Colorado Regents Will Fight To Uphold Gun Ban

BOULDER, Colo. — The University of Colorado will fight to keep a gun ban on campus.

University regents voted 5-4 Friday to appeal a ruling against the ban to the Colorado Supreme Court.

Republican Tillie Bishop of Grand Junction voted with Democrats in favor of an appeal. He said he wanted to preserve the rights of regents to make rules for the university.

All other Republicans on the board voted in favor of accepting a state appeals court ruling against the ban and allow students with concealed weapons permits to carry firearms.

CU's student government reversed its previous stance and voted to endorse the gun ban Thursday night following criticism from students.

CU has until the end of the month to to file an appeal.

___

Information from: Daily Camera, http://www.dailycamera.com/

Comments

[OdinsEye]

10:37 PM on 06/29/2010

1. The ruling adresses concealed carry on campus.

2. To carry concealed, a person must be 21, attend a course, and undergo an extra background check, not to mention the fees and and cost of the firearm and associated equipment.

3. The students who will be carrying concealed on campus are likely already legally carrying concealed off campus.

[bgood0822]

05:38 PM on 07/06/2010

Not to mention that some students are more than likely carrying illegally ON campus now.

[pjgm]

02:12 PM on 06/28/2010

I live in the University Hill neighborhood in Boulder. Seeing the amazingly stupid things college students do with skateboards, cars, couches, bikes, baseball bats, scooters, skis, and snowboards when they are both drunk and sober the last thing I want them to be carrying is a gun. Having gone to CU and having lived nearby the campus for years I've never felt the need for a gun.

[take10]

10:16 AM on 06/28/2010

Wild, wild west! Going from drive bys to sit bys! Instructors will give only passing grades out of fear of being shot in a parking lot or garage. Maybe, even in class!

[Douva]

12:27 PM on 06/28/2010

It's good to see that you spent so much time researching this issue and reading the other comments before posting your own.

[take10]

12:39 PM on 06/28/2010

I'd love to see you repeat that after you awaken in an ICU after becoming a gun statistic! Or, your loved one making it if you don't survive...

[missouriwatcher]

06:06 PM on 06/27/2010

Good for UC!! Campus is no more a place to carry firearms than is a courthouse. Emotions are likely to run high from time to time; what we do NOT need is some disturbed or angry person carrying a firearm on campus, licensed or not.

[Douva]

06:25 PM on 06/27/2010

I assume you realize that, in the state of Colorado, licensed concealed carry (of handguns) is only banned from courthouses that are secured with metal detectors manned by security personnel.

Last I checked, the University of Colorado at Boulder is NOT secured with metal detectors.

[missouriwatcher]

08:30 PM on 06/27/2010

Kind of hard to do with an area as large as an university; nevertheless, there's absolutely no good reason to be carrying a weapon on campus unless you are the police.

[RevJimIII]

11:24 PM on 06/30/2010

Assumption.

[missouriwatcher]

07:31 PM on 07/01/2010

I assume you are a man of the clothe by your pseudonym. If per chance Chrsitian, what would Jesus say?

[Bonaboman]

08:58 PM on 06/26/2010

If you are a Tennessee basketball player you can get by with having a pistol with filed-off serial numbers in your car while being drunk and stoned.

BTW - I'm much more concerned about an unlicensed gun owner than I am a college student with a concealed carry permit. I have a concealed permit and have never even pointed my pistol at a person; however, I have prevented myself from being robbed a couple of times just by letting the criminal know that I am carrying a pistol. It is surprising how quickly the slimeballs back off.

[missouriwatcher]

11:52 PM on 06/27/2010

Of course, if you were wearing one on your hip, say a .44, .45, or .50 cal., I think they probably wouldn't bother you in the first place. But anyway, back on topic, why would anyone other than police officers need one on campus? If my campus was such that I felt the need to pack heat, I would find somewhere else to work.

[RevJimIII]

11:25 PM on 06/30/2010

Equal application then? Officers cannot carry either.

[RevJimIII]

03:57 PM on 07/01/2010

"It would seem you are way off base. Police officers DO train more than the average citizen gun owner. If police have the oath to "protect and serve", just who/what are they protecting and serving? Just about everywhere I've been, police officers carry firearms--maybe not on SOME campuses, but that is a campus adminstration decision. "
Most of your average officers only train for required qualifications, not constantly and vigorously like a lot of private citizens. Protect and serve is a nice goal but not a requirement by law, officers do their best to respond quickly and safely and to handle the situation properly BUT are not required to protect you as an individual according to at least a dozen court decisions like Warren v. D.C. Law enforcement are not a protected or special class of citizen, they have a job which requires a defensive weapon as a tool, just like I live in a country where my pre existing right to self defense is recognized by its Constitution.

[Douva]

03:43 PM on 06/26/2010

Should a state-funded college be allowed to independently refuse to honor state-issued concealed handgun licenses?

In order to answer that question, you must first have a solid understanding of the issue of licensed concealed carry (of handguns) in the United States.

You'll find a solid overview of the issue of licensed concealed carry, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States

You can find additional information at HandgunLaw.us and CarryConcealed.net.

Once you understand that Colorado and most other states already provide for licensed concealed carry, the question you must ask yourself is "Why should trained, licensed, carefully screened adults (age 21 and above in Colorado and most other states) be allowed to carry concealed handguns in most other unsecured locations (locations without metal detectors) but not on college campuses?"

Why should a graduate student be allowed the means to defend himself when studying late at a public library but not when studying late at the campus library? Why should a faculty member be allowed the means to defend herself when walking to her car after an early-morning workout at a local health club but not when walking to her car after an early-morning workout at the campus recreation center? Why should anybody be allowed the means to defend himself or herself at movie theater on Saturday and in a church on Sunday but not on a college campus on Monday?

[reasonshouldrule]

10:46 PM on 06/26/2010

As a retired university professor, I would not have wanted to carry a gun with me, and I certainly would not have wanted gun-carrying students in my classes. I happen to believe guns generate more violence than they prevent, and places of learning are not good venues for firearms. Thank heaven the University of Michigan did not allow students to carry guns. I suspect I might have been shot by an occasional disgruntled student if it had. These people who "support the 2nd amendment" are beginning to push into quite unreasonable territory.

[Douva]

12:31 AM on 06/27/2010

As I've already said, this isn't about the Second Amendment. This about ensuring that laws are based on facts, not emotion and prejudice.

[missouriwatcher]

06:07 PM on 06/27/2010

As an unretired university professor, I completely agree with you.

[Douva]

03:43 PM on 06/26/2010

Throughout Colorado and most of the United States, concealed handgun license holders regularly carry concealed handguns in locations like movie theaters, shopping malls, office buildings, grocery stores, restaurants, banks, and churches, without incident. If licensed concealed carry isn't leading to rampant problems in those locations, why should we expect a different result on college campuses?

Statistics from states like Texas, Florida, and Michigan suggest that concealed handgun license holders are approximately five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes. In Texas, where one person out of every 62 is licensed to carry a concealed handgun, you are 20 times more likely to be struck by lightning than to be murdered or negligently killed by a concealed handgun license holder.

Since the fall semester of 2006, Utah state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of Utah's nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses). Concealed carry has been allowed on the two campuses of Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, and Pueblo, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of 124 semesters (as of June 2010), an average of over five years per school, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft.

[Bonaboman]

09:00 PM on 06/26/2010

Completely accurate insight. Libs will probably slam this comment; however, they have issues with the truth. I have a concealed carry permit.

[reasonshouldrule]

10:51 PM on 06/26/2010

Libs do not have "issues" with the truth. The "truth" here is highly subject to interpretation, though, including the statistics quoted above without citation. One problem I have with these initiatives is that the outcome is to actually force everyone to carry a gun--to push guns on everyone, like it or not. And before you argue that no one HAS to carry a gun, if everyone else is armed, then you will probably feel you have to be armed as well. We do not need guns on college campuses. And just because it is legal to carry one doesn't mean you have to carry it everywhere.

[markopolio]

01:40 PM on 07/01/2010

I just want to know why one would need a gun on the CU campus. There is absolutely no reason. I mean it is not in a war zone, it's in Boulder. Hippies aren't going to mug you and the five homeless people near the hill aren't going to pull out semiautomatics. I just don't understand the need.

[Douva]

03:42 PM on 06/26/2010

Though opponents often question the maturity of college students and present hollow arguments about alcohol and drug use on college campuses, such arguments have very little to do with the actual issue at hand. This is NOT a debate about keeping guns out of the hands of college students. Allowing licensed concealed carry on college campuses would not change the rules about who can buy a gun or who can obtain a concealed handgun license. Colorado and every other state that provides for licensed concealed carry has statutes prohibiting license holders from carrying while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Legalizing concealed carry on college campuses would neither make it easier for college students to obtain firearms nor make it legal for a person to carry a firearm while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. And allowing concealed carry on college campuses would have no impact on the laws regulating concealed carry at bars and off-campus parties, the places where students (particularly students of legal age to obtain a concealed handgun license) are most likely to consume alcohol. Simply put, the same trained, licensed, carefully screened adults who aren't getting drunk and shooting each other outside of campus are the same trained, licensed, carefully screened adults who won't be getting drunk and shoot each other on campus.

[Douva]

03:42 PM on 06/26/2010

With all of this in mind, you're better equipped to answer the original question. If there is no evidence that licensed concealed carry makes students and faculty less safe, and if colleges can't ensure that licensees are not placed at greater risk by being disarmed, why should a state-funded college be allowed to independently--without the consent of the state legislature--refuse to honor state-issued concealed handgun licenses?

School policies that prohibit concealed carry on campus serve no purpose but to place law-abiding license holders at the mercy of any criminal willing to disregard school policy. Unless college officials choose to ensure that campus "gun free" zones are gun free in more than name only--by taking steps (i.e., metal detectors) to disarm not only the law-abiding citizens who choose to follow the rules but also the dangerous criminals who choose to ignore the rules--there is no legitimate, fact-based reason to prohibit licensed concealed carry on college campuses.

Anyone who wants to learn the facts, statistics, and arguments supporting the legalization of licensed concealed carry on college campuses should visit http://www.CampusCarry.com.

[rudolph]

02:07 PM on 06/26/2010

What a sad, paranoid nation this is.

[Douva]

03:40 PM on 06/26/2010

Agreed. If knowing that the person sitting next to you in class might be legally carrying a gun causes you to live in fear, you should probably seek some form of psychiatric counseling.

[InYourWorld]

09:23 PM on 06/26/2010

fanned!

[reasonshouldrule]

10:56 PM on 06/26/2010

That's just ridiculous. As a student, I would not want to be in class with armed students. As a professor, I would be even more uncomfortable. Guns are fine as protection in your home, for hunting, and for other places. I don't believe they belong in civilized society. I think these obsessed gun advocates need psychiatric counseling.

[DirectProf]

01:18 PM on 06/26/2010

I come from a family of hunters (although I do not), and I respect their right and interest in owning rifles for that purpose, and to protect their property from armed intrusion.

Where it gets difficult for me is that there is very little evidence that the Framers ever anticipated that their "well-armed militias" would take their muzzle-loaded muskets and march down to the Colonial Philadelphia 7-11 and hold up the owner, and then gun him down while the owner desperately tried to get his under-the-counter muzzle-loaded rifle out to shoot back, as the polite and patient shoppers of the 7-11 wait for the assailants to finish reloading and priming their muzzle-loaded muskets and shoot them as well. I don't see that happening much in the U.S. of today either.

Firearms and technology has evolved: our gun laws and practices largely have not. Hunting rifles are not the problem that any of us are discussing, yet the gun lobby refuses to make a distinction, they protect the semi-automatic as well as the hunting rifle, and I've heard the arguments that they present and I just don't find them convincing, statistically, rationally, or otherwise. But I realize that others do ... I just don't see how.

[Douva]

03:38 PM on 06/26/2010

Personally, I don't think the issue of campus carry should be debated in terms of the Second Amendment. But since you brought it up, I'm curious to know if you believe that the same "the Framers anticipated" standard should be applied to the First Amendment?

Given the technology available in 1788, the Framers were much more likely to anticipate semiautomatic rifles than they were to anticipate the Internet. By 1788, a handful of repeating firearms had been in existence for over 100 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater). However, the telephone wouldn't be invented for almost a hundred years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone), and the first computer wouldn't be invented for over 150 years (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer).

Again, I think both sides are off-base when they try to debate campus carry in terms of the Second Amendment, but since you brought up the "Framers anticipated" question, I thought I should expound it.

Anyone who thinks that America's crime problem has anything to do with the availability of semiautomatic weapons should visit http://www.ProtestEasyGunsLIES.com.

[DirectProf]

04:38 PM on 06/26/2010

I do think that the "Framers anticipated" standard should be applied to everything, including the First Amendment. I believe issues should be evaluated on the individual basis, keeping in mind everything, including tradition, current circumstances, etc.. They Framers couldn't have foreseen the society that we exist in today, and seemed to (by adding the ability to amend) know that. So I do believe that the Constitution should be a living document.

I've seen the website that you refer to and find it as suspect as I do all of them, including the other one you posted, on both sides. There are as many websites on the gun control debate that spout their statistics. It's clear that you're in favor of concealed carry for ideological and personal reasons. I am not. As a professor, I particularly detest the idea of any of my students carrying a firearm into my classroom. And in case it's presumed, yes, I have had a serious encounter with a criminal and a firearm, and since the criminal waited until after we had passed him before pulling out his firearm and shooting (a dear friend in the head, no less), my having one would not have saved me or him. Might it other cases? I'm certain evidence can be found to support that. It still won't change my mind that everyone possessing firearms makes the world a far less safe, and certainly less friendly, place.

So we'll have to agree to disagree, I guess?

[OdinsEye]

02:03 AM on 06/30/2010

"there is very little evidence that the Framers ever anticipated that their "well-armed militias" "

Well regulated militias.

"they protect the semi-automatic as well as the hunting rifle"

Many hunting rifles are semi-automatics. In fact, the first semi-auto hunting rifles were sold commercially in the US more than 100 years ago.

"Firearms and technology has evolved: our gun laws and practices largely have not."

Most of our firearm laws were crafted well after semi-autos became commercially popular.

[Jim238]

09:44 PM on 06/25/2010

As a gun owner of over 50 years and lifetime NRA member, I'm with the regents and Student Government. They are showing sense. I would imagine student enrollment dropping quite a bit if the ban is overturned. It's bad enough having neighbors talking constantly about storing ammo and food and 'grouping' to protect the neighborhood when the 'end times come'. Wackos! Worse is allowing young people, most immature, to have a firearm on their person during a confrontation with another student.

[Sugarmaker]

09:58 PM on 06/25/2010

This is the fairly standard "wild west" argument, predicting social chaos if we loosen the gun laws. Doesn't happen.

[dsdem]

10:29 PM on 06/25/2010

Maybe you should spend some time visiting the south side of Chicago, or west Baltmore, or Pine Hills, FL, or New Orleans etc, etc. Or you could just pick up any of the local newspapers that cover those areas and have a read. Open your eyes, social chaos is rampant in this country thanks to your Second Amendment.

[Douva]

01:42 AM on 06/26/2010

Enrollment at Utah public colleges has skyrocketed since licensed concealed carry (of handguns) became legal at all of Utah's public institutions of higher education.

http://www.campuscarry.com/pdf/utah_press_releases.pdf

Since the fall semester of 2006, Utah state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of Utah’s nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses). Concealed carry has been allowed on the two campuses of Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, and Pueblo, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of 124 semesters (as of May 2010), an average of over five years per school, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft.

More facts, statistics, and arguments in support of legalizing "campus carry": http://www.campuscarry.com/supporting-facts-arguments/#content

[reasonshouldrule]

11:08 PM on 06/26/2010

If there's no difference, then why should there be guns on campus at all? Have there been any situations where those guns prevented violence? At my university, guns were not allowed on campus, and the 20 years I was there saw NO occurrences of gun violence. Same outcome as you are suggesting.

[dsdem]

08:01 PM on 06/25/2010

I own guns, lots of em - though I don't believe the Second Amendment was written with the intention of granting every US citizen the right to a small personal arsenal for sport, or bragging rights, or "just because i can."

The Second Amendment was written so that our young, financially destitute, fractious country could field a militia in case of foreign or domestic threat to national security.

I own guns out of fear of the Second Amendment militant fanatics dispersed throughout this country who view interpretation of this anachronistic legislation as the litmus test for their liberty, freedom, happiness, and identity.

Oh, it's also good fun to shoot them.

[Sugarmaker]

09:44 PM on 06/25/2010

OK, so far, in the 3 days I've been on Huffpost, It's becoming clear why the gun control crowd is on the loosing end of the debate. I would say living in an imaginary world and then writing to tell others of your experiences is amusing but not very convincing.

[happystead]

06:22 AM on 06/26/2010

It might also be that the 2nd Amd. was written because we, as a nation, were not going to have a standing army. What a country this would be if the $600 to $750 billion, (or more,) we spend on defense a year went into infrastructure, education, healthcare, social security, etc.

[Sugarmaker]

02:04 PM on 06/26/2010

Yes, we'd be speaking German.

[hagagaga]

06:04 PM on 06/25/2010

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

[Bega]

07:27 PM on 06/25/2010

You must also favor carrying guns to theaters and football fields. Right?

[hagagaga]

10:20 PM on 06/25/2010

yes

[Steve1976]

12:34 PM on 06/26/2010

Didn't DC's Ford's Theater have a ban on guns in 1865?

[enoughofrr]

06:47 AM on 06/26/2010

"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."

Operative term here is "militia".

[happystead]

07:05 AM on 06/26/2010

... and "well regulated." Why is it that "they" get their guns and "we" don't get our regulation? Money, I suppose.

[hagagaga]

02:52 PM on 06/26/2010

You do realize that there's a comma after the part about the militia, right?

[indi1216]

02:52 PM on 06/25/2010

Carry guns to school is a bad idea.

[Amhet]

04:53 PM on 06/25/2010

So is eating school food, but it happens too.

[Bonaboman]

09:11 PM on 06/26/2010

School is where you go to get condoms if you are in grade school.