But, not, e.g., professors of postmodern literary theory. A firm grip on reality should be a minimum requirement.
Posted on 04/12/2008 6:57:37 PM PDT by neverdem
After the North Illinois University and Virginia Tech shootings, college students must not only worry about the rising cost of tuition or whether they failed their math tests, but also whether their campuses are safe.
This need for safety has some people advocating permission to carry concealed weapons on campus, which is not permitted at the UA.
Supporters argue that "carrying" could help stop shootings on campus before they escalate.
If something were to happen and a person with a weapon was there, the aggravator could be stopped before he managed to do more harm, said Travis Robinson, member of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, a nationwide organization advocating guns on campus.
"VT had great police enforcement and the UA does too, but they're going to respond in two or three minutes, when an armed citizen can respond in two or thee seconds."
Apart from increasing the feeling of safety, allowing people to carry guns on campus acts as deterrence, he said.
"Students should have the right to defend themselves like everybody else," Robinson said.
Utah is the only state that allows concealed weapons in public universities, according to a Feb. 28 CNN.com article. The University of Utah in Salt Lake City prohibited firearms until the ban was struck down by the state Supreme Court in late 2006.
And while school officials fight to reinstate the ban, state legislators are considering a bill that would modify the law and allow people in Utah - including students - to carry loaded weapons openly, according to the article.
At least 13 other states are considering some sort of concealed-carry legislation aimed at college campuses, according to the National Conference on State Legislatures.
Noting the potential accident or misuse of guns, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement does not endorse concealed carry on campus, according to a March 8 article in The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Groups such as SCC argue that college campuses should not be any different than any other place in Arkansas.
"You don't know if the person behind you at the movie theater or the person buying milk in front of you in Wal-Mart is carrying. Campuses are not any different, " Robinson said.
"People who have permits are responsible, mature students, citizens. Do you see a problem carrying in Wal-Mart? There isn't."
In Arkansas, guns also are prohibited in police stations, jails, courthouses, polling places, government buildings, sporting events, bars, schools, airports and churches, according to the state Web site, http://state.ar.us.
But not everybody thinks like Robinson.
"In this issue, there are cons and pros, and I think that there are more cons, " said Lt. Gary Crain, public information officer for the UA Police Department.
Statistics indicate that in Arkansas, there's a small fraction of people who have permission to carry a concealed weapon. The likelihood of one of those people being in the right place at the right time is slim, and allowing guns is just bringing another weapon on campus, Crain said.
This would open the door to people having guns to defend themselves when a theft or a fit of anger occurs.
In 1993, during a student hearing at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, a student pulled out two loaded pistols and opened fire, injuring three people before a police officer killed him, according to a Jan. 25, 2002, New York Times article.
"Let's say a student goes to see a professor and the student is angry," Crain said. "Is that professor feeling safe? In the resident hall, if you knew someone down the hall had a gun, are you feeling safe if you're having a confrontation with this person?"
In 1991, a man entered Luby's Cafeteria in Texas and began shooting people. A woman there had permission to carry a gun, but she had left it in the car because of laws restricting her. The woman's parents and 21 other people were shot, and the woman said if she had had her gun, the situation could have been contained, according to a Newsweek article.
"In that instance, it would've made a difference, but in most instances, it would not," Crain said.
Some people argue the knowledge of guns on campus would deter people from committing such a crime. But "those individuals that would do something like that are already deranged. They wouldn't think like that," Crain said.
A former student at NIU killed six and wounded 15 on Feb. 15, and at Virginia Tech, a gunman killed 33 people in April 2007. A gun-violence crime occurred at the UA when a former student shot Professor John Locke in 2000. All three shooters killed themselves after their crimes.
Although nobody can prepare for the impact of an attack like that, Crain said, UAPD is prepared to respond to such a situation.
Incidents like this have been prevented because people are alert and report situations that seem out of the ordinary, he said.
"Members of the community should not take things for granted [but should] be aware of their surroundings and report things that they see," he said. "A community is safer when everyone participates in the safety of the community."
To get a concealed-carry weapons permit, a person must be 21 years old and complete an application packet for a Concealed Handgun Permit from the state police in Little Rock. The application also can be downloaded online, and the application packet needs to include both a license and fingerprint fee, full set of fingerprints and waiver to allow the police to access medical records. Along with that, the applicant should include a reference letter from a judge, sheriff or attorney stating the person is free from a criminal charge more than 10 years old.
SCC will hold an empty-holster protest to create awareness and answer questions April 21 to 25. "Empty holster" represents how people who have permits feel when they can't bring their guns on campus, Robinson said.
SCC has more than 25,000 members nationwide on more than 500 campuses, according to the organization's Web site.
Robinson joined the group when he turned 21 in September after the VT shooting, he said.
For more information on the subject, visit http://www.concealedcampus.org or http://www.bradycenter.org.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
“Students should have the right to defend themselves like everybody else,”
Staff...too.
If they pass all of the CCW regs.
I think a lot of students would sign up..
I’m really wanting somebody to take me on board, and have me go around everywhere around the country, speaking out about Second Amendment rights.
***Statistics indicate that in Arkansas, there’s a small fraction of people who have permission to carry a concealed weapon. The likelihood of one of those people being in the right place at the right time is slim, and allowing guns is just bringing another weapon on campus, Crain said.***
I love this line of reasoning. It’s a huge pile of steaming, fresh BS. “Oh, just because an armed student might not be where he’s needed at the right time, we’re going to revoke all students’ Second Amendment rights, no matter how old they are or what they’ve done in life.
Once again, since universities will never do this voluntarily, I expect that it will have to be mandated at the State level.
But while they’re at it, let me also suggest a voluntary notification system for CC students and faculty, also mandated by the State and carried out through the campus security police.
That is, given the size of a college campus, perhaps the majority of CC students and faculty will have no idea there has been an shooting incident on campus. And being unaware means both that they cannot assist in the situation, and have little time to prepare themselves for confrontation if they are in the path of the shooter.
When students and faculty are issued their CC permits, they are given a brochure that if they want, they will be issued a simple pager from the campus police, with only one use: to notify them if there has been an incident on campus.
If the pager goes off, they excuse themselves from class, and use their cellphone to call a campus hot line, again at the campus police office, to give them known information about the incident, and advise them what to do. This makes sense, as the campus police office would find out the details before about anyone else.
Typically, the message might say: “There is a report of a shooting at the political science building. If you are in the political science building and you have seen or heard anything, find a position of cover and please stay on the line to speak with an officer. If you are not in or near the political science building, please go to a concealed location near the front door of whatever building you are in or near. DO NOT brandish your weapon or you may be mistaken for the shooter. And if you see or hear anything unusual, please call us immediately.”
This turns a whole group of students and faculty into an intelligence gathering operation, puts them in a safe location to both observe and hold a defensive position if the shooter approaches them, and places them in a good situation to defend themselves if they need to.
Now granted, a lot of CC holders would have no interest in doing this, but I expect a lot would, if for no other reason than to know that something was going down, and they had better be ready for it.
This would not be a school run program either, as so many of them are anti-gun. And it would not really lend itself to a student run effort, as both student turnover is high, and they would know far less than the campus police about the situation.
“Staff...too.”
But, not, e.g., professors of postmodern literary theory. A firm grip on reality should be a minimum requirement.
Agreed.
Hopefully, a retired military or LEO teaching...even staff or assistant principal with similar strong background .
But, not, e.g., professors of postmodern literary theory. A firm grip on reality should be a minimum requirement.
What are your qualifications for doing so?
Lt. Crain sounds like the typical college administrative type that is so fearful of political correctness that he can’t think logically. In Oklahoma the college presidents all got together and passed a resoultion condemning the attempt to allow staff, faculty, and stdents with concealed carry permits to carry on campus. At Oklahoma State University the candyass liberal faculty senate likewise condemned the effort. At the University of Oklahoma, the president, and former U.S. Senator David Boren, also condemned the measure.
At this point the Oklahoma college administrators have offered no plan to protect students on campus. In fact, many campuses do not even have armed security personnel. I believe Boren did offer an idea that would have incoming students psychologically and behaviorally profiled so that they might be investigated. In other words, the high powered, almighty, elites of the ivory tower, have no plan to protect students, other than the normal “Oh crap!” plan.
I pray that none of these presidents and administrators has to ever look a group of grieving parents in the face and explain why they did nothing to protect their children.
Who was it that chose evil looking firearms to ban? Who thinks a barrel shroud is a shoulder thing that goes up? Why do so many Liberals think banning firearms for you and I will do anything to stop crime? Why do people think an inanimate object has a soul, knowing who or what it’s shooting at, in time to stop itself from igniting the primer in a cartridge?
I don’t have much formal firearms training, I’m not an instructor, nor a gunsmith, but if you want to take into account what I know vs. what Liberals know, then I’m pretty qualified to speak about firearms and firearm safety.
As I recall, the MSM reported that a UA Police unit called out at the building 29 seconds after the first reporting phone call was received, but it was already too late. Not only could responding police not stop the killing, they couldn't even minimize it, even with a very fast response.
Oh okay, I thought you meant you actually had credentials to engage in a speaking tour.
Don’t forget, you’re on Free Republic. That’s like a smart guy going in to a Mensa meeting...suddenly he is amidst equals, even though Out There he’s really smart! ;-)
Police are clean up crews. US Citizens have a fundamental right to protect themselves. This is enshrined in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
And what are the odds that a CCW civilian could have intervened in less than 29 seconds?
Don't get me wrong; i think allowing students, faculty and staff with CCW permits to carry on campus is a good move. It has the potential to do good and little risk of harm. But don't oversell it.
First, my post specifically stated, "that a UA Police unit called out at the building 29 seconds after the first reporting phone call was received". I assumed that a reader of the post would then realize that additional time needs to be factored in for someone to be able to make the call to the police, plus time to relay the information to the dispatcher. I obviously assumed too much.
Secondly, you refer to the CCW holder as someone who might "intervene". If you are armed in a class and someone comes in with a weapon (as in the UA incident) and starts to shoot, your response is not intervention, it is self defense, and the CCW holder can respond in a matter of seconds.
Well, $11 million of my tax dollars just went to grieving parents from Virginia Tech.
It's that whole liberal projection thing: they are the intemperate sorts who WOULD pull out a weapon in anger at a traffic incident. They wallow in rage at imaginary wrongs (remember, they aren't even proud of their country), etc., etc.
Perhaps these bricks-and-mortars institutions will go the way of the dinosaurs, when parents get tired of sending their children as defenseless targets.
...the MSM has spent time covering the anniversary of the Va Tech killings; but it’s seen as why we need more gun control....they never mention campus concealed carry.
I'm obviously not clear on what you meant by "called out at the building." It could mean that they were dispatched to the building, or that they reported from the building. I carelessely assumed the latter when you meant the former.
We are not on opposite sides of this issue. I believe that allowing anyone with a CCW to carry on campus would be a good policy decision because the potential benefits would greatly outweigh the risks. My whole point is that it should be presented, especially to folks who don't follow the issue that closely, on that basis, and with a recognition that it would not stop most campus shootings.
Overpromising the protection provided makes it easy for opponents to argue, as the campus police chief in the original article did, that armed civilians would in many if not most cases be irrelevant. It's a fairly convincing argument, a true one, and also irrelevant. We don't resist the installation of Automatic External Defibrilators because they will not save most heart attack victims.
Secondly, you refer to the CCW holder as someone who might "intervene". If you are armed in a class and someone comes in with a weapon (as in the UA incident) and starts to shoot, your response is not intervention
intervene
verb
1. get involved, so as to alter or hinder an action, or through force or threat of force; "Why did the U.S. not intervene earlier in WW II?"
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
You're clearly hung up on the word "intervene." fine. Substitute whatever verb you choose. It's not central to my argument.
it is self defense, and the CCW holder can respond in a matter of seconds.
If the CCW holder is present, is packing and has the courage and presence of mind to react when the fit hits the shan. Lot of ifs. How often has a CCW holder in the general population stopped a shooting spree in progress?
A small percentage of the general population eligible for a CCW get a permit and carry on a regular basis. I see no reason to expect that the proportion would be higher on a college campus, and a few strong reasons to believe that it would be lower:
- College campuses aren't safe, but they're usually safer from violent crime than the surrounding neighborhoods, and many people don't feel the need to arm themselves.
- College students are far more likely than most residents of the community to be legal residents of another state, and thus unable to qualify for a CCW in the state where they attend school.
- Though most are adults, college students are far more suceptible to pressure from peers and parents than other folks their age. If a roommate, significant other or parent doesn't want a student to carry, he likely won't.
Again, I support allowing CCW holders to carry on campus. My point here is on tactics. For the policy to change, people who are hostile to or undecided on the move will have to be brought on board. The best way to do that is to focus on the strongest arguments for it and not engage in exaggerations that are easy for opponents to attack.
1) A pager and a recording provide a one-way flow of information. The dispatcher woul dhave no way of knowing where the auxilliaries are or what they are doing. At the very least, they'd need two-way radios. And they would need the dispatch capacity to coordinate all those people.
2) There's not really, as far as I know, a halfway measure by which someone could act in a law enforcement capacity and still be a civilian under the law. The police department would have to carry liability insurance in case an armed civilian acting on police orders accidentaly or negligently injured a bystander.
3) It might not be a legal requirement, but the decent thing would be to provide medical and life insurance for students in case they're injured or killed in the line of duty. NYC tried to weasel out of compensating the family of an auxilliary killed in the line of duty, and it was not the city's finest hour.
I’ve already thought of these. To start with, at any given time on campus, those students and faculty with CC could be about anywhere. But they are not deputized or working as agents for anyone, either. No reason for anyone to know where they were.
Most classrooms request that students turn off their cellphones as a courtesy to others. However, a small pager that served only that one function, would get the message through. But for several reasons, the student or faculty would want to excuse themselves from the class or public area to a hallway, where they could then make a phone call on their cellphone.
This prevents causing a panic if the pager is accidentally activated, or is done as a test. No reason to panic a bunch of people, even if there is a shooting incident on the other side of campus. If there was, the student or faculty could calmly advise other faculty to ask students to, in an orderly fashion, leave campus in an evacuation direction away from the shooting.
As far as the CC students or faculty going to the main entrance of their building, this is likewise completely optional. At no time would the students or faculty be “hunting” the shooter or conducting an offensive action. But they would be in an excellent location to spot a shooter wielding a weapon in the open.
Thus they could both call in information with their cellphone, or engage the shooter if they felt a need to do so.
Putting it all together, it gives great advantages to a CC holder to protect themselves and others. It also gives them a limited option to choose between protection and defense, which are very different things.
In practice, this could be very peculiar. For example, there might be a dozen or more armed people assembling at the main entrance of the Criminal Justice department, making it an almost impossibly well defended site. But at the same time, there might not be anyone at all at the Fine Arts department next door. The ROTC department...
Again, this is why it is an exceptionally good idea to tell CC holders to not brandish unless they have to.
On the flip side, the shooter will probably be walking around in the open, brandishing their weapon, and visible *from the front entrances* of several buildings. This means that there would hopefully be a flow of information on cellphones to the campus police office, and the shooter would be at grave risk in approaching CC holders behind cover at many buildings.
Texas would have to change its law to allow this...
And the cornerstone gun control compramise was to prohibit carrying of a “gun” on campus premises...Technically meanig you “could” have one in a vehicle (locked up)...
But that is about as useful in these cases as a bag of hammers...
No, this would be too much of a hump to jump in Texas at this time...
Unfortunately, the only way to get most states to do this, would be for many more VT type massacres to occur before anything will be demanded to be changed...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.