keep their weapons in locked storage while in the dorms should have been quite sufficient. I agree with Mariyam that segregation due to the lawful exercise of your rights guaranteed by the US Constitution is a potentially severe violation of your Right to Freedom of Assembly and Association.
David! Oh my God! A COP! RUUUUN!
Well said David! We're much alike except I had a REAL job. I was a Firefighter/Paramedic LOL! IQ of 176 and I, too, and one of those "stupid gun nuts". I voted for Obama (funny how everyone screamed he was out to get our guns yet he's not made ONE, SINGLE MOVE to outlaw ANYTHING). I prefer giving life but, yes, in almost all circumstances women should have the right to choose.
Lt me test your intellect! Most people think the term "cop" is derogatory. What is the real meaning of the word?
I have heard that the term cop comes from "copper" which is what members of the first police force in New York were called because they wore copper badges.
David. Thanks for the considered response.
Firstly, I read the article. I drew a the "likely teenage" inference from the fact that we are talking about college dorms because (i) college students are generally age 18-22 and (ii) the student's presence in the dorm is evidence (not dispositive) that they are on the younger side of the spectrum because older students generally move out of dorms ASAP. I'm not familiar with the concealed carry laws in Colorado; so, if 21 years is the threshold for CC carry, then my inference was off. Though, being that these are still very young adults, and being that this is still a university dormitory, I must say that ancillary fact doesn't help your position all that much. Moreover, the fact that the CC students must be 21 says nothing about the age of the noncarrying students at risk to be shot up.
Secondly, comparing toting a gun in a dorm to free speech and assembly is ridiculous. Carrying a gun is not protected speech and requiring those who choose to incur and create the risk of carrying guns to abide together in a dorm separate from those who don't choose to incur/create that risk is not an infringement on the freedom of association/assembly.
The gun owners don't want to assemble. That's their argument. No one is preventing them from peaceably assembling in violation of their Constitutional right under the 1st Amendment; rather they are being forced to assemble. Forcing assembly is not a violation of the freedom of assembly (it may, however, be a violation of equal protection or due process...raise those issues if you like).
Lastly I've had an idea....if, as so many on here posit, CC carriers are truly such altruistic do good vigilantes intent on crime stopping (forget, the fact the already pay the police for this service for a moment)...perhaps we can require them to wear spandex super hero outfits. I'd feel much better about the prospect of some random in the Jiffy with me packing heat if he or she were wearing spandex.
Wow, Colorado approved guns in college. What could possibly go wrong?
I wonder how many parents will feel good about sending their children to a school where others may be carrying guns?
I wonder if enrollment will drop at CU?
I wonder if the legislature will amend their law to exempt colleges from allowing guns.
Didn't you people ever go to college? Why would you want people with guns on campus?
Play the odds folks. When a person dies from a gun shot, it is 20x more likely that a murder and not a justifiable homicide occured. Don't gamble with your life.
Which is exactly why I carry.
NOT carrying is just gambling on the whims of criminals.
Hey Ringo, I think you did your best work with the Beatles.
Ringo, what the hell are you gonna do when a "criminal" walks up to you, sticks his hand gun in your face, tells you to put your hands in the air, and says, 'your money or your life'?
I'll tell you what I would do, if I was carrying a gun...I'd say to myself, 'well, what do you know? The same law that made it easy for for me, a law abiding citizen, to get a hand gun also made it easy for this criminal get a hand gun. Well wadda ya know?!'
They screamed about states with CCW laws becoming the wild west and all the shootings that were going to occur..................NEVER HAPPENED!!
They now scream about dorms becoming the wild west and all the shootings that are going to occur.......WON'T HAPPEN!!!
Nobody is screaming. This is going to play out very quietly. Parents will send their kids to a college where there are no guns. Colorado will have to choose between letting people have guns and fewer students or having full enrollment and no guns.
And the first time that something happens, where a student misuses his gun, the legislature will revisit this very quickly.
Davey, the VAST majority of criminals found to be in possession of a firearm at the time they commit criminal acts are carrying STOLEN guns, NOT legally obtained such as we law abiding CCW holders have.
The questions was- what is the origin of the often misinterpreted term "cop:
ANSWER- It's actually an acronym that comes from England and stands for Constable on Patrol
I would love to see the rest of the nation mirror Alaska concealed carry law. No permit required, any adult over 21 with a clean criminal record may carry a concealed handgun.
Can you post a citation for this fact. Then, tell me why it is important. Those people in the Aurora Co movie theater, as they were breathing their last breath, did they ask themselves, 'I wonder if that bullet came from a stolen hand gun?'?
Pity something so dangerous is easily stolen.
re: Alaska, for such a rural state, Alaska has a pretty violent crime (murder and non-negligent manslaughter) rate.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl05.xls
Davey, my "citation" is real life cops, and long time friends, telling me about guns they take from already convicted criminals. It's REAL LIFE. Not some bull @!$%# figures put together by someone paid to sway opinion EITHER way. And does the entire state of Alaska have more violent crime than, say, any major city in the U.S.? Look up homicides JUST in Atlanta. There are more murders in this ONE CITY than the entire state of Alaska in a YEAR.
BUT, you raise one valid point. Because laws regarding gun storage are lax in so many places they ARE easy to steal. Perhaps THAT is what needs to be addressed. Not OWNERSHIP, or the RIGHT TO CARRY, but how people STORE them.
That's not proof. That's anecdotal. I can come up with JUST as much anecdotal evidence that having a gun either didn't make a difference OR it exacerbated the issue. Just think of when the Arizona representative was shot ... or the recent gunman in the movie theatre. There were people with CCPs in both incidents, yet it stopped NONE of the carnage. What I'm looking for is not anecdotal, but statistical evidence.
In fact, according to the LAPD
LAPD also discovered that a person with a knife can seriously injure someone with a pistol BEFORE they have time to get it unholstered. Unfortunately I can't find the reference to that because it was in another book I was just reading and I don't have the footnotes in front of me.
In a discussion as important as guns, I think that we need data. I agree that we do not need some bull @!$%# figures put together by someone paid to sway opinion EITHER way. (That is not some implicit reference to something that you think I have posted, is it?)
But that's cool, you know cops (real life cops :-). OK, let's go with that, then. How many? Do you ever talk with your cop friends about gun violence? Do they see guns used more for murder and mayhem, than they do for self defense? That is, can your cop friends confirm what Kellerman observed, in his work as an ER doctor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Kellermann
??
Or what these researchers found, that carrying a gun makes it more likely that you will be shot:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090930121512.htm
??
What do your cop friends say about that?
Looks like the city of Atlanta has a murder rate of 17/100K. Much worse than Alaska, at 4.4/100K. I think this is explained by the size of the African American population in Atlanta, which is about 20% of the city, as opposed to Alaska, which has an AA population of about 3.4%. Crime seems to be higher in areas where there are more AAs.
So, comparing Alaska to Atlanta is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. In murder rate, Alaska is closer to California than it is to Iowa. Why is the murder rate in the rual (wilderness) state of Alaska so much higher than other rural states? Until we know that, let's not be in too much of a hurry to emulate Ms. Palin's state policies :-)
Sounds good to me. How do we do that?
You did leave unanswered my question about why it is important that (as you say) most guns used in violent crime are stolen. But that's OK, if you have a good suggestion for how to keep hand guns from being stolen, I'll take that.
I can't remember the Latin (I took Mr. Diamond's Latin class in high school during the 1969/70 academic year) but believe the term comes from the Latin verb to seize. I have also heard is may stand for Constable on Patrol.
Regarding my comparison of Free Speech and Assembly to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Since we are discussing both the 1st and 2nd Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and that these two Amendments are part of the Bill of Rights I would say that the comparison is valid. I do not and will not accept that anyone's right can be abrogated due to another's wish to not associate with them in even the most general manner (discriminitory segregation and pre-judgement of guilt by association). There are risks to almost every human activity on and off the earth. In over 40 years of law enforcement I can honestly say that there are far more incidents of weapons owners that have protected themselves, or their loved ones, from death or physical harm than the Brady supporters would ever care to admit. In cases involving crazies that decide to use a weapon to make their point the unarmed are the preferred victims...if not the only victims. Finally, as a law enforcment professional I can pretty well guarantee that even if called to an armed crime scene there will be a three minute MINIMUM until we get onsite. Sit still with a three minute timer and imagine having some nutcase flapping a gun in your face and either threatening to shoot you or actually starting to shoot people. Three minutes is a VERY long time in such a situation.
These things said I still believe that we, in the US, make it far too easy to obtain weapons, especially handguns, we need a system more like Switzerland (where owning is mandatory). But they have mandatory military service and that includes weapons training. Anyone that goes through the CCL process is almost certainly pretty stable and VERY unlikely to be a criminal. Some nutjobs will always slip through. Lets face it; anyone that is so against the very concept and idea of a weapon and would rather put their full faith and trust in a police force that has been shown to be understaffed, under-paid and not always law-abiding themselves must be a wee bit of a lunatic. The Chiefs' of Police honestly believe that ONLY the police should be armed, the Constable on Patrol (most of them anyway) do NOT. The best response I ever got during my career was a call to an assault and rape attempt, a passerby shot the assailant and he passed away on the way to the hospital. The girl (13 y.o.) was saved (and from the rap sheet on this guy I mean literally as in LIFE SAVED because he strangled his victims afterwards) and you, and many others, were saved the costs associated with a court case and jail time (and the possibility of repeat murders if he made parole). Cold-blooded isn't it, but that IS the world we live in.
I don't carry often (but am always armed), wife never does (but is always armed), daughter ALWAYS does (just may not be a traditional handgun). You have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine. Your opinion CANNOT EVER be allowed to interfere with mine and unfortunately for you this is guaranteed in the Constitution. I would fear the day this no longer holds true because on that day freedom dies and the blood of all that fought to preserve and protect it becomes wasted.
Davey, first, no, the comment about the accuracy of "polls" and research numbers was not a direct reflection on your comment, and I apologize if it seemed so. Polls and studies are made to prove a point and are known to be widely inaccurate for the data they EXCLUDE.
Storage. MA. made trigger logs mandatory, with punishment based on type(s) of weapon stored. Keeping a handgun without a trigger lock, if memory serves, meant immediate forfeiture of CCW. Not everyone can afford to take the measures my wife and I have, so make disassembley mandatory. Lock firing pins/bolts up separately. A closet with hidden hinges and double locking hasps works very well as a thief knows they are pressed for time. Almost every gun in existence can be "field stripped" to the point of inopparability in moments.
As for the question I missed...if a thief can not STEAL it, it will probably NOT wind up in the hands of a criminal.
If there even exists such data, those who wind up having their own weapon used on them lack training. IF you intend to employ a weapon against an imminent threat you do no CLOSE the distance you OPEN it.
PLEASE let's not bring race in to this. YES, the vast majority of homicides and shootings in and around Atlanta are perpetrated by African Americans. I won't for a second use the argument that they are underprivileged, that they can't find jobs, and they're being held down by "the man". Working off memory, the vast majority of murder suicides (example:father murders wife, kids, kills self) take place in lower middle class WHITE families. Not getting off subject, but this goes to the subject of young people being raised to believe there are no consequences to their actions any more. However, you see my point. Yes Alaska has violent crime, and YES they have a very liberal carry law, but far less than almost ANY "lower 48" city. I can not recall a day on TWO YEARS a murder has not lead off the morning news.
Along with MANDATORY STORAGE laws the training required in nearly every state to obtain a CCW needs to be expanded and federally mandated. And if you need more information other than I get from my fellow PSOs you'll have to look it up. It's out there.
You do not need training to buy a hand gun. Do you have any idea of about how many hand gun owners are trained to use it?
But way higher than other rural states. It's apples to oranges to compare a rural state to a city. As someone who advocates nationwide acceptance of Alaska carry laws, I'd think you'd be just a little curious as to why Alaska has so much more murder than other rural states. Wouldn't you feel a little silly if all states took your advice and adopted the Alaska carry law, and then we saw a sharp increase in murder? Oops
This explains why Colorado is always getting shot up and really many colleges, students carrying guns on campus and to class. I don't understand the segregation part, so they can trade ammo and learn new tactics?
Thanks for highlighting your own ignorance.
Virginia Tech was a planned attack ON THE STUDENTS, yes the attacker was a student but he didn't just snap while sitting in class one day and reached for his gun, he arrived on campus with multiple weapons, a supply of ammo and chains and locks to seal off exits. Had any of the students in the building been armed they could have defended against the attack, making students defenseless accomplishes nothing.
So a planned student attack makes it ok? Or do the guns make you snap and it's the guns fault for all the murders? If ignorance is bliss you got it pjam.
"So a planned student attack makes it ok?"
No, people should always be allowed to defend themselves against all attacks, planned or spontaneous. For some reason the authors of the constitution felt the same way.
yes, let's all defend ourselves and making the number of killings even higher ! that's the perfect solution.. so if there is a next time -- instead of like, let's say 11 dead, it'll be like 22 dead because some idiot is allowed to carry a gun and felt the need to shoot back.. great
i hope they have great aim ... i know i'd rather just duck for cover
You post so many times I feel sorry for you pjam, it must suck to be so paranoid. Good Luck to you.
I always thought, the right to bear arms. was in relation to being able to protect the state, not for personal protection.
"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."
Regardless of if I disagree with who can carry a gun the SCOTUS has said this is a right and it is not my place to impinge on those rights.
No one with a CCW has EVER been part of a mass shooting
And the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with militia use.... it is 100% about PERSONAL firearm ownership
Good god, the ignorance and absurdity burns...
-->Steve: The Second Amendment distinctly mentions a militia. The definition of militia is, "all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service (1580-90)." In the spirit of equality, we will include women, and not exclude those people with disibilities or ailments that would exclude them from boot camp. In my case, I have an elbow injured in an accident many years ago and it pops a lot, but I am still registered for Selective Service.
When combined with the second aspect of 2A--"...the right of the people...", and in the context of all the other Amendments in the original Ten that apply to the individual, it is obvious that the intent of the Second Amendment was that it applies to the people, which is merely the plural of "person."
-->S2S, Phoenyx, IXLR8, and the others that envision some sort of Keystone Kop reaction to an attacker while circus music plays in the background and a juggler rides through on a unicycle -the "kids" aren't shooting each other in whatever sort of freak fantasy plays out in yout nine-volt brains. This isn't the Shootout at the OK Corral.
Here's what would actually happen: One or two people walk into a class of 50 to 250 people and show their weapons, likely shooting the first person they see that has pissed them off. We'll say 10 of the students are armed, and every one of them have identified the assailant.
There is no desire for them to be crack snipers going for the leg. All you want is "lead on target." They can be wearing body armor, but being hammered in multiple locations with multiple rounds will hurt them like a gorilla with a sledgehammer. Then you dogpile the sonofabitch and hold them tille the cops show up. Total time would be about 30 to 40 seconds, maybe as much as a minute.
Yes, the CCW-and-armed students will be checked out. In fact, you ask most any one of them and as soon as the "crisis" is over, their weapons will be placed in full view of any responding officers, and the students will be nowhere near those weapons -no since in stopping or surviving an attack just to be accidentally killed by "friendly fire."
At 44, I just finished college with classes full of 21-25-year-old students. I would rather have had a half-dozen mediocre shooters in a crisis as opposed to just waiting my turn to be executed.
And for the record about the administrator making remarks about guns being "hidden" and a "safe environment": seeing a firearm doesn't make your eyes blister or cause any sort of ailment not treatable by a psychiatrist. Talk to your shrink about the histrionics....
wow fred.. you do make some valid points..
in all reality they are checked out, i'm well aware of this, i have relatives that have CCW permits .. i know the process.. i also know that doesn't mean anything.. the kid in Colorado who shot in the movie theatres was not a felon.. he could have easily obtained a CCW and yet, look at the tragedy..
it only takes one time, and its not like we have never ever had any college or even high school shooting incidents in our history, so now what ? we just arm a bunch of kids and pray they can end it without killing anyone first ?
that is a reality that must be braced.. because i'm quite sure YOU'D be very upset if it was YOUR child that was shot and killed.. and just because your child may have the right to carry a concealed weapon, it DOES NOT protect him/her anymore than the child who doesn't...
the child who doesn't is more likely to take cover and save themselves, while the child who does is more likely to shoot back and be further in harm's way risking not only their own lives, but everyone else as well..
you treat it like one person will shoot.. and 17 will shoot back..
what about a scenario where one person shoots, one shoots back and misses, and the first one disarms that one or kills them...
then what do we do ? do we say "maybe allowing guns on a college campus wasn't such a great idea ?" or do we say "yay ! i'm so glad little johnny (or whoever) shot back and got killed !!"
you tell me
because whether or not you may THINK im crazy.. those are possible and realistic situations.. deal with it
Fred, good information. How would you envision a 'lead on target' scenario going with panicked people running for cover? How about in a dark theater, with tear gas present? Thanks.
None of you have ever spent much time on a college campus, have you?
For all the hide and cover proponents: How well did that work out at VATech? I still marvel that they all stayed on their knees and waited to be executed by a nutcase. Where was the conflict management consultant?
Fred -
It is highly likely you will survive in this world longer than a lot of the posters here. You knew that, didn't you?
SDNative -Are you implying that people would be running toward the assailant, maybe standing tall and hoping for a group photo? Whatever....
People are hitting the floor, or they are ducked-down while running for an exit.
Asking pointless questions about every possible scenario does not negate what I said. It is a logical fallacy somewhere between Reductio ad absurdum and plurium interrogationum. In this case, you're trying to use a vague set of criteria (dark theater, tear gas, etc) that may or may not be true** in order to pick away at a general set of events, and will keep using different, small variances in order to try and disprove what I said. This isn't a discussion of past events (specific theater) but the possibility of future events that have a track record of happening -i.e. Columbine, Virginia Tech.
Any actual scenario discussion requiring the detail you are expecting would necessitate a more thorough explanation of the room, exits/entrances, number and description of assailants and their weapons, ambient conditions, etc.
What's next? Strobe lights and dancing elephants added to the equation? Maybe a waterslide and someone in a Cookie Monster costume? The CCW holder is only four-feet tall and can't see over anyone so he tries to ricochet bullets off the light fixture from 75 yards?
**Theaters are not pitch dark -the screen itself is reflecting a huge amount of light. Also, classrooms are generally well lit, which is the actual scenario under discussion.
You keep bringing up VA Tech. Take a little time and do some math. Add up the number of college campuses in this country where the VA Tech incident didn't happen. One college campus out of how many?
Silly, silly people.
Pheonyx13: That is the logical fallacy of "Appeal to Fear," i.e. we should not do something because of all these crazy scenarios I have conceived.
Honey, please....try that at a bachelorette party, but quit trying to limit people's ability to defend themselves based on hysteria.
Since you brought kids into it: If my daughter went down fighting, so be it -it's better than knowing she was executed by a coward. I don't necessarily ADVOCATE that she carry a firearm; I have a problem with some false sense of security provided by laws that are only followed by people like my daughter.
It's already illegal to kill people, but that's not working out so well.
Good posts, Fred. Some people don't understand that firearms in the right hands (police, military, security, and free, law-abiding citizens) actually respond to threats and save people's lives:
Good Samaritan Saves Walmart Employee From Knife Attack
CCW Hotel Clerk Shoots Armed Robber
Old Man Defends Home Against Home Invasion
CCW Defends his Family from Armed Carjacker
Elderly Man Shoots Armed Robbers at Internet Cafe
Old Woman Fends off 5 Armed Robbers at Jewelry Store
There are literally thousands of these incidents available for viewing. Remember:
So instead of my "Appeal To Fear" .. or however you wish to deem it.. i should sit there with the bachelor party and state "hell yea ! some guy pulls a gun i'm totally shooting him ! just like this yo !" .. ? is that the argument ? that i should be more proactive and put myself in unnecessary danger ? i mean, it only takes one time to miss the person i'm shooting and i'm an instant target.. not to mention an instant target that is the object of now anger since i shot at someone and missed...
so i should tell everyone to defend themselves by shooting anyone they see pulling out a gun ?
umm.. yes.. let's try that in reality on a college campus sometime and see how well that works out...
that should make great news
and as for the children..
i'm glad that you would wish your daughter dead by trying to shoot someone..
i personally would not wish my child dead in that scenario, i'd wish my child alive by running for cover and saving their own ass .. not trying to be the hero.. cuz in that scenario - my child is alive to tell the story and will be for a long time yet.. where's your daughter in this scenario ? oh yea.. dead..
i don't understand how someone could wish advocate for that, but its definitely your decision
having the right to defend yourself - yes - giving everyone the right to carry a gun because they are just scared and paranoid ? - no - .. and yes, they can obtain CCW and still be paranoid or scared which is why the feel the need to carry a gun...
like i said.. how many more people have to die ? and how many of them have to be related to you ?
I think every white baby should get a CCW with their birth certificate. Then they could protect themselves from circumcision ("Only take a little doc, if you know what's good for you"!) or black babys with stolen weapons, or the preschool inoculations before going to school for the first time, (shoot me nursey, and I shoot you, as it were). Yep, Thanks NRA, your special!!
Not everyone who carries a gun is scared or paranoid. Those of us who carry firearms for our personal defense are not angry (except when some liberal @sshole proposes a new gun control law), not scared, not paranoid. We are not all looking overhead for black helecopters. We are not all wild-eyed bible thumpers, racists, homophobes, or whatever other label Liberaldom chooses to attach to us because they have a phobia about the tools of personal defense. Are there some people who carry guns who are like that? Yes. I carry a gun at all times, because it is my right to do so and I support the Second Amendment. I also support gay marriage, abortion/contaception rights for women, separation of church and state and a whole host of other things that piss off the religious nutcase wing of the Republican party. But you liberals think that all gun owners and all conservatives are some monolithic unit and that we all believe exactly the same way on every issue. It is sterotyping and bigotry, plain and simple.
Because none of the thirteen colonies had any kind of militia and everyone that showed up to fight against the British were individual citizens the term Militia ment individuals! Sorry facts are facts! If anyone wanted to research more then what is spoon fed the public they would know exactly what the second amendment ment!
For each amendment input was sought from the Legislature of each Colony! New York state sent this to show what they wanted the second amendment to mean! " The right of the individual to keep and bare arms in order to take back by force if necessary any rights or powers given any governing body or committee for their own well being"! If you can read that and think it means Militia then you are lying to yourself!
But yet you stereotype all liberals in the same paragraph never stopping to think that there is a large majority of us liberals that totally support our second amendment rights just as strong.
Its a two step process for the gun nuts. 1 get to give the government the finger because they got a right that did not exist before because the second amendment did not even say anything about cc. Second to hate on the imaginary Liberals. Where I live the most vocal person against CC is and ultra conservative and has been all his life. He is also an expert on the constitution and views the hooplalah over this as just another take over by the arms merchants who throw money at politicians. Saw a note on no cc has ever committed mass murder...LOL thats just stupid. There is a cops family in twinsburg Ohio and a persons family who worked at a parking garage in Cleveland who probably wish this had never passed so less than one percent of the population could go macho because both the policeman and the attendent were murdered by people with cc's . One on a traffic stop and the second one over an argument over a parking space and the cc went back to his car got his gun came back and murdered the attendent. Now we sit here waiting for that magical moment they used to pass this when some person with a cc comes to the rescue when there is an attack. Wait on...
2nd Ammendment is about personal rights of defense. And even if it was not, gues what...it's OUR government we need to now fear and hold accountable. There is NO threat from outside. It's HERE on your doorstep. Your Constitutional rights are being threatened now more then ever, i'm also talking 1st Ammendment. Thank GOD for the NRA. Spotted obama trying to ram-rod a new ammendment that's written to say that only INDIVIDUALS have free speech. Can't do it as a group...like the NRA. I'm not in a gang, but i've done the trainings. As example, many gangs' initiation includes beating up or killing an innnocent person. That is beyond intolerable. What we CC people know is, that we'd have a really fair chance in defense, being unarmed when scum like that go hunting. You people who actually want to disarm Americans so that they are helpless are off the scale of ignorance. You actually continue to believe that that is the answer to violent crime. Police are stretched thin and simply will not be there to protect and to serve. Did you know many gangs send their people into the US military to be trained? Think on it.
Dwight--all you nutcakes that are afraid of your government are a real threat to the US. Your paranoid posts are the writings of a lowbrow. A fringester who has watched to many John Wayne movies or played to many video games. Ah, the wannabe, macho people. Geeez. And, by the way. Screw the liars at the National NRA. Have they sent the free tin foil hats out to you this year?
Oh my Dwight...I lost your thread about half-way through because it made no sense! Would you care to try again? Learn to spell, learn proper punctuation and grammar. You sound ignorant.
The whole premise of Concealed Carry is that NO ONE KNOWS....You're an idiot if you advertise it....If you have a CCW Permit and wear a T-shirt that says "Are ya feelin' lucky punk ??----make my day " or the one I've seen for women in bright pink ..." I'm HOT and I'm PACKIN' HEAT" ...You're just asking to be shot in the back by an armed thug...then he gets your wallet AND your gun...or your pocketbook with your gun inside is ripped away before you get raped....
So, if you live in that dorm, anyone seeing you come and go from there will know you carry...It defeats the purpose. This business of safes for nightime storage is just ridiculous and an attempt by the University to still have control....Is someone there 24/7 to give you "access" to your own gun if you have to go out for a late night Pizza run....leave for a Midnight Rendezvous with your Special Someone ??? If you take a weekend road trip home and return to Campus at 4AM Monday morning to get ready for classes, will someone be there to relieve you of your weapon while you go shower and dress for your 8AM class ??
Trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist for law abiding citizens.....
May I please have my gun, sir ???
Higher learning ?
This is about as dumb as it gets !
Most crimes are committed by sick people who can get a gun without a permit !
I've got no problem with CCW permit holders. They have been vetted and are not the problem.
However, people here are over estimating their potential to stop a mass attack. Many CCW permit holders do not intend to protect those around them - they will try to escape first. They're not police. They are not necessarily going to confront the attacker directly.
Second, how is any CCW permit holder going to be able to tell a good guy from a bad guy if there is an attack and suddenly 10 other guys have drawn their weapons? How is anyone going to tell in the chaos? How is any unarmed person going to know that the dude who just pulled a gun next to them isn't in on the attack?
The ability of CCW permit holders to intercede is not a certainty. Has happened, sure, but it's not going to be an automatic thing.
I have a permit. I have little intention of pulling my weapon until cornered or someone in my family is immediate danger. Sorry everyone else. I'm not going to risk losing my permit because I misinterpret a situation - or people misidentify me. I don't need that headache.
It's real simple folks........if you don't like guns for God's sake DON'T own one, but, stay the hell away from MY right to own and carry one!!!!
@Tactical45, comment 2.25
Did all that name calling make you feel better? Or do you need 5 more minutes of recess to cool off?
You needn't fear the government, but you had better have one hell of a healthy respect for their capacity to subvert your rights. "Imminent Domain," "Indefinite Detention," "Warrantless Wire-Tapping," etc. They've already stolen rights the founding fathers thought were inalienable. If you can't see that, then you're not paying attention.
It's about time someone used their "brains", such as they are in Colorado.
" the Colorado Supreme Court upheld an appeals-court decision in March that struck down the university’s ban on guns."
Yes, good job Supreme Court.
They did? Really? REALLY? Because what I am seeing is bigotry, segregation and opening doors to "us v. them" jim crow type laws. No thanks and frankly I've been against ever stupid gun law since that abortion of cowardice called the Brady law.
Thank goodness and the founding fathers I live in an open carry state...I don't 'need' no stupid ccp. IF I chose to I carry out in the open and usually a firearm that can brain them as well as perforate them. 8^)
Discrimination, plain and simple. The second ammendment allows me to protect myself and others, where does it give Colorado State University the right to take that away? It doesn't. This is a situation where gun owners are guilty WITHOUT having committed a crime, and are being punished. there is no difference between this and being discriminated against because of political views, sexual orientation, race or religion. Are they going to have separate dorms where people have to check in and out for all of those different groups. There is a violence problem in our society, and the police and the government cannot stop it, nor can they adequately protect us, we have to have the ability to protect ourselves. If someone abuses that right, punish THEM, severely. We don't need more laws, we need to enforce the ones that we have to the letter of the law. Why is it everytime something happens we have to have another round of useless laws. Crime didn't go down during the Brady Ban, it went down when people went out and bought guns with Obama's election. You do the math.
Let them take that right away from us, and the next situation where someone is injured or killed after being denied the right to protect themselves, and let's see what happens. If you prohibit me from protecting myself, then an organization is accepting COMPLETE and TOTAL responsibility and liability if I am injured or killed, and we will just be adding to the litigation culture, but we are left with no other recourse. These situations are sad, but we cannot punish everyone for the actions of a few.
schiffner - The court used it's brains in overturning the ban on guns, those are the poeple I was referring to. The campus officials are everything you say.
Snowman, relegating people to a separate dorm isn't calling anyone guilty or taking their rights away or punishing them.
What CSU is doing respecting the rights of people who don't want their son are daughter living in the same dorm as individuals who are so paranoid they feel the need to be armed all the time. You may think having a gun at your side makes you and everyone else safer. A lot of us feel just the opposite, and you don't have the right to infringe on our beliefs.
You can't smoke in college dorms even though it is a legal activity. How is not being permitted to have a loaded weapon in your room any different. I have just as much right to be safe from a drunken college student with a gun in his room, or one that is stressed out during finals week, as you have to be protected from second hand smoke.
And you gun advocates call yourselves "responsible". Pfffft.
I would not have a problem with the CCW dorms, all they have to do is ban alcohol on campus, and make all the CCW dudes get a physiological evaluation before finals every term.
what right is that? please list the right as defined in the US constitution and declaration of independence that you are referring to?
you have no right to infringe on others rights and thats exactly what you want, you are the one who is paranoid that killers lurk behind ever gun, when the facts do not support your opinion.
All this is not about the second amendment nor is it about safety its about selling useless weapons to people who should not even be near one. A win win situation for the arms merchants to amke up for the losses in countries who have sense enough to ban them unless you are trined and in their safety forces. End of story.
You right wingers better get on over here and defend this clown...Man drops gun in movie theater, shooting self in buttocks.....who did he save?
I dont know if this good or not. It's good that the State Supreme Court upheld the right to carry and self defense, and that the accommodations are a starting point in being able to fully exercise a constitutional right... But its also "separate but equal", and possibly a really bad idea to allow the precedent that its ok to only allow "half-rights" as that could lead other rights to be diminished/curtailed
Remember... you HAVE rights at birth.. the govt doesnt GRANT you rights, in fact they usually try to restrict and remove your rights
I don't dial 911..................
So they can't take their guns to their rooms, how stupid is that. I am sure that the woman being raped in the dorm will be glad to hear that her gun is safe in a lock box in the dorm monitors room.
Let's see how many alleged rapists and intruders get the surprise of their lives in the groin.
Snowjob,
"Crime didn't go down during the Brady Ban, it went down when people went out and bought guns with Obama's election. You do the math."
This type of statement is made every time there is a conversation about gun related issues and every time it's said it's wrong.
The rate of violent crime overall is at it's lowest since the 1960's. Crime rates went up from 1960 to 1992. There has been a steady and precipitous fall since then. We've had president from both parties during this time so your post is questionable at best and just plain wrong in reality.
Additionally, there seems to be this assumption that all CCW carriers are always going to be responsible and reliable guns owners that will never make bad desicions in times of stress. They will never go out and have a drink. They will always walk away from any problem short of life threatening. Right, no "law abiding citizen" has ever committed a crime.
I've just read the previous comments .... what is it with you turkeys, having to to have a piece strapped to your side 24-7 ....????
Do you have brains?????
Apparently more than you Robert. I know plenty of police officers. ALL of them carry 24/7 except when drinking. Not because their jobs require them to but because they actually see the way the world works and the way people are and they KNOW why legal and law abiding citizens should carry. You never know when/where you will need it. Hopefully never, but I would rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Just because you are ignorant of the dangers in society today does not negate everyone else's rights. If you do not like guns that is also your right to chose not to carry. You however d not have the right to strip the rights from others based on your opinion.
You're a turqoise gorilla, "booga, booga."
I've decided I'm not going to try to argue using logic with liberals anymore. Doesn't seem to do any good. I'm just going to spout nonsense like they do. Can't do any worse.
Green is the color of lion shoes.
Gouranga: I lived all the US and Europe, in some not so nice areas, and have never been in a situation where I felt I needed a gun. The world gets scarier when you think someone is going to jump out from behind a bush every second.
Also we have 3 cops & 2 state patrol in our family and none carry 24/7.
Anyone who has to have a gun with him at all times to feel safe is simply timid and afraid. There's really no other explanation.
"Anyone who has to have a gun with him at all times to feel safe is simply timid and afraid"
True. And anyone not having a gun when faced with harm against themselves or their family is also timid and afraid and far more defenseless.
Was there a point to your comment or did you just feel a need to state the obvious?
Personal protection is ONLY needed when you are attacked.... now if you can make certain criminals can only attack between 1:30-3:45 on Thursdays, then I can leave my gun at home more....
And I have used my firearm 3 times to protect other people that were being attacked... they were so glad that I was armed & ready.... the cops showed up about 20 minutes afterward to take their statements & file the report..... at least they were still alive to make the report.....
And.... no shots were fired in any of the situations.....
Feel I need to? Not as such, I just find that a gentleman or a lady is best dressed when armed. Uncivilized people such as yourself should be gratefull that WE firearms people who are patently your betters in every way are hopefully their to protect your uncivilized and uncooth self.
You little people are so amusing, weak and gullible. Why I bet you actually believe the invisible man. HA!
Or in words a pencil necked geek of your ilk would understand. Be quiet and let your better run things you aren't well bred enough to be allowed out without adult supervision.
oh yes.. i feel SO much safer knowing you are carrying a weapon and can shoot someone's head off at any moment because you are stressed out, or upset or in a fight or just feel like being a hero or something stupid like that..
yea.. and you call me uncivilized ? i'm sorry, i guess i am since i don't advocate people carrying around weapons designed to be violent, in public, where they have the ability (and recently have been using that ability) to END SOMEONE ELSE'S LIFE !
i guess killing people is civilized ?
Why is it when CCW owners are asked to follow societal rules, they sceam "discrimination"? How silly! You don't want to follow the rules of campus housing, live off campus.
OK. Lots of folks who think Constitutional rights are evil (at least this one).
How would you react if any university decided to put all card-carrying ACLU members in separate housing?
Right.
ACLU members don't fire bullets.
Oh but some do too! Moron.
Nope. Show me one instance anywhere of an ACLU member being loaded and firing a bullet.
When ideas are made illegal, only the illegal will have them!!
if you do not understand why our founders wrote the declaration of independence and included the second amendment in the US constitution then you cannot call yourself a citizen of these united states, you have become a serf.
Hey Robert! the right to free speech is protected in another amendment! So what is it with you guys allways having to run off at the mouth with your slander? Maybe your type should be kept in a seperate dorm!
So lets just arm every student in college and maybe high school and have a shoot-out at the OK-Coral, right PJAM09? There have been enough killings in schools around the country.
Swagganaut, I hate to burst your bubble, but unless you are a member of the 1%, you are already a serf, lol. And if you fit the profile of most 2nd Amendment fanatics, you are on the lower end of serfdom.
I don't carry my gun to kill, I carry it to live.
will-906003
Right. VA Tech is a prime example. That case shared one thing with Aurora. It was a gun free zone! No LAW ABIDING people there had guns. Too bad. Too many people think that brandishing a weapon, which is seldom required or done, is the only deterrent offered by carrying guns. It isn't. The fact that potential criminals believe that one or more people in an area may be carrying concealed weapons is a powerful deterrent and quietly reduces crime. That is why areas with the strictest gun control laws - like Chicago, and until recently DC - have the highest violent crime rates. Do Chicagoans feel secure, knowing they have strict gun control laws? Or do they worry because they are the murder capital of the country?
swag, still trying to tell people who are Americans and who's not, Really? Get off your high horse, GUNS never solved any problems, just CREATED more. LIVE FREE or DIE!!!!!!!! and carring a gun with you isn't LIVING FREE!!!
They just gave people the ability to solve problems.
Nope, they didn't create anything.
Firearms are only tools. The are inanimate objects, they don't DO anything without a person operating them.
So in your inability to make any rational point, you just go straight to spouting utter nonsense.
Guns make it easy to kill.
When someone in the US decides to kill, he or she will most likely choose a gun as the weapon.
An armed person who wants to kill has the advantage over an armed intended victim.
When someone dies from a gun shot, it is much more likely that a murder (crime) and not a justifiable homicide has occured.
It's easy for crazy people in the US to get guns.
Robert-958789- you are a moron. I have personally been in two situations (one in college) where my pistol saved my life and the life of another. Friends and coworkers have repeadedly said they feel safer in my company because they know I am a responsible gun carrier.
Wait! What's that noise? Oh, it's the indignant outrage from Wayne LaPierre about how separate dorms are a violation of the 2nd Amdt.
Nice apples to oranges analogy. ACLU members aren't inherently dangerous, guns are. Nice epic fail.
ACLU members are far more inherently dangerous than firearms. ACLU members are people with the ability to harm others. Firearms are inanimate objects that cannot do anything without a person.
Ah, maybe this explains it....are you by any chance a preteen?
This explains why Colorado is getting shot up?? Last I checked the criminals or the criminally insane dont follow laws Seven2Seven, they do whatever they feel like doing.
Guess what the NO GUNS ALLOWED sign did at the theater? Yeah, thats right...motivated all the normal, law abiding concealed carry citizens to leave their guns in the car but not the one bent on mass murder. Try again
Riley, I guess you Colorado people will need another big shooting event to get it. Probably will be on this campus by the new fraternity formed by this ruling "CAPPA, CAPPA, CAPPA". Good luck.
To get what? That if one or a few people had a gun in the theater then there would be a smaller body count? Pretty simple math to me IXLR8. Guess you just want to take the legal weapons out of the hands of law abiders and ensure the gangs, criminal enterprises and thugs have them
Right, the Aurora situation would have been better if dozens of people had drawn handguns and started firing at each other in a dark theater filled with choking gas.
It would have been much easier for responding police officers to identify the actual shooter while dozens of people are firing off hundreds of rounds at themselves and the shooter and innocent victims.
Gun nuts - please tell me. If it's so easy to prevent a mass shooting by having concealed carry, please tell me the last mass shooting that was stopped by someone carrying a concealed weapon.
What good is that going to do. It is like having a sign on the building that says come on in rapist we have no weapons so now you can have your way with no chance of getting injured. If some rapist got shot the liberals would be upset and start a online petition protesting the rapist getting hurt.
We all know which residence halls will have the least amount of crime now... the ones with the gun owners. If were attending class there I would get a permit just to be able to live in that building.
are you kidding ? that's the building i'd avoid because some idiot's gun would go off, all the other paranoid idiots would think someone is shooting the place up and BAM !! -- instant war zone
yea.. i'll stick with the spoons ok ?
Phoenyx - You stick with the spoons, we all insist. You sound incapable of handling pointy objects.
i sound incapable ? you are advocating turning a college campus into a Call of Duty style shooting range and you think that I sound incapable ?
i think you should reconsider that one carefully
"turning a college campus into a Call of Duty style shooting range"
Wow. Have a nice day.
aww.. thanks :) its very kind of you to tell me to have a nice day.
but my question is this.. so WHEN (not IF) another event occurs that involves people being shot.. are you just going to keep blaming all the people who are using the guns ? and what if this next time.. people DO shoot back and make it worse ? are we still just blaming the people ?
how many people have to die ?
Well, now, that is just silly. What would make a dorm for CCW holders that are required to lock their weapons away while in the dorm any more vulnerable than a dorm where CCW holders do not live? And it isn't like there will be a big sign on the front of the building stating, "THIS IS THE CCW DORM! STUDENTS MUST LOCK THEIR WEAPONS UP WHEN IN THE DORM!"
Unsecured weapons in a home environment are responsible for more accidents than they are responsible for preventing any form of crime.
OOH, Phhoe, can I play?
"I sound incapable?"
Yes you do. Your reading comprehension is suspect. Your rant about a dropped gun in dorm and all the resulting gunfire? The dorm is a no-gun zone.
Your debating skills are weak. Filled with "what if'," "how aoout": and suppositions stated as fact - deal with it!
OK. You hate guns and don't think anyone should have the right to defend themselves. See? You could state that in one sentnece and be done.
(I agree you should leave sharp implements alone.)
Tell ya what. All gun haters go live in a state that has severe restrictions on gun ownership. That way the people will feel the same about guns and not use guns or get guns. Everybody else that doesn't care or chooses to use their 2nd amendment rights can stay. That'll take care of all this. Flaming bleeding heart liberals can do what they want and god fearing gun owners can do what they want. And while they are at it they can obamacare and infanticide galore! Perfect. Within one generation gun haters, homosexuals, and baby killers will all be dead. Have a nice day :)
mpa - are you kidding me ? really ? so a gun never ever drops and goes off accidentally ? is that what you are saying ?
yet - im incapable ?
you can say my debating skills are weak.. how many news articles (including a recent one) have people being accidentally shot by their own weapon because they dropped it ?
oh ? you don't know ? how about the man at the movie theatre recently who dropped his gun AND SHOT HIS OWN ASS ?! .. yea..
so please please please, tell me it doesn't happen and that all my what if's are fake.. PLEASE !
and if you follow anything moron, i don't hate guns, in fact i have family members who have CCW permits.. i simply do not agree with it.. that's it
guns have their place, yes, but i just debate where it is..
so stop assuming
Dr. Knowlittle, if I were you I'd forget about the rapists and start to worry about the people who stole your brain!!
this here is paranoia, nothing based in reality and you see danger everywhere regardless of the facts.
this is a complete lie based only on personal opinion, we would never be a free nation without firearms so every single day firearm ownership saves 300+ million lives from government oppression and enemy invasions.
"In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600. This makes firearms injuries one of the top ten causes of death in the U.S.
The issue of "home defense" or protection against intruders or assailants may well be misrepresented. A study of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides
In another study, regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and suicide in the home.
Individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession . It would appear that, rather than being used for defense, most of these weapons inflict injuries on the owners and their families."
Source-library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/​GUNSTAT.html
They cannot ban guns legally, but they can segregate gun owners, NExt? or people who believe in gun ownership? How about we segregate idiot progressives from the rest of us. NOw that would be an improvement.
if that would get rid or the idiot conservatives and poorly bred liberals I'm all for shipping them to antartica wearing nothing but a speedo swimsuit...okay maybe a latte to split between them all. I'm a bull moose progressive and as such am a far better american that any conservative OR stinking liberal...they all smell of hypocritcal two faced inbred freaks.
Please don't send any of these idiots to Antarctica, I used to work there, they don't anymore idiots, with or without speedos. Thanks!
the only thing that separates you two is a prophylactic! Bull moose! holly crap, i eat bull mouse.
Sick society where the answer to gun violence is more guns.
Sick society where the answer to HUMAN violence is refusing to enforce border laws.
Guns are no more violent than a spoon, they are inanimate objects.
OK. You can have as many spoons as you like.
spoons are inanimate objects just like guns... but guns were designed to kill.. were spoons ?
you didn't design a gun to eat your bowl of cereal with in the morning.. sorry
Guns are no more violent than a spoon? Are you serious? If you really believe than, then you should arm yourself with a spoon and you should feel equally as safe as if you had a gun.
WinWin - " you should arm yourself with a spoon and you should feel equally as safe as if you had a gun"
Why would I need to "arm myself"? A gun is violent right? Isn't that your argument? If I have a gun I can just let it take care of the violence for me because it is violent... I don't need to "arm myself" or be involved at all.
tell me pjam, what was a gun designed for ? scooping up your ice cream from your bowl ? oh wait.. that's a spoon... so what was a gun designed for ?? was it designed to just deliver a handwritten note to criminals stating "you are bad" ?? .. no .. it was designed to kill ... isn't killing a bit violent ? .. even just disabling your attacker by not shooting them somewhere that could kill them is violent.. so i think maybe yes.. guns are violent.. that's their intent
A gun is like a shovel... it can be used to plant roses, build the foundation of a new home, or to dig a grave.... the shovel has no control over how it is used.... only the hand holding the shovel can make that decision.....
Phoenyx - It was designed to expell a projectile at a target, same as watergun, nailgun, slingshot, bow, etc...
You know that target shooting is an Olymoic event right? Both Archery and rifle... are they too violent for you to watch?
Violence only occurs when it is the directive of the person wielding the object.
If I spooned your eyes out would it not be violent? Would all spoons then be violent or just me?
it was designed to expell a projectile at a target at high speeds.. and i'm sure its because someone needed to send a letter REALLY quickly, so they folded it up and put it in the barrel of a gun and shot it off to their neighbor.. right ?
and like i stated in another comment.. the Olympics falls into the category of a controlled environment.. a college campus or movie theatre or just in the middle of broad daylight does NOT fall into the category of a controlled environment
and to spoon my eyes out.. you'd have to be close and incapacitate me.. with a gun, you can be much further away..
see differences now ?
Every time I read the nonsense that gun nuts try to pass off as reasoned arguments, the more convinced I am that they are mentally unqualified to be carrying firearms in the midst of normal people.
If truly mentally unqualfied, then they wouldn't have been eligible for weapon's permit. Oh, I see what you're driving at -- the government is supposed to be able to discern who's qualified or not, but the government tends to screw things up on a regular basis. Just follow the failures of the Fairfax County government, the VA Tech authorities, the Montgomery County government where VA tech is located. They all shirked their responsibilities even though the shooter's mother was begging for help for her son.
Guns are no more violent than spoons? LMAO!
Tell that to they guy that dropped his gun and shot himself in the a$$ earlier this week. I challenge you to find a single instance in all of history where a spoon has accidentally discharged and put a bullet hole in anyone.
Given some of the "logic" being exhibited in this thread, there are obviously quite a few CCW holders that are "mentally unqualified" to be walking around with a loaded weapon, CME mgmt.
Quite frankly, your right to carry a loaded weapon does not supercede my right to be safe from stupid people with guns.
Geez, Doc. Spoken like most morally and intellectually superior progressives. You have rights, others not so much based on your superiority. Don't like that part of the Constitution? Get it changed. And don't give me the old crappola about changing times and militia until you have read the Federalist Papers.
Perhaps you are wiser than the founders, but it is doubtful.
That CCW permit does trump your right to feel safe. Good luck.
Your rights do not supercede my rights. That is where you are showing your inability to reason.
Your feelings of paranoia have little to do with reality. However, the statistics on accidental firearm deaths in this country make those of us who do not want to be forced to be around stupid people with guns have validation in actuality.
If you actually knew the statistics on accidental firearm deaths, you'd be far more terrified of your fellow drivers, swimming pools, and a whole host of other things that result in far more accidental deaths than do firearms. Your feelings of paranoia have little to do with reality.
wow, omg WOW! you have no right to "...be safe from stupid people with guns." please show me that right as defined in either in declaration of independence or the the US constitution? you are one paranoid person.
when people have no valid arguments they just make stuff up.
The standup comedy routine of Phoenyx13 is the most amusing I have witnessed since Cheech and Chong. To think there is an individual that honestly believes that when bullets are flying the best defense is to put your head in the sand and hide like an ostrich! Come on man - I ATE the last ostrich that pulled that stunt on me! You make up facts and are so oily in your ability to avoid truth that you have made yourself look like an utter fool.
You seem to honestly believe that a weapon can go off by being dropped. One THAT old is a collector's piece and would be deemed unacceptable and/or unsafe to actually use. Then you assume that a weapon is dangerous just for existing. Sorry but someone has to pull the trigger. I have (during my law enforcement career) dealt with victims that have been killed (or maimed) by pencils, rulers, newspaper, baseball bats, baseballs, knives, machetes, lawnmowers, 1 gallon gas cans, fists, feet, tree limbs and so on. In one school demostration I actually showed a class 47 different deadly weapons in a single classroom without ever showing a firearm as one of them. My sons and daugters all know that they are to go down fighting, never just hide and become the powerless victim of violence. I don't care what they pick up and use but they will fight. Only one daughter will consider a firearm and that is fine with me. I don't believe that anyone should be forced to carry, especially someone like you that is so completely paranoid and ignorant about weapons and weapons safety. Chances are you will never, in your lifetime, ever need to thank someone with a CCW for saving you or someone you love from a violent crime, but it could happen. It may be a cop, it may be a security guard, it may be a member of the NRA coming back from the range where he has been teaching his 12 year-old safe weapons handling and proper respect for the weapon in addition to accuracy, speed and how to double-tap. If and when that day comes I suppose you will spit on them, that is fine too . . . but if it happens to be anyone in my family we will knock you down.
That's right, Swagganaut, I absolutely do have that right. Don't stop reading the Constitution at the 2nd Amendment. You would be surprised at what you could learn by reading it in its entirety.
ok david, calm down.. if you want your kids to play with guns and possibly shoot themselves, i will not infringe upon that right... nor will i feel sorry for you either when you or your kids end up dead.
guns are inanimate objects - yes - accidents happen - yes (read the news ? how many stories recently of people getting shot either on purpose or by accident.. including stories of law enforcement officers with their guns in their house and their wonderful kids get ahold of them and there ends up being a death.. sounds great.. i'll stick to other weapons like pencils.. if someone comes at me with a pencil, i have a fighting chance moron and can disarm that person.. i can't disarm someone that can shoot me from a long distance away)
as for me honestly believing that a gun can go off if its dropped ? really ? you just showed me how low your IQ and reading comprehension is -- LOOK IT UP, JUST THIS WEEK SOME IDIOT IN A THEATRE DROPPED HIS GUN AND SHOT HIS OWN A$$
so yea.. tell me, PLEASE tell me that guns can be dropped and will never go off.. ok ? yea, thanks
next, you want your kids to play with guns and carry them ? go for it
someone starts shooting in a public area (like a college campus for example), i'd rather save my ass and run.. and i'd rather my child do the same thing, they have increased their chances of being able to tell me about the story later.. unlike your children who will be trigger happy and want to shoot back, thusly making them instant targets and you taking off of work so you can bury your child
keep in mind idiot, we are talking about COLLEGE STUDENTS .. not about law enforcement officials or anything of that nature.. this is about COLLEGE STUDENTS ...
so yes, laugh, be my guest.. you can laugh while attending your kids funeral as well
All you anti-gun finatics keep pointing out the same incidents: Aurora, Virginia Tech, the man shooting himself in the butt. How many people do you think carry on a daily basis without incident ? Many, many, many more !
My husband has a CCW and just had to use it to defend himself in a road rage incident just a couple days ago. The 2 gentlemen stoppped in front of him, got out & approached his car. Upon seeing the gun in his lap, they retreated back to their own vehicle. Not a shot fired, yet my husband made it hime safely. He has been carrying for many years now and this was the first time he felt he needed to pull his gun. The whole idea behind CCW is that the weapon is there when you need it.
and to answer the question "you want your kids to play with guns and carry them?" No, I do not want my kids to PLAY with guns. My kids have been raised around guns of all types and have been taught to respect the weapons. We are all hunters who eat everything we kill. My kids have seen what a bullet can do. It is not kids like mine you need to fear. It is those who have not been taught the principals of owning a gun, whio have not been educated, that you neeed to fear. Those will be the ones who grab a weapon and fire out of fear or who "accidentally" shoot their friend. Education is key !!!
Phoenyx13 - You are indeed singularly uneducated and obviously stupid when it comes to firearms. Do you honestly believe that a modern weapon with a floating firing pin and modern ammunition will go off if dropped on the floor while adjusting yourself in the seat in a theater? So I am to assume you also believe EVERYTHING printed by the press or on the Internet because the "Wouldn't print it if it were not so!"
You have a real knack for making up situations that fullfil your need to be proved right. I only have a lifetime of experience that proves you wrong ON EVERY SINGLE POINT. 600 accidental deaths per year from discharge of a firearm, over 31,000 from accidental poisoning and over 24,000 incurred from automobile accidents. My children are much more likely to be hit by a bolt of lightning. I do not appreciate your tone or attitude towards my children. They are not pawns who exist for your benefit and amusement. If they are accosted in an open area and in public they would almost certainly run, just as I would. You need to stop altering the playing field to suit your argument - this article is talking about a dorm which is neither public nor open.
You do not know me, nor do you know my children. Stop pretending that you do. They are NOT trigger happy, they are responsible and mature human beings, three of whom are beyond the legal drinking age. None have driven a car while intoxicated, two have served on juries, one is on an academic scholarship at UC - Denver (and YES she knows her way around firearms but will not reside in a segregated dorm). The other daughter was indeed injured in an accident, she was on a sports scholarship when she was injured in a motor vehicle accident and now drives a wheelchair and will, most likely, for the rest of her natural life. She still loves to shoot at the range and considering that she cannot run, or hide I purchased her a beautiful Colt M-1911 .45 Government Model for her last birthday. When she finishes up her Concealed Carry background check and passes the mental she will be carrying that "shiny new spoon" everywhere she goes and I, for one, feel good about it and don't really care about your opinion regarding this.
You can play statistics games all you want. An unarmed populace is a nice safe obedient group of people. Criminals call them victims, governments call them serfs. Comparing a weapon like a firearm to a spoon may be foolish. But when all is said and done a weapon, be it a firearm or a knife, is a tool. A drill needs to be operated safely and responsibly but any fool can buy one. At least not every fool can buy a firearm. In Mexico they have some of the most stringent gun control laws on the planet, how's that working for them down there - huh?
Guns in schools. Gee, what could POSSIBLY go wrong...?
Purple is a funny smell
(See my above comment for explanation.)
And let's throw a post-football game kegger into the mix...
Toasty - You mean like at Virginia Tech? Thank goodness none of those attending class were armed or something might have "gone wrong".
Only an ignoramus like you would think that highlighting a group of people (students) as unarmed targets would result in something good.
Pjam, it's actually going to happen because of brainless people like you. One guy is going to drop his gun have it go off (Happen this week in a movie theater) and everyone who pulls theirs out is going to shoot until empty. Would you want to be in the middle of that? I hope your there to direct "traffic".
Or we could consider four or five well-armed but untrained students shooting at each other, each thinking that the others were the bad guys.
And name an incident of this happening?
It's sad how your daydreams of what COULD happen, apparently trumps the reality of the headlines which do happen.
These are not mere daydreams of what COULD happen. Innocent people get killed all the time by people with guns who made bad, snap decisions. Try Googling "mistakenly shot..." and see how many hits come up.
I'll wait for your response that these lives lost are merely the price we pay for living in a free society, or some other NRA BS
Ha Ha. scrolling down are skimming all your drool pjam show you are a nutcase. You are delusional which means you can seperate the truth from reality. Seek counsel, it could get better for you.
Seven -
So the dropped gun in the movie theater went off. How many rabid gunners opened fire then?
Blows your, "guns don't shoot people" argument right out of the water, though, doesn't it? As well as invalidating that old, "CCW holders are responsible people concerned with safety first." argument.
PJam, name an incident where one of you armchair Rambos stopped an active mass shooter with their concealed carry weapon?
Since it happens all the time there must be dozens of examples of it.
The other shooting in Aurora, New Life Church shooting, South Carolina church where the guy with a shotgun broke in on the congregation, Tyler Courthouse shooting, and not CCW but the Parker Middle School Dance shooting and Appalachian School of Law Shooting.
And this one, 150 yards with a hand gun:
My daughter was considering Colorado for school, but I did not know that the students can carry there. Now there is another thing to vet schools on. My opinion is that students do not need to be carrying on a college campus. Too many small dramas that can turn into a big tragedy, too many drinking parties, etc. And don't give me that nonsense about one carrying student saving the day. It would be more like the idiot that shot himself in the butt.
Flying is like breathing underwater.
(see my above comment for explanation.)
If this is a showing of your IQ you should never be allow near a gun! And apparently you have never been to college.
To obtain an concealed license, one must pass a full background check with your local, state & federal agencies... how many students attending class with your daughter are CONVICTED felons?
That check only goes back 5 years. Likewise, it can miss any pending charges.
It isn't the felons with guns you need to worry about in a college dorm. It is the drunken student, or the student stressed out from finals week.
There have been plenty of reports in the news recently of shooting committed by people who were not felons until they started murdering people. They were perfectly legal gun owners.
Steve: The Dark Knight shooter passed a back ground check for guns, he was law abiding until he wasn't. And how do I know how many felons will be on campus, I don't, but they are allowed to go to school if they want.
How do you know when anyone snaps? A guy gets dumped, an argument at a party blows into more, a bad grade means a lost of scholarship. Have you ever lived on a campus? These are young people away from home typically for the first time. Life is very exciting, scary and sometimes very raw. Emotions turn quickly at that age, and guns in the mix is not a good thing. If I want her at a campus without guns that is my right.
Maybe they should have a seperate dorm for the felons!
Okay - I have lived in New York City for over 20 years, and in some pretty shady parts. I have never nor will I feel the need to own a gun to protect myself. If I can deal with Brooklyn, surely you can deal in Colorado. Guns are for the weak and/or angry. And the only people I know who did own guns are dead because of them...
Go ahead gun owners, insert angry comment here:
"the only people I know who did own guns are dead because of them"
Exaggerate much? Do you feel better now?
No, I don't exaggerate and no, I don't feel better. But thanks for caring....
You can`t carry one legally in the city anyway so whether you felt the need or not "nanny" Bloomberg has already taken that decision away from you.
Now if they could just do that to the criminals...
Not angry, just he facts.
Maybe weak and angry, but certainly afraid. The gun lovers will dance around and do the twist like Chubby Checker, but they can't get away from the fact that those of us who are never armed are the ones aren't afraid. These are people who are scared to death to leave home without a piece. Must be tough to go through life that timid.
Know any police there in NY?
EarlyOut-1524710:
Just because you're not afraid, doesn't mean there is no danger. To those who claim to have lived in tough neighborhoods and never experienced a violent attack, you are the beneficiaries of the herd. The statistics are in your favor because you're among the multi-million masses so the odds of being singled out for criminal attack are small.
However, there are those in the herd who have been victims of violent crime. Despite the statistics, they became victims. Were that not the case, there would be a signifcantly reduced need for law enforcement.
It boils down to risk assessment. If you feel safe in the herd, then you won't think to prepare for an attack. If you acknowledge that attacks do occur and consider that you (or anyone in the herd) could be attacked, and further consider the consequences of such an attack, you might think to prepare for such an event.
Guns are like life preservers. 99.99999% of the time, most of us won't need one. But when we find ourselved in a situation where we do need one, it's quite likely to late to obtain one.
Weak, angry, and afraid are a dangerous combination. Someone with those traits is highly likely to perceive threat where there is none and shoot an innocent victim.
DVYNC -
No nasty comment, but I think you have been lucky. Wish I had had a gun when a punk kid pulled a knife on me in my upper west side apartment lobby (86th). Or when the 12 year old tried to rob me with a knife in Chicago's Hyde Park (Took that away from him, didn't get a scratch, but I was lucky.)
Your personal experiences (or mine) don't have a great bearing on this topic. It is written in the Constitution - just like your right to state your opinion.
OK, Doc.
"Weak, angry, and afraid are a dangerous combination. Someone with those traits is highly likely to perceive threat where there is none and shoot an innocent victim."
Do you have the data to back up that statement?
FBI statistics show sidearms are used more than a million times each year to prevent crimes. Most of those do not involve the actual discharge of the weapon (See recent examples where crazed knife-wielder was disarmed after stabbing people in convenience store.) Bet you don't read those kinds of articles, do you?
Yep, lots of data to back that up. Exactly why police are required to take a psychological exam before they are sworn in and allowed to carry a gun. To rule out those with personality traits and emotional disturbances that make them dangerous to have a weapon.
More data: go online and check out the personality profiles of people who have committed murder. Bernard Geotz would be an excellent place to start.
Go into any introductory course in psychology on any campus university and learn a little bit about personality traits and social perspectives that have shown, time after time, to be found in those who commit spontaneous acts of agression based on their own misperceptions. Try Google Scholar for some academic and empirical studies done on the topic.
I'll be checking out your FBI statistics. I suggest at this point, that you are either incapable of reading and understanding statistical data, or you are intentionally misrepresenting the stats. I'll be back to let you know which it is.
As I thought. The FBI does not have any such statistic indicating what you have claimed. They keep statistics only on gun violence, and only on those cases that have been charged and sentenced.
You are going to have to come up with a source for your silly numbers. Otherwise, we all know that you are pulling them out of your rear end.
It sounds like they're instituting a bunch of regulations that will do very little to actually make anyone safer from gun violence.
Actually it will make the campus safer from all forms of violence as students will be able to defend themselves.
yes, they can defend themselves and make it a bigger bloodbath.. sounds like a great way to ensure safety on campus
"they can defend themselves and make it a bigger bloodbath"
And not defending themselves is going to make it a smaller bloodbath?
P.S.
Nothing "ensures safety" and that wasn't the intent, it is about the right to defend oneself.
well i'm not sure about you.. but if i'm unarmed and someone has a gun.. i think i'm going to run for cover.. which would make it a much smaller bloodbath then if i decided to try to play hero and shoot back
get it ?
this isn't some video game, this isn't some fun past time and this isn't a controlled environment like the shooting range.. its real life .. that is quite different
I don't see much of a change. The previous policy and it is that way in most colleges in the state is that if you live in the school's housing you could not keep any firearms in your room. They had to be stored at the school's public safety office so you would have to go there and sign it out. This looks to be effectively the same policy.
Or get drunk and shoot someone.
If increasing amounts of guns are carried by students on champus, in classes and kept in their dorm rooms..
The most likely and probable increased outcome on a college campus is more "immature" people starting an "in anger dispute" violent encounter with a gun because they feel empowered - so rather than a good old fashion shouting match or fist fight - you get a shooting by an "angry person" who feels "wronged"
stoney, what ?? you mean someone might start a shooting match because they feel "wronged" and aren't mature even tho they had their background checked and aren't a felon which qualifies them to carry the weapon in the first place ?
that is just crazy talk !
**yea, can you taste the sarcasm?**
Having a background check and not being a felon does not preclude immature actions by young folks or from older ones for that matter. I'm retired military - also spend much time in college/graduate school to watch many young folks in these environments from dorms to barracks.Been around enough to watch some pretty dumbass thngs and angry people go off the handle. I'm saying and it likely would would happen that this behaviour would continue and increase likely of "guns available in this enviroments" would increase the likeihood of having a gun used in anger.
Not against guns per se -- have some -- just beleive in proper time and place
People do "shoot" because they feel wronged and in anger -- they shoot others for being jealous or feeling cheated..............
You can beleive what you will and so can I
Right, Stoney!
Given the fact that the frontal lobe does not fully develop until the age of 25 or more, people under this age (the vast majority living on a college campus) are prone to impulsive behavior. Not exactly the population you want with loaded, unsecured weapons in their rooms.
Stoney -
How did they let a voice of reason in here? Three step-sons here. The oolder two are military right now (Army and Marine) and they both own guns and are responsible adults at 25 * 26. The youngest is 22-going-on-13 and should never have a gun - and we all tell him so. Fortunately he can't afford one.
It is always about responsibility. My brother, college professor, shudders at the thought of owning any kind of firearm - he is honest enough to say that he is afraid he will blow his foot off. I expect the same is true of many posting here, they are just not as honest.
Stoney,
my comment was in agreeance of yours
i do concur that those events can and will happen.. i don't care how much of a "responsible" adult you are 90% of the time, it can and has happened to many people ... so the question is: shall we make it easier or harder to bring that gun on to a college campus so they can potentially shoot your child ?
my vote - let's make it harder
i agree with you, guns in the proper time and place
Segregation is not a bad idea -- it is awe some idea...to show you are segregated if you think you need a stupid gun in the college. what you need are books, pens and computers. Pathetic state passes the gun law in school , at least university can do is segregation. Moral is : Guns are killing americans. we do not need guns, whatsoever. It seems like most killings are done by mentally retarded joe blow then drag dealers, gang members. So solution is close down the sell of all guns. Amend the constitution.
Hippo hair tastes like grey.
(see earlier comment for explanation.)
"So solution is close down the sell of all guns. Amend the constitution" Great idea!!! Let's make it so only the criminals with no intent of following the law and a predetermined intent to do others harm can get them. Don't allow the law abiding citizen who sees all the crime and the 20-30 minute wait for cops to show up have any way to defend theirself. Oh, and I must say, your grammar is above reproach. Truly a shining example of the intelligence level of those who want the second amendment repealed.
It is pitiful when a country allows its' citizens to carry weapons that should only be carried by those who enforce and protect the law. People should be allowed to defend themselves, just not with mass-murder weapons. Guns are mass-murder weapons. The only thing that is equivalent to and/or completely overpowers such a weapon is a bomb.
Limiting the sale of guns and ammunition (especially the ammunition) would mean fewer people who are tempted into committing crimes and murder. Guns make people feel empowered and can establish a false feeling of security (to both criminals and citizens). If people started adopting dogs instead of buying guns, then this country would be better off. Dogs are one of the best criminal deterrents out there.
10 years in this country I am never attacked, mugged or robbed by a criminal. Are you ever? If you live in place like Sao palo brazil, yes you may need to carry a weapon because robbing, mugging is every day thing. Look at the statistics, there is a higher chance of you getting killed by your relatives, acquaintances than a criminal.
Let me add you this, You may have a better grammar than me. You may be more qualified than me but you act and think like a uneducated person. Education is not just to acquire a degree, it is all about broaden your horizon.
Rosupi, it's people like you who allowed Hitler's takeover of Germany. People are not "tempted" into mass murder by having a gun. Remember that crazy f*ck who was chopping up people with a sword on the NYC subway about 10 years back? Too bad Bernie Goetz wasn't on that car with him!
People with registered concealed weapon permits are not the problem. Letting people buy assault weapons and multiple clips for personal use on line or at gun shows is the problem. Military weapons only belong with the military.
That's what the citizens of Germany said right before WWII. Worked out well, right?
and just to not change my theme for the day.
Giants love skittles.
(see my earlier comments for explanation.)
How do you find a difference in the type of weapon in the hands of the SAME law-abiding citizen?
This had to come from the faculty lounge.
This is the best idea I've heard in a long time. If someone doesn't want to carry a weapon there's no reason they should be forced to habitate with those that do. Simple, straightforward, and doesn't impinge on anyone's rights or preferances.
Except for the fact that before this rule, no one knew or thought about who had a gun and who didn't. Now people know, and people with ill intentions will go after those they know do not have guns.
I'd prefer it not be publicized whether or not students carried guns, or are allowed to carry.
I would also think the college would insist that anyone carrying take a gun safety course, and pledge to the university that if they choose to drink, they must first hand over their gun to campus police. My biggest worry would be accidental shooting deaths from intoxication. I also think, besides campus police and staff members, the only people who should know if a student is carrying is the roommate.
Well, now that's just silly. How does knowing that ALL students are not armed in their dorms make any one group "more vulnerable" than another?
And of course it needs to be publized. There are many that would choose a school where students in classes are NOT armed.
JackB -
Would yu feel the same if any university decided they needed to identify all ACLU members so that those who didn't want to be around them would have that option?
Be honest.
ACLU members don't shoot bullets. And they are generally very open about identifying themselves. At most, they can be an annoyance to those that want to oppress others. Hardly comparable to someone walking around with a loaded weapon.
Let me take a wild guess here. You never learned what fallacy is, did you?
It will be interesting to see if the ACLU jumps on this one.
Yeah, like that would happen!
I have been a lifelong gun owner and enthusiast. I have lived in four major cities that have "rough" reputations. At no point in my entire life have I EVER thought, "I wish I had my gun on me." Never. And I don't believe that is just luck. I have been in hairy situations, but I firmly believe that a gun would have escalated the situation with permanently bad results.
I respect every citizen's right to carry a gun. But it is difficult to respect the obvious fear and/or stupidity that drives one to brandish a weapon when things go a bit sideways. These stupid behavior shootings occur pretty much everyday now, and every time we are told the 2nd Amendment protects that behavior. Yeah....... but that still ain't right.
I don't own a gun, but I completely agree with you. I would feel less safe with a gun.
Matthew, if you've been a lifelong enthusiast, then you already know that passing a law that says students can't have guns will not stop the wingnut who is going to come to campus and start shooting people. People like that are probably obivious to such laws.
It may not stop some of the libertarian wingnuts. But guns on campus is a pathetic idea promoted by the gun industry to sell more guns. If you went to college you know that the students are still kids; they drink, smoke, and are not of an age to always make good decisions. Most studies show that our ability to make good decisions are generally poor until about age 25. I don't think anyone needs a gun, but putting guns in the hands of young people is like handing over the wheel to an alcoholic or doper. I would love to see a world without guns, but as long as we have crooks we are probably only able to limit who can have a gun and I don't think waiting until age 25 is a burden. Most people killed in their residence is shot by someone else with their own gun.
You never need a weapon.....until you REALLY need it. Maybe someone responsible, will protect your wife and children if they are ever in danger.
Matthew,
Are you not capable of understanding that people do use firearms -- lawfully, safely, successfully, and of necessity -- for self-defense all the time? I'm glad that you have been fortunate enough never to have needed a firearm to defend yourself, but it's absurd to use that one anecdotal point as the basis for concluding that no one ever has legitimate need of a firearm to defend themselves. People who "brandish a weapon when things go a bit sideways" are committing a crime and should be punished -- depending upon your definition of "a bit sideways." Their actions do not justify restricting the rights of the many other responsible citizens whose guns rest safely in their holsters unless there is a truly genuine need.
thats the dorm I would want to live in, low crime rate, folks who share a common interest, sounds ideal to me.
Except for this:
So...even the "segregated" concealed-carry guys, in separate dorms, are forced to relinquish their weapons...in the place they would need it most. Still makes the students sitting ducks for a psycho with a grudge. All your sharpshooting skills won't do any good if you can't get to your gun.
Poll choices of "Yes", "No", and "I Know"??? Pathetic. I get even though. I run AdBlocker on your site, so you don't make one cent of revenue from me. In the unlikely event you ever start actually editing and fact-checking again, I'll happily change that. Fat chance, right?
That poll was very flawed. I doubt the CC students feel safer with the policy.
This article isn't about CC. Being a private college CC does not have to follow the law that the state supreme court ruling was about.