[ToTheLeft]

You guys are actually seriously considering this????

I'm all about the right to own guns, but just using some common sense would tell you not to allow them on a college campus.

I've seen enough guys almost dead from fireworks, potato guns, dry ice bombs, and other assorted home made explosives on a college campus to know better than to put a loaded gun around loaded kids.

I realize LU isn't exactly party school central, but come on.

Have you ever been shot by a potato gun? That crap hurts! My friends loaded a rolled up pair of socks in the potato gun and hit me and it hurt like crazy!

[Hold My Own]

I've seen enough guys almost dead from fireworks, potato guns, dry ice bombs, and other assorted home made explosives on a college campus to know better than to put a loaded gun around loaded kids.

I realize LU isn't exactly party school central, but come on.

I want to come to your parties...

[JDUB]

that sounds awesome. i'm in for those parties!

[Realist]

I wasn't talking just one party, more like hundreds over the span of college. But don't drop artillery shells in hollowed out beer bottles on a side street next to campus. I decided it wasn't one of my brighter moves after shrapnel cuts in jeans and 8 cop cars were looking for me and a few others.

[Schfourteenteen]

You guys are actually seriously considering this????

I'm all about the right to own guns, but just using some common sense would tell you not to allow them on a college campus.

I've seen enough guys almost dead from fireworks, potato guns, dry ice bombs, and other assorted home made explosives on a college campus to know better than to put a loaded gun around loaded kids.

I realize LU isn't exactly party school central, but come on.

Have you ever been shot by a potato gun? That crap hurts! My friends loaded a rolled up pair of socks in the potato gun and hit me and it hurt like crazy!

I would like to see that.

[asforme]

I wasn't talking just one party, more like hundreds over the span of college. But don't drop artillery shells in hollowed out beer bottles on a side street next to campus. I decided it wasn't one of my brighter moves after shrapnel cuts in jeans and 8 cop cars were looking for me and a few others.

And you're one who we should be listening to about campus policy? Because of your stupidity you are trying to take away the ability for responsible citizens to protect themselves and their families? I do not go to stupid parties, I go to class, work and then I go home to my wife and son. And when our school is a giant collection of evangelicals and a prime target for terrorism or other acts of violence I want to be able to do what I can to make it home so I can continue to provide for my wife and son. It's not all about you and your college party experience. Honestly I hope you are arrested and soon. Of course, someone with as little regard for safety and the law as you do probably wouldn't be affected by the removal of your legal right to carry a gun. If you wanted to, you would do so anyway just like any other irresponsible criminal.

Irresponsible criminals are unaffected by this weak rule. They don't care what the rules are because they do what they want anyway. Responsible citizens who have gone through the bureaucracy of getting a concealed carry permit are the only ones who respect and are affected by this rule at all. And they have every right to provide for their own protection. The supreme court ruled that police are not responsible to protect citizens. With that precedent, removing a citizens ability to protect themselves is a death sentence should anyone with disregard for the rules decide to commit an act of violence.

I cannot believe your absolute selfishness that you would have the University strip me of the right to protect myself and ensure that I can continue to provide for my family so you can attempt to mitigate the dangers of your reckless lifestyle. Some of us are here to learn and our safety should be priority over your parties.

[PAmedic]

^^^

uh, it should be noted that Realist is from Winthrop

hence: "Winthrop Fan" in his avatar.

and I don't believe him to be stupid. that was more than a little over the top. You can disagree w/ people w/ out resorting to personal attacks.

[ToTheLeft]

I wasn't talking just one party, more like hundreds over the span of college. But don't drop artillery shells in hollowed out beer bottles on a side street next to campus. I decided it wasn't one of my brighter moves after shrapnel cuts in jeans and 8 cop cars were looking for me and a few others.

And you're one who we should be listening to about campus policy? Because of your stupidity you are trying to take away the ability for responsible citizens to protect themselves and their families? I do not go to stupid parties, I go to class, work and then I go home to my wife and son. And when our school is a giant collection of evangelicals and a prime target for terrorism or other acts of violence I want to be able to do what I can to make it home so I can continue to provide for my wife and son. It's not all about you and your college party experience. Honestly I hope you are arrested and soon. Of course, someone with as little regard for safety and the law as you do probably wouldn't be affected by the removal of your legal right to carry a gun. If you wanted to, you would do so anyway just like any other irresponsible criminal.

Irresponsible criminals are unaffected by this weak rule. They don't care what the rules are because they do what they want anyway. Responsible citizens who have gone through the bureaucracy of getting a concealed carry permit are the only ones who respect and are affected by this rule at all. And they have every right to provide for their own protection. The supreme court ruled that police are not responsible to protect citizens. With that precedent, removing a citizens ability to protect themselves is a death sentence should anyone with disregard for the rules decide to commit an act of violence.

I cannot believe your absolute selfishness that you would have the University strip me of the right to protect myself and ensure that I can continue to provide for my family so you can attempt to mitigate the dangers of your reckless lifestyle. Some of us are here to learn and our safety should be priority over your parties.

If I ever need more reasons to reinforce why I don't support gun laws and why I am not a conservative... I will pull up this post.

And guns don't provide for your family. You working does. So stop worrying so much about where you can show off your heat and worry more about that family and making money for them. I would be more worried about sending my family to places where there are young adults legally able to haul around a loaded weapon that could kill them in a split second. But you keep fighting for those gun laws! I mean, WWJD, right?

[Rocketfan]

I wasn't talking just one party, more like hundreds over the span of college. But don't drop artillery shells in hollowed out beer bottles on a side street next to campus. I decided it wasn't one of my brighter moves after shrapnel cuts in jeans and 8 cop cars were looking for me and a few others.

And you're one who we should be listening to about campus policy? Because of your stupidity you are trying to take away the ability for responsible citizens to protect themselves and their families? I do not go to stupid parties, I go to class, work and then I go home to my wife and son. And when our school is a giant collection of evangelicals and a prime target for terrorism or other acts of violence I want to be able to do what I can to make it home so I can continue to provide for my wife and son. It's not all about you and your college party experience. Honestly I hope you are arrested and soon. Of course, someone with as little regard for safety and the law as you do probably wouldn't be affected by the removal of your legal right to carry a gun. If you wanted to, you would do so anyway just like any other irresponsible criminal.

Irresponsible criminals are unaffected by this weak rule. They don't care what the rules are because they do what they want anyway. Responsible citizens who have gone through the bureaucracy of getting a concealed carry permit are the only ones who respect and are affected by this rule at all. And they have every right to provide for their own protection. The supreme court ruled that police are not responsible to protect citizens. With that precedent, removing a citizens ability to protect themselves is a death sentence should anyone with disregard for the rules decide to commit an act of violence.

I cannot believe your absolute selfishness that you would have the University strip me of the right to protect myself and ensure that I can continue to provide for my family so you can attempt to mitigate the dangers of your reckless lifestyle. Some of us are here to learn and our safety should be priority over your parties.

How old are you? First your fighting to carry a gun on campus yet want to ensure you provide for your family??? Either your a drama queen/freshman or your 35 and can't communicate effectively. One of those options i can simply write off due to age, the other would be pretty embarrasing.

[asforme]

^^^

uh, it should be noted that Realist is from Winthrop

hence: "Winthrop Fan" in his avatar.

and I don't believe him to be stupid. that was more than a little over the top. You can disagree w/ people w/ out resorting to personal attacks.

Regardless of where he's from, he's using his irresponsibility as an argument for taking away my rights. He wasn't just sting a generalization that could be argued in the realm of ideas without referencing any individual, he was using personal experiences which are evidence of gross irresponsibility and criminal behavior. A criminals perceived right to party and be irresponsible does not come before my right to self defense. If LU has a problem with drinking and partying, than that is a separate issue that should be strictly dealt with in a way that only punishes the irresponsible and does not affect those of us who see school as a learning environment and simply want to stay safe.

[Rocketfan]

I would be more worried about sending my family to places where there are young adults legally able to haul around a loaded weapon that could kill them in a split second.

Don't go to Walmart then.....

[ToTheLeft]

I would be more worried about sending my family to places where there are young adults legally able to haul around a loaded weapon that could kill them in a split second.

Don't go to Walmart then.....

I know the peril I put myself in when I walk through those automatic doors. It's scary.

[asforme]

And guns don't provide for your family. You working does. So stop worrying so much about where you can show off your heat and worry more about that family and making money for them. I would be more worried about sending my family to places where there are young adults legally able to haul around a loaded weapon that could kill them in a split second. But you keep fighting for those gun laws! I mean, WWJD, right?

Guns don't provide anything, they are inanimate objects, effective tools for self defense. Whenever I am not on campus, I equip myself with one to increase the chances that I will not be victimized by an act of violence. I equip my home with smoke detectors and fire extinguishers so that I am not killed in a fire, and I wear my seatbelt so that I am not killed in a car accident. They are all safety measures to ensure that I can wake up tomorrow morning and go to work and provide for my family. I thought the idea of ensuring my safety so I could continue to be alive and able to work was a pretty simple concept.

Prohibiting guns is like prohibiting fire extinguishers or air-bags in cars. They do have their own dangers but it is better than the alternative of having no choice but to hope not to be victimized.

[asforme]

I would be more worried about sending my family to places where there are young adults legally able to haul around a loaded weapon that could kill them in a split second.

Don't go to Walmart then.....

Or any restaurant, shopping center, movie theater, grocery store, public street ect...

In Virginia chances are that one out of every hundred people are carrying a concealed handgun.

[RagingTireFire]

I had actually planned to abandon this thread since it was going nowhere quickly but I ended up back here somehow --dang 'last post' button -- and couldn't let this little electronic diahrea go by unflushed.

Furthermore, I doubt that you can back up that statement regarding schools in Utah. Utah already has one of the higher suicide rates in the country -- particularly among young people -- so I doubt that you can produce a statistic that says having guns available hasn't a contributing factor.

While I was in Utah last year, I noticed an abundance of signs for drug rehab centers, specifically for meth addicts. Some of them were quite disheartening, directed mainly at mothers ("Another blatant sign of a Utah Meth User" with a picture of a diaper bag). You're trying to imply that because Utah has fewer gun control laws, the suicide rate has increased, which is simply not true. On page 64 of the PDF at www.gunfacts.info, it shows that availability of guns, or the increase of guns, does not increase suicides.

No, I was referring to the actual suicide rate in Utah. As for the website you're quoting, it's not exactly the most objective source for information available. In fact, it's run by a guy who describes himself as a "political provocateur".

and the fact that there's no way that any person could unholster their weapon -- particularly if it's concealed -- and be prepared to use it on an attacker if said attacker were not at least 18-20 feet away.

With proper training and practice, a concealed firearm can be unholstered very quickly. But you would like to disarm people because they "might" not be able to use it, and therefore, would never need it.

This is actually based on law enforcement information. Anyone with a criminal justice background can tell you that a suspect can cover a distance of 18-21 feet -- depending on the source -- before a trained police officer can unholster and use their weapon against them. And you expect Joe Citizen to be able to get a gun out of his sock in less time than that? Please.

It's not a matter of having a dirty harry fantasy. And how dare you imply that I would ever wish another incident similar to VT's occur, ever again. I take owning, carrying, and operating a firearm very seriously.

it's the ability to defend myself against evil should evil try to take advantage of me

You can't tell me that you take this seriously when you talk like a rejected page from a John Milius script.

[asforme]

No, I was referring to the actual suicide rate in Utah. As for the website you're quoting, it's not exactly the most objective source for information available. In fact, it's run by a guy who describes himself as a "political provocateur".

Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US and nobody's allowed to have a gun in Japan. People who want to commit suicide will, with whatever tools are handy.


And please elaborate on how the possibility that a gun may not be able to be used in self defense justifies removing the option. If someone isn't guaranteed a 100% success rate than they should have no choice but to cower and beg for their life? Firearms are used defensively in the US 2.5 Million times per year and usually all that is necessary is brandishing before a would be attacker changes his mind. Are you suggesting all those people would have been better off victimized because they may have not been able to draw in time?

[ATrain]

If someone wants to kill themselves, whether or not they have a gun is going to make little difference. No gun, then stab yourself...no knife, jump off a bridge/building, run into traffic and hope you get hit, use a razor to slit your throat/wrists, drive your car off a cliff, down a whole bottle of pills...if someone's desparate to end it all, lack of a gun isn't going to stop them.

[Baldspot]

91 posts so far but vicarious liability and the increased rates to find an insurance carrier to cover the exposure is as far as you need to go on this subject before realizing its a bad idea.

I love guns, just not the risk exposure.

[asforme]

91 posts so far but vicarious liability and the increased rates to find an insurance carrier to cover the exposure is as far as you need to go on this subject before realizing its a bad idea.

I love guns, just not the risk exposure.

Funny how that isn't an issue for any of the other local businesses where I carry all the time. When was the last time you heard of a mass shooting in walmart? Blue Ridge Community College seems to be able to find insurance, as do all the schools in Utah.

My homeowners insurance never asked if I had guns, but they did ask if I had a pool or a trampoline. Funny, we have several pools here, and we're building a freaking ski slope.

But if I recall correctly Virginia Tech did just spend quite a bit of money to try and preempt some lawsuits. If anything is a liability it is enforced victimization.

[Rocketfan]

If someone wants to kill themselves, whether or not they have a gun is going to make little difference. No gun, then stab yourself...no knife, jump off a bridge/building, run into traffic and hope you get hit, use a razor to slit your throat/wrists, drive your car off a cliff, down a whole bottle of pills...if someone's desparate to end it all, lack of a gun isn't going to stop them.

The rainbow warrior ^ speaks the truth.

[RagingTireFire]

If someone wants to kill themselves, whether or not they have a gun is going to make little difference. No gun, then stab yourself...no knife, jump off a bridge/building, run into traffic and hope you get hit, use a razor to slit your throat/wrists, drive your car off a cliff, down a whole bottle of pills...if someone's desparate to end it all, lack of a gun isn't going to stop them.

I'm not arguing that point. However, most other methods of suicide are a lot more survivable than suicide by gunshot. They also take a good bit longer so there is a much better chance of outside intervention to save their life.

[asforme]

If someone wants to kill themselves, whether or not they have a gun is going to make little difference. No gun, then stab yourself...no knife, jump off a bridge/building, run into traffic and hope you get hit, use a razor to slit your throat/wrists, drive your car off a cliff, down a whole bottle of pills...if someone's desparate to end it all, lack of a gun isn't going to stop them.

I'm not arguing that point. However, most other methods of suicide are a lot more survivable than suicide by gunshot. They also take a good bit longer so there is a much better chance of outside intervention to save their life.

But removing the rights of permit holders to carry for self defense makes sure that in the event of an attack there is no chance for the victims to save their own lives. It sounds like you're suggesting that we should remove the ability of law abiding citizens to defend their own lives that they value and wish to protect for the slim chance that someone who does not value their life can be rescued because they had to resort to some other method of suicide. That is assuming that a gun rule has any affect on the ability of a suicidal person to get a gun. But since 90%* of suicides are committed in the home, the campus-carry rule likely has little to no effect.

*“Youth and Adolescent Suicide: A Guide for Educators,” Oregon Resiliency Project, University of Oregon, 2003; After Suicide: A Ray of Hope for Those Left Behind, Eleanora Betsy Ross, 2001

[RagingTireFire]

. But since 90%* of suicides are committed in the home, the campus-carry rule likely has little to no effect.

What are dorm rooms if not temporary homes?

[asforme]

. But since 90%* of suicides are committed in the home, the campus-carry rule likely has little to no effect.

What are dorm rooms if not temporary homes?

I do not believe that dorms were included in that statistic, but the source material does not reveal the details. Regardless, there is no substantial evidence to suggest that increased availability of firearms leads to increased suicide rates.

Studying the effects of the Brady bill requiring background checks and waiting periods for gun sales, the AMA concluded that implementation of the Brady Act has no associations any with reductions in homicide rates or overall suicide rates. But then they claim "However, the pattern of implementation of the Brady Act does not permit a reliable analysis of a potential effect of reductions in the flow of guns from treatment-state gun dealers into secondary markets." (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/284/5/585)

So a study just released by the University of Michigan analyzed these secondary markets in the form of gun shows, which tend to be highly unregulated in one of the areas focused on by the study, Texas. They concluded "Our results [] provide no evidence to suggest that gun shows lead to a substantial increase in the number of homicides or suicides in either California or Texas. If anything, we find evidence of a modest decline in the number of homicides following the average gun show in Texas" (http://closup.umich.edu/research/workin ... -final.pdf)

Both reliable studies from reputable organizations. If you can find any real data that supports otherwise (and does not come from the Brady Campaign or the Violence Policy Institute, both notorious for data manipulation to support gun control) than this may be something worth discussing, but right now it is simply a hypothetical with no evidence to suggest that it's even an issue.

[Schfourteenteen]

I go to class, work and then I go home to my wife and son. And when our school is a giant collection of evangelicals and a prime target for terrorism or other acts of violence I want to be able to do what I can to make it home so I can continue to provide for my wife and son.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I imagine next time you see a plane coming at you you should get your gun out and shoot the plane.