I felt this should have its own thread outside of the gun thread.
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/2009/01/27/column__absolute_safety_is_impossible


by Jeremy Baker, regular columnist
Tuesday, January 27, 2009; 9:04 PM
Last Wednesday evening police responded within moments to reports of an assault at the Graduate Center's cafe.

They secured the GLC. They caught the guy who did it. VT Alerts fired off hundreds of thousands of calls, texts and e-mails with the alacrity of lightning.

If you take away nothing else from this tragedy, it's important to understand that this was the most flawless performance of the VT Alerts system to date, and then realize that none of that mattered to Xin Yang.

A basic fact of life is that we can never be completely safe anywhere, unless we are willing to make the kinds of sacrifices Ben Franklin scorned. It's time for President Charles Steger and the university administration to acknowledge the inherent flaws in the VT Alerts system and act accordingly -- meaning it's time that students licensed by the state of Virginia to carry a concealed handgun be allowed to do so on campus.

As one of many people who have lost a friend to gun violence, this is not a call I make lightly. Guns are not a perfect solution. It's dubious at best to say that a responsibly armed citizen would have been the solution Wednesday night, because from what I understand, it was over before anyone could react. But ever since April 16, the administration has tried to sell us on the idea that all guns are evil, and you can see the seeds of this irrational anti-gun bias in the non-reasons given for their willful inaction that morning.

One of the main reasons cited for not closing the campus that day was that it's, well, difficult. Especially when students are trying to, you know, get to class and stuff. This is plausible if you assume the police forgot the presumptive lessons learned from William Morva's escape on the first day of the fall semester, when they had already cancelled classes by the time I tried to take the bus to my first that August morning. The other reason was that they were already questioning Karl Thornhill, a "person of interest" not only because he was Emily Hilscher's boyfriend, but also because he was a gun user. Since it was obvious that he was the murderer, we students didn't need to know anything until a few minutes before the final murders began.

But even after the truth came out, the tough questions were never asked of the administration and police very loudly or for very long. Tim Kaine swept them out of the way through committee, everyone settled out of court and campus police bought a shiny new Segway.

Instead of a serious reevaluation of the magical legal barrier that causes weapons to disintegrate when they cross the threshold between the real world and campus, we have the VT Alerts system, a $35,000/year pacifier -- a safety net that shattered like glass under the weight of its first crisis last November.

Those of you who were here got the "shots fired outside Pritchard Hall" message about 40 minutes after it happened. Unfortunately, the two follow-up messages fell victim to "access issues" in 3n's database and weren't received. After berating 3n for their failure, Tech was so concerned for our safety that they sent 3n back out to do the exact same job -- only this time with instructions to do it better, as well as a field test to make sure it happened.

Now the field test as well as the real crisis has been deemed a success, with some people concerned only with the lack of message boards in all areas of campus. But while I personally would like to see one installed in the lone English classroom that has been overlooked, I know that it is a reactionary measure designed to tell time and to make our administration look like it's doing something to preserve our safety.

Allowing students who have already earned the right to concealed carry in Virginia the right to carry on campus would enable responsible adults to protect themselves when unthinkable things happen.

You would notice a person carrying a gun on campus with the same frequency that you would notice one at the grocery store, mall and/or church. More importantly, during a crisis, first responders are trained to distinguish between people like civilian shooters and undercover police officers when they arrive on the scene.

But you really don't have to take my word for any of this; look at Blue Ridge Community College. Look at Colorado State, look anywhere in Utah, look at Switzerland if you fear that licensed citizens exercising their right to protect themselves automatically translates into more violence.

What we shouldn't do is swallow the prevailing wisdom that Wednesday's response proved that we are safe. It's time for Tech to set aside fear and ignorance and allow us to quietly protect ourselves.

1/28/2009 6:03:35 PM

That article could use a good editor, but it makes some valid points and well illustrates the ineffectiveness of the so called safety measures currently in place at campuses across America.

1/28/2009 6:31:43 PM

yes, absolute safety is impossible

EVEN IF YOU HAVE A CONCEALED WEAPON

1/28/2009 6:33:38 PM

I'm for CCW, CCH, OC, Carry on Campus; I'm for gun owners rights. But what I don't get is some of the arguments that the Campus Carry people make. This article is a perfect example; they argue that cops are ineffective and that if allowed to carry on campus, these gunslingers will be able to stop the next VT, or some crime like this. While I will agree that police work is mostly reactionary, its better than thinking that CCH on campus will be the win. Could you kill, honestly? Could you pull your gun quick enough before you get shot or would we find you dead in your seat still staring at the chalkboard? Was the most stressful situation you have every been in? Have you ever been in a gun fight? Have you ever been under stress and in a gun fight? Have you ever shot at a moving target? Have you shot in no light? Have you ever shot around someone or screaming people? What if the calvary rolls in and you are with your gun running down the hall? Guess, what? You are now dead. I'm just playing devils advocate here. I'm just not a fan of this argument and I think it is thin. If it works, and I'm not saying that some Joe Blow couldn't stop a rampage with a single shot, then its a grand slam, otherwise it just strikes out. There are just too many variables to think that a permit and shooting at some paper targets will stop the violence.

If you want to argue w/ my statements, argue. Just be an adult. You might change my mind, who knows.

1/28/2009 6:40:02 PM

^well said. [I've a CCP, NC]

1/28/2009 6:42:36 PM

Quote :

"I'm for CCW, CCH, OC, Carry on Campus; I'm for gun owners rights. "

Good

Quote :

"But what I don't get is some of the arguments that the Campus Carry people make. This article is a perfect example; they argue that cops are ineffective and that if allowed to carry on campus, these gunslingers will be able to stop the next VT, or some crime like this."

This is where you start to go astray. Police are not effective. The 'gunslingers' are not trying to stop the next VT. They are not the police. They would like the ability to protect themselves from crazy people, just like the could if they are off campus. If a crazy does come in the room, they have at least some chance. Sure, they could be shot and die first, they could possibly kill the BG before dozens of people are killed. At least they have an option other than sitting in a shooting gallery with a target on their face.

Quote :

"While I will agree that police work is mostly reactionary, its better than thinking that CCH on campus will be the win."

It isn't about 'the win'. It is about being able to protect yourself if the need arises. I would rather be able to protect myself than pray that I can stay alive for 4-6 minutes while the police are in route.

Quote :

"Could you kill, honestly? Could you pull your gun quick enough before you get shot or would we find you dead in your seat still staring at the chalkboard? Was the most stressful situation you have every been in? Have you ever been in a gun fight? Have you ever been under stress and in a gun fight? Have you ever shot at a moving target? Have you shot in no light? Have you ever shot around someone or screaming people?"

Could I kill - Yes
Draw or be dead? - Who knows, but at least I have an option.
Stress? - Having a gun pointed at my head by a drunk moron in Greensboro, Being strangled from behind with no warning when I was a child, hydroplaning on the highway and fearing once again for my life.
Gun fight? - I didn't have a gun at that point, the drunk guy did
Been under stress in gun fight? - most people haven't
Shot moving target? -Yes
Shot in no light - Yes, but how does this apply at all?
Shot around screaming people? -nope, most people haven't.

Quote :

" What if the calvary rolls in and you are with your gun running down the hall? Guess, what? You are now dead. "

We are not the police. We are not going to hunt down the BG. We are not wild cowboys. The weapon is to protect myself, and by extension, people in my immediate vicinity. No one would be running down the hall with a gun out.

Quote :

"I'm just playing devils advocate here. I'm just not a fan of this argument and I think it is thin. If it works, and I'm not saying that some Joe Blow couldn't stop a rampage with a single shot, then its a grand slam, otherwise it just strikes out. There are just too many variables to think that a permit and shooting at some paper targets will stop the violence. "

Here goes assumptions again. It isn't about students going around acting like police and trying to stop all threats. It is about my RIGHT to be able to protect myself, that gets taken away when I cross an imaginary line that defines campus.


[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 7:31 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2009 7:28:44 PM

I'm all for the right of people. Its just whenever I hear this argument brought up, the pro campus carry people always come off that way. If you want to carry on campus for protection, cool. But when people start an argument about this subject it usually snowballs into campus carry would have stopped VT, I would have stopped VT, they could have stop VT.

I think CCH laws are too strict. In NC, many places that a normal citizen should practically be aloud to carry but they can't. I think its jacked that you can carry a gun all around Raleigh but if you pass down Dan Allen, you are SOL.

I just ask that people realize what the Campus Carry isn't a golden ticket to stop active violence and it shouldn't be a plank of the campaign.

My list of questions was merely to spark thought. Any number of situations can arise in an active shooter. No situation is ever the same. Columbine and VT are/were two different animals. There is no so set pattern for active shooters as each incident is dynamic and unique.

Quote :

"No one would be running down the hall with a gun out. "

Again food for thought. Might not be running down the hall. Might be shooting down the hall, you pull a gun step outside to see what going. Lights out. Those cops moving down the hall just saw a man w/ a gun in an active shooter. Keep on trucking.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 8:27 PM. Reason : my g/s/p sucks]

1/28/2009 8:26:50 PM

Quote :

"gunslingers will be able to stop the next VT, or some crime like this. While I will agree that police work is mostly reactionary, its better than thinking that CCH on campus will be the win. Could you kill, honestly? Could you pull your gun quick enough before you get shot or would we find you dead in your seat still staring at the chalkboard? Was the most stressful situation you have every been in? Have you ever been in a gun fight? Have you ever been under stress and in a gun fight? Have you ever shot at a moving target? Have you shot in no light? Have you ever shot around someone or screaming people?"

i could, at the very least, be safe enough with my weapon to not hurt an innocent person so i would at least like the right to try to defend myself (the same right that I magically have when I step off campus)

Quote :

" Again food for thought. Might not be running down the hall. Might be shooting down the hall, you pull a gun step outside to see what going. Lights out. Those cops moving down the hall just saw a man w/ a gun in an active shooter. Keep on trucking."

Well that would be stupid, and would be a horrible accident. But people aren't idiots, or at the very least they themselves are only getting hurt for their action i.e. no one innocent is getting hurt because of them

really what this comes down to is what is so magical about campus that you can concealed carry? you can continue to make arguments as to why you think it is ineffective to concealed carry, but concealed carry is legal off campus, so what is so special about campus?

1/28/2009 8:45:07 PM

^Never said CCH is ineffective. I'm for CCH on campus. I'm very pro CCH pretty much anywhere. I CCH. As stated before, I don't see why campus is sacred ground. However...

I'm asking why do pro campus carry consistently rally behind the notion that CCH on a campus will stop the next VT? I just don't think its a sound point and that there are better arguments to be made in favor.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 8:54 PM. Reason : dsf]

1/28/2009 8:51:59 PM

They are not saying that CCW will prevent VT.
The argument is that allowing ccw statistically has the possibility to reduce the body count.
And we want our rights to be upheld all the time, not just when we are off our 'safe' campus.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 8:56 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2009 8:54:59 PM

actually, the column says that CCW will allow people to protect themselves. they never say that it will stop another VT, just that the feel good things people have been sold won't either

1/28/2009 8:57:12 PM

The possibility yes, but in conversations/arguments w/ people I've had, they see CCH on campus as a silver bullet. I'm not trying to disect this article, just trying provoke discussion in general.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 9:00 PM. Reason : g/h/g/h]

1/28/2009 8:59:08 PM

Campus Carry is nothing more than another feel good tactic. Only aimed at the concealed weapons crowd rather than at the trust the system crowd. If you survive one of these situations its not going to be because you had a weapons and were able to rationally think your way out of the predicament, its going to be because you were lucky enough to not get shot by the crazy bastard in the classroom with a gun regardless of your possession of a gun. Introducing more firearms into a tense situation in the hands of non-professionals is a recipe for disaster and you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

1/29/2009 12:02:21 AM

^ so you believe that concealed carry should be done away with?

^^ i don't think that anyone views it as a silver bullet solution. I think that people view it as a net positive...in addition to the fact that there's no reason to treat a college campus any differently than a supermarket, a mall, a gas station, etc.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 1:37 AM. Reason : ^ i think you are confused as to which approach is simply "feel good".]

1/29/2009 1:37:07 AM

I think that a lot of folks may be under the impression that as long as you have a clean record, you can get a CCH. Not entirely true. Although pretty easy by most people's standards, the weapons proficiency test that is a required part of every CCH permit program requires you to demonstrate proficient use of your weapon. Failure results in your inability to obtain a CCH permit until you can pass the test.

As far as how long it would take you to shoot someone, that would vary by situation. Since most people have never been in a "gunfight" (a rather ridiculous requirement for your opinion to have any merit, imo), your first reaction will undoubtedly be shock. Followed by that will be you remembering you have a weapon and know how to use it. At that point, a person with experience using their weapon will be able to raise their weapon and fire on the target within about 3/4 of a second (go to the range and time yourself if you don't agree). Someone with a gun already at eye level could shoot within 1/4 of a second.

As previously stated, it isn't about toting power or playing the hero, it's about protecting yourself, and by default, innocent people within your immediate vicinity. You should always take care when carrying your firearm, as you are ultimately responsible for the final resting place of every round you fire. So, if the BG is in a classroom, 10 yards or more away from you, and there are innocent people behind him, you'd better be a good marksman before considering taking the shot. However, if you are in a cafe and there is noone behind the BG, and you are at a comfortable range, light him up.

1/29/2009 9:06:58 AM

Quote :

"Campus Carry is nothing more than another feel good tactic. Only aimed at the concealed weapons crowd rather than at the trust the system crowd. If you survive one of these situations its not going to be because you had a weapons and were able to rationally think your way out of the predicament, its going to be because you were lucky enough to not get shot by the crazy bastard in the classroom with a gun regardless of your possession of a gun. Introducing more firearms into a tense situation in the hands of non-professionals is a recipe for disaster and you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise."

Campus carry is all about self-defense, just like anywhere else you can carry. I'm on campus late at night quite often. I've had 3 friends have a knife and/or gun in their face and their wallets demanded on campus. I'm not going to say if they had a gun they would have not gotten into this situation, would started a gun fight, etc. BUT at least, if campus carry was real, they could defend themselves, when they needed to. My brother was mugged by 7 thugs one night on campus, almost beaten to death. You're telling me campus carry is about feeling good or some other shit. Fuck you and that stupid idea. If my brother would have been allowed to carry then he wouldn't have gone through what he did.

And it doesn't take "professionals" to carry guns. It takes proficiency. And you think that someone with a weapon can't diffuse a situation, deter a crime, end a crime? Maybe you should do some research. Why do the police carry guns?

1/29/2009 9:23:15 AM

just the announcement that people are allowed to carry on campus will make a huge difference in crime

its easy to walk up to someone when you are absolutely sure they dont have gun

1/29/2009 10:06:27 AM

I dont want to be too much of a smartass since this is the lounge, but the point of this article is like the Captain Obvious award of the year. Of course absolute safety is impossible, you can never completely stop 100% of nutbags that want to do crazy shit.

1/29/2009 10:12:53 AM

Well, you would think that it goes without saying, but in this very thread there is a claim that the pro-CCW side thinks that it is a "silver bullet" solution. In fact, the opposite is claimed as the title and very premise of the thread.

1/29/2009 10:19:26 AM

I don't think it's a silver bullet solution. I just want the opportunity to defend myself if/when needed. It's ludicrous that I can't. The "take it like a man" thing doesn't exact work when a criminal has a knife or gun and coming towards you. Why do you think campuses are hotspots for crime? Because criminals know there a very few weapons on campus.

The fact that people are CC'ing on campuses would be a deterrent. CC'ing on campus is like anywhere else - people should have the right to protect their life, and the best way we have for this so far is to carry.

1/29/2009 10:31:48 AM

Quote :

"The fact that people are CC'ing on campuses would be a deterrent. "

I personally think this would be the main benefit of allowing campus carry. Would be criminals would have little to no way of knowing whether a potential mark is carrying or not, thus making the risk of robbing them exponentially higher.

In addition, if people were allowed to carry on campus, all those with permits would have a thorough understanding of the laws governing the use of deadly force, and would also know the consequences that could follow if deadly force was used when it was not justified.

I think a logical way to regulate permit holders on campuses would be a registration system backed up by state legislature, making it illegal to carry an unregistered firearm on educational property. That way, if a permit holder did use deadly force on campus, their permit number, DL, and the serial number for their weapon(s) would be on file. If not, then just consequences would follow.

Thoughts?

1/29/2009 11:23:02 AM

Quote :

"I think that a lot of folks may be under the impression that as long as you have a clean record, you can get a CCH. Not entirely true. Although pretty easy by most people's standards, the weapons proficiency test that is a required part of every CCH permit program requires you to demonstrate proficient use of your weapon. Failure results in your inability to obtain a CCH permit until you can pass the test."

You know, I've been told this a handful of times and while I don't doubt that it's true in a large majority of cases, a friend of mine got a CC permit recently and when I asked him about the shooting portion (since I'd never known him to shoot a gun before getting the permit), he pointed to a door about 15 feet away and said that if you could hit that door, they'd pass you.

Needless to say, it was a bit concerning.

1/29/2009 11:37:39 AM

Quote :

"In addition, if people were allowed to carry on campus, all those with permits would have a thorough understanding of the laws governing the use of deadly force, and would also know the consequences that could follow if deadly force was used when it was not justified. I think a logical way to regulate permit holders on campuses would be a registration system backed up by state legislature, making it illegal to carry an unregistered firearm on educational property. That way, if a permit holder did use deadly force on campus, their permit number, DL, and the serial number for their weapon(s) would be on file. If not, then just consequences would follow."

Just treat campus no differently than any of the myriad of other places where people CC all the time. Nobody's talking about arming students or making any special rules for campuses. People are just saying to allow the same people who carry in Wal-Mart, or Crabtree, or Cameron Village, or Baja Burrito--with no ill effects--to also be able to do the same thing in the Brickyard or Harrelson Hall.

There are no special controls that need to be enacted, or special training that needs to be conducted, beyond what is already in place for a CCP. CCP holders are already not a problem anywhere else. In fact, they are statistically less likely to commit a gun crime than a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is. We are just saying that a CCP holder doesn't go raving mad, howl at the moon, and start shooting places up the moment he walks across Hillsborough Street onto campus, so why treat campus any differently?

1/29/2009 11:38:46 AM

Quote :

"I'm all for the right of people. Its just whenever I hear this argument brought up, the pro campus carry people always come off that way. If you want to carry on campus for protection, cool. But when people start an argument about this subject it usually snowballs into campus carry would have stopped VT, I would have stopped VT, they could have stop VT."

Exactly.

I don't think it's a bad idea for already established legal rights to carry over to a campus.

But the people that are gung-ho about this seem to drool at the idea that they could be a hero and save people against the droves of mad-men out there. I don't see this perspective advancing their cause.

They need to look at why the policies exist in the first place, and point out what about the reasons for disallowing guns doesn't make sense. Not talk about how great of a hero they could be if they ever got a chance to make use of having CCW permit.

My hunch though is that it's primarily the professors that don't want students to have guns, and the professors will always win on a college campus. I know I had a CSC professor here at State who had a student he failed threaten to kill him, and they searched the student's car and found some weapons. This type of story is going to scare any prof in to being against CC>

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 11:54 AM. Reason : ]

1/29/2009 11:52:13 AM

I would love to see CCH on campus just like anywhere else. However, I would not be opposed to a campus registration requirement. I don't prefer it, but it wouldn't be a big issue with me. Something along the lines of, if you are traveling through campus (such as going down pullen or dan allen and no stops on campus) then cch with no registration is fine. However, faculty, students, and staff on campus must register if they are going to carry.

Again, I don't think this is needed/want it, but it seems like a fair compromise to me. Would this system be perfect? No, but it would probably give some people that are hesitant about allowing CC on campus a little security for some reason (they tend to like stuff like that).

1/29/2009 11:53:27 AM

^ That actually is a good compromise.

1/29/2009 11:55:05 AM

My one concern about cc on campus would be, does it allow dorm residents to posses/carry weapons?

I'm hesitant on this part because there are too many stupid people on this, and other campus(es) that would possibly screw everyone else. I just foresee some dumbasses getting drunk and then having a shootout. Meanwhile, the rest of us level headed people carry on campus for our protection and don't do anything stupid.

1/29/2009 11:58:46 AM

^^ i agree. i don't particularly want an additional control system, but if it would increase peace of mind, then fine.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:04 PM. Reason : ^]

1/29/2009 12:00:04 PM

^^^^^ I'll bet money that guy wasn't a CCP holder to begin with, so the point is moot.

Of course, if this argument has nothing to do with any logical point, and everything to do with emotional responses of people who don't really know what they're talking about.

Moving on, I think the argument that CC on campus could prevent or minimize shooting rampages has merit. It wouldn't help in every instance, but that's like saying that airbags are bad because they occasionally kill an occupant that otherwise would've lived (I wish that airbags were optional, because I'd personally rather save the money and save the weight in a sports car, but I digress...). Again, nobody is claiming that it's a silver bullet solution, and nobody is claiming that it's the only reason to allow it (or more correctly, to continue prohibiting it).


^^^^ That wouldn't serve any practical purpose whatsoever...in other words, the correct, logical solution is for people to stop worrying about it and allow it, or at least allow it and shut up about it. On the other hand, while a constraint on personal freedom and privacy for no gain whatsoever, it would still be worth it if it would convince people to allow CC on campus. It's completely stupid and pointless, but I guess the ends could justify the means (though I disagree in principle).

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:08 PM. Reason : asdf]

1/29/2009 12:03:58 PM

^ The objections are mostly emotional i'd guess, but there is some merit in the thought that someone with a legit cc permit might have their weapon stolen by a depressed, psychotic classmate.

1/29/2009 12:08:01 PM

^^
I also agree with you on the registration serving no real purpose. What I'm saying is that if something similar to what I described would help to get CC on campus, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:10 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 12:09:21 PM

Quote :

"My one concern about cc on campus would be, does it allow dorm residents to posses/carry weapons? I'm hesitant on this part because there are too many stupid people on this, and other campus(es) that would possibly screw everyone else. I just foresee some dumbasses getting drunk and then having a shootout. Meanwhile, the rest of us level headed people carry on campus for our protection and don't do anything stupid. "

How many 21+ year olds do you know that live in the dorms?
The universities that allow CCH do not allow people who live in dormitories to keep them there. I beleive most are stricter than that.
As well, people with a CCH are statistically very unlikely to ever do something like you posted above. Criminals do though.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:15 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 12:14:36 PM

^^^That just goes for keeping weapons in the dorms. That's a seperate issue--sorry, I should've made that more clear...and I don't think that allowing firearms to be kept in the rooms of dorm residents is a good idea.

Of course, there aren't a lot of 21-year old dorm residents, and of them, I'd think that most would have a car that they could store a pistol in if they wanted to.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:26 PM. Reason : asfd]

1/29/2009 12:24:32 PM

I agree that CCH'ers are highly unlikely to be the ones to do something stupid, but some kids are just that dumb sometimes. And you'd be surprised how many people are 21+ living in dorms - I'd venture to say about 10-12% which I believe is a pretty good number.

I also think that you shouldn't be allowed to keep them in dorms either because 1.) theft 2.) I think it would be easier for others to access the firearm 3.) dorms are full of people that make bad mistakes and are immature

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:42 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 12:41:50 PM

first off, i want to say i have nothing against concealed carry

i just want to ask... would you feel comfortable if teachers and staff were allowed to carry at high schools? what about elementary schools? what if it was a private school? what if it was your child's teacher?

next everyone will want to be able to carry in a bar or a bank because you never know when someone might walk in with a gun. it could be argued that you are more likely to get into a violent altercation at a bar than in class.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 3:49 PM. Reason : ..]

1/29/2009 3:47:51 PM

Quote :

"i just want to ask... would you feel comfortable if teachers and staff were allowed to carry at high schools? what about elementary schools? what if it was a private school? what if it was your child's teacher?"

if they were required to train on a regular basis, yes. i am a parent and i would feel a hell of a lot more comfortable if my son's teachers were armed. that might never happen in my lifetime though. with the current government and school system the way it is.

Quote :

"next everyone will want to be able to carry in a bar or a bank because you never know when someone might walk in with a gun. it could be argued that you are more likely to get into a violent altercation at a bar than in class."

i wouldn't mind bar carry, if you aren't drinking.

how do you feel about states that allow carry in places that serve alcohol?

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM. Reason : t]

1/29/2009 4:04:00 PM

Yes, I'd love for teachers/admin to carry. As long as they are properly trained, have refresher courses, and excellent B/G & M/H checks, then I'm all for it.

As for banks and bars, yes, it should be legal to carry. However, I do support the zero alcohol tolerance. If you drink, don't carry. But if I want to stop in a place, say ruckus, and get lunch and a soda, there is no reason I shouldn't be allowed to carry.

1/29/2009 4:17:41 PM

Agree with ^, and ^^.

Remember, I am a teacher. I'm currently at NCSU, but I go back to middle school next year.
Would there be cause for alarm if I was allowed to carry when I was teaching? I don't think so.

1/29/2009 5:49:21 PM

I disagree on the carrying in a bar situation. Sure, there are plenty of upsides, but bars can be crowded and if some drunken idiot were able to somehow get ahold of a weapon and start firing it off, there would be dumptruck loads of hell to pay.

I'm all for teachers/professors/faculty being allowed to carry. Hell, make that all state/federal employees. I used to work for the state of Florida, and I can remember a couple times when carrying would have been nice, like when our office was stormed by pissed off, death threat yielding red snapper fishermen after a regulations change.

there was a bill in FL in the House about allowing state employees to carry, but I don't know if it ever went through.

1/29/2009 7:15:09 PM

^well if you are CC'ing it's highly unlikely that a drunkard will get your weapon. In fact, I'd say it's less of a risk around drunk people. They won't recognize a print as well, have slow reaction time, and probably fumble around, give you time to react.

1/29/2009 7:38:16 PM

as a teacher, i absolutely think that teachers should be allowed to CC. as of now, the students are packing far more firepower than teachers, and that is absurd.

1/29/2009 7:41:38 PM

^

1/29/2009 7:43:20 PM

^^^ good point

1/29/2009 7:45:13 PM

I just want to reiterate an important note that has been mentioned in this thread a few times.

Many of you claim that pro-gun people are saying that relaxation of carry laws is our "silver bullet", will end crime, and/or we are looking to become heroes. This is far from the truth. I don't know of any person that carries who wishes to be a hero or thinks that carrying on campus, among other places will end crime. We only wish to have the opportunity to defend ourselves and hopefully deter crime.

I am not looking to be a hero. I want to be as far away as possible from such incidences. I don't want to have to deal with the emotional, physical, financial, and legal implications of using deadly force. However, if my life depends on using deadly force and going through this, then I should be able to save my own life and not have some uneducated, selfish nut
say I can't. I should have the legal right and the means to protect my life.

I know that it's unlikely that I'll ever need to use deadly force. It's also unlikely that I'll need an airbag, seat belt, fire extinguisher, smoke alarm, airplane oxygen mask, an emergency exit, a flotation device under my airline seat, a house alarm, etc. But nearly every plane, building, home, etc has at least one of those items (items that apply, obviously). And many of those can be dangerous or end up harming someone. A firearm is no different than any of these safety devices. It's nothing but a harmless object until used and any of these can be used to do good and to do bad. CCP holders are the ones that would do good with a firearm. Criminals would be the ones to do something bad and a law against carrying on campus won't stop them. Such laws are only disarming law abiding citizens.

The nature of my job requires that I be on campus late and as we all know, campuses are hot spots for crime, including NCSU. I, and any other law abiding citizen, should be allowed to have the means to defend our own life, whether that be on a college campus, grad school, bar, bank, or post office. Criminals don't wait for your preferred time of being attacked. Criminals often prey on victims in areas that are conducive to their actions and many of these places are non-carry.

1/29/2009 8:22:06 PM

The idea of letting whoever carry weapons on campus isn't a fix for the problem. There are 30,000+ students on campus, the chances that several of them aren't immature people who will carry a weapon and shouldn't is pretty high. I'll draw your attention to the NCSU tailgating incident which escalated to deadly force because someone with a piece got in a fight and decided to use it. What happens when that happens on campus? My bet is the outcome is similar, eventually. Plus NCState risks enrollment going down, funding being pulled, a need for increased police presence on campus (probably the only benefit from the whole thing) which will cost more money. If everyone wants to be safer then what we need is more badges patrolling around. I'm all for gun rights but on campus there's no way to keep the rule out of the hands of people who will abuse it. The cost isn't worth the benefit.

1/29/2009 9:27:49 PM

^No.

What happened at the tailgate was because a couple thugs WITHOUT permits did what criminals do best. I am sick and tired of people making it sound like such a defining moment for us as a university when, while unfortunate, a rather typical crime took place.

Cops are mostly reactionary, as previously stated. More cops wouldn't necessarily have kept that unfortunate situation from happening.

1/29/2009 9:57:41 PM

:facepalm:

30k people would not be carrying guys, they are talking about allowing people who have concealed carry permits to carry on campus. these people already carry concealed everywhere else, right across the street there are people with concealed carry permits, but the right magically disappears on campus. allowing concealed carry on campus wouldn't mean an influx of people carrying weapons, it would mean that the people who are ALREADY carrying weapons OTHER PLACES would now be allowed to carry on campus. how would it be different for you? it wouldn't, it would be just like being anywhere else. do you worry about people carrying concealed at the coffee shop, or at mcdonalds, or at the store? no, this would be no different.

the people involved in the tailgating shooting did not have their concealed carry, in fact it is just another example that laws like the one banning licensed concealed carry on campus only hurt law abiding citizens because criminals are going to bring a gun if they want to.

1/29/2009 9:58:00 PM

Quote :

"the chances that several of them aren't immature people who will carry a weapon and shouldn't is pretty high. I'll draw your attention to the NCSU tailgating incident which escalated to deadly force because someone with a piece got in a fight and decided to use it."

that is seriously some of the most retarded dribble ever to come out of someone's brain. it doesn't make any sense, nor does it prove any point at all?

there were no CCP holders at the tailgate. only the bad guys had guns. so how would that be different that any other day on campus?

Quote :

"Plus NCState risks enrollment going down, funding being pulled, a need for increased police presence on campus (probably the only benefit from the whole thing) which will cost more money."

I'm not sure how this plays into your argument, as you cite no evidence.

Quote :

"If everyone wants to be safer then what we need is more badges patrolling around. I'm all for gun rights but on campus there's no way to keep the rule out of the hands of people who will abuse it. The cost isn't worth the benefit."

How would having a large police presence be safer? The only way to be 'safer' is to have 1 officer to a student.

You aren't for gun rights at all. I'm not really sure why you even wrote that. Your entire argument is the polar opposite of that statement.

I'd stay away from the drugs.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 10:16 PM. Reason : d]

1/29/2009 10:16:09 PM

Quote :

"The idea of letting whoever carry weapons on campus isn't a fix for the problem. There are 30,000+ students on campus, the chances that several of them aren't immature people who will carry a weapon and shouldn't is pretty high. I'll draw your attention to the NCSU tailgating incident which escalated to deadly force because someone with a piece got in a fight and decided to use it. What happens when that happens on campus? My bet is the outcome is similar, eventually. Plus NCState risks enrollment going down, funding being pulled, a need for increased police presence on campus (probably the only benefit from the whole thing) which will cost more money. If everyone wants to be safer then what we need is more badges patrolling around. I'm all for gun rights but on campus there's no way to keep the rule out of the hands of people who will abuse it. The cost isn't worth the benefit."

Not to be demeaning and since this isn't chit chat... aww fuck it. This is some of the dumbest shit I've heard and proves that you no idea what you are talking about. This sounds like one of those anti-gun arguments from people that don't know anything about guns, just like my sister. She says she hates guns and that no one should have one. Ask her why and she says because she hates guns... fucking retarded.

1.) 30,000 people wouldn't be carrying. I would venture to say in the low hundreds.
2.) CC'ers aren't there to save everyone else; they are there to save themselves if the need arises.
3.) It's not, "whoever". It's people deemed legal by the state, who are knowledgeable in state and federal laws, proficient with handguns, understand the legal, physical, emotional, and financial consequences of using deadly force, are law abiding, of good character, have a clean back ground check, are of good mental health, etc.
4.) NCSU tailgating incident involved non CCP holders, drugs, alcohol, and stupid people. A deadly mix. Most of us support some type of idea saying alcohol consumption = no carry (can't conceal carry with any BAC level - NC Law). Drugs + carrying doesn't even have to be discussed.
5.) Enrollment decreases? Highly doubtful - why would that happen? because campus is no safer?
6.) Lose funding? Que? WHAT? Campus carry laws would be state laws, so why would the state take away funding? It may lose some private, nutjob donors, but pick up others. There are always people willing to give.
7.) CC'ing = need more cops? Not at all. Many cops appreciate CCP holders and feel that it takes some amount of pressure away. CC'ers aren't the ones that have the cops called on them. It's the guys that the CC'ers are trying to defend themselves from that have the cops called.
8.) You want to talk about abuse of the law? how about criminals on campus holding people up at knife/gun point? How about two student thugs attempting to car jack some girl and then firing shots at her? How about my brother being beaten to near death on campus? They are abusing the law. Sure, we could hire 1,000 cops and probably never need to CC on campus. Hell, let's get every city, county, and state to have one cop per person and let them tag along everywhere, then no one but cops will need guns.

9.) Cost not worth the benefit? There's an imaginary line where my rights end for no apparent reason and where I all of a sudden have no means to protect my life. I consider defending myself a very worthy benefit.



[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 1:49 AM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 1:44:40 AM

Quote :

"the chances that several of them aren't immature people who will carry a weapon and shouldn't is pretty high. I'll draw your attention to the NCSU tailgating incident which escalated to deadly force because someone with a piece got in a fight and decided to use it. What happens when that happens on campus? "

Dude, please tell me that you just didn't read the thread and have no idea what we're talking about. I'll be able to stomach that better than you telling me that you are unable to grasp this simple concept...

I was at the tailgate with the shooting. In fact, I had been tailgating about 50 yards from where it happened, and had just gone inside. I, too, was a USMC Lieutenant at the time, and I have several friends now who knew the guy who got killed. However, the shooter in question there was an intoxicated drug dealer. I think he had kidnapping charges or something pending when he shot those guys.

That is not what we are talking about here.

We are talking about allowing people who legally hold a concealed carry permit (CCP), who have received the state mandated training and a more extensive than normal background check, and who carry all sorts of other places without incident to carry on campus as they do everywhere else (besides bars and concerts).

This group of people is statistically less likely to commit a gun crime than are the POLICE OFFICERS that you want more of. Stepping foot onto campus is not going to make these people go inexplicably psychotic and start shooting people.

Quote :

"If everyone wants to be safer then what we need is more badges patrolling around. "

What, so there can be a huge overabundance of cops with nothing to do, who'll hassle people constantly as a result? Or so they can be 3 minutes away when you have 3 seconds to deal with a situation? Or so they can hike your tuition or everyone else's taxes some more to pay for it? Sounds like a great plan all around.

Quote :

"I'm all for gun rights but on campus there's no way to keep the rule out of the hands of people who will abuse it. "

Yes there is, man. It's already being done, and quite effectively.

Quote :

"This sounds like one of those anti-gun arguments from people that don't know anything about guns"

Ah, you mean like 99.9% of arguments against guns? I can't recall offhand a single time I've heard an anti-gun argument come from anyone who had ANY IDEA what he was talking about. Most of them stem from huge misunderstanding of issues.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 10:55 AM. Reason : asfd]

1/30/2009 10:54:02 AM