Posted on 02/23/2008 10:04:40 PM PST by Tahts-a-dats-ago
CCP laws are nothing more than backdoor gun registration. If the RATS take control and decide to confiscate guns the homes of CCP holders will be the first ‘compounds’ to be raided by a kindly BATF. They are real partial to the way Alcibiades and Hannibal had their weapons confiscated for the last time.
In my state you are allowed to open carry as well as to carry inside your vehicle. While most people don’t open carry because they don’t want the hassle of dealing with the police questioning them, there are a lot of people carrying guns in their vehicles around here. It gives people the ability to protect themselves for at least some of the time that they are away from home, without the cost and hassle of the CCP, plus it also keeps them off the CCP list. However, if you buy from a licensed gun dealer, the govt can still get the information about the sale and know what you have purchased even if you aren’t registered for a CCP.
how bout liberal free?
Very likely all the drug use and much of the alcohol use is illegal. Seems like laws haven't stopped those activities, so why believe that making bringing guns on campus illegal will help? After all, I think there are laws against blasting away at people anyhow, and it appears those laws aren't stopping folks, either. No point in criminalizing the one last defense between a psycho nut case and the would-be victims.
Substance: Yes, campuses should be gun-free zones, with the exception of security, and even they could probably get by with pepper spray and tasers.
Problem is, declaring a "gun-free zone" don't make it so. A a great many have noted, signs and policies are no impediment to someone with murder in mind. If you could erect a magic shield that would exclude all unauthorized firearms from campus, I'd endorse it. But it doesn't exist, and the half-measures in place do more harm than good.
Here I'll offer a critique of some of the arguments on the RKBA side: Don't overplay the NIU or VT cases. If students were allowed, even encouraged, to carry concealed, it doesn't mean that all would.
What percentage of eligible citizens in "shall-issue" states get a permit, let alone carry routinely? I'd expect the percentage among college students to be lower, because kids feel safe on campus, whether they actually are or not. I'd guess one in 100 would be a high-end estimate. Higher if your campus has a lot of veterans on the GI Bill, or cops and servicemen continuing their education.
At NIU, it is possible that a strapped civilian could have stopped the assault, but it's unlikely. It happened without warning, in one classroom, and by the time the cops arrived two minutes later, it was all over. The odds that there would be someone with a CCW in the room, that he could grasp what's going on, get to his weapon, line up a shot and drop the shooter before he dropped himself. Not great odds.
On the other hand, it was armed citizens who kept Charles Whitman pinned down during his UT tower spree, and a Texas Ranger and an instantly-deputized citizen who went to the top of the tower and took him down.
College campuses? Liberal-free? Where would all those displaced libs go? They'd have to set up cots and tents in the stadiums. I think those FEMA trailers might be available still...
..and the problem is?
As others have pointed out, the idea isn't to arm everyone, it's simply to allow those who are willing and otherwise qualified to carry concealed weapons. Personally, I think the type of student who would actually carry a weapon is unlikely to be the party-animal type. All the younger men I've known who obtained a CCL were Boy Scout types.
I see the same type of concerns you have come up pretty often on these threads. Given the behavior of some college students, I can understand why you'd be uneasy with letting them carry. But something that has always bothered me is that no one ever questions allowing other young people who are NOT in college carry concealed weapons. I can assure you that 21 year old factory workers, drivers, bartenders, etc. do plenty of drugs, booze, and partying.
If a large percentage of 21 year olds are still "children" and not "adults", then we should change our laws to raise the age of majority. I accept that 18 or 21 may be too young to allow someone to carry a weapon. But if that's true then I also think 18 or 21 is too young to vote, marry, enter contracts, enlist in the military, or be tried as an adult. If we decide to restrict rights from a group of people based on age, then we should be consistent and strip all other rights AND responsibilities from them as well.
Gun free zones are just like any other law; law abiding citizens don’t need them and criminals don’t care.
All it does is keep guns out of the hands of those responsible enough to use them.
There were no shootings on campus (and this was not during the prohibition).
Regardless, what is the difference between a college campus and a bus stop 20 yards away?
Great points!
I tried following the links, and ended up in some kind of internet chain-letter zone.
Get stuffed, and keep this tripe to yourself.
Stuff it back. I simply asked for comments on an article I had written; don’t blame me if clicking a link was beyond your ability - as the page lands directly on the article (even after clearing my cache).
If you think it’s tripe - don’t bother posting in the thread. You’ve got tons of other threads to reply to, nobody forced you to this one.
Thank you for your comments. Feedback was the entire purpose of the thread; I appreciate the fact that you took the time to respond with your thoughts. And I will consider them for future reference.
Where has anyone said that EVERYONE should be allowed to carry on campus?
All I've heard or read about, including the students organization which is working for this right, have said that adult students, who already have state carry permits (most states require 21 yr old or older), as well as professors, teachers, administrators, faculty, etc., should be allowed to carry on campus.
There have been many instances of such people stopping/limiting the slaughter of innocents around the country, and at various locations, including colleges (Appalachian Law School) and K-12 schools (the assistant principal that retrieved his nearby handgun and stopped a young murderer who was headed to another local school to continue his rampage).
I would bet that the professor at Va Tech, who had survived the HOLOCAUST, no less, and made a valiant - if not entirely successful effort to protect himself and his students, would have wished for the proper MEANS (a handgun most likely) to STOP the mad killer in his tracks.
If you agree that we have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to keep and bear arms, then you must agree that BEAR means we can CARRY those arms for protection.
Since these CONCEALED guns will not even be noticed, it will not upset the educational atmosphere whatsoever, but like the fire extinguishers sitting in those classrooms (virtually unnoticed as well), they will be handy TOOLS should an emergency situation arise.
Students and staff should have the option to carry.
Feel free to convince me.
++++++++++++++++++
it’s doubtful that “everyone” would carry. There are police officers who attend class. There are others with permits, former military, hunters and others very familiar with guns who have used them responsibly for years. The people who you do not wish to have guns are the very people who can and will obtain them by breaking laws. Gun free zones only ensure that people who obey laws will give them up. The people who don’t and won’t obey laws still have the ability to obtain them.
Ok. Just to play devil’s advocate, what happens if, say, 50% of teachers or RAs want to carry and 50% don’t? An event occurs in the lecture hall or dorm floor where the teacher/RA is unarmed because he chooses not to be. Do you see any repercussions from this? Lawsuits because maybe the RA on the floor below does carry or a professor in the next hall over does carry - a student could say, “If MY 2nd floor RA was carrying like the 1st floor RA, I might not have been injured.” Who bears the responsibility if a firearm is stolen from a professor/RA on campus and used in a campus crime? I’m just throwing this stuff out to think about.
Then again, sometimes, legal action is called for, i.e., if I, or my kid, were injured or killed at VA Tech when that massacre occurred, I/my family would definitely sue the school.
Why?
Because, not long before the needless massacre occurred, the head of the school crowed about the failure of legislation that would have allowed concealed carry on campus. He said something to the effect that he wanted students and parents to FEEL safe on campus. Unfortunately, HIS way to accomplish this SAFETY, in his ignorant hoplophobic liberal mind, is to maintain a GUN-FREE ZONE (read that, a TARGET RICH ENVIRONMENT).
This is the reaction of an ignorant, anti-gun liberal who does NOT live in REALITY. It also suggests a LEGAL OBLIGATION of the school to do their best to ensure the safety of all that walk onto the VA Tech campus, since the school is disallowing those qualified adults the RIGHT and the MEANS to protect themselves in a MEANINGFUL, REALISTIC way (NOT having to rely on lesser or WORTHLESS means of "protection", i.e., calling 911, packing "Pepper Spray", etc.).
As to the specifics of this post of yours, yes, the choice of students and faculty will have to be voluntary, and many may not choose to be armed, but just ALLOWING adults the option should relieve the school and officials from responsibility, should a crazy/criminal/terrorist go on a shooting rampage. At least there would be a CHANCE that someone carrying concealed could intervene and limit the, otherwise inevitable, carnage.
As far as a stolen weapon, the answer, as in most things in life, is EDUCATING CCW citizens (my NRA could, perhaps, best do this) in HOW to keep their weapon secure, NOT disallowing ALL law-abiding adults the right and the means of effective self defense because something like this MIGHT happen.
Despite similar dire warnings and predictions of "shootouts in the streets" and a return to the "Wild West" by anti-gun zealots and the ignorant among us, states that have allowed CCW have had no such problems develop. In fact, law-abiding citizens practicing CCW, are, as a group, MUCH LESS LIKELY to commit crimes than the population as a whole.
Even, and perhaps, MOST ESPECIALLY, in an academic learning environment like college, where the idea should be to take young adults and make them into well-rounded, INDEPENDENT and productive ADULT members of a FREE SOCIETY, part of the lessons to be taught should include relying and depending on ONE'S SELF for our basic needs, INCLUDING our SAFETY and WELL-BEING.
Other than at a national level, relying in, and trusting GOVERNMENT, or institutions such as schools, for our personal safety, is nothing but folly, and the antithesis of what our great FOUNDING FATHERS intended for Americans and America.
Of course, in America, one is free to rely on others for their well-being and safety, if they so desire. THEY can call 911 and choose not to be armed. It is they that are most likely to be the victims, and have the police show up just in time to draw a nice chalk line around their lifeless bodies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.