Posted on 10/26/2016 6:49:18 AM PDT by facedown
A rise in shootings on college campuses has added a new front in the gun debate, centering on this question: does it hurt, or help, to have more armed people at school?
snip
But many believe that having more firearms around makes gun crime more likely. They oppose the campus-carry campaign as an extension of broader efforts to allow people to carry concealed weapons in other public areas, which they say raises the risk of violence.
Those gun-control advocates are now being backed by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, who just released a study that argues the campus-carry movement is based on flawed assumptions about the relationship between civilian gun use, violent crime and mass shootings, including several killings on college campuses.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Good find.
And in most states, you don't qualify for CCW until you are 21.
Liberals are dangerous when given guns. Universities are liberal indoctrination centers, that teach irresponsible behavior. Not sure how this will play out.
As with most other universities, Arizona State University had a regulation forbidding guns on campus a long time ago. That was ignored, for the simplest of reasons: nobody gave a damn.
Most of the students who carried were either criminal justice majors, many of whom had been or were police, and ROTC cadets, some of whom had mini-arsenals and impressive gun familiarity, it being their prospective line of work. But even a lot of ordinary students carried, typically book bag guns, and their reasons for doing so were many and varied.
While every now and then someone with a gun found it necessary to brandish, to prevent a crime in progress, to my knowledge they never needed to fire their weapon.
Most liberals abhor guns...Most conservatives don’t...Most liberals on campus would not consider carrying a gun...A lot of conservatives would...I know there are many more liberals on campus at this time, but if 1 out of every 100 students was CC, that would make a huge difference in the safety...
It looks like an AK-47 variant, but the magazine looks reversed (?). It struck me as odd, also. Anyone know more?
I also read the report.
They based a large part of their opinion piece on a study that looked at mass murders where at least six people were killed. They included private residences and non-gun free zones, which they define as having armed police or civilian security on the premises, such as a mall or military post.
They repeatedly pointed out that 60% of people convicted of violent gun crimes legally owned their guns at the time of the crime. They ignore the fact that all offenders must be first-time offenders at some time, and that criminals are obviously not deterred by gun laws.
They say crime went up in right to carry states, but their own graphs show a decrease. It’s not clear how the author of the study they reviewed came to conclude there was an increase. They then go on to creates unfounded reasons why this might be true.
They said that gun carriers were just as likely to be injured defending themselves as those who defended themselves without firearms - 4% - without pointing out that few unarmed people will defend themselves against an armed assailant.
They continue to conflate college students of legal age for owning guns with all “teens”. And while I agree that suicide and alcohol are problems with all teens, their own data suggests that college students have fewer gun problems than average “teens”.
A Bloomberg-funded hit piece written by anti-gunners. Just look at the author profiles at the end of the article.
From the article: “The researchers said that the data showed that most fatal mass shootings occur where guns are allowed...”
Name One.
Fatal mass shootings occur exclusively in Gun Free Zones.
Psychos are crazy... not stupid.
And an expensively miseducated one will not only think it, he will arrogantly crusade against it.
Plenty of those to be found in school these days, especially on the faculties.
See my post at #47
Wow. What a BS job.
Notice how the argument from the Left has shifted; used to be, they argued that nobody but the police should be able to own a handgun. (The hardcore crazies still do.) But now, the Left is desperately trying to hold their previous stronghold, college campuses (or campii). They know that across the nation, states are allowing permit holders or just regular nonfelon citizens to carry there. The Left knows it’s losing, and is getting desperate.
You beat me to it. Concealed carry has been authorized on the U of I campus for two years now, and despite the bloodcurdling shrieking on the part of the libs in the faculty the total number of incidents to date is...zero. These people at Johns Hopkins who say there isn't any data haven't looked for it.
This is fundamental difference between Libbies and Normal People.
The Libbies look at things on the average, and pretend to try to solve problems in general.
A Normal Person tries to solve his own problems and wants to improve his own situation.
They can argue (incorrectly, as it turns out) that campus carry may increase shooting slightly, on average.
But the Normal Person knows that when TSHTF, he wants to have something more deadly than a pencil to work with.
There’s something really strange about that AK-pattern rifle
But why should ANY "study" conducted by an academe that is proven to be operated and controlled by Progressive elements and supports Progressive/Leftist policies be trusted in the first place? Why must we accept these bogus studies over COMMON SENSE?
The same theory of mistrust of those whose agenda is anti-2A is applicable to Progressive-owned polling companies and the 96% of all media that admitted they financially support Frau Hitlery for Fuehrer. Their respective credibility is shot.
“It’s not clear how the author of the study they reviewed came to conclude there was an increase.”
When you make your conclusions before you look at the data, anything is possible...
;>)
I think liberalism is founded and rooted in dishonesty. It has happened to me so often that I just assume it: when a liberal cites a fact, the fact does not in reality exist. They just make things up!
When Arizona went to Constitutional Carry, the libs were predicting disaster. Shootings in the streets! Shootings in the bars! Drunk CCWs running around, shooting up the town!
Didn’t happen. Not even close.
A while back, I argued on FreeRepublic that we should NOT allow CCW in bars because drunks would shoot the place up. Someone else pointed out that another state had allowed it for years, and there was no problem.
The difference between me and a liberal is that I looked at the data, realized the other poster was correct - and I changed my view! I’m just not dishonest enough to be liberal - even when I’m wrong!
Then there’s the folks who carry concealed without any official approval, not leaving any data trail for folks to argue about. We aren’t going to change our habits no matter what the courts or Congress have to say.
You can ccw on bars in Colorado. You can even have a drink if you stay under the limit BUT EVERY LEGAL CLASS I HAVE TAKEN recommends not drinking at all when carrying. My frau always asks if I am drinking when we go out to dinner. Almost always the answer is no.
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.