Posted on 04/20/2007 2:46:06 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob
I live in western North Carolina, an area of the country in which there never has been, and never will be, a shooting like the one this week at Virginia Tech. There are plenty of guns in western Carolina. There are two universities and a college, where potential victims like those at Tech, can be found by the thousands.
But, we have a different culture, here. To my experience, more than half of all households in Carolina own multiple guns. More than a quarter of all the local trucks and vans on our highways are carrying guns, mostly handguns. And the people in Carolina who own those guns know exactly how to use them.
Only a small fraction of the gun owners here have taken any formal training in handling guns. Most of them have, however, grown up all their lives using guns. They all know the basic rule: do not aim a gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot them.
Some of the gun owners in Carolina are military veterans, where they received the most thorough training in using weapons, that anyone can get. The New York Times has mentioned, disparagingly, that rural men and women are more likely to join the military than those from suburbs or cities. The Times suggested falsely that rural youths have “nothing better to do,” and that’s why they sign up in greater proportion. No, it’s patriotism and pride; but those concepts are a tad foreign to the Times.
The bottom line is this: if any gunman started shooting students anywhere in western Carolina, he would never get to shoot more than 50 people, 32 of them fatally. The gunman himself would be dead before then, probably shot with a tight grouping by an armed civilian, even before any police could arrive on the scene. And, I suggest that our police would not hold back, fail to communicate, wait for orders.
The civilian shooter who would end the carnage in our part of the country could as well be a student as a teacher or other adult at any of our institutions. And if it turned out that the civilian shooter who dropped the murderer like a sack of feed, didn’t have a permit for his weapon? Well, the Sheriff of the appropriate county out this way would issue him a permit, and apologize for the delay. Any District Attorney who sought to prosecute the shooter who saved lives would be out of a job, as soon as the next election rolled around.
Let me explain the dynamics of “gun control.” I’ll do this in terms so clear that even Senator Barbara Boxer has a chance of understanding it. People who decide to shoot other people don’t give a cr*p about laws against murder. Obviously, they don’t give a cr*p about any laws on something as trivial as possessing a gun.
Therefore, ‘gun control” laws which makes it harder to buy, carry or use a gun, will have zero influence on those intending to murder their fellow citizens. If Senator Boxer wanted to find out how easy it is to get guns illegally, she should talk to police who are experienced in the weaponry available for cash on the barrel head, near any California high school, especially but not solely in the rough sections of town.
“Gun control” the way it is conceived and practiced by the likes of Senator Boxer means taking guns away from law-abiding citizens, and guaranteeing the criminals that they can ply their trade in a free-fire zone. Gun control, properly practiced, means take a wide stance, use both hands, “aim small to miss small,” and squeeze, don’t pull, the trigger.
Because a majority of the citizens in western Carolina practice that kind of gun control, that is why there never has been, and never will be, a shooting disaster here like there just was at Virginia Tech. A small story in a small newspaper, which the national press totally failed to notice, proves the point.
The Union Leader in Concord, New Hampshire, reported on 17 April a shooting the night before at the Uptown Tavern, Fifty people were present when one customer pulled a gun and started shooting. Nine shots were fired, the last two going into the shooter, from another customer who was carrying a weapon. No one was killed.
Now, that’s gun control.
- 30 -
About the Author: John Armor practiced in the US Supreme Court for 33 years. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu He lives in the 11th District of North Carolina.
- 30 -
The judge was a lib, but she knew I had her and she didn't want to be reversed on appeal. Atlanta is liberal, but the General Assembly is very, very conservative. Even when it was composed of 100 percent Democrats.
I hope I'm not as old as I feel right now, after a morning training dogs and then an afternoon building a deck railing and a gate! And then we're going out to a jazz club tonight to hear a friend's band. I should be about 95 by midnight!
Do campuses in that part of North Carolina permit guns?
John / Billybob
Well, not really, New York City, Chicago and other urban hell holes had some pretty restrictive gun control even in 1950. Look up "Sullivan Act" for example. Passed in 1911, it gave local (read New York City) authorities control over who could and could not be armed. It was intended to block "carry while Italian", and to ensure that only Sullivan's cronies in New York City were armed, not the members of any rival gangs.
Even then, the New York Slimes was a big advocate of citizen disarmament. BTW, although it was promised that homicides would drop after passage of the act, they did not.
That would be Susanna Gratia-Hupp, then just Gratia, my former state representative. BTW, it was just as illegal to have the gun in her truck as in her purse, but the likelihood of getting caught was much less, and she was concerned about losing her license to practice her profession, chiropractic. instead she lost her parents. Thanks in no small part to her testimony and activism, Texans can now have the firearm in either place, without such worries, although in the purse requires a license from the state.
WCU prohibits weapons in the residence halls, but the student handbook says nothing about "on campus". But see below:
UNC-A's Resident handbook states: "Possession or use, whether open or concealed, of any weapon while on public or private university-owned property is a felony, and a violation of state law, punishable by a fine of up to $500 or six months’ imprisonment, or both.
Possession of a Concealed Weapon Permit does not entitle individuals to carry concealed weapons of any kind on university-owned property. Weapons include, but are not limited to, guns, rifles, pistols, explosives, paintball guns, BB guns, bowie knives, crossbows, daggers, switchblade knives, metallic knuckles, throwing stars, knives of more than six inches when opened. Weapons, ammunition, fireworks, gasoline, oil and other combustible or explosive materials are not permitted in or around the residence halls"
Similarly the Duke University Polices state:
It is against North Carolina state law and university policy to possess a gun, rifle, pistol, or other firearm of any kind, or any powerful explosive on university property. Likewise, students are not permitted to possess on campus any weapon, including mace, BB gun, stun gun, paintball gun, air rifle, air pistol, sword, bowie knife, dagger, slingshot, switchblade knife, blackjack, and metallic knuckles.
So apperently the situation is actually *worse* in North Carolina than in Virginia. In Virginia it is only local policy that prohibits faculty, staff, and eligible students from being armed, in North Carolina, it's state law.
And sure enough, her s the statute that does the deed. GS_14-269.2
(b) It shall be a Class I felony for any person to possess or carry, whether openly or concealed, any gun, rifle, pistol, or other firearm of any kind on educational property or to a curricular or extracurricular activity sponsored by a school. Unless the conduct is covered under some other provision of law providing greater punishment, any person who willfully discharges a firearm of any kind on educational property is guilty of a Class F felony. However, this subsection does not apply to a BB gun, stun gun, air rifle, or air pistol.
Apparently if you happen to be driving through campus, and are not a student, staff or faculty, it's only a Class 1 misdemeanor.
I think y'all need to work on your state laws, as do Virginia and Texas
Texas Penal Code: § 46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a firearm[0], illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a): (1) on the physical premises of a school[0] or educational institution, any grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by a school[0] or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school[0] or educational institution, whether the school[0] or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;
Queen Ann thought the people were too stupid to be trusted with voting, in a non-binding referendum, on whether they should be able to carry guns. George Bush, OTH, signed a concealed carry law, with no need for the people to vote on it directly. (However Queen Ann's dissing of the people of the state was a big part in GWB becoming governor, and thus President. Maybe we should thank her for that much, as otherwise who knows what sort of President we might have had on 9-11.)
And neither would folks in Western Virginia, or central Pennsylvania, or any number of other "hill" places, or in most of Texas, hills or no hills. But in most cases, the shooting is over before anyone not already on the scene can respond. And since in almost all states, and even more colleges and universities regardless of state law, responsible, even licensed, adults are prohibited from being armed, the only ones liable to be armed are the perpetrators.
Those laws and polices must be changed. Even when not enforced, after the fact as it were, they have a chilling effect on the exercise of most useful and salutary right. IOW, they cost lives, and will continue to so until repealed.
Most of them are in violation of the federal and state constitution anyway, other than the ones that are strictly "policy" of a private institution.
“That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power”
Article 1, Section 13., Virginia Constitution.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.”
Article 1, Section 30, North Carolina Constitution.
“Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.” Article 1, Section 23. Texas Constitution.
I’d never heard of that one and had to look it up! I really like the size of it! Any pros or cons you can offer?
Got my daughter a SP101....357 and at the range it howls..guys look at her like she is nuts...but not after seeing the target downrange....
No, I certainly didn’t have a “know it all already” attitude. lol I never knew what they were handing me to shoot and they took full advantage. I remember one quite literally knocked me on my butt!
Dumb question... are the grips you recommend rubber? How do they compare with Hogue grips?
The PPK you have is absolutely gorgeous!
I have Pachmayrs on all my .45s and on my .41 Mag as well.
‘tis better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
yeah, I’ve heard that saying before...
Please at your leisure define "these kinds"....from your original post.
As I would like to eliminate the depends on what the "meaning of is" is argument.
As I'm hoping you would agree, that would be a waste of time on your part and mine........As I have nearly unlimited examples of people defending themselves from deadly force, with deadly force.
FRegards,
“these kinds” — meaning carry a concealed weapon where it’s declared illegal, or it’s against company policy (at your job), or it’s against a university policy (your a student or a teacher there), or in a school zone (you carry one on the property of a school)...
also, “not good ending” — meaning lose job, be prosecuted for violating law, be fined — whatever the negative consequences are.
So, where someone has had a concealed weapon and has used it, in that illegal zone, or prohibited zone, even if something was prevented, it’s either a lost job (if employee) or some kind of suspensions or punishment, or complete dismissal (maybe at a uninversity), or being prosecuted by some DA (like if carrying on school grounds)...
When I say in all cases that I’ve heard — whenever I’ve heard about that sort of thing — it’s always in context of someone losing their job, being punished or prosecuted, or some kind of penalty.
That’s basically it... I would say...
well that makes perfect legal sense
Southwest VA is very similar to Western NC regarding gun owners and people who carry. This happened at a college and people going to school tend to not carry weapons, they carry books. Even if it were legal for students and professors to carry concealed there, I seriously doubt any of them would have.
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.