Of the 70 colleges and universities that allow concealed carry...

[Atypical Liberal]

None have reported any problems since they started allowing it:

http://www.thepelicanpost.org/2011/05/16/concealed-carry-on-campus-louisiana/

Very good video at the link.

[ZombieHorde]

1. None of them have reported problems because there were no survivors! nt

[rl6214]

30. Is that survivors of the zombie horde?

I have the Zombie Apocalypse Survival Guide. I will definitely survive.

[HelenWheels]

2. HB 413

Doesn't this law make you at least a little bit concerned about concealed carry on campus? So if the guy sitting next to me in a classroom accidentally shoots me he gets off without any punishment? Am I not understanding this law? I sure hope so.

[GreenStormCloud]

14. You are greatly misunderstanding it.

If a CCWer shoots you, then you can sue the shooter. You can't sue the college because they didn't do the shooting.

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. How do you sue when you're dead?

[gejohnston]

56. the odds of that happening are zero

but there is always manslaughter charges etc.
Go K State
Go Wichita State Shockers

[GreenStormCloud]

60. Your chances of being struck by lightning are abut 40 times greater...

...than you chance of being illegally shot and killed by a CCW permit holder.

[Hoyt]

3. Like we are supposed to believe the "Students for Concealed Carry on Campus" in a conservative blog.

It's not about how many people have been shot. It's about contaminating colleges with guns.

[rrneck]

4. You are a laugh a minute!

:rofl:

[Hoyt]

7. At least I don't use right wing sources like that to bolster my opinion of gun toting.

[rrneck]

9. You couldn't find a source

to bolster the bulk of the idiotic drivel you produce with a super computer and a room full of Philadelphia lawyers.

:rofl:

[lawodevolution]

11. this isn't cuba, there should be no illegal media or information

and I don't care if sources are left or right wing if they are good

[DWC]

45. You hit the nail on the head

The truth is the truth where ever you find it. Further, self defense is not a socio-political issue and there is no Right or Left to it. The 2nd amendment recognizes it. Human nature demands it.

Semper Fi,

[eqfan592]

43. "Yes, I'll only listen to sources....

..that only reenforce the opinions I already have! NEVER to ones that may challenge them!"

[RSillsbee]

47. Does this include right wing sources such as the Brady Campaign?

They certainly seem to be a favorite of the antis here

[lawodevolution]

5. You can write stupid comments but you can't reference a website to prove the OP wrong

Now stand aside while we pass ccw on campus state after state over the next few decades until it's the norm.

[Hoyt]

6. A bunch of home schooled right wing students can say anything they want about guns - and you cheer.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

8. You say that...

...like it's a bad thing. :)

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. Feel free to prove them wrong, then. Exercise *your* rights.

Me, I'll go with facts and empirical evidence over empty rhetoric any day of the week and twice on Sunday

[one-eyed fat man]

38. How about this guy?

His parents were big contributors to anti gun groups. His mom was so anti-gun when she found the barrel stub from his sawed-off shotgun in his room she didn't have a clue. He wrote a high school report on gun control and got a good grade for it. Left wing, gun control advocate students support your position...

Eric Harris: Gun Control Poster Boy

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[one-eyed fat man]

50. You didn't read the link.

He's a gun control poster boy.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/shooting/1122pare2.shtml

"I don't want you going down there," Kathy Harris told officers headed for Eric's basement bedroom, but she relented and allowed the search to continue, according to documents contained in the 11,000-page release.

The officers found shotgun shells on Eric Harris' bed, a shotgun with a sling hanging on the side of a dresser table and a bomb lying nearby.

<snip>
Labeled "Nixon," the tape carries the voice of Eric Harris, with him saying it was made nine hours before the attack.

"People will die because of me," he says on the tape. "It will be a day that will be remembered forever."

<snip>
The FBI agents delicately looked inside the bags -- and instantly understood the true intentions of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris: death, by fire, for hundreds of their fellow students.

The gym bags each held a large bomb fashioned from a barbecue grill propane tank, a gasoline can and other fuel cylinders. Each was wired to a pipe bomb. A two-bell alarm clock served as a timing device.

Had both bombs not failed, explosives experts concluded, the 660 kids in the cafeteria at 11:20 a.m. April 20 likely would have died -- nearly four times the number killed in the Oklahoma City bombing.

A blast that size would have turned every fork, every spoon, every tray into shrapnel. A giant fireball would have roared through the cavernous room, sucking up oxygen in its wake -- making survival all but impossible.

Maybe his support for gun control was his projecting...like you?

On the other hand,

"Similarly, Johns Hopkins University gun violence researcher John Vernick told me that after reviewing conflicting research on whether more guns meant more or less violence and crime, the National Research Council concluded it was impossible to determine a causal link."

[jpak]

39. +1

yup

[gejohnston]

57. Just to pile on

http://www.tincher.to/mmm.htm

Although I don't know if the Tec nine mentioned is the full auto Swedish version or the one affected by AWB, point is her drug dealer son had awful customer service and she shoots the wrong person in revenge, while leading Million Mom March.

[Euromutt]

64. That's freedom of expression for you

An unfortunate side-effect of that is that sometimes, people will say things you don't want to hear. In fact, living in a free society in general entails that some people are going to engage in activities of which you cannot see the utility, or the attraction, or which you may find offensive (or "tacky"). But as long as it "neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg," that's their business.

[lawodevolution]

12. lol, people don't learn from history. Hoyt, replace the word "guns" with "blacks" and I bet that

was the anti-civil rights fight back before anti-civil rights became anti-gun.

[Hoyt]

36. Why do you guys keep equating your supposed gun rights, to civil rights movement? Ain't the same.

People preferring you leave you guns at home, is not remotely comparable to what has been done to minorities. You should be ashamed.

[Bold Lib]

51. The enumerated 2A is not imaginary nor supposed. It is a civil right no matter how

much you jump and scream that it is not.

yup

[Euromutt]

62. Analogy does not equal equation

Nobody's equating the right to keep and bear arms with equal rights for blacks, LGBTs or whomever. For starters, drawing parallels and making comparisons isn't the same as equating; in this video, Grover explains what "equates" means around the 3:46 mark.

And really, the analogy isn't between the two sets of rights; it merely takes your arguments against the RKBA and sees how they would apply in a different context.

Actually, your position reminds me very strongly of the extended analogy fallacy, with this (real-life) example (from a discussion on anti-cryptography legislation):

"I believe it is always wrong to oppose the law by breaking it."
"Such a position is odious: it implies that you would not have supported Martin Luther King."
"Are you saying that cryptography legislation is as important as the struggle for Black liberation? How dare you!"

As the page says, the fallacy occurs mentioning two different situations, in an argument about a general rule, it interpreted to constitute a claim that those situations are analogous to each other. In this particular context, the general rule is that it is not only permissible, but indeed desirable to (continue to) banish certain things from institutions of higher learning because some people think they "demean" or "degrade" higher learning, and "contaminate" campuses (whatever the fuck that means).

If you don't like the fact that your arguments can be used to argue for things of which you disapprove, maybe you need to revise your arguments.

[PavePusher]

27. Ah, the viral-contagion theory of guns.

Almost as strongly supported as the animist theory of gun crime.

Well played.

Is this D.U.-zy worthy?

[Hoyt]

37. Well, I see you are back responding to me after stomping off. I liked it better before.

[PavePusher]

40. Sorry, you just keep topping yourself.

I'll try to quit again...

[rl6214]

31. And the hits just keep on coming from you

Like you pretend to know what is going on in EVERYONES mind all the time.

[Atypical Liberal]

41. Never heard of the blog - found the article via reddit.com n/t

[X_Digger]

46. I know this is a foreign concpet to you..

But in order to counter a point, you have to do... *gasp* research!

How many incidents involving concealed carriers have been reported to police (campus or otherwise) on the campuses where it's not restricted? Hm?

Saying, "Waah, I don't like the source!" is not an effective counter-argument.

[Hoyt]

49. How many times have campus packers had to use a gun on campus?

[eqfan592]

53. Given that DGU's are very hard to track...

...especially in situations where no shots are fired and the attacker runs off, nobody is really sure. Though you are very well aware of that, I think, and re just trying to be cute.

[Bold Lib]

52. Are you saying that there HAVE been problems with legal concealed carry on the

campuses that allow it? Please, cite those problems.

[one-eyed fat man]

58. Gonna ban the ROTC too?

They have been contaminating colleges with guns since before VMI fought at New Market.

[Euromutt]

59. That's a remarkable, and quite revealing, statement

It's not about how many people have been shot. It's about contaminating colleges with guns.

I've increasingly been coming across statements to this effect on this forum: that permitting licensed carry on campus will "degreade," "demean" and "contaminate" higher education. When you say "It's not about how many people have been shot," that's a very strong indication that you've tacitly conceded the public safety argument, and indeed, any argument that involves objective measurements. All you've got left is that you find the idea of campus carry subjectively distasteful. And that's just not a good enough reason to deprive people of their personal freedoms.

[X_Digger]

61. I'm sure it's the Robert Bork 'moral harm' principle in action..

As writer Dan Baum said in a recent Harper's article (August, 2010)..

.....My friends who are appalled by the thought of widespread concealed weapons aren't impressed by this argument, or by the research demonstrating no ill effects of the shall-issue revolution. "I don't care," said one. "I don't feel safe knowing that people are walking around with guns. What about my right to feel safe? Doesn't that count for anything?"

Robert Bork tried out that argument in 1971, in defense of prosecuting such victimless crimes as drug abuse, writing in the Indiana Law Journal that “knowledge that an activity is taking place is a harm to those who find it profoundly immoral.”

It’s as bad an argument now as it was then. We may not like it that other people are doing things we revile—smoking pot, enjoying pornography, making gay love, or carrying a gun—but if we aren’t adversely affected by it, the Constitution and common decency argue for leaving it alone. My friend may feel less safe because people are wearing concealed guns, but the data suggest she isn't less safe....

[Euromutt]

65. It may also owe something to FDR...

...who listed "freedom from fear" as one of his "Four Freedoms" in his 1941 State of the Union address. He, in turn, owed it to some deep-rooted New England Puritan thinking, as the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony recognized a "freedom from fear" as far back as the 17th century.

But while I see that this idea has appeal in principle, it has some serious drawbacks in practice. The most obvious is that feeling safe (or unsafe) is by no means the same as being safe. You may be able to make yourself feel safer by metaphorically sticking your head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge reality, but that doesn't actually make you safer. Conversely, it's quite feasible to get worked up over something that really does not pose a credible threat to you.

And that brings us to the fundamental hypocrisy of people who appeal to their supposed "right to feel safe," which is that we invariably see that such people expect their concerns to be deferred to, whereas these same people blithely dismiss the concerns of others as "irrational fears," and often have no compunction whatsoever about insinuating that people who carry are cowards and suffer from some form of psychosis, and empirical evidence (that a permit holder misusing a gun, be it through malice or negligence, is more rare by several orders of magnitude than other forms of violent crime) can go take a powder.

[beevul]

68. Its eerily similar to...

Its eerily similar to this one:

"I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns."


Is it not?

[rrneck]

69. Partisan blather.

I'm no big fan of guns on campus and I have perfectly good reasons for it. But my reasons aren't good enough to ban the practice. ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x376125 )

Universities are possibly the last bastion of liberalism in this country, followed closely by trendy coffee joints. Most of all the wailing and gnashing if teeth is about taking coup in the culture war.

[pnwmom]

15. And how many of them are in Utah, where students

drink, on the average, one drink per week? As opposed to all the rest of the states where more than 40% of students engage in binge drinking?

[eqfan592]

19. A fair number no doubt...

..which doesn't change the fact that even at campuses outside of Utah it still hasn't proven to be a problem.

[pnwmom]

21. It hasn't been in place outside for Utah long enough to know. n/t

[eqfan592]

22. We've already had this talk...

....Colorado State has had it for going on 8 years now, among others. That's plenty long enough to get some idea of what the ramifications might be. Something to keep in mind is that in a free society the burden of proof rests on those who wish to restrict the rights of people that such a restriction is necessary. To date, no such evidence has been presented that warrants the continuation of these "gun free zone" policies.

[PavePusher]

28. Lying or wilful ignorance?

Which is it you are commiting to?

[Euromutt]

63. Washington state has been "shall issue" since 1961...

...and carrying a firearm on the campus of a state-funded institution of higher learning is at worst a disciplinary offense, not a criminal one. And even so, such prohibitions don't ever seem to have resulted in anyone being expelled or fired, very probably because that would give the person in question standing to file suit against the regulations as being in violation of Art. I, Section 24 of the state constitution. (Privately owned and operated colleges are, of course a different matter.)

[Atypical Liberal]

42. How is a 21-year-old on campus any different than one on campus?

The fact of the matter is, we already know that CCW permit holders are hyper-law abiding, hardly ever being convicted for any sort of crime, let alone firearm crime.

These kinds of people are unlikely to be involved in alcohol crimes, either.

[WatsonT]

71. Keep moving that goalpost

At any point will you no longer be able to come up with an excuse for why all these dire predictions about guns fail to come true?

[provis99]

16. heres one.

http://gbgm-umc.org/mission/news/yoonmw3.html

[DonP]

17. A 12 year old story on a on a campus that doesn't allow CCW?

That's relevant, isn't it. The first tip that there's something wrong is "Janet Reno said ...".

I couldn't even tell if the shooting was on or off campus.

[provis99]

24. IU does allow CCW. I had a CCW at IU.

And I was two blocks away when the Korean student got blown away on campus.

[lawodevolution]

34. Link to info about this happening on campus please

[DonP]

54. No, actually they don't and they didn't in 1999 either

IU is a gun free campus and is proud of their zero tolerance policy toward both students and faculty and employees.

So either you were breaking the University rules or let's just say your "memory is fuzzy" about the rules at IU.

But since this incident has nothing to do with CCW and didn't occur on campus your story is actually pretty irrelevant.

[eqfan592]

18. Ummm, sorry, but how is that at all related to the OP?

A drive by shooting by some white supremacists is the sort of thing that could happen with or without concealed carry on campus.

[provis99]

25. so moving the goal posts is your response.

Ok, well Im done with you, then.

[PavePusher]

29. You psot a story that has nothing to do with a CCW, and bitch about "moving the goal posts"?

That's fucking rich.

Your lies are becoming tiresome. And we are done with you.

[lawodevolution]

35. Ask provis99 to put up a link that indicates the victim was on campus when this happened so far this

One explains they were near campus and the shooting spree was a multi state event not an on campus shooting

http://www.interpretermagazine.org/umns/intlnews_archive.asp?ptid=&story=%7B0AE2099D-F07D-4F7A-BDD6-F0EE08E11C77%7D&mid=881

[eqfan592]

32. WTF are you talking about???

Where in the story you posted did it mention CCW being a factor????

[lawodevolution]

33. Did not happen on a campus though

[Atypical Liberal]

44. Not on campus nor involving CCW

The article is not clear, but since the shooting happened in front of a church I doubt it happened on a university campus. Also, since it was a drive-by shooting, it is unlikely that the shooter had a CCW permit.

After Googling, it does not seem that Yoon was on campus, and I can find no evidence of the shooter having a CCW permit.

[Euromutt]

66. No, it did happen on campus, technically

However, the IU campus is rather large, and traversed by a couple of arterial roads, one of which is the road (E 3rd St) on which the shooting occurred. The Korean United Methodist Church is within the bounds of the campus (SW corner of E 3rd St and S Clifton Ave); Google Maps shows the Bloomington Islamic Center and the Lutheran Campus Ministry Elca are both less than a block away, also on campus.

But you're right about the shooter, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Nathaniel_Smith">Ben Smith. For starters, he was from the Chicago area, and though he'd attended IU in Bloomington (which is probably how he'd become familiar with the location of the KUMC and the layout of the IU campus), at the time of the shooting spree, it was barely three months past his 21st birthday. He could conceivably have held an Indiana non-resident permit, but it seems highly unlikely.

Moreover, Smith started his killing spree by hijacking a minivan at a gas station in Ina, IL, and shot people in northern Chicago and Skokie on July 2nd, and Springfield, Decatur and Urbana on July 3rd before committing the shooting in Bloomington on July 4th. This was emphatically not a case of some CCW permit holder losing his cool and shooting someone with a handgun he happened to have on him; the guy was white supremacist prick on a two-state rampage, and he probably deliberately drove by the KUMC on Sunday morning because he knew there'd be Koreans there for him to shoot.

[Euromutt]

67. A shooting that was part of a spree that started in Chicago two days before?

Smith had already shot six Orthdox Jews in northern Chicago and a black man (former Northwestern basketball coach Ricky Birdsong, who was killed) in Skokie the preceding Friday; then two more black men in Springfield, IL, a black minister in Decatur and a Taiwanese immigrant in Urbana on Saturday, before finally fatally shooting Yoon on Sunday morning, all in drive-bys from a stolen minivan (which is probably why he only managed to kill two of the twelve people he managed to hit).

Smith had attended IU the preceding academic year, and probably decided to drive by the Korean United Methodist Church because he was familiar with its location and knew there'd be Asians for him to shoot at on Sunday morning. It's supremely unlikely that Smith had an Indiana non-resident CCW permit, since he was barely three months past his 21st birthday at the time, but even if he had, this wasn't a killing that occurred because he happened to be carrying a handgun. The racist piece of shit drove from 150 miles from Urbana, IL to be in that particular place at that particular time.

[MyrnaLoy]

20. how many

reported violent gun crime before they were allowed? Very few.

[eqfan592]

23. Because the only type of violent crime that counts...

...is gun crime, right? I mean, somebody getting raped at knife point doesn't count as much as somebody raped at gun point, am I right??

[ileus]

26. Of course none have....there's nothing to report.

[WatsonT]

70. All the mountains of evidence saying concealed carry does not increase gun-crime rates

Hasn't persuaded the fanatical followers of brady.

Why should any new statistics do so?

They don't care about facts. They are operating on faith. You may as well provide factual evidence for evolution to a creationist for all the good it will do.