Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Concealed carry rep speaks on gun laws
The Post ^ | 25 April 2008 | John Parsons

Posted on 04/26/2008 5:43:15 AM PDT by marktwain

A representative from Students for Concealed Carry on Campus argued for a more sensible policy for carrying concealed handguns on college and university campuses at Walter Hall last night.

“It’s hypocritical to say you can bring a gun into a 300-person movie theatre but not a 300-person lecture hall,” said Stephen Feltoon, Midwest regional director of SCCC.

Feltoon, a 2007 graduate of Miami University of Ohio, spoke for a 40-person group as part of the SCCC’s weeklong protest of concealed carry laws across the nation that forbid concealed handguns on college campuses.

The OU Second Amendment club — comprising about 10 active members who participate in shooting activities and safety lessons — invited Feltoon to speak for the occasion.

Current Ohio law states that you cannot bring a concealed firearm on campus unless you have a license to do so and the gun is locked in your car or you are in the immediate process of locking it in your car, Feltoon said.

“That’s it,” he said. “One sentence removes my right and yours to carry a concealed firearm on campus.”

Feltoon refuted several counter-arguments he often hears, like the idea that college students are often highly stressed drinkers and drug users. He said it is illegal to carry a gun while under the influence of alcohol whether you are on campus or not.

SCCC began as a Facebook group after the shootings on the campus of Virginia Tech last year. The group then held its first empty-holster protest on Oct. 22, 2007.

After another shooting at Northern Illinois University, the groups’ membership grew to about 22,000.

“If Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois taught us anything it’s that putting up a sign that says ‘no guns allowed’ really doesn’t work,” Feltoon said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: banglist; concealed; niu; ohio; sccc; student; virginiatech
You won't see reporting such as this in the Washington Post!
1 posted on 04/26/2008 5:43:16 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

ABOUT TIME. The 2nd Amendment was meant to EMPOWER Americans...not shackle them.


2 posted on 04/26/2008 5:51:40 AM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
“If Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois taught us anything it’s that putting up a sign that says ‘no guns allowed’ really doesn’t work,” Feltoon said.

I would tell them to go deactivate all security systems at their bank and put up a sign...

"No Bank Robbery Allowed."

3 posted on 04/26/2008 5:56:08 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
“It’s hypocritical to say you can bring a gun into a 300-person movie theatre but not a 300-person lecture hall,” said Stephen Feltoon, Midwest regional director of SCCC.

That's not hypocrisy, that's a double standard. Hypocrisy is when someone does something he advises (or legislates) against others doing.

4 posted on 04/26/2008 5:56:19 AM PDT by coloradan (The US is becoming a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

As a starter, let all ROTCers and faculty pack loaded heat in class.
Go Bobcats.


5 posted on 04/26/2008 6:02:12 AM PDT by noah (noah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
Hypocrisy is when someone does something he advises (or legislates) against others doing.

To parse, if a legislator passes one law for students on a campus he doesn't visit, but passes better law for himself in places where he IS likely to be, then that might be hypocritical.

Perhaps we can agree on 'inconsistent?' =)

6 posted on 04/26/2008 6:06:00 AM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

It’s a double standard. One set of rules for colleges and another for everywhere else, even if the age ranges of the clients are equal. Why are college students somehow inferior or less responsible than the general population? (I thought people who went to college were supposed to be role models for others, not deserving of contempt or patronization.)


7 posted on 04/26/2008 6:11:45 AM PDT by coloradan (The US is becoming a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
Why are college students somehow inferior or less responsible than the general population?

I don't know. But they are. Hormonal imbalance?

Accused of a variety of abusive behaviors — including shocking prospective fraternity members with an electric cattle prod and burning the pledges with a hot clothes iron — three former members of a University of Texas fraternity were charged with misdemeanor hazing Friday, according to court documents. ... The charges stem from an investigation into the fraternity's activities during the 2006 semester when pledge Tyler Cross, 18, fell to his death off the balcony of an off-campus dormitory. ... ... Last year, three officers of UT's Lambda Phi Epsilon received probation after an investigation into the death of Phanta "Jack" Phoummarath, a freshman honors student from Houston who was found dead after an off-campus fraternity party Dec. 9, 2005.

8 posted on 04/26/2008 6:19:22 AM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2harddrive

I wish I knew what it would take to get FL off its fat-ass on this one. As a whole the “shall-issue” carry law is pretty good in the state, but the always politically correct “school-zone” exclusion is seemingly impenetrable.


9 posted on 04/26/2008 6:25:26 AM PDT by Bull Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

“I don’t know. But they are. Hormonal imbalance?”

Exactly. They are too young and irresponsible. Drinking, voting and gun ownership ages should be set at 21. Driving should be restricted to daylight hours with an adult present until the age of 18.

Anyone with a legal CCW permit should be able to carry concealed at colleges. Open campus colleges cannot provide security for students or staff.


10 posted on 04/26/2008 6:37:01 AM PDT by Poser (Willing to fight for oil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

In order to make your case that college students are less responsible than the general population, it doesn’t suffice to provide a few anecdotal cases of college students doing something irresponsible. There are many cases of non-college-students in the same age range doing things a lot worse than that, e.g. being gang members and and murdering people - and yet gang members are eligible to go to movie theaters.


11 posted on 04/26/2008 6:55:04 AM PDT by coloradan (The US is becoming a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; Shooter 2.5; wku man; SLB; ..
Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!
12 posted on 04/26/2008 6:57:43 AM PDT by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Again, let me propose that if there is momentum at the State level to allow CC permits on campus, and effort should be made, again at the State level, to voluntarily empower CC holders on campus to everyone’s benefit. No reason to even ask the liberal college administration.

That is, the State should also mandate a voluntary pager system to *notify* CC students and faculty if there has been an incident on campus. Once they are paged, they step into a hallway and make a cellphone call to a recorded message from the campus police, with information about the incident.

This accomplishes several things. To start with, most CC students and faculty would be unaware of an incident on campus unless they are notified. But notification gives them precious time to prepare themselves, emotionally, and mechanically, with their weapon.

Second, the call would suggest to them that if they chose to do so, they should find a covered position near the front entrance of their building, to both observe, and be in a safe defensive position. Importantly, not to brandish their weapon, however, so they are not mistaken for the shooter, and certainly not to go hunting for the shooter.

This would provide both intelligence information and some degree of site security, as a covered position near the front of a building would have a good area of observation if the shooter was in the open; it would help protect the unarmed people in the building; and it would help to shorten the duration of the incident.

A lot of CC students and faculty would not be interested in such a system, but some would. And even half a dozen such people on the campus would strongly increase the degree of difficulty for the shooter. The shooter would make his presence known, but the CC holders would be in the shadows ready to strike if needs be.

It would turn a right into an opportunity.


13 posted on 04/26/2008 8:43:28 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

“If Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois taught us anything it’s that putting up a sign that says ‘no guns allowed’ really doesn’t work,” Feltoon said.

Actually, it says, “Deranged maniacs: open killing field inside! Nobody can or will resist your massacre! Come on in and open fire!”


14 posted on 04/26/2008 10:27:58 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
This all sounds very good (could cell phones be used as pagers?) but wouldn't even be necessary if people were comfortable with guns in their presence.

What's sorely missing these days are people who are, or have been, 'near' a gun and aren't put-off by it. Imagine retrieving a pistol from a concealed holster (say, behind the back) in mixed company and laying it on the counter for them to observe (adult show-and-tell, if you will). Some would be aghast, some would go "cool, can I look at it", one might faint. These are not reactions that adorne a free republic but are endemic in slave states.

The right to carry brings with it the opportunity to lessen fears associated with arms among those most unfamiliar. If guns could generate the kind of 'yawn' that displaying say, a drill might, we will be on our way toward what the founders had in mind. But, our 'betters' won't allow it.

I can only ask "why", as it serves no purpose to keep people in the dark as to guns. Crime stats defy the this illogic.

Campus shootings, mall shootings; good thing the flock is as large as it is 'cause, "it probably won't happen to me" seems the message coming from our elite 'leaders'. Which misses the point entirely, which is: no one should be a victim of Johnny Crazy when and if, he goes off his meds. Not a free people, anyway.

15 posted on 04/26/2008 5:30:39 PM PDT by budwiesest (Coming to a town near you, unless of course, you put a stop to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: budwiesest

I specified pager notifications, because in many situations, it’s polite or requested that people turn off their cell phones. But there would only be *one* reason why your pager would go off. Also, I don’t see the problem here as comfort with guns, but having a gun doesn’t matter if you have no idea you need one—right now.

As far as people being comfortable showing off their guns to others, I would *never* be comfortable in a situation like that, any more than I would be comfortable if someone had a large knife in their hand while gesticulating like an Italian in an animated conversation. There are far too many dumbasses in the world who think, or act, like guns are toys. Guns are for grownups, or kids who behave like grownups.

Just two or three accidental discharges around you, and you tend to get testy about these things. And having to jump behind a big rock, which I have, because some idiot is trying to cap a rattlesnake between his feet in a rocky river bed with a .45, makes me downright annoyed.


16 posted on 04/26/2008 5:57:04 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poser

“They are too young and irresponsible. Drinking, voting and gun ownership ages should be set at 21. Driving should be restricted to daylight hours with an adult present until the age of 18.”

They can join the service at 18 and go off and defend our country and die for our country, but you think they are too young and irresponsible.


17 posted on 04/26/2008 6:59:57 PM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: caver
“They can join the service at 18 and go off and defend our country and die for our country, but you think they are too young and irresponsible.”

Yes. Absolutely. In case you were wondering, I was drafted at age 19. I couldn't vote or drink for two more years. The military guarantees supervision, which teenagers need desperately.

Maturity comes in stages. Rights and privileges should also come in stages.

18 posted on 04/26/2008 7:04:16 PM PDT by Poser (Willing to fight for oil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; All
Given that John Bingham and the 39th Congress not only clarified that the 2nd A. protects the personal right to keep and bear arms, but that Sec. 1 of the 14th A. prohibits the states from enforcing laws which abridge constitutional rights, we're seeing a situation where:
1) College students and administrators are ignorant about what the Constitution says about gun rights.

2) College students simply cannot afford the legal costs of fighting for their gun rights.

3) Both of the above.

Also, given that colleges trumpet a well-rounded education, they practically obligate themselves to opening shooting ranges and offering classes in gun training, as opposed to hypocritically abridging student's 2nd and 14th A. protections by outlawing guns on campus.
19 posted on 04/26/2008 8:23:36 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10
“1) College students and administrators are ignorant about what the Constitution says about gun rights.”

We have allowed the leftist to take over most colleges and universities. They are not as much ignorant of the Constitution, as positively opposed to it and what it stands for. Look at Bill Ayers, who has done everything he could to destroy this country, who hates what America is and what it stands for, and who was welcomed into academia at the University of Illinois, Chicago, and who even now is doing everything he can to subvert the system from within.

The problem is not that he is ignorant of the Constitution, the problem is that he despises it.

20 posted on 04/27/2008 5:55:09 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; All
The problem is not that he is ignorant of the Constitution, the problem is that he despises it.

Thank you for replying, but I've got some reservations about your statement above. First, noting that I don't know much about Bill Ayers, since the Constitution contains many things, do you know what specific aspects of the Constitution that he despises?

Also, given the prevalence of politically correct interpretations of the Constitution, does he despise honest interpretations of the Constitution, or is he inadvertently despising politically correct interpretations of the Constitution?

21 posted on 04/27/2008 12:59:47 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

One of this group spoke at our Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL) lat week.


22 posted on 04/27/2008 1:03:08 PM PDT by bmwcyle (I always rely on God and Guns in that order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

I sent you the posts with the information about Bill Ayers to help you to understand the philosophy of the people who have taken over most of the colleges and universities in this country.

They treat Ayers and his ilk as Rock Stars because they actually had the guts to take violent physical action against the system they despise...The United States. This is why I say that they despise the U.S. Constitution.


23 posted on 04/27/2008 7:54:39 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: coloradan; sam_paine

You’re right, that’s not hypocrisy...this is what I get for not looking at my speech more carefully.

All college students have a hormonal imbalance? Does that include all of the non-traditional students like the 30 year-old in one of the classes I’m kinda taking?

It’s not that *college students* are more responsible, it’s that *licensees* are.


24 posted on 04/28/2008 7:42:41 AM PDT by nehpets99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nehpets99

Welcome to FR!

If I can be of any help to you in continuing to stand up to the opposition, please don’t hesitate to ask.

You make a good point, which is that licensees are what should be compared, not the college population as a whole. (I personally oppose permits, being more of a Vermont-carry type if I had my way.) But given that permits do actually exist, what reason could possibly exist to deny their authority on colleges? The answer can’t be a lack of need to do so, as V. Tech has made clear. No, it’s got to be something else. What? (I have some guesses.)


25 posted on 04/28/2008 7:32:18 PM PDT by coloradan (The US is becoming a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson