Why is concealed carry illegal in universities in America?

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:19 am

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/16/vtech. ... index.html

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:35 am

Mix a gun culture and widespread neurosis and this is the inevitable result. It's tragic but it will keep happening until such time as Americans wake up to the fact that there's something hideously wrong with that culture.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:40 am

I'd like to see 3 or 4 more of these events before the next election.

The US gun lobby needs to be beaten into submission by outraged ordinary people making their politicians do something about this. I'm sure once the gun lobby was defiantly stood up to then you'd find they were not as powerful as imagined.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:41 am

Dan,

Uh, this is the result of some guy who couldn't handle the stresses of his life...not anything about what you said.

America isn't a gun culture. That's the problem. If it were, this would've been prevented. But instead, the kid shot like 60 people and killed 33...all were defenseless.

Taking away our means of defense obviously doesn't create peace, and today is proof of that.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:45 am

By the way, the state that I live in (Wisconsin) is one of the last 2 that doesn't allow concealed carry at all. Every other state allows it with a permit. I sent a letter to my governor today...I hope others would do the same, to shut up the people that want to take our rights away.

Guns don't kill people, people do. Gun laws don't stop anyone from attaining a weapon, they merely stop people from defending themselves against someone who breaks the law.

This shit needs to change, and by myself I can't change much...

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:04 am

Right, so if everyone carried a firearm we'd be safer? What complete and utter lunacy.

Cory Duchesne · Post by **Cory Duchesne** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:05 am

Scott wrote: By the way, the state that I live in (Wisconsin) is one of the last 2 that doesn't allow concealed carry at all. Every other state allows it with a permit. I sent a letter to my governor today...I hope others would do the same, to shut up the people that want to take our rights away.

Charlton Heston would be proud.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:12 am

I sent a letter to my governor today...I hope others would do the same, to shut up the people that want to take our rights away.

Guns don't kill people, people do. Gun laws don't stop anyone from attaining a weapon, they merely stop people from defending themselves against someone who breaks the law.

These are the standard meaningless clichÃ©s trotted out every time this topic comes up.

Just how common is it for a gun toting civilian to be saved by them using a gun on an intruder attempting to harm them? Fuck all Iâ€™d imagine. There would be far more lives lost by accident, suicide, or temporary domestic rage.

Just what danger is the US under at present in terms of foreign invasion? - zero.

Gun laws can be geared to stop people from attaining a weapon, though in the US it would take quite a number of years to bring this about. Without doubt significant criminals will always be able to obtain guns, but owning a gun is really of little protection in that case. Less significant criminals, like drug addicts, would eventually find it harder to obtain a gun, so homicides should decrease.

The real reason people want to own guns is that it makes them feel powerful. Shooting a gun is apparently a good feeling. For me, it has been so long since Iâ€™ve shot one, Iâ€™ve forgotten what it is like.

We just have to face up to the fact that all freedoms come at a cost. In a world where individuals are allowed to pursue interests way outside of historical norms, then more and more people will lose control of their minds. The only way to limit their damage is by rational society agreed controls - otherwise innocents will pay the price, just as they always do in these shooting rampages.

I also think (intuitively) gun ownership and the culture it promotes has something to do with the yanks over-aggressiveness in foreign actions. They are careless and arrogant in the manner in which they treat people in the countries they occupy.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:04 pm

Dan,

Right, so if everyone carried a firearm we'd be safer? What complete and utter lunacy.

If I carried a firearm, and someone came into my classroom shooting people, the rest of my classmates would be much safer with me there, than with me gone or without a firearm.

Concealed carry permits aren't given to people with dirty backgrounds. Yeah, I'd be worried if everyone could carry around their weapons. Of course some people shouldn't have them. Everyone that does have them should be properly trained before being allowed to carry.

But we should be allowed. It's complete and utter lunacy to think that not being able to defend ourselves makes us safer. Especially in light of what happened today.

Seriously, Dan, what a fucking joke.

Cory,

Michael Moore would be proud. :)

Jamesh,

These are the standard meaningless clichÃ©s trotted out every time this topic comes up.

Read them again and rethink your position. They aren't meaningless.

Just how common is it for a gun toting civilian to be saved by them using a gun on an intruder attempting to harm them?

The mall incident just about a month or two ago was stopped because of off duty police officers who just happened to be in the mall with their weapons concealed.

Fuck all Iâ€™d imagine. There would be far more lives lost by accident, suicide, or temporary domestic rage.

Really? Or are you just speculating? You might want to research the statistics before spouting off. They're the exact opposite of what you think.

Just what danger is the US under at present in terms of foreign invasion? - zero.

Hmm...that strikes me as odd when I see a documentary of a Pakistani tribe shouting "Death to Americans!" Or when I see the actions and rhetoric of Iran.

Gun laws can be geared to stop people from attaining a weapon, though in the US it would take quite a number of years to bring this about. Without doubt significant criminals will always be able to obtain guns, but owning a gun is really of little protection in that case. Less significant criminals, like drug addicts, would eventually find it harder to obtain a gun, so homicides should decrease.

Like you said, criminals can always attain guns. I can MAKE an M-16 in my shop for just a couple hundred bucks. "Owning a gun is little protection"? How do you figure that? When you've got some guy in a room with you, shooting at people, how can a gun be said to be of little protection? You could stop him from shooting everyone including yourself with that gun!

The real reason people want to own guns is that it makes them feel powerful. Shooting a gun is apparently a good feeling. For me, it has been so long since Iâ€™ve shot one, Iâ€™ve forgotten what it is like.

Well I just shot my WASR (legal semi auto version of an AK) about a month ago...yeah I haven't felt compelled to shoot it again. I don't get the feeling powerful idea.

We just have to face up to the fact that all freedoms come at a cost. In a world where individuals are allowed to pursue interests way outside of historical norms, then more and more people will lose control of their minds. The only way to limit their damage is by rational society agreed controls - otherwise innocents will pay the price, just as they always do in these shooting rampages.

But your stance is that we shouldn't be allowed to concealed carry. You think that will stop innocents from paying the price??? That's exactly what happened today. No one was carrying because the school specifically made a policy regarding it, and thus, 60 some people were shot by ONE person.

Do you think that one person gave a damn about any laws?

So, you see...it's kind of pointless to argue for gun control by saying that it keeps innocents safe. Today is proof that it doesn't. I don't see how this is hard to understand.

I also think (intuitively) gun ownership and the culture it promotes has something to do with the yanks over-aggressiveness in foreign actions. They are careless and arrogant in the manner in which they treat people in the countries they occupy.

Yes, that does sound highly intuitive, and not very well thought out.

Gretchen · Post by **Gretchen** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:09 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:Right, so if everyone carried a firearm we'd be safer? What complete and utter lunacy.

It is not so much an argument about everyone carrying, as the fact that forbidding weapons only renders helpless those who would never kill anyone except in self-defense. The criminals and those who have obvious psychological disorders find them easily enough through pawn shops, black market, theft, private sale and gun shows.

The fear of never knowing whether or not someone is "carrying" is enough to stop some people, not all - some are just bloody crazy. However, if guns are completely banned, those who have access, that shouldn't, feel no restraint in doing whatever they please.

I'm not sure it would have mattered whether someone was carrying or not in this particular case as the gunman was obviously manic and suicidal. I am utterly amazed that a guy could kill that many people with two 9mm guns that quickly. While watching the news, I was waiting for an assault weapon to be announced. Very sad state of affairs.

Guns are not the enemy folks, people are. Not that he could have killed as many, but he could have fatally stabbed a few people here and there, and it still would have been a tragedy. So what do we do? The media will exploit it for months, the university will be sued by everyone, some other person with similar psychological disorders will learn how much notoriety one can get if they create such a stir - getting more than 15 minutes worth of fame, and the university will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on security measures only for it to happen at a different institution that is not prepared.

But James, in America, we don't have our armies guarding our streets as in many other countries in the world. Our freedoms prevent splinter groups from civil warfare, unlike many others. I think Americans are much less likely to have this culture with which you speak than many others who if left alone would continue to kill each other and move to take over other countries if they could.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:29 pm

Passthrough,

Good to see someone actually thinking about the issue...

So what do we do? The media will exploit it for months, the university will be sued by everyone, some other person with similar psychological disorders will learn how much notoriety one can get if they create such a stir - getting more than 15 minutes worth of fame, and the university will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on security measures only for it to happen at a different institution that is not prepared.

What do we do? Prepare ourselves.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:41 pm

It is pointless talking to you religiously minded nuts about topics like this - both of you still carry huge mental barriers to rational thinking as a result of the totality of your experiences in religious groups.

You just can't see the big picture, only your little individual one.

"Guns are not the enemy folks, people are."

This statement has zero rational meaning. It is a bit like the rationalisations the religious use when disaster strikes. "God choose to kill my wife in a disaster, because that was gods plan".

ahh, what is the point anyway, you brainless clods can keep the highest homicide rates in the western world for all I care.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:12 pm

Haha, okay?

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:42 pm

Scott's on to something here, actually. A city in Georgia (Kennesaw) used to have a law on the books that every homeowner had to have a gun - it had one of the lowest crime rates anywhere in the country.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:33 pm

A city in Georgia (Kennesaw) used to have a law on the books that every homeowner had to have a gun - it had one of the lowest crime rates anywhere in the country.

Completely meaningless. So do north european countries like Sweden (have low crime rates with extremely restrictive gun laws).

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:42 pm

Actually it's not completely meaningless. It goes to show you that gun ownership doesn't equal increased crime rates...thus negating your whole argument.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:45 pm

Actually it's not completely meaningless. It goes to show you that gun ownership doesn't equal increased crime rates...

How the hell do you get that from this comment

A city in Georgia (Kennesaw) used to have a law on the books that every homeowner had to have a gun - it had one of the lowest crime rates anywhere in the country.

Why did they remove the law then? Not that it means anything anyway.

Not that I am talking about the broader topic of crime rates anyway, but the killing of people - there is a huge difference. The US compared to other democracies clearly shows that overall neither crime rates nor the killing of innocents decreases with gun ownership.

You are a total fuckwit at times Scott. Shouldn't we be working towards an ideal world - could guns held by the masses play a role in such a world??? obviously not.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:12 pm

Why did they remove the law then? Not that it means anything anyway.

Because some moron with a little power was scared of guns, and wanted to take away our rights as Americans? It does mean something. Reread what she wrote. "Had one of the lowest crime rates..."

Not that I am talking about the broader topic of crime rates anyway, but the killing of people - there is a huge difference. The US compared to other democracies clearly shows that overall neither crime rates nor the killing of innocents decreases with gun ownership.

Does it? Show me these stats.

You are a total fuckwit at times Scott.

Why are you being rude?

Shouldn't we be working towards an ideal world - could guns held by the masses play a role in such a world??? obviously not.

Your stance shows that you don't trust the masses. So pull your head out of your ass and think for a second about the cliche, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

If you want to work toward an ideal world, rethink how you're going to do it. Right now, your methods are those of a fuckwit.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:39 pm

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

You still cognitively think of things as individual things - things of their own right. So you class people as agents of free will "people kill people" with regard to the causes that cause people to kill in the first place. It is a fucking real shallow way to look at things, and ever so typical of all those of the religious bent.

So clown what are you going to do to people to make them never want to kill a person.

Lets say you spring me fisting your sister and she is crying out in pain. You've been out to a party and are drunk.

What would you do?

What if you later found out she was into that sort of thing and you just didn't know it. Would you then kill her as well?

The trouble with guns is that they allow an emotionally distraught person to pronounce death upon another without due regard to whether it is deserved or not. How often do you hear of people who regret their actions once their immediate emotional turmoil has subsided.

You know what -for the hell of it, I am going to regard you, and all those like you, as the CAUSE of this present crime.

sschaula · Post by **sschaula** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:55 pm

You still cognitively think of things as individual things - things of their own right. So you class people as agents of free will "people kill people" with regard to the causes that cause people to kill in the first place. It is a fucking real shallow way to look at things, and ever so typical of all those of the religious bent.

Well, I'm not religious so I don't know where that's coming from...

Of course people are agents of free will. Of course I regard the causes that cause people to kill in the first place. What are you talking about here?

So clown what are you going to do to people to make them never want to kill a person.

What can I do? Nothing of course. It's a good thing that concealed carry laws are restrictive. I don't think everyone should be able to carry a weapon...for instance, you. I would hope you're already flagged for something and that it'd be illegal for you to carry a weapon in this country. It's obvious you can't think straight.

Lets say you spring me fisting your sister and she is crying out in pain. You've been out to a party and are drunk.

What would you do?

What if you later found out she was into that sort of thing and you just didn't know it. Would you then kill her as well?

I would kill you in that moment, because I'd obviously think you were raping her. When I later found out that she liked it, I would look at her weird and not kill her, then probably apologize for what I'd done...then walk away in disgust.

The trouble with guns is that they allow an emotionally distraught person to prounce death upon another without due regard to whether it is deserved or not. How often do you hear of people who regret their actions once their immediate emotional turmoil has subsided.

This is a great point. What does this have to do with allowing people with clean records to carry a weapon? It seems to have more to do with guns, period...which is obviously something no one can control.

You know what -for the hell of it, I am going to regard you, and all those like you, as the CAUSE of this present crime.

As the cause of what happened today at Virginia Tech????

Is this clear thinking??

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:06 pm

Jamesh wrote:Lets say you spring me fisting your sister and she is crying out in pain. You've been out to a party and are drunk.

Mate, you're looking at it from the wrong perspective, in many a conservative utopia, guns are legal and fisting is banned. PROBLEM SOLVED.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:24 pm

As the cause of what happened today at Virginia Tech????

Is this clear thinking??

No (which is why I said for the hell of it). You are potentially complicate though for any future deaths, above that in which a knife killer could perform, if you, along with 100 million others, prevent rational guns laws from being introduced.

The most directly complicate are the political members of the republican party and the gun lobbyists. I hold them almost entirely responsible for these deaths - more people should take this view and express it.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:34 pm

sschaula wrote:
Why did they remove the law then? Not that it means anything anyway.
Because some moron with a little power was scared of guns, and wanted to take away our rights as Americans?

Why do Americans always think they have natural rights by dint of nothing more than their nationality? Anyway, the gun laws in that town weren't of a genuinely prescriptive nature anyway. You didn't have to own a gun. There was a number of ways you could opt out of doing so. Besides, those laws were primarily for the purpose of private home protection. There's not much of an analogy here.

It may be that in certain communities of that type such gun laws can have the effect of limiting certain forms of crime. The point is there are other ways of doing it. And it has little to do with the more general reality of the admixture of guns and neurosis in American society. This isn't a "crime" issue at bottom; it's more broadly sociological. Your arguments on this are really quite nebulous, Scott. You say not everyone should have a gun. Well, other than mental people, criminals and Jimbo, who shouldn't? That leaves almost everyone, right? So, we'll have students by the hundreds all sitting in classrooms with 45s at their hips? Will we have designated shooters like we have designated drivers? Will there be drink-toting laws? No toting over 0.5? Guys in bars everywhere all packin'? I mean, why not? What if one of them just got dumped by his wife and decides to blow a few potential cuckolders away? Someone's gotta take him down, right? Hopefully it's the designated driver who is also the designated shooter.

I also think your belief that in the sort of situation that unfolded at Virginia Tech that the shooter would have been taken down by others who were armed naive. Having everyone armed solves nothing and produces an obviously cartoonish picture of a society. What amazes me is that you don't seem utterly horrified at the very idea of having to advocate it.

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:56 pm

Anyway, the gun laws in that town weren't of a genuinely prescriptive nature anyway. You didn't have to own a gun. There was a number of ways you could opt out of doing so. Besides, those laws were primarily for the purpose of private home protection. There's not much of an analogy here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia

Kennesaw has the nickname of "Gun Town, USA" due to a city ordinance passed in 1982 [Sec 34-1a] that requires every head of household to maintain a firearm with ammunition. It was passed partly in response to a 1981 handgun ban in Morton Grove, Illinois.[read petty politics]. Kennesaw's law was amended in 1983 to exempt those who conscientiously object to owning a firearm, convicted felons, those who cannot afford a firearm, and those with a mental or physical disability that would prevent them from owning a firearm. It mentions no penalty for its violation. According to the Kennesaw Historical Society, no one has ever been charged under the law.

Criminologist and gun-control critic Gary Kleck attributes a drop of 89% in the residential burglary rate to the law (Kleck, 1991), and Kennesaw is often cited by advocates of gun ownership as evidence that gun ownership deters crime (see, for instance, this 2004 sheet of talking points from the Gun Owners Foundation). Other criminologists dispute the 89% figure, using the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting data, and find instead a small, statistically insignificant increase in burglaries after the law was passed (McDowall, Wiersema and Loftin, 1989; McDowall, Lizotte and Wiersema, 1991).

lol.

HUNTEDvsINVIS · Post by **HUNTEDvsINVIS** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:37 pm

I think we should get to the root of the problem then we will not need guns in the first place. Its called a lack of respect. The cute pop trash pop culture is a mere veneer for the underlying lack of respect for anyone or anything. That Eric kid and his friend who blew up their class mates in America a few years ago wasn't just addicted to games and full of natural hatred. That kid was actually teased and ostracised by a lot of his classmates. And for what? A few laughs at the weird guy? I am not saying this stuff is right, it is morbid and horrible, but people had better clean up their acts and their schools or kids like that will take revenge and use society's lack of respect against it.