iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dennis A. Henigan

Dennis A. Henigan

GET UPDATES FROM Dennis A. Henigan
 

Keep Guns Off Campus

Posted: 03/ 3/11 12:04 PM ET

In the wake of the Tucson shooting, Arizona's legislature is considering various bills addressing guns and violence. The legislation with the best chance of passage has nothing to do with strengthening the state's laws to prevent dangerous individuals from easily acquiring the firepower that enabled Jared Loughner to shoot 19 people in about 16 seconds, killing six of them. Incredibly, the bill with the most momentum would force Arizona colleges and universities to allow the concealed carry of guns on campus.

The Arizona bill is one of many similar bills being pushed in states across the nation, as the gun lobby seeks to overcome the collective judgment of college administrators, faculty and students that allowing guns on campus is a recipe for disaster. Up until now, sanity has prevailed, as such bills have failed 43 times in 23 states in recent years. But the forces of "gun everywhere" are back, and pitched battles are underway, not only in Arizona, but in Texas and elsewhere.

It all started with the Virginia Tech mass shooting of almost four years ago, which prompted "gun rights" proponents to argue that the shooting could have been stopped if one of the students in the targeted classrooms had been carrying a gun and could have returned fire. It is revealing that none of the students and teachers who actually were under fire that day have become proponents of concealed carry on campus. Indeed, Colin Goddard, who was shot four times in his French class, has become a crusader for stronger gun laws, as poignantly depicted in the documentary Living for 32, now being shown on college campuses coast-to-coast. (The movie was shown at the University of Arizona and Arizona State this week.)

The argument supporting guns on campus is based on a bizarre assessment of relative risks. Its proponents seek to create the remote possibility that a legal gun carrier will be in the right place at the right time when a killer attacks, and will act effectively to stop the attacker, when the attack itself, particularly a mass attack, is itself a remote possibility. In order to create the unlikely chance of this "good guy shoots attacker" scenario becoming reality, the proponents of campus concealed carry seek to ensure a proliferation of guns in classrooms, dorm rooms, dining halls, sports stadiums -- anywhere where a violent attack may occur.

This necessarily means introducing a broad new array of obvious risks into everyday life on college campuses. Those risks seem anything but remote: that an argument between a professor and a disgruntled student will erupt in gunfire; that an intoxicated student will accidentally discharge his gun while showing it off at a Friday afternoon keg party; that a student's momentary despair over a romantic break-up will turn lethal as he finds a gun and turns it on himself.

The pro-gun crowd assails "gun-free zones" that allegedly invite the violent to attack the unarmed, but the reality is that currently gun-free college campuses are far safer than the gun-saturated communities that surround them. Justice Department figures show that college students aged 18 to 24 experience violence at a 20% lower rate than non-students in the same age group. In addition, 93% of the violence against students occurs off campus.

Given that in most states gun owners must be 21 to carry concealed weapons, the "guns on campus" activists question why law-abiding adults licensed to carry in other locations should be barred from doing so on college campuses. Several obvious responses come to mind.

First, the experience of states in making it easier to carry concealed weapons hardly recommends extending concealed carry to college campuses. The evidence is mounting that very dangerous people are being given concealed carry licenses, that they are committing egregious violence with guns, and that liberalized concealed carry is associated with more violent crime, not less. Why should we subject our largely peaceful college campuses to a policy that has led to greater danger outside those campuses? After all, Jared Loughner was a legal concealed carrier under Arizona law until he shot 19 people.

Second, college campuses are particularly hazardous environments for widespread gun possession and carrying. They are populated largely by individuals aged 18 to 24, a highly volatile time of life and the age group with the highest incidence of such behaviors as binge drinking and drug use. Moreover, those young people live in dormitories, group houses and other high-density situations in which it is difficult to ensure that a gun always will be in the possession of the person licensed to carry it.

The pressures of college life itself add to the risk, particularly the risk of suicide. Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa of the University of Texas, in an eloquent letter to Governor Rick Perry opposing concealed carry on campus, cited the concerns of "campus health professionals, who know and deal with the reality of the emotional and psychological pressures of academic life, separation from family, relationships -- all pressures that contribute to the harsh reality that suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students."

Finally, don't believe for a minute that the "gun rights" crowd is content to limit campus concealed carry to 21-year-old seniors and grad students. At the same time the gun lobby is pressing the Texas legislature to force Texas universities to allow concealed carry, the NRA is pursuing a lawsuit to strike down, as a violation of the Second Amendment, the Texas law setting 21 as the minimum age to carry concealed. If the NRA gets its way, it will be freshmen and all other students who will be eligible to carry loaded guns on campus.

Students are standing with their professors and administrators in resisting laws forcing campuses to accept guns. The student government at the University of Texas has come out foursquare against such laws. Just this week, 57% of the Texas A&M student body voted against guns on campus. These are young people who have grown up around guns, yet understand they have no place on a college campus.

Ultimately, this is not just a campus safety issue. It also is an issue involving the core values served by institutions of higher education. It is difficult to imagine anything more destructive to an environment of academic freedom -- in which controversial issues can be passionately debated free of fear and intimidation -- than students or professors "strapped" as they participate in those debates.

Students, faculty and administrators get it. Do our lawmakers?

For more information, see Dennis Henigan's Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy (Potomac Books 2009)

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 845
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
11:35 AM on 03/10/2011
Do you think that this will make it even easier for "gunmen" to carry weapons on campus? This is the question I keep asking myself. www.matterofopinion.com
photo
rikilii
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
12:47 PM on 03/10/2011
If by "gunmen" you mean people with guns who intend to shoot other people, then the answer to your question is emphatically "no".
12:22 PM on 03/11/2011
last time I checked--bans on concealed carry did NOTHING to stop any of the shooters that decided to commit mass murder on campuses like Virginia Tech
11:40 AM on 03/07/2011
My 40 caliber Glock stolen from the truck it was stored in hasn't been found yet. It will probably turn up someday, somewhere, maybe they'll find it after a convenience store robbery or something and get it back to me I hope. That was 20 years ago in Houston parking lot. Maybe it's in Mexico now, I'd rather keep control of my guns and keep them safe and secured. Making Staff and Faculty store guns in cars for criminals on campus to get while leaving them defenseless if a crazed unlicensed student decides to bring an AK-47 to school to shoot the teacher (actual occurrences) doesn't make sense.

The bill needs to pass so they are stored safely and securely as they are at Wal-Mart, Church, Grocery stores, Restaurants, at the Bank, and everywhere else that "people" go. It's just common sense.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:24 PM on 03/07/2011
If "crazed unlicensed students" bringing "AK47s to school to shoot the teacher", and "criminals on campus" stealing guns from Faculty cars are really an ongoing concern, Faculty should leave their guns at home, and the University should increase armed security.
04:37 PM on 03/07/2011
easy on those strawmen guffy--I know how much you are looking forward to when all Los Angeles LEAs are forced to go to shall issue CCW
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RevJimIII
Grin and Barret...
10:41 PM on 03/07/2011
So you are basically arguing the point of which person you believe is qualified (in your estimation) to carry a firearm responsibly, no?
 
You seem to trust security guards and law enforcement despite the evidence that CCW holders hold a better safety record and hit/miss ration... interesting.
11:39 AM on 03/07/2011
This bill goes not add more guns to campuses than the ones already there, it allows the same guns to be secured better.

Texas Penal Code 46.03 defines premises as a, "A building or Portion of Building." So licensees carrying guns in a city library is ok, but to enter the campus library you must store it in your car.

The same guns are on campus, just stored differently.

Ask yourself this:

I'd feel safer at a college that:

1) Forced "everyone" (or "people") to store guns in cars, allowing easier access to guns on campus for criminals committing vehicular burglaries.

2) Allowed licensed, responsible, adults who underwent training and background checks on Local, State, and National levels, to have their weapons safely secured and concealed while they are in buildings like they are everywhere else.
------------------

Personally, I HAVE had my car broken into and the contents stolen.
I have NEVER had anyone reach into my pants in class or in the library to see what might be concealed in there.

Considering the increased risk of a gun ending up in a criminal's hands on campus with car storage as it is now, I'd vote for the second option. Why provide easier access to guns for criminals on campus? It makes no sense.
photo
Old Jarhead
F-4. The triumph of thrust over aerodynamics
09:12 PM on 03/06/2011
For SShaw490.

I have read all your comments today, and have a comment. You have repeatedly asked how many mass shootings have been stopped by a CHL. You have stated that only a few have been stopped and that is after the shooter has started his massacre. The question I have is how does a CHL know that a mass shooter is about to start a mass shooting, and since there is no way of knowing, if a CHL took preemptive action, wouldn't that land him in Mr. Sugarman's list you seem to be fond of? If mass shooters were not necessarily worried about CHL, why do they commonly choose "gun free zones" rather than at gun stores, ranges, or police stations? What few mass shootings that have been stopped by CHL, or other armed persons, has resulted in far fewer fatalities overall.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:47 AM on 03/07/2011
I'm not sure how many jilted lovers, or disgruntled workers, or depressed students would find suitable targets for their wrath at gun stores, or ranges, but plenty of psychos with scores to settle take on law enforcement in full awareness of the consequences. The presence of "CHL"s doesn't faze them one bit.
photo
Old Jarhead
F-4. The triumph of thrust over aerodynamics
09:16 AM on 03/07/2011
Stay away from matches with all those straw men, Guffie. Most mass shootings take place in "gun free zones", regardless of your deflection. That criminals also "take on" law enforcement is not new news, and that has happened for more years than you have been around this world. Yet these types of mass homicides are relatively new, and have predominately occurred in the last 50 years. Mostly in "gun free zones".
12:33 PM on 03/07/2011
There are no real, fact based statistics, but here are a lot of fairy tales. Woulda, coulda....
02:36 PM on 03/07/2011
and you are one of the Brothers Grimm
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:56 PM on 03/07/2011
Almost all ex post facto "research" is, even without the cherry picking. Controlled research is another thing, and I doub't the lobbies would allow it.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
02:38 PM on 03/06/2011
For those whose primary argument is CHL holders are law abiding citizens who wouldn't commit a violent crime, check out

http://wethearmed.com/index.php?topic=8500.0

Over 150 murdes, 9 of them against police officers, by media-reported CHL holders since May '07. And since police won't report all the stats, this website has to rely on media reports for its data, so the real numbers are clearly much, much higher.
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
03:01 PM on 03/06/2011
Repeating the VPC claim does not make it true.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:47 PM on 03/06/2011
Nor do your contrived insinuations make the VPC's claim false.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
04:45 PM on 03/06/2011
I reposted it because it took forever to show up and I thought the original had gone off into cyberspace.
05:24 PM on 03/06/2011
Your stats actually prove how lawful CCW holders are.

The "study" goes back about 4 years. America averages about 16,000 total murders per year, meaning that time frame covers about 64,000 murders.

Yet of those 64,000 murders, only a few hundred are shown to be by CCW holders. Thus it is proven that CCW holders commit a microscopic fraction of the murder total and are not a significant threat as a whole. You have shown that CCW holders are far less likely to murder then the public at large, not more.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
05:55 PM on 03/06/2011
First, the vast majority of CHL permits go to people who get them on a whim and never carry a gun in public at all - people who own a gun in their home for defense are a whole different caliber of person than the kind of paranoid nut who thinks he has to carry a gun around in case today is the day he gets to be a hero. I have 5 guns at home, but I'd never consider carrying one around in public. Secondly, those were only the media-reported murders that could be confirmed to have been committed by CHL holders. The true number is obviously many times higher. And maybe you should call up those families and tell them that their loved one's murder was statistically irrelevant - particularly the 9 police officers who were murdered by law-abiding CHL holders. I'm sure they'd be understanding about it. Plus it'd be good practice for your calls to families of college students who got involved with someone else's girlfriend and was shot by another law-abiding CHL holder, or who got in a fight at a beer bust and got shot by another law-abiding CHL holder, or who was sitting in class when a law abiding but deeply depressed CHL holder pulled out a gun and started shooting people, or a professor who was shot by a CHL holder who didn't like his grade. You'll need that phone call charm then.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
02:19 PM on 03/06/2011
And as far as the base assumption that CHL permit holders are law abiding citizens:

Concealed handgun permit holders have killed at least nine law enforcement officers in addition to 142 private citizens (including 15 shooters who killed themselves after an attack) since May 2007 according to the latest update of Concealed Carry Killers, a Violence Policy Center (VPC) on-line resource that tallies news reports of such killings.

The web site, located at http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm, is updated monthly to include new fatal shootings since May 2007 by concealed handgun permit holders and any changes in the legal status of permit holders facing criminal charges. (Any concealed handgun permit holders who are eventually acquitted of their alleged crimes are not included in the tallies maintained on the site although the facts surrounding the shooting are detailed.)
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
02:55 PM on 03/06/2011
"Concealed handgun permit holders have killed at least nine law enforcemen­t officers in addition to 142 private citizens "

Not while exercising concealed carry in public. VPC's claims have been constanly proven to be misleading and often flat out false. They include people who never had a permit to carry concealed (because VPC got permit to purchase as required in that state confused with permit to carry), people whose permits had expired, shootings which did not take place with a concealed firearm, shootings which took place in areas where concealed carry permits are not needed, etc.

Take anything the VPC says with a large pinch of skepticism. They are notrious for being deliberatly misleading and even advocate doing so on their website.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:11 PM on 03/06/2011
I think I get it. Shootings enacted by concealed carriers in areas where a concealed carry permit is not needed, or by those whose permit had expired should not be included in statistics reflecting shootings by concealed carriers, but the "VPC" employs tactics which could mislead us. Am I right?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
01:36 PM on 03/06/2011
At the end of the day, campus police can't possibly effectively police a population that is carrying thousands of concealed handguns. The inescapbable fact is, common sense by any reasonable person would be that such a situation would invariably lead to violence and threats of violence, would unduly disrupt the education process and would be an outrageous infringement on a normal student's ability to pursue his academic career. These are not arguable points - college administrators don't want them, student bodies don't want them and campus police don't want them. If for some bizarre legal reason there's no way around it, I'd say CCW holders should be identified with an arm band or other insignia to alert students and campus police that this person is armed and potentially dangerous to those around him.
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
02:59 PM on 03/06/2011
"At the end of the day, campus police can't possibly effectivel­y police a population that is carrying thousands of concealed handguns."

First, it would not be thousands. It would likely not even be over 100.

Second, they can do so every bit as effectively as they can police the population right now.

"The inescapbab­le fact is, common sense by any reasonable "

You are engaging in a "poisoning the well" argument.

"These are not arguable points "

Yes, they are.

"I'd say CCW holders should be identified with an arm band or other insignia "

Which completely negates the advantages of concealed carry and would actually cause a lot of the problems you are using as reasons not to carry concealed.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
04:40 PM on 03/06/2011
Identifying CCW holders would identify those people on campus who were legally carrying a weapon. You got a problem with that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
06:41 PM on 03/06/2011
An identifying arm band has been tried before.  Sounds like a possible solution.  Finally!
http://tinyurl.com/q4y4en
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
01:30 PM on 03/06/2011
For those of you who continue quote Heller, you must not have read it. A provision:

(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.[43][44]
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
02:59 PM on 03/06/2011
We know exactly what Heller says, thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
04:39 PM on 03/06/2011
So why do you continually quote it as if it makes it legal to take weapons on campus as a fait accompli, when it does no such thing?
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
09:28 PM on 03/05/2011
The rights of private property owners are being infringed by the pro gunners,

"Tennessee is one of four states, along with Arizona, Georgia and Virginia, that recently enacted laws explicitly allowing loaded guns in bars. (Eighteen other states allow weapons in restaurants that serve alcohol.)."
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
09:41 PM on 03/05/2011
Incorrect. The owners of the bars can still forbid firearms if they want. All these laws did was remove the state laws which were a blanket ban and which actually infringed on the right of the property owner to allow firearms if they so desired.
10:23 PM on 03/05/2011
The bar owner probably won't know who is carrying till the shooting starts.
10:29 PM on 03/05/2011
OdinsEye commented on Heller, which found, "District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use within the home in federal enclaves". Though Heller incorrectly interpreted the 2nd, it did refer to the home, not flashing a gun willy nilly on the streets or on campus.
12:30 PM on 03/06/2011
Your point is bogus. First there is no such thing as a bar in Virginia. There are restaurants whcih serve alcohol, and virtually all state laws that allow a permit holder to carry his personal protection firearm in such an establishment allow the owner to prohibit it. No one's private property rights are infringed by that.
01:05 AM on 03/08/2011
Interesting thing came up in my concealed weapon class here in Florida, yes I know Florida isn't Virginia. We were informed that a "no firearms" sign is not legally enforceable, there is no legal penalty for ignoring the sign, not even tresspassing. The most the owner can do is ask you to leave if they find out.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:33 AM on 03/05/2011
For those of you who may have missed it, here's the case for gun carry on college campuses in a nutshell -

JimInHouston 11 hours ago (11:15 PM)
98 Fans
Become a fan
"What if the campus administration and students don't want to permit this?"

Tough."
01:33 PM on 03/05/2011
Perhaps a more eloquent argument?

At Virginia Tech, Cho had eleven minutes to walk room to room, firing over 170 rounds, shooting people as he saw fit to do. One person blocking a door was shot through the door and died. Students were going out windows. Everyone but Cho was unarmed, they were fish in a barrel. He may as well have been walking through a petting zoo. Police report hearing the final shot after they broke in, before going to the second floor. If not for his suicide Cho could have kept on killing until stopped.

"How the Virginia Tech shootings unfolded
Edited extracts from the Virginia Tech report, detailing the events leading up to and on the day of the April 16 massacre in which 33 people died."

"9.15-9.30am: Cho is seen outside and then inside Norris Hall, an engineering building. He chains the doors shut on the three main entrances from the inside. No one reports seeing him do this.

9.40-9.51am: Cho begins shooting in room 206 of Norris Hall, where a graduate engineering class is under way. This is where most of the killings take place.

9.51am: Cho shoots himself in the head just as police reach the second floor. Cho's shooting spree in Norris Hall lasted about 11 minutes. He fired 174 rounds and killed 30 people in Norris Hall plus himself. A further 17 people were wounded."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/30/highereducation.usa
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
06:07 PM on 03/05/2011
Have you ever been in a gun fight before?  I'll even accept paintball or laser tag as a parallel situation.
09:30 PM on 03/05/2011
Yes, Cho's rampage is proof the proliferation of guns is the problem.
03:41 PM on 03/05/2011
guff--cut the histrionics--we can come up with all sorts of over the top statements that you have made under your past BANNED screen names
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
06:50 AM on 03/05/2011
Here's the bottom line - The gun lobby asserts that they have a right to carry weapons on a college campus because they hold CHL permits. I say I have a right to send my son to a college in which he's not going to be sitting next to a homesick, lovesick, depressed kid who's experimenting with drugs and flunking out and his world is crashing around him and he thinks his life is over...and he has a gun in his pocket. Your right to carry is not universal - there are millions of places where you can't carry a weapon whether you have a permit or not. This is one more inappropriate place for people to carry weapons.

I thought it was interesting that Texas A&M polled their students and 57% didn't want guns on campus - and this is one of the most conservative military-based schools in the country. If you can't sell the A&M student population, you can't sell any of them.

Students don't want it, professors don't want it, campus police don't want it, the general public doesn't want it, and at the end fo the day, your rights don't supersede mine.
12:08 PM on 03/05/2011
While I don't personally care for the tone of grandstanding on this topic lately in several states, there is a logical flaw in the assumption that disallowing concealed carry prevents the possession of a weapon.

I agree that students have a right to be secure in their surroundings while attending classes, just as they have this same right anywhere else. If prohibiting the possession of a weapon without a corresponding process for enforcing this prohibition (TSA-style screening?) were synonymous with creating a zone of guaranteed safety, there would be no reason for debate.

The state in which I live (and attended college) does not restrict CCW permittees from carrying on campus, and there has never been a single case of even a threat to safety resulting from such carry. The assumption that college students are ill-equipped to safely possess weapons is simply not borne out of the facts. As most states require permittees to be 21 years of age, the association of "homesick, lovesick, depressed kid who's experimenting with drugs and flunking out and his world is crashing around him" just doesn't reflect the real world.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
03:41 PM on 03/05/2011
You must live in Utah. In Texas, it's a whole different world down here. Just because your college experience didn't include a lot of hyper stressed out people doesn't mean it's not a common college experience other places. I guarantee you that it is. In fact, if I'm remembering the stats correctly, suicide is the second leading cause of death for college kids nationwide.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
02:17 PM on 03/05/2011
I keep waiting for one of you CHL people to reply to this, but all I hear is crickets. How is it that your non-universal "right" to carry a weapon supersedes my right to send my son to a college in which he doesn't have to wonder which of his stressed-out, despondent classmates might be sitting there with a gun in his pocket? I guess you have no answer to that.
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and retired military combat vet
06:25 PM on 03/05/2011
When you son is walking around off campus, going to the movies or the mall or the grocery store, he is exposed to people lawfully carrying concealed.
photo
rikilii
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
09:15 AM on 03/06/2011
You absolutely have the right to send your son to a private college that does not permit guns on campus.

Happy now?
12:07 AM on 03/05/2011
"This necessarily means introducing a broad new array of obvious risks into everyday life on college campuses. Those risks seem anything but remote: that an argument between a professor and a disgruntled student will erupt in gunfire; that an intoxicated student will accidentally discharge his gun while showing it off at a Friday afternoon keg party; that a student's momentary despair over a romantic break-up will turn lethal as he finds a gun and turns it on himself."

And yet Dennis can't point to any examples of this happening in colleges where CCW is already allowed. Something to consider.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SShaw490
A man hears what he wants and disregards the rest
10:59 AM on 03/05/2011
Nor can the other side show a single instance in which an armed CHL holder prevented a mass shooting before it happened, which is the scenario they use to try to legitimize their argument. They say someone who'd want to go into the cafeteria and start shooting people would be shot by armed CHL holders, yet this has never happened unless the shooter had already run out of ammo, in which case it's all over anyway.

It comes down to rights - Does a CHL holders' right to carry a gun (a right that is not universal already since there are millions of places you can't take a gun whether you have a permit or not) can supersede my right to send my son to a school where he doesn't have to worry about whether a despondent kid sitting next to him in class is carrying a gun. Is the CHL holders' right so obviously superior to mine that we'd actually change an existing policy to allow it? I doubt you could get 35% of all college students and their parents nationwide to accept such an outrageous assertion.
photo
rikilii
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
12:46 PM on 03/05/2011
Man, how many times do I have to post this link today?

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14808321/detail.html
12:55 PM on 03/05/2011
SS--we have supplied links to several incidents where armed students/staff have ENDED the incidents before the police have even arrived
11:58 PM on 03/04/2011
"It is revealing that none of the students and teachers who actually were under fire that day have become proponents of concealed carry on campus.'

Really? I didn't know Dennis was a mind reader. I didn't know he called up all the dozens of people who were in Norris hall that day and found out their views on CCW.

Just because not everyone has decided to persue a lucrative career as a paid lobbyist for a special interest group like the Brady Bunch like Colin Goddard doesn't mean they don't have strong views on the subject, against CCW or in favor of it.
09:42 PM on 03/05/2011
I hear the pay is excellent at the NRA.Their lobbyists are laughing all the way to the bank, meanwhile there is the blood of innocent's killed by gun use in the streets.
12:49 PM on 03/06/2011
A comment in search of a point.
12:16 PM on 03/12/2011
MORE STUDENTS "SURVIVING" VIRGINIA TECH SUPPORT CAMPUS CARRY. (These are not paid employees of anything)

Example
Wayne Chiang
Ken Stanton

Both, along with MANY who lost friends at Virginia Tech, are members of VIRGINIA TECH STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY ON CAMPUS
Google them or find on Facebook.