= Premium Content

  • Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

‘Campus Carry’ Bills Fail in Texas and Louisiana

June 2, 2011, 12:38 pm

Bills to allow concealed weapons on college campuses failed this week in both Louisiana and Texas, two states that were considered extremely likely to pass such legislation this year. In Louisiana a House committee rejected the proposed bill, probably killing its chances of passing this legislative session, the Associated Press reported. In Texas, where a concealed-carry bill had overwhelming support in both the Senate and House, lawmakers could not meet a deadline to pass the legislation. A Democratic lawmaker had blocked its passage at the last minute. This year nine state legislatures were slated to consider bills prohibiting public universities from imposing weapons bans. In April, Jan Brewer, Arizona’s governor, vetoed a bill that would have compelled public universities to allow concealed weapons on campus.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • rick1952

    Perhaps more rational thinking by our legislators will overcome the hype promoted by the concealed carry lobby.  I am not convinced that college campuses are genuinely more dangerous places without persons who are concealed carry permitted.  Despite the tragedies at VA Tech and Northern Illinois, Clery data compiled by the US Dept of Ed does not indicate that there is rampant violence on college campuses that requires allowing more armed persons on campus, concealed carry or not.  The most recent Supreme Court decision about individual gun rights is clear that rational government regulation regarding possession of firearms is permissible.  Prohibiting guns on campus seems rational to me, given the data on crime and 30+ years experience working with traditional-age college students.  Firearms will not contribute to solving the problems we experience on campuses across our nation.

  • taoshiker831

    Sanity prevails. 

  • wagamama

    Unfortunately, the Texas Legislature is now in special session and it is possible that the guns-on-campus bill will be re-introduced; however, since Governor Perry has not indicated it is a priority with him (as he did with voter ID and forced sonogram viewing for women wanting abortions), those of us who oppose this stupid and dangerous legislation are keeping our fingers crossed that State Senator Jeff Wentworth, the instigator of this legislative effort, won’t try anything underhanded.

  • akprof

    I’m pretty convinced that the more guns on campuses, the more dangerous campuses will be!

  • ctate

    Reporters have consistently misrepresented this issue. The bill in Texas (originally SB 354) did not “allow” concealed weapons on campus. The current law leaves it to institutions of higher education to decide whether to “allow” concealed carry on their campuses. SB 354 aimed to take away the right of state institutions of higher education to decide how to deal with the issue of the carrying of licensed weapons on campus. Its goal was to mandate that all state institutions of higher ed be required to allow licensed weapons on campus. Representative Wentworth and other promoters of the bill made a clear statement of their position that the state knows better than local officials how to deal with the potential for violence on campuses. This would have been yet another unfunded mandate pushed by the state legislature on universities.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    All this measure does is guarantee criminals that they won’t meet any resistance. Do you really think someone determined to kill, rape, or rob is going to be concerned with the minor offense from bringing his gun on campus to do it? Over 70 campuses nationwide already permit weapons to be carried on campus, and they haven’t had any issues whatsoever. The 2nd amendment does not end at some magical barrier defined by a school’s borders.
    http://www.conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

  • chuckkle

    I think the problem is the concealed part.  Campus police have their weapons out in the open.  If students, staff, and faculty are to carry side arms, they should be openly visible so everyone knows the ground rules.  That way you know who you are tangling with and in what direction it might escalate.  It would also be interesting to have High Noon shootouts on the quad over lunch hour.  Something memorable for visiting prospective students and their parents.

    Chuck Kleinhans

  • 22259152

    Emotions always cloud issues.  Too bad rational thought does not prevail.

  • 22259152

    It is not about “Public Safety”  it is about “individual safety.”

  • rreeder

    It is really interesting to see the paranoid positions of some people over this issue.  First, only people over 21 could obtain a CHL.  So, in general, only seniors and graduate students would be eligible.  Second, demographical studies of CHL holders show such low levels of criminal activity as to be statistically insignificant.  Third, criminal activities never seem to bother some people until it happens to them personally. 

    Some campus police aren’t even armed.  Those that are, generally are not sufficiently trained to be able to handle an active shooter.  As such, most CHL holders are actually better trained and motivated to defend themselves in this type of encounter.  Carry on campus will be here in the near future.  You need to be prepared.  Start acting like a real person and not a tyrant. 

  • internalaudit311

    rreeder – you obviously know little about college students today. on the Texas campus I work on (and most college campuses today) the average student age is 27-29 years old. The idea that all freshmen, sophmores and juniors today are under 21 is a three decade old fallacy–it does not represent today’s university and student. I also HAVE a CHL, and I think old pistol rick perrry and the Texas legislature are gun nuts who have no concept of what they are doing. I would prefer to rely on the professional police force we have on campus (professionals who are trained to handle shooter situations) to handle these emergencies (in the miniscule chance somehting would happen) rather than having a bunch of rootin’ tootin’ gunslingers who think they are the world’s answer to violence running around campus armed.

  • rogue_academic

    Ragtopz, I don’t want to dwell into pro or against campus carry here, but I cannot but point that your attack on rreeder is uncalled for. I did not notice much ignorance in his/her post about student population. The point was that immature 18-20 year olds are excluded from concealed carry (I do not think a 29 year old can be deemed immature for simply being a freshman). By the way, your trust in college police is very amusing. Try to rewatch Virginia Tech tapes — the only training clearly visible is from consuming donuts, if you look at the width of the bottoms of most of those “trained professionals”.

  • internalaudit311

    Virtue–guess I need it explained how pointing out the facts to reeder is an attack.Your response was the only attack. I suspect you are in the same boat as rreeder-shoot first and ask questions later. I have great respect for the professional police officers on my campus-I personally know many of them. To paint all police officers as donut eaters is a sad generalization by a weak mind.

  • rogue_academic

    Don’t you agree that the statement “you obviously know little about college students today” is a rather far-fetching assessment that questions a person’s competence (especially given that the majority of the readers here are faculty, staff, or students)?
    I also don’t think I attacked you. If I did, I will be fast to apologize. Concerning VT police I only stated the obvious from the tapes, the fact that concerns me. Besides, I did not paint “all” of officers this way (in particular SWAT members are usually very fit). But how many police officers you see on the streets and campuses are overweight? (And then how many soldiers or military officers are?). If you know some of them well enough you should be aware of the donut culture. The following video was proudly shown to me as a part of a non-public presentation by a police lieutenant:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfnqgNHkmao

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com
    You know, of course, that 70 campuses nationwide already permit duly licensed individuals to carry their weapons on campus, right? Ok, now lets talk facts. Americans own 90 million more guns than they did in 1991, and yet violent crime is down 43%. [1] And if you still think gun control is the answer, just look at the UK. They have more total crimes per capita [2] and over four times as many violent crimes per capita compared to the good ole USA. Hell, they even have more crimes than South Africa. Canada, despite its similarly draconian gun laws, also has roughly twice as many violent crimes per capita than US.[3] Bottom line? Gun control doesn’t prevent crime, even if you live on a relatively isolated, puny stinking island and have cameras on every street corner like the Brits do.

    200 years later and Thomas Jefferson still knows best.

    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are
    neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things
    worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve
    rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be
    attacked with greater confidence than an armed one”

    - Thomas Jefferson

    [1] http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=206&issue=007
    [2] http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita
    [3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

  • internalaudit311

    I appreciate that you included links along with your commentary. That is the supportive way to express your point and have it properly considered. It was not making blanket accusations or generalizations without support as others have done here.

    I have been in higher ed for over 25 years. Note that I mentioned that I AM a CHL holder in the state of Texas. I am no anti-gun, gun control nut. I strongly support the second amendment. That does not mean I think it is smart or reasonable for many or all individuals to carry concealed or on their hip where allowed. Your statistics say violent crime is down-just the arguement for not having more guns on campus. The fact that there are 90 million more guns is not a badge of honor to me–it is more a picture of paranoia. Criminals do not fear someone having a gun. The indivudals who have been involved in campus shootings were bound and determined to die anyway-as I said earlier nothing like a rootin tootin shootout-the more guns the merrier. Guns do not belong on campus.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com
    “Criminals do not fear someone having a gun.”

    Wrong again.

    “Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi surveyed 2,000 felons
    incarcerated in state prisons across the United States. Wright and Rossi
    reported that 34% of the felons said they personally had been “scared
    off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim”; 69% said that
    they knew at least one other criminal who had also; 34% said that when
    thinking about committing a crime they either “often” or “regularly”
    worried that they “[m]ight get shot at by the victim”; and 57% agreed
    with the statement, “Most criminals are more worried about meeting an
    armed victim than they are about running into the police.” (James D.
    Wright & Peter H. Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey
    of Felons and Their Firearms [1986]. See Guns and Public Health:
    Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda? by Don B. Kates, et. al.
    Originally published as 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 [1994]).”

    Allow me to repeat for emphasis:
    “Most criminals are more worried about meeting an
    armed victim than they are about running into the police.”

    As for lunatics like Cho and the Columbine kiddies, they committed suicide when first confronted with armed resistance. They were there to execute people, not get in a gun fight. This was confirmed by a study of several mass killings. The original news article is not available, but this link has the data:
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/showthread.php?t=402299

    Gun free zone = target rich environment.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

     http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

    One more thing I’d like to say. I fully support the notion that you can’t take your gun everywhere you go. In my state, the list of prohibited locations includes the following:
    - Jails
    - Court houses
    - Nuclear facilities
    - Schools

    Anything jump out at you about the difference between schools and those other 3 types of venues? You don’t have to walk through a metal detector to get into school. Jails, court houses, and nuclear facilities are “gun sterile,” and since I have the assurance that no one else there is armed, having had to pass by an armed guard and through a metal detector, I don’t really mind not bringing my gun. Schools are not sterile, and while I understand the logic against permitting weapons, I don’t think it’s valid.

  • internalaudit311

    We can agree to disagree. I am not nearly as enamored by the research studies you cite, One of the hazzards of being an academic is that we tend to believe that all research is valid-I don’t necessarily subscribe to that theory. I have seen too much manipulation to (a) get the results the researcher wants, or (b) get more funding in the future for more ‘research’.

    (And note that while 34% of the felons in the study you cite said they feared somone who was armed, that leaves 66% of felons who do not. And note that the study was from 1986–thaqt’s 25 years ago–a lot has changed since then)

    “Funny” that in Texas, guns are not allowed in the state capital, unless you have a CHL then you can bypass the metal detectors and walk right in with your pistol. I will contuinue to support gun rights, but will continue to beleive that we don’t need more guns on campus.

  • rreeder

    I’ve been teaching for over 25 years.   There’s very little I haven’t encountered in higher ed.  Yes, I work in Texas too.  If you think campus police are “trained”, you’re sadly deluded as to the facts.  BTW, the only one mentioning donut eaters was YOU.

  • archman

    The Texas A&M students, when polled this spring, rejected carrying guns onto campus. Public safety departments at most every college reported in the news (Texas, Arizona, Virginia) have also rejected this. Ditto for most campus administrators.

    So where is the big push for this? Knee-jerk politicians trying to score cheap points, apparently. It’s getting rather ridiculous that these “leaders” keep ignoring the advice and wishes of the people that will actually be most affected by carrying guns onto campuses. Students, faculty, and staff are being ignored. Shameful.

  • internalaudit311

    I’ll speak for my campus (as I did above) and say we have highy trained law enforcement officers who I know and respect. You talk about an “attack”?? call yourself “deluded”, not me!!!

  • internalaudit311

    RE: donut eaters? wrong reeder–read Virtue’s comment above then I’ll accept your apology!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    First of all, I think the sampling method there leaves something to be desired. I’m suspect that if I posted the question differently, the results might be different.

    Q1. “Do you think people should be able to bring guns to class?”
    A1. “Hell no!”

    Q2: “Some of your peers, including some active duty military personnel and other safety enthusiasts, have been trained in the legality and employment of lethal force against a deadly threat. They wish to protect themselves and you against a potential violent criminal. Do you think they should be able to exercise their second amendment right, and bear arms on campus?”
    A2: “Hmmmm, maybe?”

    In any case, the media has people in a frenzy, convinced that guns are terrifying and will blow up at any second. But why should their irrational and unsupported fears tread on my constitutional rights?

    “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    - Benjamin Franklin

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    Sorry, but the facts disagree with your uninformed and haplaphobic conviction. Britain has hugely “successful” gun control legislation in place. Handgun ownership is illegal. Firearms possession is basically unheard of. And guess what? Britain has 4x as much violent crime per capita as America. Hell, Britain even has more crime than South Africa, a country with infamous rates of violent crime . And it’s not an isolated phenomenon. Canada, which also has draconian gun laws, has roughly twice as much violent crime per capita as America.[1] The reason? As Thomas Jefferson said, “an unarmed man can be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.”

    Don’t be naive. The police can’t protect you. If you’re lucky, they’ll show up 20 minutes after you call them, and maybe be able to collect enough blood or semen to find your killer in a few months, but you’ll be long dead. Are you going to comply with the criminals? My best friend gave them everything he had. They killed him anyway. Take some personal responsibility for your safety. Fight back, if appropriate. Statistically, you’re much more likely to come out uninjured if you resist with force. [2]

    [1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

    [2] Gary Kleck, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York, 1997. pp 293-294.

    Read more: http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

  • rick1952

    Conlaw Bloganon – first, sorry to hear about the homicide of your best friend.  My family experienced a gun homicide as did a family with which we were friends (both victims were young men), so unfortunately, I know what that means emotionally.

    However, your claims about violent crime in Britain and Canada are not relevant to the need to address conditions on college campuses in the USA.   The data that is relevant is the data about violent crimes on college campuses.  That data does not indicate that the kind of violent crimes that occur on college campuses will be reduced by the presence of armed persons.  There is no violent crime wave on college campuses.  Given the statistics about campus crime, fear of violent crime is greatly exaggerated by those promoting concealed carry policies.

    Having grown up in genuinely dangerous neighborhoods where the threat of gun violence was real (in The Bronx and North Philadelphia), I know something about places that are dangerous and places that are not.  I can assure you, college campuses are not dangerous places in the way that my old neighborhoods were (and still are.)

    To take responsibility for our safety, we might better use our time and energy to reduce the presence of guns in society.  Given the many decades of lax gun regulation in our nation, it will take quite a while to reduce the threat posed by so many guns in the hands of so many dangerous persons. But, as the Chinese proverb says, the longest journey begins with the first step.  So let’s take a step forward by keeping college campuses safe from those whose paranoia lead them to believe campuses are unsafe and require them to arm themselves against imagined dangers.  Let’s not take a step backwards and create yet another environment in which persons with guns can pose a threat of deliberate or accidental harm to others.

  • lewandowski

    Interesting comments . When they had an incident last year at UT-Austin the campus police do carry guns and are extremely well trained and trained with the City of Austin Police on campus for such a case some months before.  Maybe what we should be is promoting better training by campus police not a “Wild West Mentality”.  Even when the Police Chief of Austin was asked this same question about carring guns on campus he stated that they gave a “shoot to kill order” for ANYONE who was carring a gun – so to argue to carry a gun in such a case would most likely the “John Wayne save the World Person” would have been killed.

    So for the people who are so paranoid that their campuses are dangerous than I suggest your rights should be to perhaps carry a granade, pull the pin and say good-bye. 

    Age does not matter if a student or professor is allowed to carry a gun , for when your upset about your girlfriend dating your professor or your failing out because of lack a study skills or the professor did not get tenior – these type of people who cannot solve a problem without a gun will be the one’s who carry.

    It is sad in America, that the consitution is being misinterprided by wacks who want to be cowboys and not citizens of the 21st century!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    Not relevant? Your argument is that fewer guns = less crime. The facts show otherwise.

    And anyway, like I said, over 70 campuses nationwide permit carry. There has not been any rash of crime as a result. In any case, if you’re so worried about “college-age students,” realize that the bulk of the people eligible to carry will be faculty, staff, and graduate students, due to the requirement that you be 21 to get a carry permit.

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

  • 22259152

    In reply to:  dank48:  “What exactly is the difference?”

    The difference is Public Safety focuses on the overall management of  law enforcement/safety services.  Policies, procedures, enforcement, patrol focus, visibility, prevention, etc.

    Whereas, individual safety focuses on the self or group.  Self defense, vigilance, personal safety, etc.

    Public Safety is not capable of providing services to all recipients all the time; nor is it intended to.  It is reactive in nature.  For example, once you are shot and killed, they will investigate your death and possibly bring the perpetrator to justice.  Individuals shoot the bad guy so that public safety can investigate them for employing deadly force in self defense.

    So in essence if you employ public safety you maybe dead, the other you may be alive.

  • 22259152

    More like insanity to me.

  • 22259152

    RReeder, I agree with the first part of your statement.  I also agree somewhat with the second part of your post as well.  However, not all police officers on college campuses are lacking in training.  Many have training programs that are far superior to local departments.  Many of those officers are recruited by local departments because of their training and expertise.   

  • 22259152

    If you look at the tapes closely, you will see that many of the plus sized officers are from other surrounding departments and not VT.  I have only been to VT on a short visit and did not see or meet any of the officers in order to form an opinion.  I would suggest, forming an opinion based upon video tape also does not provide sufficient evidence on the fitness level of the VT Officers.

  • 22259152

    Being a concealed carry permit holder does not an expert make.  Nor does it provide any sort of weight to the issue at hand. If it is not a badge of honor, then why even mention it?

    I totally disagree with your analysis, if there is any, and your positions.  Conlaw Bloganon hits much closer to the mark.  

  • 22259152

    IF the Austin Police Chief gave orders to “shoot to kill,” then he/she is an ass.  That is not good policy or procedure and would subject him/her to severe civil repercussions and possibly land him/her in jail. 

  • lee1967

    Conrad Bloganon either did not notice or neglected to mention that the murder rates in both the U.K. and Canada are less than half the rate in the U.S. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)   Over the last decade, the U.S. homicide rate has trended down a bit from about 5.5/100,000/year to about 5.0/100,000.  The last few years, the corresponding rate has been less than 2/100,000 in both Canada and the U.K.  Guns are involved in roughly 6 out of 10 homicides in the U.S., but only about a third in Canada and less than a fifth in the U.K. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

     Eli:
    The way I see it is, we have infinitely many more guns, but only 4 times as many homicides as England. And to sweeten the deal, we have liberty. And we don’t have big brother hanging from every streetlamp watching where we throw our boogers.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

     Eli:
    The way I see it is, we have infinitely many more guns, but only 4 times as many homicides as England. And to sweeten the deal, we have liberty. And we don’t have big brother hanging from every streetlamp watching where we throw our boogers.

  • rogue_academic

    Quite possibly so, but it is a moot point which department they belong to. They were responders to an “active shooter on campus” situation and this is all that matters. They are the people we will be expected to trust our safety and lives with if something similar happens again. Besides, the very fact that there were four (?) different departments with minimal communication among them ,mentioned many times in relation to VT shooting, does not add much to my confidence that the law enforcement will be there in time to save me. Moreover, as courts ruled police have no legal obligation to protect individuals.

  • internalaudit311

    Great response and commentary!!!!!!!

  • jracca

    I doesn’t really matter what students think if you ask me. If concealed carry was allowed every student is still allowed the choice to carry or not carry. Why would we ask the opinion of college students on a constitutional issue? We don’t let students decide whether they are subject to unreasonable search and seizure.

    Unfortunately, nobody can give me any reason to make colleges any different from other places where people can lawfully carry a handgun. What exactly is different? Nothing. I think the debate should really be about whether we have concealed carry or not, the debate about college campuses is absurd, there is nothing that makes it different from the mall, a restuarant, or any other place people congregate. Either a person is responsible enough to carry a handgun or not. Having a false boundary at the edge of a campus building doesn’t make sense to me. Allow it everywhere or don’t, but we should have an honest debate, rather than pretend that  a college campus is some kind of consecrated ground.

    Until we can unsure nobody is carrying a gun like at an airport, we can’t really enforce the prohibition anyway, all we can do is catch someone who failed to keep their concealed handgun concealed, which doesn’t make anyone safer. Anyone who would shoot someone probably doesn’t care about the law since murder is already illegal.

    I think any debates on the issue should focus on the broader issue of concealed carry and stop fooling about arguing about college campuses.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    The thing about gun control nuts is, they want it their way, and they want everyone else to have it their way too. I don’t care if you carry a gun, just don’t tell me where I can or cannot carry mine. I’ve got the constitution on my side, and a populace that is rapidly realizing that the police cannot protect them.

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

    P.S. Read Gonzales v. USA if you expect the police to protect you. (Hint: They won’t.)

  • rreeder

    What’s really sad is the gunophobs who won’t recognize the 2nd amendment as it was originally written.  Go back and see how many states had amendments that just said The right to bear arms shall not be infringed.  Be your own scholar and not Gun Control.  Or just be opposed to the 2nd amendment.   At least be intellectually honest instead of taking the easy way out.

  • rreeder

    ragtopz2000,
    Your reply was to ME and what I said: not to someone else.  I hate people putting words in my mouth.  Your additude towards anyone who opposes your viewpoint is terrible.  You must be a full professor with tenure at a large school to have developed this attitude.  Grow up and learn to adjust.  You’re going to have to anyway because concealed carry on campus will be here whether you want to be or not.

  • rick1952

    Conlaw: Sorry, but you fail to understand my argument.  My argument is fewer guns = lower risk of accidental or deliberate gun violence.  No evidence or data demonstrate that persons on college campuses face a higher risk of violent crime than persons in other environments, and in fact, there is a lower risk of such violence on college campuses.   Hence, the call for armed protection via concealed carry is based on paranoid imaginings.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    I work at a top university, which happens to be in a major metropolitan area that is wrought with violent crime. Don’t tell me my campus is safe. You don’t have to defend yourself if you don’t want to, but don’t let your naivete tread on my constitutional rights.

  • rreeder

    .22 (I like the first part of your alias),
    We are all a product of our experiences.  My experience at a number of universities is that campus police are less-well trained and lower paid than state police.  In fact at one university, the police chief couldn’t qualify until I took him under my wing and taught him to shoot.  Five hundred rounds of .38 special and several empty chambers later, he qualified.  The range master asked him who taught him to shoot.  Answer: an accounting doctoral student.  He didn’t believe it. 

    Your school might well have trained security.  I still maintain most schools don’t.   Are they always around at night when you leave to get into your car?  My school officers left hours before I leave. 

    Most of the people who have commented on this forum are scared to death of their students.  Don’t they realize that the campus police won’t follow them around town?  Clint Smith, the owner of a noted firearms training facility has been quoted as saying, “I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.”   The levity of the statement belies the seriousness of the situation.  When danger threatens immediately, the police are only MINUTES away.  If you’ve never had it happen to you, you’re lucky.  If you’re unlucky enough, maybe you’ll survive.  If so, the next time you’ll be carrying a firearm unless you’re a slow learner.

  • sundog50

    Sadly, more unarmed students will need to die cowering in their classrooms waiting for the ‘experts’ before the needed campus carry legislation is passed. Eventually, it will be passed.

  • rick1952

    Conlaw – OK, provide the Clery data about your campus indicating the number of violent crimes involving a weapon that occurred on the campus at which you work.  Tell me the name of the campus, I will look it up myself.  I have worked and studied on campuses in Philadelphia, Boston and Camden, NJ, where gun crime is an unfortunate fact of life.  Over thirty years and I know of only one instance in which a gun crime was committed on the campuses at which I studied or worked.  I reject, out-of-hand, your statement that I am naive.  I grew up in neighborhoods which required clarity about real dangers, have lived in several major cities and raised my children in them (not in the suburbs surrounding them) and know well the risks.  Despite the gun violence in the cities, that violence did not take place on the campuses. The difference, as far as I can tell, between your perspective and mine is that I try not to let imagined fears dominate my thinking.  Your argument in favor of concealed carry has little to do with constitutional rights and more to do with imagined fear.  That is unfortunate.

  • blakeman

    Too bad that Jefferson never said what you claim.  See the Monticello website: http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/laws-forbid-carrying-armsquotation.

    The quote is from Beccaria.  Jefferson comments in the margins of his own copy, “False idee di utilità.”  I really hate the persistent misuse of the Founders for contemporary political purposes.  

    This is what happens when people quit reading books and only read emails forwarded on the Internet.  

  • rogue_academic

    While the request is reasonable let me point out that not only “the number of violent crimes involving a weapon” should be considered. Guns are not only used to defend against an armed attack. For example in many states it is legal to use lethal force to prevent a rape, kidnapping, carjacking, unarmed burglary. Since Conlaw is citing research that indicates guns have overall crime deterrent effect, the bigger crime statistics ought to be considered. Besides, even if a fear could be deemed imaginary, the question is do we have the rights and moral superiority to restrict protection against that imagined fear in other individuals or should we let them decide for themselves? Since we became so sensitive to other people’s feelings (aka political correctness) should we tell a former robbery/rape victim that she has no business carrying means of personal protection because the probability of another crime is RELATIVELY low?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Conlaw-Bloganon/100002402694026 Conlaw Bloganon

    Uhh, thanks, but I know the origin of the quote. I never claimed that Jefferson originated it, just that he said (ok, he wrote it) it, and that I hold it to be true.

    And for the record, “False idee di utilità,” or “False Ideas of Utility,” is the chapter title of Beccaria’s book, “On Crimes and Punishment,” in which he postulated the theory that Jefferson repeats in his text. Beccaria writes, “False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; what would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined…..”

    I’m sure someone 10 years ago said that the grass is green. If, today, I also observe that the grass is green, and some dofus named blakeman disagrees, does that make me wrong and the guy 10 years ago correct?

    http://conlaw-bloganon.blogspot.com

  • rogue_academic

    “This is what happens when people quit reading books and only read emails forwarded on the Internet.”

    It pays off to be well-educated! Or at least to know how to copy and paste a quote into google. But honestly, Blakeman, did you know it was from Beccaria before you perused Monticello website?

  • edwoof

    State legislators need to pass legislation that would allow guns in the public viewing spaces in the state legislatures before addressing guns on campus. If they really believe that carrying a gun is an essential liberty, then they should welcome an armed public within firing range while they do their job.

  • rogue_academic

    They do at least in one state — Utah.

  • Fiftycal

    About 100 people have been killed in “mass shootings” in the last 10 years.  In the same time, about 140,000 have been murdered.  So, NO, the reason behind concealed campus carry is NOT to play John Wayne and stop a crazy like Virginia Tech.  Of course without campus carry there is almost NO CHANCE someone could stop the shooting.  Like they say, when seconds count, 9-1-1 is minutes away.  But how about the co-ed that was RAPED last week in the UT Parking garage?  How about the 500+ felonys that occured on Texas campuses last year?  Are they not serious?  Is your need to FEEL safe more important that the ability to BE safe?  This is just more “blood in the streets” BS from anti-gunners.  It’s been mouthed for years and has NEVER HAPPENED!

  • Fiftycal

    In Texas, if you have a concealed handgun license, there is an express lane to get into the Capital.  You don’t even have to go thru the metal detector.  I’ve taught various legislators the concealed handgun course in their office in the Capital.  You think that is “welcoming” armed citizens into the Capital?  Oh, and state and local government offices are BY LAW required to allow concealed carry except for courthouses and jails.

  • http://profiles.google.com/dksuddeth Duane Suddeth

    so your argument comes down to nothing more than you have a problem with gun violence, just not other types of violence?

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.