Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hyzenthlay
I get your point. And I am inclined to agree about the 'average' student, at least remembering my college days. I'm not calling for arming the entire campus.

Think, if you will about the one-half or even one percent who might be able to carry without incident--the ones with the maturity, demeanor, and who are willing to embrace the responsibility which goes with the right.

One half a percent translates to one person in evry 200 armed. Statistically speaking one person in the lecture bowl, depending on the class size. One in every second or third classroom. In the case of Tech, that would mean 130 additional people (out of 26000), aside from any arms campus security or police might be carrying, who have the ability to stop a lunatic.

While that is no guarantee there will not be incidents, especially if the forces of jihad pull out the stops, it is a level of ability to respond to threats which no police force nor security can provide on such a widespread basis.

In all actuality, permit holders would not be likely to be completely evenly dispersed throughout the campus. I would wager certain majors would attract the types of persons who would be more likely to seek their concealed carry permits, (that would make for an interesting study, in and of itself), and these folks would tend to be more concentrated in the vicinity of those departments. Still, it would have great potential to reduce the capacity for violence, just as permit holders do off campus.

As you said, it isn't for everyone. It is a tremendous responsibility, and one not to be taken lightly.

4,956 posted on 04/19/2007 8:53:36 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4934 | View Replies ]


To: Smokin' Joe
I get your point. And I am inclined to agree about the 'average' student, at least remembering my college days. I'm not calling for arming the entire campus.

I am. Fines for anyone caught not carrying an effective defensive weapon, jail time for repeat negligent offenders.

It's a duty and responsibility of citizenship to not only take care of yourself, but to be able to assist another. I don't think that those with religious or other deeply held philosophical scruples against doing should be forced to do something against their beliefs, but there needs to be a way to tell them from the stupid or lazy who've just forgotten or misplaced their weapon.

So a reasonably available exemption license should be available for those people once they demonstrate their sincerity, and something temporary for those medically or otherwise temporarily incapable of effectively defending themselves. The fee for such permits can be used to offset the public cost of protecting those who can't help protect themselves or others, with fee waivers for those experiencing simple temporary interruptions in their ability.

A college student who can't exhibit the restraint and skill level of a $9.00-per-hour security guard doesn't belong in college. And if he negligently or irresponsibly acts in ways that threaten others, there'll be an entire university community of those prepared and equipped to deal with it.

4,959 posted on 04/19/2007 10:22:12 AM PDT by archy (Et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno. [from Virgil's *Aeneid*.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4956 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson