Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Guns on campus is a maniacal idea (NH)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 10:54 AM
Original message
Guns on campus is a maniacal idea (NH)
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/296359/guns-on-ca...

The year 2011 is shaping up to be the Year of the Gun in New Hampshire, and citizens are none the safer for it.

Lawmakers began the year by overturning the ban on carrying guns in the State House complex. They went on to pass a "stand your ground" law that allows citizens to use deadly force rather than first attempt to retreat when in any place they are lawfully entitled to be.

Steps to eliminate the need for a concealed weapons permit, and thus a criminal background check, failed. So did a plan to form a state "defense force" comprised of citizens charged with defending the state "from invasion, rebellion, disaster, insurrection, riot, breach of peace or imminent danger thereof." But an idea that's even worse, forbidding colleges and universities from banning guns from their campuses, lives on, thanks to its embrace by the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee.

Ed MacKay, chancellor of University System of New Hampshire, put it nicely when he said campuses are "places where impetuous behavior can sometimes take place." The fact is, especially for males, the parts of the brain that affect judgment and decision-making aren't fully formed until their college years are behind them. And those college years can be booze-soaked and in some cases, as the recent arrest of 11 students at a UNH fraternity suggest, drug-addled. Adding guns to the mix will make campuses much more dangerous.

<more>

what he said...

yup
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. Guns and booze have ALWAYS made a great combination.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. That's my Loonislature!
Heck I'm surprised they haven't figured out yet that UNH is a socialist institution and needs to be abolished altogether.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Old Codger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. Somebody might
Want to check out the results of allowing guns on campus before they decide it is such a bad idea, they have been allowed for concealed carry in Oregon for quite some time now, can't seem to find anything about all the massacres this has caused, probably NRA is hiding all that info somewhere. Also a majority of college students are not of a legal age to have a concealed permit, federal law requires you be 21 to own a hand gun and qualify for concealed carry.

Of course the detractors will adopt the republican standard for this forum and continue to use a dogmatic approach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. Soooooo... all you nay-sayers can cite to evidence that this has been detrimental....
at the places where it is already legal, amIrite?

I shall contemplate the zephyrs whispering in the pines while I await the replies filled with damning evidence....

yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Do you have any evidence it has been beneficial to anyone but those who like to carry guns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. I don't really need to.... as, if it does not harm, it's a moot issue.
And since you are the ones proclaiming doom and gloom, it's your onus to provide the evidence.

That's how debate works, hoyt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. I asked that question nearly a year ago, and have yet to get *any* examples:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

However, we were regaled with accounts of shootings off-campus, shootings by prohibited persons, shootings by people
who simply ignored extant gun bans.

But nary a one by a legit permit holder, And since it can be demonstrated that it causes no harm, it should be allowed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #16
28. That is not how all the students feel
"The bottom line is that even if someone passes a background check
and qualifies for a concealed carry permit (if their state requires one),
that person is not necessarily a law-abiding citizen. They could have a
substantial criminal record involving misdemeanor offenses, or a history
of mental illness. It is notable that campus shooters including Gang Lu,
Wayne Lo, Robert Flores, Biswanath Halder, Seung-Hui Cho, Latina Wil-
liams and Steven Kazmierczak passed background checks in acquiring
the firearms used in their attacks. Some possessed a concealed carry
permit in their home states; others would have qualified had they applied. Finally, individuals who are
prohibited under federal law from owning or purchasing firearms can still pass a background check (and
potentially qualify for a concealed carry permit) if their disqualifying records have not been transferred to
NICS."
www.studentsforgunfreeschools.org /
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. One problem
a speeding ticket is a misdemeanor offense. Mental health issues include minor depression. The lack of a permit did not prevent anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #28
49. Which of those named had concealed carry permits?
And more to the point, which of those shootings occured on campuses that didn't legally allow firearms?

Word magic only works at Hogwarts, you know...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #16
35. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #12
29.  Can you prove that the life you lived has been beneficial to anyone
outside of your family? If so then post cites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #29
37. Had 734 positives when I searched under, "Is Hoyt XXXXX worth a shit?"

Was afraid to look, but the negatives turned out to be much less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
51. As long as it isn't harmful, who cares? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
52. You have any evidence it has to be?
Are you seriously suggesting that everything anyone does must be beneficial to others before it is permitted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. I see no reason why a properly trained permit holder shouldn't be able to carry on campus
the same as anywhere else. Despite these stereotypes (tempestuous, booze-soaked, drug-addled), the campus world isn't magically separate from what's around it, and most of the behavior that gives rise to these stereotypes occurs off-campus anyway, where campus gun bans don't apply now.

Using these 'crazy kids' arguments to in favor of a ban is unfair and insulting to the mature and thoughtful students who make up a large but unsung part of the community, and who are entitled to make their own adult choices about self-protection...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
30.  The antis can not even state what "properly trained " is to them. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. Please explain this statement...
Please explain this statement:

"Steps to eliminate the need for a concealed weapons permit, and thus a criminal background check, failed."

Eliminate a background check...how...exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. By not making it required. Everyone - criminal or not deserves to pack heat - Live Free or...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. To which background check does that statement refer? N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. To carry a GOP/NRA/ALEC/Koch Bros. concealed gun in NH
yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #19
40. I've never seen that brand
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nightwhisper Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. Guns on Campus are a good thing
The more guns on Campus by law biding people is a good thing. I have been carrying a gun (38 or 357mag) since 1976. Shot one person (drunk driver driving down a sidewalk and already hit one person ready to hit others). He didn't die but he did later after his jail sentence he drove a motor cycle drunk and hit a parked truck.

We have to STOP the criminals in their track if they have a weapon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. thanks - I couldn't have explained better why this is lunacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. thanks - You couldn't have fallen more flat-faced for a one-time poster. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Gun Hero!!!!111 We who are about to die salute you!
Bookmarked
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #9
41. Gun hero? Please define or is this just another one of your buzz words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. So how did you know this person was a "druink driver" before you started blazing away heroically
How did you know it wasn't a diabetic with an insulin reaction? or an elderly person that lost control?

Did your great big gun whisper to you?

well did it it????

:thumbsdown:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. And that is a perfect example of why guns in public are crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. Welcome to DU. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. You found a kindred spirit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
31. Are you serious? You shot a guy driving a car?
How the hell did you get away with that? How did you know he was drunk and not ill? Do you wear a badge or a cape?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
chrisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
47. And then you lifted the car up over your head with your bare hands and tossed it away!
Edited on Mon Dec-05-11 10:48 AM by chrisa
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kurmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
18. Did we learn nothing from the Virginia Tech tragedy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DonP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Yes, we learned that criminals and the insane ignore gun bans - no matter how well intentioned
VT had a campus gun ban, just like folks here support, so did Northern Illinois University, in fact there is no CCW in Illinois.

So when someone started shooting there was no one on site to do anything about it while the police set up a cordon around the buildings and the only defense was trying to barricade the door and pleading for your life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Union Scribe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. ^ This.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. VT was a gun free zone
While students and teachers hid the best they could, they were defenseless and being murdered. Meanwhile, the campus cops stood around outside with their fingers up their asses, listening to the gun shots, waiting for the city police to show up with the SWAT team.

What did you learn?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #18
42. YUP
We learned there is nobody on campus to stop a crazed killer because only law abiding gun owners follow the laws, criminals do not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #18
44. No, apparently you didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kurmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #44
56. I learned an excesss of guns, sold by the uncaring vender of them caused the tragedy.
Now is anyone else going to spin this where they somehow think more fuel on the fire is going to reduce the damage done by excessive gun production?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. Nothing to spin
Edited on Mon Dec-05-11 06:44 PM by We_Have_A_Problem
and has nothing to do with excessive gun production.

Why should the vendor care about a damn thing beyond the sale of the item? It is an inanimate object - nothing more. The vendor is in business to make money - nothing more. He carries no moral, legal or ethical responsibility for how someone may misuse a product he sells at some point in the future.

I would also submit to you that production is not excessive. There is hardly a surplus of firearms sitting in warehouses. Seems to me production is keeping pace with demand.

So basically, you didn't really learn shit. You just applied your personal fantasy filter over reality and have attempted to place blame on others rather than the individual responsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #57
61. It's like blaming child porn and identity theft on the easy availability of computers.
Edited on Mon Dec-05-11 06:50 PM by friendly_iconoclast
Or the National Association of Automobile Manufacturers for drunk driving fatalities.

Tools don't compel anybody to do anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. in order to have this fuel,
you have to assume it is the CCW killing each other instead of gangsters killing each other. When you subtract the drug gang business disputes, our murder rate is about the same as Europe. Come to think of it, places where gun laws are very lax like Vermont and Wyoming are safer than Europe.

Oh yeah, Europe's murder rate was astronomical before guns were invented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. Did Cho's guns tell him "Go shoot up VT"? Guns are inanimate objects, not the Ring of Sauron.
Gun bans as word magic, a stated belief in animism- I'm surprised someone isn't peddling bulletproof shirts..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #56
60. The vendor had nothing to do with it, and followed the law precisely.
The STATE failed to report Cho's disqualification to NICS, thus allowing him to purchase a firearm.

So, no, you didn't learn a damn thing from Virginia Tech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
21. The college administrators seem to not know their student demographics.
Allowing concealed handguns on campus would affect half of the senior class, the other students remain ineligible due to their age. Plus, most seniors do not live on campus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
22. Here's the bigger problem....
Why the fuck are these administrators allowing so much alcohol and drug abuse on campus?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Francis Marion Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
24. An American university...
is no place for the Bill of Rights.

Keep that Bill of Rights off campus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #24
33. You're right - it's a place of learning
Kids who want to tote guns should join the military, where the BOR doesn't apply either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. don't know much about the UCMJ do you?
It is trumped by the Constitution, including the BOR. The Miranda warning is in Article 31. In the US, a military court is more fair than a civilian court because both sides have equal resources and the prosecution is prevented from poisoning the jury pool through the media.
The students at VT, what would you have done better while the police stood around outside with their finger up their asses listening to the gun shots?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. I know Miranda is not in the BOR
I was pointing out that when you become the property of Uncle Sam, you forfeit certain rights. 1A comes to mind. As you well know, the military is not a democratic institution.
What would I have done at VT? I wasn't there, but my daughter's best friend was, so I do have an emotional connection. There are very few shootings on college campuses. All of them are tragic. Some think the answer is to arm students and teachers. I think a much safer option would be to install metal detectors and have zero tolerance for weapons in a learning environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #39
43. I have not heard anyone suggest arming students and teachers - rather, people advocate
allowing those who can legally carry off-campus do the same on-campus. And I see no problem with that - CCWers create very few problems in general, and there's no reason to think that would change on campus. (Also, the primary argument for allowing CCW anywhere is to give those who choose the chance to protect themselves; any crime prevention or benefit to others is lagniappe.)

Campus shootings are very rare, but we know that they are not deterred by campus gun bans. I doubt that any realistic physical barrier would be much more of a deterrent - can you imagine the fences, checkpoints, guards, and hassle that would be needed to have any hope of keeping weapons off campus?

You mention the learning environment, but a fortress architecture and TSA-style checkpoints would be far more damaging to the university atmosphere than the occasional gun in someone's pocket that no one ever sees. Not that it's either/or, since CCW is not about enhancing campus security, and is unlikely to have a detrimental effect on campus safety.

Beyond that, this campus-military comparison is ludicrous. Universities are not places where people should "forfeit certain rights" - they're places where rights should be vigorously discussed and defended...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #39
46. Actually, Miranda is explaining the 5th, so yeah
it kind of is. You also have 1A rights, just that the restrictions are more complicated. I used to bad mouth Bush and Cheney at work. Others did Clinton. Those are not offenses for enlisted members. If I were an officer, I could have faced legal problems.

There are very few shootings, true. Unfortunately, violent crimes such as rape is not as rare.

Metal detectors are a viable option (although zero tolerance rules tend to be taken to absurd extremes). Arming students and teachers works in Israel. I had a friend that was an exchange student to Israel was freaked (even coming from a gun owning family) when the math teacher walked in with an Uzi on his shoulder. Of course, this is a country where you can to to a police station and check out a gun, including full auto, like it was a library book.

But that is not the point. The idea is not to arm students and teachers, the idea is to give them that choice.
Either choice would be better than what was done. One nutcase vs several students and teachers with no training in escape and evasion and unable to defend themselves while the cops stood around outside listening to the gunshots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #33
45. 21+ year olds aren't 'kids'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #45
53. Anyone under 50 is a kid to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. I understand what you're saying...
...but from a legal perspective a 21 year old is most assuredly an adult. Why should someone who is 21 years old and doesn't go to college have the ability to CCW, but someone who does attend college has to give up his rights in order to go to school? Makes no sense to me...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #55
63. And carrying a gun around on the off chance one might need it for SD makes no sense to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. Then don't do it. However, what makes sense for you to do in your own personal
behavior, in your own opinion, doesn't support in any way the notion that other adults should suddenly be treated differently on a college campus compared to off the campus when it comes to their own personal choices. If there was an argument to be made relative to the specific business or security of the university that would be one thing, but there isn't...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. I think you're wrong. People go to college for a specific purpose - to study
They forfeit many rights in furthering that purpose. Smoking and drinking in class. Submitting to a somewhat structured environment and the rules of the administration. The fact is that most students, teachers and administrators strongly oppose campus carry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. drinking in class?
Ever been to a US college or university? It is not as structured as secondary. I have my coffee or diet Pepsi on my desk half the time.
While I don't know the percentage of students et al who oppose it, their arguments are pretty weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #70
73. I meant alcohol, but I think you knew that.
Polls are all over the place and I don't trust the one's Ive seen. But I have 3 kids who've attended college and I've visited several and attended a couple myself.
I know that they and all their friends totally oppose campus carry. I know several professors and associate professors and they all feel the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. Actually
Edited on Wed Dec-07-11 12:05 AM by gejohnston
no, because most students are under 21. The college I go to now have dual enrollment with high schools, so many are under 18. That and my kind of puritan upbringing. My mom never allowed alcohol in her house.
That said, how do you feel about Wyoming's University/college system rule that you may conceal carry as long as you have written permission from campus security?
Before you ask, I last went to a Wyoming college between 1887-1995, which the map has is "may issue". It kind of wasn't. IIRC (I looked it up for a high school term paper, during the Carter years) Wyoming was shall issue to specific occupations (private investigators, doctors that made house calls, and pharmacists are the ones I remember.) No issue to everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #74
78. You know, I might be OK with that. Depends on screening process.
Anyone armed in such a highly populated environment should undergo the closest scrutiny and serious training in respect to that environment. Maybe part of a campus police auxiliary force and known to fellow students as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #78
81. campus police are often
private rent a cops or poorly trained like the ones that stood around at VT. Colleges and universities are not highly populated, and I am against rule or law that allows arbitrary power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #81
83. It's not arbitrary power. It's bestowed power having been earned and
it is necessary power for the proper functioning of the institution. That is my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #83
85. Ummm.... you have very... odd... ideas.... about Civil Rights. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #85
91. Really? What is odd about them?
There are many everyday situations when and where civil rights are limited.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #91
92. I am not able to think of a single...
...everyday situation where civil rights are limited.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #92
97. Really? Why does that not surprise me?
Next time you go to an airport or any federal building, try exercising your first, second, fourth and fifth amendment rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #97
109. That's the problem.
Irony, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #109
112. Indeed
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #97
116. Those are not everyday situations
I can exercise my first amendment rights at any of those locations. Second? That one is certainly restricted but ostensibly others are taking responsibility for my safety. 4th and 5th? Those are not in any way restricted or suspended. Thanks for trying to make the equation though.

Care to try again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #116
134. They are every day to many people. Maybe not to you. You apparently live in a bubble.
Next time TSA asks you to strip or remove your shoes, try making a joke about terrorism, if you really want to know how well your first amendment rights are protected. Sounds like you are ok with others taking care of your 2A rights on a plane, but not at church or in class. Interesting. I suggest you study the other amendments in terms of search and seizure of personal property without cause, due process and compensation. Seems you don't have much of a grasp on the issue of constitutional rights, and kind of ironic that the one you are most comfortable relinquishing is the one you shout about so loudly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #134
138. I am still quite capable...
...of making a joke about terrorism. There is nothing stopping me from doing so. However, as such jokes are taken seriously in those situations, I would do so knowing the risks. As it would only be a joke, while I would be detained, i would ultimately face no criminal charges.

I am not "ok" with people taking care of my right to keep and bear arms, and in fact, they don't. They simply make it illegal for me to carry a firearm on a commercial carrier as part of my carry on luggage. I can still pack one in my checked luggage, and I can still carry other forms of arms - and I do. After all - ANYTHING can be a weapon in the right hands.

I said NOTHING about being comfortable with relinquishing my rights under any circumstances. I accept that currently I must tolerate them being restricted in certain specific environments and I work to get many of those changed.

You, on the other hand, seem perfectly fine with not only relinquishing your 2nd Amendment rights, but want me to give mine up as well...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #138
142. We all feel more secure knowing that you "still carry other forms of arms" on airplanes.
I'm sure the TSA would be fascinated to know what kinds of weapons you are carrying. My decision to not exercise my 2A rights is very different from relinquishing them. It merely demonstrates my lack of paranoia and general fear of others. Having spent almost seven decades on this planet in dozens of countries, I have never had the need or desire to be armed. I do not think I am unusual in that. Even as a police officer, when my life was threatened, it never entered my mind that a handgun might have helped.
The compulsive toting of a gun is no different to dependency on heroin or alcohol, if you can't function properly without.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #142
152. I have weapons on aircraft too. You probably do as well.
Edited on Sat Dec-10-11 05:39 PM by PavePusher
Just because you do not perceive them as weapons does not change their potential.

And again with the insinuations? When will they end?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #152
157. What insinuations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #83
93. see definition one
if whim or personal decision is allowed, it is arbitrary. That is the problem with may issue. In NYC, you would have to take absurdly detailed test (kind of like Alabama literacy tests written in Chinese)and wait for months. Don Imus (never mind his coke addictin) or members of Aerosmith on the other hand, same day service after bribing officials. That could be why New York and California CCWs are not valid in Wyoming.
arbitrary (rb-trr)
adj.
1. Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice.
2. Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference: The diet imposes overall calorie limits, but daily menus are arbitrary.
3. Established by a court or judge rather than by a specific law or statute: an arbitrary penalty.
4. Not limited by law; despotic: the arbitrary rule of a dictator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #93
95. I thought we were talking about the power of college administrators.
Not the decisions they make.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Common Sense Party Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #74
94. 1887-1995? Damn, I thought *I* took a long time to graduate.
You don't look that old.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. Rules pertaining to the specific purpose of the university are fine, although I think
you're being to blurry and casual with that phrase "forfeit many rights." Actually asking a person to give up a right should require a significant justification and substantial scrutiny.

But that to the side, there's no university-specific reason to bar concealed carry: a firearm that nobody sees creates no disruption, does not impair the educational process, and does nothing to impair the safety and security of the campus. The only (invalid) arguments that I've seen in favor of these restrictions rest on the nebulous assumption that universities - like churches - are 'different,' and/or on stereotypes of college students as irrational, mercurial, drug-addled alcoholics.

I'm in favor of shall-issue CCW (with training requirements) for adults in general. Since this practice creates no appreciable problem outside the university, there's no reason to think that it will mysteriously become problematic on campus...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #72
75. I understand your position. It's not complicated.
It's no different, in a way, than carrying a Bandaid in case you cut yourself. Normal enough, maybe a tad anal, but follows a certain logic and appeals to certain personality types. Careful people. Righteous people. Insecure people. Frightened people. Smart people and probably some paranoid people.
Most college students arrive straight from high school, where the thought of handguns in class is anathema. They don't need to be wondering who might be carrying a gun around. College campuses are full of all kinds of folk in all kinds of moods. Most are at a very critical and highly stressful point in their lives. Introducing invisible handguns into their environment as a potential problem solving tool is a recipe for disaster.

Most have no problem forfeiting their Constitutional rights when boarding an airplane or ship. Why should a college or church be any different. They are the ships of knowledge and faith and as such should be sanctuaries of learning and spirituality.
At the very least, I would let the students decide by a democratic vote. That way kids can choose whether they want to go to a gun-free school or not. They shouldn't have it foisted on them by a bunch of state legislators in the pockets of lobbying groups like the NRA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #75
76. As a church/state separation near absolutist,
(I would let some monasteries slide on taxes)churches should be the same as any other private entity or business, it should be up to the church's management and not the state.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #76
79. Agreed
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #75
77. The whole world is full of "all kinds of folk in all kinds of moods" and students live in the world
Despite flowery analogies about ships of knowledge, universities are not magically different spaces. If trained adult CCWers pose no problem off-campus, there is no legitimate reason to bar them from campus (and absolutely no justification to let let students - or anyone else - vote to exclude mere 'stuff they don't like').

You're quite simply wrong in your interpretation, and now you've introduced another strange assessment of college students (timidly wondering who has a gun) as well as what I take to be a veiled and nonsensical implication about the role concealed firearms play in daily life. (Depending on what you meant by "potential problem solving tool" of course - obviously guns are the correct tool for rare and specific problems.) Allowing responsible adults to make their own private decisions on-campus, in exactly the way they do off-campus, is in no way shape or form a "recipe for disaster."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #77
80. This isn't about right or wrong, we have different opinions
Each of us thinks he's right. I respect your opinion, though I disagree with it. You see it as a private decision, I see it as an institutional decision. A school is not a democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #80
82. "A school is not a democracy" said the fellow who, a mere five posts ago,
suggested that students be allowed to vote democratically on whether or not to ban guns from campus. :shrug:

Campus policy should be an institutional (and state*) decision, but I hold campuses to the same standard as any other government entity: if they wish to restrict personal liberties, they need to be able to articulate a valid and reasonable reason for doing so. Particularly when the restriction touches on Constitutional issues.

In the case of concealed firearms, there is no credible evidence of disruption or threat that would arise from properly licensed adults choosing to carry them. Thus, the restrictions have no valid foundation (IMO). The claims the students don't want it, or might get nervous, or are too often intoxicated, or any other justifications presented thus far, cut no ice.


* I should have been more clear earlier that I've been intending to refer to public universities, as mentioned in the OP. As far as I'm concerned, private schools, churches, and other private entities can ban guns to their hearts' content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #75
86. College is nowhere near the only stressful or even most stressful point in most people's life.
In my experience, it was one of the calmer portions of my youth.

And yeah, I do have a problem with the forfeiting when flying. More because it's by government edict, rather than the company rules, but whatever. I'd like to vote with my dollars on that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #86
98. Maybe you didn't undergo the pressure that students endure today.
Many people, including myself, share your disdain for the treatment travelers have been subjected to since 9/11. However, it is a classic example of individual rights being curtailed for the greater good. Similarly, few would go to a public library to exercise their 1A rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #98
108. Pressure? I've been in the military over 20 years. I know what pressure is.
So do my comrades who go back to school after varying years of service.

College kids fresh from high-school may think it's pressure. Lack of perspective is more apt.

"...it is a classic example of individual rights being curtailed for the greater good." Curtailing freedom and liberty that pose no direct, imminent, severe threat of harm is never done "for the greater good". And if you believe otherwise, I can not help you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #108
114. You've been in the military for over 20 years? You haven't had enough of guns yet?
Maybe it's time you left your guns at work. But, as you would point out, that's your choice. Most veterans I know had there fill of guns during their service. I know several young guys who have returned from tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, severely disturbed. I've talked at length with them and feel deeply for them. A lot of anger, depression, feelings of betrayal by their government, substance abuse, broken relationships. The thought of them carrying a weapon to school, work or the local bar, is nightmarish. Also, having served, you should be comfortable operating in an environment where your rights are curtailed. You make a contract with the government when you sign up. A student also makes a contract to abide by campus rules. They can always choose another school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #114
115. If you think we carry guns at work, it demonstrates your ignorance of the military.
Your aquaintences are not overachingly representative.

"Also, having served, you should be comfortable operating in an environment where your rights are curtailed." Yes, as a requirement of certain service. NOT as a requirement of Citizenship. Big difference. And no, it's not at all "comfortable. Ask the folks who lived through Ft. Hood how "comfortable" it was to be "curtailed" and defenseless while a criminal shot them. So much for your "join the military to carry a gun" bullshit.

Seriously, you are merely demonstrating glaring ignorance and very poor logic. I urge you to stop while you are only waist-deep in this hole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #115
120. I was referring to friends and family who did tours of combat, but you knew that.
You chose the military and the curtailment of individual freedoms that go along with that. It has nothing to do with citizenship.
I think my friends, relatives and acquaintances are representative, as they are different ages, ranks and come from different parts of the country and I don't know of one who would think about carrying a gun in a civilian environment. And they are not all Democrats. Mostly, they are decent guys trying to regain, or hold on to their sanity and get on with their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #75
102. Private vs public
"Most have no problem forfeiting their Constitutional rights when boarding an airplane or ship."

And yet when someone is the owner of the airplane or ship, they can carry guns if they so choose.

"At the very least, I would let the students decide by a democratic vote."

What else would you let them vote on? And what wouldn't you let them vote on?

"That way kids can choose whether they want to go to a gun-free school or not."

They have that choice regardless of whether any particular school allows it or not, unless ALL allow it.


"They shouldn't have it foisted on them by a bunch of state legislators in the pockets of lobbying groups like the NRA."

On the other hand, if they take state or federal dollars, they should be made to adhere to the bill of rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #68
87. Exactly what rights do they forfeit?
Really - I'd love to know. I am unaware of a single right one forfeits in exchange for an education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #87
99. By abiding to campus rules.
1A rights are usually restricted to public areas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #99
100. " 1A rights are usually restricted to public areas." Sadly, you are not alone in that attitude:
Edited on Wed Dec-07-11 09:02 PM by friendly_iconoclast
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"Professor Called Police After Student Presentation"

Gotta keep those 'dangerous and inflammatory' ideas out of the classroom, amirite?


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #100
103. Ideas are fine in the classroom. Guns have no place.
The professor over reacted, for sure, but better to err on the side of caution. Try joking with a TSA agent.
Classes, though composed of individuals, are not about individuals. The group comes first, just as it does on a plane or ship. Society's needs outweigh individual needs. That's why we call it society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #103
105. What problems have legally carried guns caused to that group known as...
..."staff and students at college campuses that allow this already"? If you can show harm to this group, you might have something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #103
110. You can use that reason to excuse all individual injustice.
It is utterly without principal or regard for individual liberty or freedom.

No, thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #110
117. You have an odd perspective for someone in the military
You've spent more than two decades in an organization that depends on group support, survival and coordination at the expense of the individual.
You gave up many of your individual rights over 20 years ago. Now you want them back in the form of carrying a gun around in a civilian environment. That makes us all feel very secure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #117
123. Your feelings aside, what harm does it cause? There are several dozen campuses where it is legal.
If it were problematic, I'd assume you could find some accounts online.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #123
126. How do you define harm?
People live with cancer every day. Does that mean they are well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #126
132. Define it yourself. Call it "moral harm", if you wish. But be specific.
Something beyond "I don't like the idea".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #123
136. I suggest you read this if you want some perspective on the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #136
137. I think he was
going for something more empirical than an op ed. Oh yeah, has it been confirmed that the Temple student shot a fleeing felon in the back?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #136
140. "Students should not be wandering alone at night."
Proof that there is a problem, and it isn't those carrying legally.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #140
155. Anyone carrying a gun is potentially contributing to the problem
Legal guns become illegal guns every day. What is it about that fact that you don't understand. Adding fuel does not extinguish a fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #155
159. Anyone carrying a penis is potentially contributing to the problem
A legal penis become illegal rape tool every day.What is it about that fact that you don't understand. Adding fuel does not extinguish a fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #155
160. how many of those stolen guns
Edited on Sat Dec-10-11 10:23 PM by gejohnston
are stolen from the police? Given the microscopic number of guns diverted compared to the number of crimes prevented, I would say there is more baking soda than lighter fluid being dumped on the fire.

Edit to add, we are both old enough to remember street gang weapons before the war on drugs. They were mostly knives, tire chains, homemade maces. They could not afford guns, so the few that did were either zip guns or some $20 piece of shit made by Clerke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearm
none of these were legal:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/07/22/1090464799...

The French, Danish, and Polish freedom fighters made copies of the STEN sub-machine guns in bicycle repair shops and basements. I doubt the Nazi puppet governments gave them licenses to do so (which made their guns, illegal before they were legal)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #160
161. I have always advocated disarming the police.
Nobody should carry weapons to be used against humans, except in battle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #136
144. It elided the fact that the student fired back after being shot first by an attempted robber...
...and that this did not occur on campus.

I'm sure those small omissions were entirely inadvertent on your part:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/my_town/warrington/warringto...

By Matt Coughlin

Staff Writer

A Warrington native in his second year at Temple University is recovering after exchanging gunfire with a would-be 15-year-old robber early Monday morning.

Robert Eells, 21, was smoking a cigarette with a roommate outside their rowhome on the 2300 block of North 12th Street in the city about 1:53 a.m. when three males approached, police said. One of the males, 15-year-old Rafiq Thompson of Philadelphia, pulled a gun and demanded money, according to police.

But Eells was no easy mark. He refused to hand over money and the teenager started firing. Eells was hit in the stomach, but returned fire with his own handgun, striking the teen in the leg and torso, according to police. The teens accomplices ran away. Eells and Thompson were both taken to Temple University Hospital.

Eells grandmother, Kathryn Mack of Upper Southampton, said he was released from intensive care and placed in a regular hospital room, where he is in stable condition. The bullet passed through his body but doctors made an 8-inch incision to repair his internal organs. Doctors told family members he was lucky, the bullet missed striking a section of intestines that would have left Eells in need of a colostomy bag for the rest of his life....



http://articles.philly.com/2011-09-06/news/30118806_1_t...

Turnabout is fair (gun)play
September 06, 2011|BY CATHERINE LUCEY, luceyc@phillynews.com 215-854-4172


A 15-YEAR-OLD thug who tried to rob a Temple University student early yesterday got an unexpected surprise when the college kid pulled out a piece of his own, in self-defense.

The young gunman and two teenage sidekicks came upon Robert Eells, 21, and a friend just before 2 a.m. on 12th Street near Dauphin. He tried to rob Eells and opened fire, at which point Eells shot back, police said.

Multiple shots were fired, and Eells was struck in the stomach and the robber in the chest and leg. Both were taken to Temple University Hospital, where they were treated and listed in stable condition yesterday, police said.

The would-be robber, whom police did not identify because of his age, will be charged, police said. Officers last night were looking for his two accomplices....


http://temple-news.com/tag/robert-eells /

...Robert Eells was with a friend on his front stoop in the early hours of Labor Day when a 15-year-old male came up and demanded money.

When Eells refused, the youth took out a gun and shot him in the stomach, reports state. The juvenile tried to flee, however, Eells, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, drew his own gun and returned fire, shooting the youth in the back. Both Eells and the assailant were hospitalized and both are expected to make full recoveries...


Try again.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #144
156. Not relevant. I'm very familiar with this incident.
Point is that Eells, being a proud CCW holder, felt emboldened to stand his ground and raise the ante. Hopefully, he'll use his head next time and easily avoid this kind of confrontation. Fortunately nobody was killed, but as usual, the taxpayers get a nice bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-13-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #156
162. You're not the first to blame the victim and defer to the better nature of predators.
Then again, it's not your life that was at risk, was it? It's not unknown for you lot to claim that if you cooperate, you won't be hurt.

Sadly, it's not true in too many cases:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Another compliant store clerk is shot and killed


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

You might be willing to gamble that "thieves just want the money".


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

What kind of twisted notion of "civilized" behavior requires me to accommodate a thief, an assassin, or a rapist and makes HIS life less stressful?...

...Why so much thinly-veiled enmity for those who successfully resist a criminal's vile predations?



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"Trial in 09 store clerks death opens" (Compliant victim shot dead)

Now remember, class- that poor victim of society that's extracting an involuntary donation from you won't hurt you unless you resist him. Obviously Dangol did something wrong that doesn't appear on the surveillance video...


I, too, hope Eells uses his head next time- and fires until his assailant is no longer moving...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #117
139. Why on earth do you think I value them so greatly, and not want to see them restricted....
for no useful purpose?

Sheesh.

You seem to think we turn into robots or something. Speaking of "living in a bubble"....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #139
143. We all value our rights. Few people want them restricted.
Having a right does not mean it must be constantly exercised. Rights are not muscles. 2A rights exist for those extremely rare occasions when they may be needed. Compulsive toting is extreme behavior and an abuse of that right and in all probability, will eventually lead to all of us losing it. Be careful what you wish for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #143
146. It seems I'm not the one wishing here. If you value Rights so poorly, we're done here. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #146
150. Valuing something does not necessitate abusing it or being obsessed with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #150
151. You may stop the insinuations, accusations and stereotyping at any time. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #151
158. Please explain what you mean.
Maybe we should do continue the conversation in DU3, a whole new world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Francis Marion Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-07-12 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #103
163. But dangerous 'things' are mandatory in the classroom.
We need all kinds of dangerous 'things' in the classroom.

Acids, bases, solvents, bunsen burners spewing flammable gas. Boiling liquids. Explosion hazards. Carcinogens are needed. Biohazazds are a must.

Chemicals capable of killing an entire classroom are also completely necessary in that classroom.

Got to have scalpels, saws, lasers, lathes, hydraulic presses, high voltage, huge tanks of oxygen and of acetylene.

If you want to get away from the dangerous 'things', you can't even go outside- there's people walking around with heavy wooden skull crushers (some folks call them 'bats').

What made you think that guns are the only dangerous thing on campus?

Got to have a fire extinguisher in the classroom... but maybe not, since fire doesn't 'belong' on campus.

Heart problems don't 'belong' on campus, so neither does the AED.

Does the fact that a person does not want bad things to happen really justify depriving the student body of the 'things' they need to cope with those bad situations?

If you deprive students of dangerous things, don't you also deprive them of chemistry, physics, engineering?

But if students CAN be trusted to use hydrofluoric acid properly, why can't they be trusted to use a gun properly?




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #99
101. What happened to academic freedom?
Glad I didn't go to university in the UK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #101
104. What does academic freedom have to do with it?
And what does the UK have to do with it? University of Kentucky?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #104
107. You said students lose their 1A
rights in university. That would include the student's freedom to speak in the classroom, regardless what the institution thinks. Based on your post, I am guessing students in the United Kingdom have no such right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #107
118. Don't be absurd. I never said anyone loses their rights.
I said they are limited. Classrooms are places for learning and the exchange of ideas in a structured format. They are not a place for unbridled free speech and chaos. Do you really believe this country has more individual freedoms than the UK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #118
121. In the classroom,
yes. Stop on he street and frisk without probable cause, from what I am understand: yes.
The UK's libel laws do limit freedom of speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #121
127. Wrong on all counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #127
133. sure about that?
Can a British student disagree with or correct the instructor?

stop and search laws:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8453878.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/stop-and-search


Based on reading these and some progressive sources, yeah they kind of do. Not by the Crown, but the lack of money. It seems that their libel laws make SLAPP suits easy to file. Here, the plaintiff has to show what is said is untrue as well as show damage. If what is printed is true, it is not libel. For all practical purposes, that does limit free speech by allowing winnable SLAPP suits.
If I understand this correctly, the plaintiff only has to show damage to reputation, even if true.
http://www.pugilator.com/awareness/are-british-libel-la... /
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/libel-laws-ni...
http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/article/102585/Br...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #63
67. Fine. That's your choice. Nobody is telling you to carry one.
You, however, seem to think that you can tell others not to carry one. That is where the conflict arises.

You make your choices and I'll make mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. I'm not telling you not to carry. I'm asking you to reconsider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #69
84. I have reconsidered
I have come to the same conclusion though.

When there are no more people in the world who would harm another just because they can, then I will reconsider it again. Until then, I see no reason to change my mind.

WANTING people to be able to live free of harm is one thing. Pretending harmful things do not exist is another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #84
89. And contributing to the problem is yet another thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
We_Have_A_Problem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #89
90. I agree - it certainly is.
Hence, I do not contribute to the problem of criminal activity. I do not engage in those acts.

defending myself from those who are contributing to the problem is not the same thing - but then again, you knew that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #90
96. Supporting tha ongoing proliferation of handguns contributes to the problem
The more handguns in circulation, the more fall into the hands of those you would defend yourself against. But you knew that. You lose your gun to the wrong person and you have just contributed. It's a vicious cycle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #96
106. What "problem"? The violent crime rate is *down*, even as the number of guns increase.
So, unless you're one of those Borkian 'moral harm' types there seems to be no problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #106
111. What problem? Lemme think. Hmm....
How about, kids in America are 12 times more likely to be killed by a gun than kids in 25 other industrialized nations combined.
Not a problem to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #111
113. different populations
the kids who are killed and are doing the killing are mostly gangsters killing other gangsters fighting over who gets to fill someone's bong bowl. Don't see very many of them on campus or with CCWs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #113
119. "gangsters killing other gangsters fighting over who gets to fill someone's bong bowl"
OK, that explains everything. I never realized that the whole problem was being caused by a bunch of teenage pot heads. Unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #119
122. pot heads, coke heads of all ages
are fueling it with their money. Our murder rate of 4.8/100,000 is a national average. Now break it down by area. It is much higher in large cities and drug trade routes. Places like Vermont and Wyoming are as safe as Europe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #122
128. I give up. You obviously live in a capsule.
The states you mention have about 3 times the suicide rate of Washington DC and New York. But of course suicides don't count, even though 90% of unsuccessful suicide attempts are not followed up by sussessful suicides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #128
129. suicides are different
and we are talking about murders.
My question still stands on suicides:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

How do gun laws affect suicide rates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_OECD_countries_by_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #128
130. For the sake of your argument, you should *hope* that suicides don't count.
Else someone might wonder why Canada, with quite strict gun laws compared to the US, has a higher suicide rate than the US.

Or along the same lines: Why does Japan, with very few guns in civilian hands, have a suicide rate that is higher than the US
murder and suicide rates combined. One might get the idea that non-gun suicides don't matter as much in certain circles...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #128
153. Elegant linguistic trickery, nothing more.
"The states you mention have about 3 times the suicide rate of Washington DC and New York." (re:Vermont and Wyoming)

Which places have the larger suicide PROBLEM?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #111
131. The rate of those is declining as well, so while still a problem, it's a diminished one.
Got anything else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #131
135. "so while still a problem" - Eureka!
Got lots more, but let's stick with them one at a time. You acknowledge we have a problem. Got any solutions or ideas for eliminating that problem or evidence that there is a noticeable decline?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #135
145. Yes. Better education, more gun safety classes, and an end to the pointless War on (some) Drugs.
You will note that none of the above involve restricting a group of people who aren't the cause of the problem...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #33
48. We do a lot of learning in the military, frequently while heavily armed.
Feel free to promote any stereotypes you want, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #48
54. I'm not knocking the military. On the contrary.
And I have no idea what you mean by promoting stereotypes. I don't find too many stereotypes around here, but rather independent thinkers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
62. LOL.
"Kids who want to tote guns should join the military..."

Right, and kids who want to protest should join the ACLU... :eyes:

If the college takes so much as 1 red cent of public money, the bill of rights ought to definitely apply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #33
88.  I forget where I first heard that
"Kids who want to tote guns should join the military"

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens dont need guns, as their having guns doesnt serve the State.
~Heinrich Himmler

Not exact, but close enough.
Interesting choice of wording.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Francis Marion Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #33
147. It's a place of learning alright:
Lesson One:
Your personal freedom charter- the Bill of Rights- DOES NOT APPLY to you if the establishment says it doesn't.

Lesson Two:
This proposition:
"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

Really means:
"...the right OF THE POLICE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
and
"...the right of American college students SHALL BE INFRINGED WHENEVER AND HOWEVER THE ESTABLISHMENT WANTS"

Lesson Three:
It's better if you never read the Bill of Rights. But if you stubbornly insist upon reading it, don't count on exercising a specific right.

Lesson Four:
You are state property- you have no rights the state is bound to respect. Rather, you are indulged with certain narrow favors- subject to modification, cancellation at any time- which the state chooses to dispense.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Francis Marion Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #33
148. When and where...
American college students are 'sworn in' to college, and thereafter abide by the Uniform Code of Academic Justice.

Produce the document.

Since you claim that Universities can do whatever they want irrespective of our rights as Americans, why can't they get rid of women, blacks, Jews, etcetera- really turn back the clock to the high point of massive disrespect for rights? After all, if Amendment II doesn't have to be respected, why should anything else?

Since the University knows best, why not reinstate slavery on campus (Grad school??!!) - that other state of being defined for a person debarred the use of arms. Is that the core tenet of your argument, that people have must lose any rights that University policy chooses to shear from them?

How about a 'No blacks may sit at the lunchroom counter' policy. Why not? That WAS 'official policy' in some places, I seem to recall. And again, why not, since rights don't have to be respected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #148
149. some argue that slavery still exists
in the form of NCAA sports. The idea that the athletes work for free while the university rakes it in.
Not saying I buy in to it, only that you reminded me of the argument some years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-10-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #33
154. P.S. You are dead wrong, the BoR applies to us....
though in some specialized and sometimes highly modified ways.

But since you seem very unfamiliar with actual military life, outside your stereotypes, I'll let you do your research.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-04-11 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
27. are they really not safer? You think the criminals noticed the laws or lack of?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
38. Blood in the streets, etc.
:boring:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-05-11 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
50. If you are 21, you are legal, college or no college.
Ed MacKay, chancellor of University System of New Hampshire, put it nicely when he said campuses are "places where impetuous behavior can sometimes take place." The fact is, especially for males, the parts of the brain that affect judgment and decision-making aren't fully formed until their college years are behind them. And those college years can be booze-soaked and in some cases, as the recent arrest of 11 students at a UNH fraternity suggest, drug-addled. Adding guns to the mix will make campuses much more dangerous.

The simple fact is that in most, if not all states, you must be 21 years old to obtain a CCW permit.

And the fact is, if a 21-year-old non-college student is permitted by law to carry a firearm, then there is no reason why a 21-year-old on a college campus can't do so, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #50
66. a logical next question
would be what is the chancellor doing about the under-aged drinking and drug abuse? Did I go to a really mellow school or has MacKay been watching Animal House too many times?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Simo 1939_1940 Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
65. I have asked pro-restrictionists to rebut **ONE** of the

arguments made by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus - and not surprisingly, ZERO responses were tendered:

http://concealedcampus.org/common_arguments.php

Pour yourselves a nice glass of your favorite beverage, make yourselves comfortable, and prepare to enjoy (once again) the marvelous Symphony of Crickets in D.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #65
124.  private gun safes that can be secured to walls -- stupid
So I have to buy a gun and a safe to go to your college?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #124
141. Who said anything about "have to"?
Only you, it seems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-11 11:15 PM
Response to Original message
71. The President of UNH cited frat house behavior as a reason to not allow CCW, but the frats are not..

...on school property.

The fact that they already can carry guns on their frat house property and throughout no-UNH Durham, but he can't cite an incident of firearm violence shows that he is merely fear mongering.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
125. How can there be any guns on campuses?
Aren't they already "gun free" zones? Such a great idea. Just post a sign and poof...no more guns...no more crime...no more evil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 17th 2019, 04:50 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC