Any comments (on my article) are welcomed and desired: let me know what you think!
Gun-free zones are a magnet to mass-murderers.
That’s about as effective as making them idiot free zones.
I love the liberal mind. They are saying that a mass murderer, who will kill as many people as he can in cold blood wouldnt dare violate a gun control law like a "gun free zone". I mean, murdering as many people as you can is one thing, but who would step over the line and violate a "gun free zone" law?
Well no one would of course. Brilliant!
I have mixed feelings. Constitutionally, every one has a right to bear arms. Yet, I am uncomfortable with the idea that everyone should be allowed to carry on campus. Pervasive use of drugs and alcohol being my major concern. The fact that “children” are not becoming “adults” as early as they once did being another.
Feel free to convince me.
Gun free zone... another name for liberal fantasy land.
http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/04/when-mass-killers-meet-armed-resistance.htmlAlso, despite our 2nd A. protections, the Swiss have distinguished themselves as leaders in integrating firearms management into their culture, effectively reducing crime.
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html
Sure. Let’s let them be mass slaughter zones instead.
Well, they’re already learning-free zones, and truth-free zones, and free-speech-free zones...why not?
I have a friend who is a radio commentator here in Fairbanks who prefers to refer to "gun free zones" as "Target Rich Environments" instead.
If you're willing to do a little Internet Research, I seem to recall a woman who testified before Congress a few years ago and several State Legislatures thereafter regarding Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) Permit Legislation that was proposed before several State Legislatures.
If I recall (and I could get some of the facts wrong so please do verify), she used to carry a handgun but one day she had an appointment to have Lunch with her parents in a Restaurant in Killeen, Texas. Yep, you guessed it; they were in a little place call Luby's Restaurant. She decided to obey the law and removed her pistol from her purse and locked it in the trunk of her car before she and her parents entered the restaurant. Shortly thereafter a man who was shortly to become famous (or infamous) drove his vehicle through the front window of the restaurant and then got out of hte vehicle with a gun in hand and proceeded to start killing the patrons.
According to later testimony, she reached for her pistol only to remember that she'd left it in the trunk of her car. She watched helplessly as the psychopath proceeded to walk ever closer to her table. I believe her father decided to 'rush' the gunman and try to save his wife and daughter but wa shot down for his attempt. The gunman then shot her mother and would have shot her as well but that's when the police arrived and ended his shooting rampage. She lived but her father and mother were the last two people to die in that massacre and she could have stopped it had she kept the pistol in her purse!
When you decide to declare someplace like that a "gun free zone" (or if you prefer, a "target rich environment"), the psychopaths will know that very likely there will be no one to stop them until the police arrive. That means that a whole lot of people are going to die unless someone decides to break the law and "carry" in defiance of the law.
I think the law needs to be changed to allow CCW - that's the only way that safety of the ordinary citizenry can be assured!
If that guy out in Reno was raping and killing the professors instead of just the students you better believe that the school would be advocating that everyone take advantage of Nevada’s open carry laws.
how bout liberal free?
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.
I tried following the links, and ended up in some kind of internet chain-letter zone.
Get stuffed, and keep this tripe to yourself.
Students and staff should have the option to carry.