[Just another Joe]

Should guns be carried in schools? No. A school should be a place of higher education. As we have seen by recent tragedies, schools can and are also turned into scenes of carnage by those who are not responsible enough to have a gun. Also, what does the property owner think of guns on his/her property? I support the 2nd, but I refuse to have a stranger on my property with a weapon.

Let me take this in two seperate instances.

Should guns be carried in schools? No. A school should be a place of higher education. As we have seen by recent tragedies, schools can and are also turned into scenes of carnage by those who are not responsible enough to have a gun.

So, only those who are NOT responsible enough to carry a gun should have one.
I mean, this type of person is not going to care about the law, whether buying, or carrying, or shooting someone else for no reason.
You have just disarmed all the responsible, law abiding, able to take out the irresponsible citizens.
The shooter now has a free fire zone just as it happened at Virginia Tech.

Also, what does the property owner think of guns on his/her property? I support the 2nd, but I refuse to have a stranger on my property with a weapon.

If it's a private university you have a point. If it's a public university it is owned and operated by the state. Are you saying that the state has the authority to over ride the Constitution of the United States and ignore the 2nd Amendment?
The is a difference between private property and publicly owned property.
The state should have no recourse but to allow carrying a weapon unless there are specific threats to harm or kill another. (As in a courtroom when threats have been made, possibility of assassination of a public official, etc)
Private property is a different issue.

[the OlLine Rebel]

“If it’s a public university it is owned and operated by the state. Are you saying that the state has the authority to over ride the Constitution of the United States and ignore the 2nd Amendment?”

How do you explain courtrooms and state houses and the like? You can’t get more GOVERNMENT than that, the 1s who are supposed to protect 2A, right?

[Sarajevo]

So, only those who are NOT responsible enough to carry a gun should have one.

The original comment, as written-"As we have seen by recent tragedies, schools can and are also turned into scenes of carnage by those who are not responsible enough to have a gun."

I was stating the fact that those who are NOT responsible enough to have a gun are the ones who cause the carnage, not that they should have one. As we have seen by todays news posts, this guy was looney tunes. He should not have had a gun, or any weapon for that matter. Now, how do we weed out those types of people? There is no simple answer.

I have disarmed nobody.

Are you saying that the state has the authority to over ride the Constitution of the United States and ignore the 2nd Amendment?

That is not being stated , nor implied by me. It does seem to be status quo though. Many politicians seem to think the Constitution is their's to dilute as they see fit.

The is a difference between private property and publicly owned property.

My bad. I assumed it was a private institution without checking.

The state should have no recourse but to allow carrying a weapon unless there are specific threats to harm or kill another.

I am in complete agreement here. Let's add mental illness as a reason to deny carrying also.