College Allows Student to Advocate for Concealed Carry on Campus, Abandons Repressive Policy

[paulsby]

a nice victory for free speech...
http://volokh.com/2009/10/02/pittsburgh-area-college-allows-student-to-advocate-for-concealed-carry-on-campus-abandons-repressive-policy/#comments


So reports the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, discussing the case we blogged about in May. Here are some excerpts from FIRE’s summary; there are more details, and pointers to the relevant documents, here:


student threatened with punishment for attempting to form a gun-rights group at Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is finally allowed to distribute pamphlets about the group on campus. The college has also rescinded its unconstitutional policy demanding “prior written approval” for “personal contact with individuals or groups related to non-sponsored college material or events.” … Christine Brashier, who wanted to form a chapter of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), was told that her pamphlets were unacceptable “solicitation” and that any further efforts would be considered “academic misconduct” ….

After FIRE took Brashier’s case public in May, generating national news coverage, CCAC attorney Mike Adams finally replied to FIRE. Adams assured FIRE that Brashier did not face any disciplinary action and that she did have the right to try to form a SCCC group, but he reported that CCAC would not budge from its unconstitutional policy of prior review of materials….

But, FIRE reports, the policy has finally been changed; “Michael J. Rinaldi, a FIRE Legal Network attorney in the Commercial Litigation Practice Group at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP in Philadelphia, … successfully pressed CCAC to allow not only Brashier but all CCAC students to exercise their fundamental rights on campus.” Good work.

[donco6]

1. A gun rights group called "FIRE". Great. n/t

[paulsby]

5. it's not a gun rights group

it's a free speech group.

Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

[donco6]

9. Of course not.

"student threatened with punishment for attempting to form a gun-rights group at Community College of Allegheny County"

Whatever.

[paulsby]

11. do you have difficulty with reading comprehension

i said FIRE is not a gun rights group.

FIRE is a free speech group, specifically on college and high school campuses.

go to their website and read the press releases

in this case, FIRE defended the right of a student to form a gun rights group at a public college.

that is CLEARLY a first amendment issue, and FIRE won. the school backed down. FIRE has an incredible record of fighting for free speech. READ THE PRESS RELEASES. they are all there.

[donco6]

22. Not at all. Not at all. n/t

[pipoman]

87. Is the ACLU

a pedophile group because they have defended the rights of such groups, or are they a GLBT group because they have helped GLBT, or maybe they are KKK group because they assisted in the Klan's bid to demonstrate.

I guess that a rights group must only defend rights you like or they are a freeper group, huh?

[Treo]

12. Guns on Campus

CSU allows concealed carry on campus no blood baths yet. I have carried a concealed weapon on campus for two years ( as did one of my professors) neither weapon jumped out of the holster on its own and began shooting people.

[paulsby]

15. ditto for WA state

there is no law prohibitng them on public campuses. on private campuses, some campuses have "policy" against them. this has not yet been challenged as to legality. but it's undeniably legal on public campuses (UW WSU etc.)

[Treo]

17. Any new graveyards because of it? NT

[paulsby]

20. yes

they ring the UW campus. i swear the place is like frigging beirut!

[MichaelHarris]

85. not true

[GreenStormCloud]

91. Please cite the WA law that makes it illegal.

I said LAW, not administrative policy. Admin policy is NOT law.

Of course, you can't cite such a law. There was a long thread sometime back in which you were unable to cite such a law. You kept trying to claim that admin policy was law, but it isn't.

[gorfle]

120. FIRE is has nothing to do with guns.

http://www.thefire.org/

Foundation for Individual Rights

http://www.thefire.org/about/mission/
Mission
The mission of FIRE is to defend and sustain individual rights at America's colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, legal equality, due process, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience — the essential qualities of individual liberty and dignity. FIRE's core mission is to protect the unprotected and to educate the public and communities of concerned Americans about the threats to these rights on our campuses and about the means to preserve them.

They were involved with this case because a student wanted to start a college club and distribute pamphlets for it, and they were denied this by the college.

[villager]

2. we're calling gun industry lobbying groups like the NRA "free speech" now?

n/t

[BzaDem]

3. How is it not free speech?

Would you still be OK with the ban if it were a pro-choice group on campus?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. So college students are now gun industry lobbyists?

[paulsby]

7. FIRE is a free speech lobbying group

before you spout off about something you haven't researched, why don't you check the link, go to the FIRE site, etc. and educate yourself

this particular case was about free speech in relation to firearms rights advocacy, but that is not what FIRE does. they do (generally) free speech on campuses, of ALL kinds. this incident just happens to involve gun rights advocacy.

[thunder rising]

8. Damn, I thought we had our analogy to ACORN. If you hadn't posted I was free to hate them without

even knowing what they did ;-)

[Euromutt]

110. Well, FIRE does seem to be somewhat selective who they stand up for

The cases they accept seem to lean rather towards situations of social conservatives being muzzled by a liberal administration in the name of political correctness, though by no means exclusively so. While they've been perfectly willing to take on private universities, they've shied away from outfits like Liberty or BJU.

That doesn't alter the fact that the cases they take up are bona fide violations of free speech, but let's not laud them to unequivocally; there's evidently some stuff they won't touch.

[aikoaiko]

10. I see you're still having a difficult time understanding the Bill of Rights....

Keep coming back.

[michreject]

89. Aren't they entitled to the same rights as everyone else?

Or just those that you agree with?

[slackmaster]

117. Nobody is calling the NRA or any other lobbying group "free speech"

Speech is action, behavior. A group of people is a thing.

HTH

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. The 1st Amendment wins.

[Initech]

13. So let me get this straight: low-cost health care for everyone bad, concealed weapons on campus good

God and the rest of the world wonders why we're so fucked up as a nation.

[paulsby]

16. which entirely misses the point

whether or not you agree with gun rights advocacy, it is CLEARLY a first amendment violation for a public campus to prohibit student advocacy for same.

free speech matters. even when it's about those evul gunz (tm)

[Treo]

23. Almost.

Try this VA tech concealed weapons not allowed 32 people dead bad. Luby's Cafeteria concealed weapons not allowed 23 dead 20 wounded bad.

New Life Church Concealed weapons not only allowed but welcomed three dead and the the shooter ran in to a citizen W/ a concealed hand gun who dropped him

Do the math

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

35. Why does it have to be an either or proposition?

[Euromutt]

112. What do the two have to do with each other?

The "arm everyone" canard notwithstanding, it's not like anyone is proposing issuing students handguns and concealed carry permits paid for out of state and/or federal budgets.

[Arugula Latte]

14. "Repressive" policy

:rofl:

Oh lord, the gun nut bullshit is thick sometimes ...

[paulsby]

18. did you read the press release and documents?

some of us respect the 1st amendment. you apparently don't

yes, prohibiting students from advocating for causes on campus, from handing out literature IS repressive, and it IS a violation of the 1st amendment (on a public campus).

the school also used prior restraint by requiring students to submit potential materials before being ok'd to use it.

that is also a violation of the 1st amendment (prior restraint)

free speech matters. even for those you disagree with, if that's the case in regards to your viewpoint on gun rights

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

37. Not as thick as those unable to read apparently.

[rwheeler31]

19. Oh hell lets just kill everyone , then we never have to think

about solving a problem. These are college students?

[paulsby]

21. free speech matters

even if it's free speech of gun rights advocates.

yup, the constitution applies to them too.

[RoyGBiv]

24. Oh for pity's sake ...

This is not to the OP, rather a comment on some of the responses.

This is what's wrong with the state of political discourse in this country, including (obviously) DU and forums like it.

People read a headline, pick out the parts they like or don't like, and then go off half-cocked (pun intended) about it. They either don't have a clue what is really going on or purposely ignore it so they can beat their own personal dead horse.

I don't like the idea of concealed carry generally, and I hate it on college campuses, but that is NOT what this is about. This is about the right of people to advocate a position on an issue. We live in a nation where we supposedly have the right to advocate ideas that others dislike. If you curtail those groups that advocate positions you dislike then you have absolutely no right to complain when it happens to groups advocating positions you do like ... unless you revel in your hypocrisy.

[rwheeler31]

25. This is not a free speech issue, this is a violence and

intimidation issue.

[RoyGBiv]

28. Wrong n/t

[paulsby]

29. are you serious

advocacy for gun rights is "violence and intimidation"?

man, george orwell would LOVE you.

take one dose of orwell, and one dose of voltaire.

and heal thyself

[rwheeler31]

36. Yes Arms dealers have caused problems for every

country. You seem to like the slaughter.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

39. Illiteracy is obviously causing problems for you in addition to the arms dealers.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

38. You can't possibly be saying that advocating for a policy is violent and intimidating?

[PavePusher]

93. No, it's an ignorance and bigotry issue.

And you are the fail.

[paulsby]

26. awesome post!!!

you would think it would go w/o saying that principles like free speech matter, and that regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with somebody, that they enjoy those same rights.

sadly, that so often is not the case

[Euromutt]

102. Thank you!

You get the point, and articulated it well.

[Monk06]

27. ya know I got kicked off FR for getting into and argument with gun runner FReeper Godebert

Over just this issue. I made the quite reasonable
claim that guns had no place in an institution of
higher learning because it destroys the essential
mutual trust and civility necessary for peaceful
intellectual exchange to take place.

Ironic that the 2nd amendment FReepers have come
here to stir up trouble.

[paulsby]

30. that kind of statement

is against DU rules. who exactly are you calling out?

[Monk06]

32. I'm calling out a FReeper who is one of Jim Robinson's best pals. Read the post before piling on !!

[paulsby]

33. i did

and i have no idea to whom you are referring

[Monk06]

34. Godebert is a member of the FReeper elite. He runs a 2nd amendment

propaganda site called righttobeararms.com IIRC

He's a publisher of gun rights 'literature' and
very well known in the Gun Show community.

His real name is Allan Gottlieb. 'Gottlieb' is
German for God Lives or live by God.

How ironic is that??

In other words Ace, Godebert is NOT A MEMBER OF DU !!!!!

Also on edit he is a convicted felon who spent six years
in the Federal Pen for fraud !!!!!

[Euromutt]

101. Your German needs work, among other things

"Gottlieb" is a contraction of "von Gott geliebt," German for "beloved of God." It's the same name as Amadeus (Latin) or Theophilos (Greek).

In other words Ace, Godebert is NOT A MEMBER OF DU !!!!!

In that case, he's not who you were talking about when you said earlier:

Ironic that the 2nd amendment FReepers have come here to stir up trouble.

To whom on this board are you referring as a "FReeper <who> has come here to stir up trouble"? You made an implied accusation, the least you can do is have the stones to stand behind it, or the good grace to withdraw it if you can't substantiate it.

Incidentally, I suspect that the word you're looking for is "alanic," i.e. "something mistakenly thought to be ironic by someone who doesn't know what irony is."

[Monk06]

113. Let me try an clarify what I mean by 2nd amendment FReepers

On one of my posts I said to Treo that I consider the
2nd amendment to the US constitution and disaster in the
history of civil society. By this I mean it invokes the
Hobbesian notion that the state of nature is by definition
lawless and brutal. Only through a social contract where
we agree to the constraint on our natural and bestial nature
by a system of laws enforced by the state can we live in
some semblance of peace.

The 2nd amendment contains a covert pessimism regarding
the social contract because it posits the state itself as
an enemy of liberty. It is important that the word liberty is
used in this context rather than freedom.

Liberty is a notion that begs for the untrammeled expression of
the individual will. Freedom on the other hand merely invokes a
release from bondage not the legitimate constraint of law.

Essentially, I think the the 2nd amendment betrays and anarchic impulse
in the political culture of the US immediately following the revolution.
The suspicion of national government by the individual states combined with
the overt declaration that without an armed citizenry, government devolves
ultimately into tyranny, is the root of a profound anxiety within the culture.
This anxiety led to the second amendment guarantee of the right to bear
arms as a defense against tyranny (any constraint on individual freedom)on
the part of the Federal Government.

To sum up when I mention 2nd amendment FReepers I am saying that I consider
all proponents, including DUers, of the inviolability of 2nd amendment
rights to be ideological soul mates.

I should point out that I readily admit that I am arguing as a Canadian
and I am coming to the belief that Canadians and Americans will always
be divided from each other on the question of guns and gun rights. The
cultural gap is just too great for us to agree on this issue

And thanks for the corrections on my German. I love the language but it
took me two years to get through first year German

[Treo]

116. The State

The 2nd amendment contains a covert pessimism regarding
the social contract because it posits the state itself as
an enemy of liberty.

I think the founders were pretty savvy W/ this. Have you ever seen a government become lessrestrictive of the rights of its people over time? IMO the state is the enemy of liberty. I don't I view government as a necessary evil that must be tolerated by a free society

[Euromutt]

118. Why focus on the 2nd Amendment alone?

The entire Constitution is predicated on distrust of a strong central government, and at the time of writing, that was an entirely justified position. It generally still is; a lot of national governments today still deny their citizens full civil and political rights. Admittedly, in the specific cse of the US, that had a lot to do with the fact that the several states didn't have a lot in common, were distrustful of each other, and didn't want any of the others seizing control of the central government and imposing its values on the rest. Then again, that's essentially the basis of any constitutional democracy: the limits exist to a large extent to prevent the imposition of a tyranny of the majority (or a bunch of people claiming to be the majority).

Only through a social contract where we agree to the constraint on our natural and bestial nature by a system of laws enforced by the state can we live in some semblance of peace.

Perhaps unwittingly, you illustrate the problem by saying "some semblance of peace." There have always been, and always will be, people who aren't interested in adhering to their side of the social contract. On occasion, such people may even achieve government office. The Constitution is set up to limit the ability of such people to do harm, and get rid of them.

I spent three years working for the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and one lesson I took away from that is that you can't placate a bully into being reasonable. Nor should you be expected to try. But if you take away people's means of self-defense, you're going a long way into forcing them into the situation where they have no option but to submit and hope for the best; and history indicates that the best can be pretty damn bad.

I should point out that I readily admit that I am arguing as a Canadian and I am coming to the belief that Canadians and Americans will always be divided from each other on the question of guns and gun rights. The cultural gap is just too great for us to agree on this issue

I'm actually originally from the Netherlands. I've only been a U.S. citizen for two years. I also used to be a proponent of gun control. Believe me, cultural attitudes can change; all it takes in this case is to be sufficiently annoyed at your government.

[Trajan]

41. I'm calling out this thread ...

As Gungeonitic material ....

[Monk06]

43. ?????????? So what's Gungeonitic. I always like to start the day with a new world.

[paulsby]

64. this thread is about free speech, not guns

the underlying gun issue is not relevant. the issue is that a public college campus attempted to use prior restraint (unconstitutional) and attempted to (and did, until they were challenged) prevent a student, on a public campus, from passing out literature and advocating for a cause he believed in.

it's a free speech issue. and it's important

[Treo]

68. Paulsby

I apologize for helping to derail this thread. If you would like I will stop commenting on the SCCOC

[paulsby]

82. follow your heart nt

[TankLV]

52. I f the fucking shoe fits...

and it fits YOU perfectly...

[paulsby]

83. if supporting the 1st amendment

fits that shoe, then slip that puppy on (hush puppy?)

[Common Sense Party]

42. "2nd amendment FReepers have come here"

Really? Name them. Point them out--on this very thread.

[Monk06]

44. Let me answer your question with a question. Are you in favour of CCW on U campauses??

[Treo]

46. I'm not only in favor of it, I do it NT

[Monk06]

47. Well then welcome to DU. Just to make it clear I think guns are the worst

evil invented by mankind and the 2nd amendment to
the US constitution the worst perversion of the
principles of civil society.

[Treo]

48. You can't close Pandora's box

The fact is that guns are here. The bad guys are going to have them no matter what laws you pass and all your going to do is disarmed the law abiding, the very people you should trust the most.

I say this a lot but I want you to really think what it means

VA Tech was a gun free zone. Until it wasn't an 32 people died

Columbine was a gun free zone. Until it wasn't and 13 people died

NIU

LSU

Vonn Marr

Luby's Cafeteria

Paducah Ky

Lane Bryant

YWAM Denver

But when the same guy that shot up YWAM Denver showed up at New Life Church ( W/ an AR and a couple THOUSAND rounds of ammunition)
He ran into a civilian W/ a permit who dropped him and only 3 people died

[Onceuponalife]

51. So you're advocating for high school kids to carry guns to school?

:crazy:

[Treo]

55. When I was in High school we did

There was a corn field across the street and during pheasant and quail season it was on at lunch break. we kept shot guns in the backs of our trucks. No one thought twice about it


ETA
To answer you question specifically this disscussion doen't concern itself W/ high school kids it concerns itself W/ adults 21 years and older who are already licensed to carry concealed handguns off campus we're merely asking that we be allowed to do on campus what we are allowed to do off campus.

[DonP]

115. We had "tight" gun control in High School too

It was the early 60's and we were required to check our shotguns in the front office when we arrived.

It was not unusual to see five or six leaning against the wall behind the desk.

It was about a 2 and a half mile walk through prime pheasant and rabbit country each way. The kids who lived on larger farms, with recently cut over cornfields, became very popular as the season rolled around.

What's really hysterical, is this was in rural Cook County Illinois! Today, Daley would stroke out at the thought.

[Monk06]

53. Well there are know restrictions on gun ownership in Afghanistan either

But I don't think I would like to live there.

Your reply is on the lines of the classic right
wing response to gun ownership. An armed nation
is a polite nation.

Well it's not. So occasionally a serial killer is
thwarted because someone has a gun such as the New
Life Church example. The RW loves to tout that example
but for every one of those there are a thousand drive
bys and mass murder suicides but bitter men whose wifes
don't want them anymore and they can't accept it.

In countries where it is difficult to obtain a gun the
perpetrator would have to rely on physical strength and
less lethal means to exact revenge.

You may be willing to live in a world where going to get
a hamburger could get you shot but I am not.

[Treo]

57. willing or not you do NT

[Monk06]

63. Sorry too fatalistic for me. For me getting out of a violent situation before

a one on one confrontation is always the best option
and living in fear but well armed is never an option.

[Treo]

70. Monk

You and I are on opposite sides here, I'm not going to change your mind and you're not going to change mine. So let's agree to disagree and let it go ok?
Peace

[Monk06]

76. I thought we were already at peace. You made a civil case for youself so Respecto.

[Treo]

80. Cool Nt

[PavePusher]

95. "For me getting out of a violent situation..."

"before a one on one confrontation is always the best option"

And all of us here agree with you on that one. Or are you trying to accuse us of something?


"and living in fear but well armed is never an option."

We do not live in fear. You may wish to limit YOUR options, I do not. Purposely limiting your options of self-defense is stupid. I will not let you limit MY options under the law.

[paulsby]

106. exactly. classic fear canard

i have fire insurance on my house. am i in fear of a fire? no (i'm a former firefighter btw). but it gives me a way to be prepared, financially, if one happens.

i wear a seatbelt, even when tooling around my very suburban neighborhood at 25 mph. am i in FEAR of a collision? no

i have several months of food storage (actually, at least 6) as well as water purifying equipment. am i in fear of some sort of collapse a la katrina? no. but i am prepared.

i wear a bullet resistant vest every day at work. am i in fear of getting shot? no. (although my best friend was shot and killed, and several other friends shot), but i wear it to be prepared.

etc.

[PavePusher]

94. Let's detail the fail...

"Well there are know restrictions on gun ownership in Afghanistan either"

Your strawman, it burns.



"Your reply is on the lines of the classic right
wing response to gun ownership. An armed nation
is a polite nation. Well it's not."

Wow. Now guns cause rudeness. I guess mine are defective in an all new way. My gunsmith is really getting tired of me asking why my guns don't seem to kill people, cause rudeness or panic in the streets.



"So occasionally a serial killer is
thwarted because someone has a gun such as the New
Life Church example. The RW loves to tout that example
but for every one of those there are a thousand drive
bys and mass murder suicides but bitter men whose wifes
don't want them anymore and they can't accept it."

Thousands of shootings for every defensive use. Really. Got stats for that? It's O.K., we'll wait....



"In countries where it is difficult to obtain a gun the
perpetrator would have to rely on physical strength and
less lethal means to exact revenge."

Except, in countries where it is difficult to get guns, THE CRIMINALS STILL GET THEM and the citizens are left to "rely on physical strength and less lethal means" to defend themselves. Hardly equitable in my opinion. Please note that in Britian, an island nation one would think fairly easy to seal the borders of, the more guns that get banned, the higher the gun crime rate gets.



"You may be willing to live in a world where going to get
a hamburger could get you shot but I am not."

And that is why I am armed and exceedingly polite. Except to ignorant, anti-rights bigots. I kind of hate them.

[WWFZD]

114. There were massive restrictions on private ownership

of firearms in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, among many others. Given the choice between the extremes, I think I'd rather live in Afghanistan.

[GreenStormCloud]

90. The 2nd is part of OUR constitution and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

And our side won the legal battle to establish it as an individual right. Now we are almost certain to win incorporation of the 2nd.

So you might as well get used to it.

[Common Sense Party]

75. You're not answering my question at all. Typical.

You called out other DUers and said they were Freepers.

Name them.

[Monk06]

79. Well Treo is an ex FReeper so technically that's one, but he's a good head

Plus I'm and ex registered FReeper so I guess
I can out myself.

I will say this when a CCW thread pops up on DU
the number of sub 1000 post DUers increases dramatically
get the picture? Plus I didn't name anyone by name or
DU id so I didn't out anyone. No rule violation there.

[Treo]

81. I even boycotted the Dixie Chicks

Until I heard "Not ready to make nice"

[Treo]

45. Guns on campus

carried a gun on campus for two years CSU allows permit holders to carry on campus. I don't see a lessening of civility. I don't think any one even knew I was heeled

[Monk06]

49. Well you should have attended a Canadian University for two years

Just to see what life without guns is really like

But tell me this why did you feel you needed to
carry on campus?

If the answer is you didn't feel safe without
lethal force immediately available then you
attended a University where the environment was
antithetical to free thought.

If I have to worry that a student may pull a gun
on me if I disagree with him then I am in a situation
where respect for law, civility and the rights of all
not just the best armed are respected. The world you
describe is anarchy

[Treo]

54. The scenario you describe

Almost never happens. As a rule CHP holders are some of the most law abiding people on the planet. In order to get my permit I had to submit a copy of my fingerprints to the county sheriff along with a list of every place I'd lived for (I think) ten years. The FBI vetted me throughly and found nothing in my background that indicated that I was prone to violence and issued the permit. Every time this comes up those who oppose concealed carry say that there will be blood in the streets and permit holders will be shooting each other over parking spaces, but it never happens ( or if it does the instances are so few that they don't even register).

In the unlikely event that I ever do have to use my gun for self defense I almost certainly will be arrested( at least until the police sort things out). I may well have to pay several thousand dollars in legal fees defending my actions in court and I will have to live W/ the fact that I shot another human being for the rest of my life.

Because of this I tend to take carrying a gun very seriously, I am more circumspect when I'm carrying than when I'm not because I am aware that any altercation I have have the potential of escalating to a gunfight Knowing that tends to make me much more civil than I would otherwise be.

But tell me this why did you feel you needed to carry on campus?

I carry a gun everywhere I go. I'm carrying one now. My daughter had the misfortune of marrying a drug dealer when she was 17. He is serving a second drug related prison sentence at FCI Florence right now. He is there partially because of testimony that my wife gave. He has also lost custody of all his children as a partial result of my wife's testimony. Both he and his family have sworn revenge. That's why I carry a gun
TYPO

[Monk06]

56. May I say I sympathize with your situation but I stand by my position

I would never live in a society where guns were
considered necessary for every day survival.

I would use any resources I had to move as far
away from any such situation as I could and there
are lots of places in the world where you can go to
escape the constant specter of gun violence.

[Treo]

58. Name one NT

[Monk06]

60. Barcelona, Venice, Tokyo, Osaka, Shanghai, every Canadian city

except Jamaican neighborhoods in Toronto and Surrey
in Vancouver. Also Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm, Munich,
Frankfurt, Berlin, I could go on but you get the idea.

In none of these cities would you be allowed to carry a gun
in the public streets unless you were a policeman or licensed
personal security guard

[Treo]

66. Your post proves you wrong

except Jamaican neighborhoods in Toronto and Surrey in Vancouver.

Can I assume that the criminals carry guns in those areas?

In none of these cities would you be allowed to carry a gun

The criminals do.

I live every day of my life W/ the possibility that a criminal may try to kill me, my wife ,or our daughter. The laws you suggest would disarm me and affect them not at all.

My ex SIL is a convicted felon. by law he is not allowed to own a firearm of any type. He wasn't one day home form prison before he had one. The law didn't slow him down at all.

[Monk06]

69. That's my point it's against the law for the Jamaican gangs to have

guns. Whenever they are charged illegal possetion
of fire arms is one of the charges.

Plus the guns they are using are smuggled in from
Detroit, something the Canadian government has loudly
protested about ie lax US gun laws

Now an LA gnagbanger can carry a gun all the live long
day if he isn't a felon. In Canada carrying an unsecured
handgun in public will get you put in jail .... which is
where anyone carrying a gun in public belongs IMO

[Treo]

72. It's illegal to carry a gun in LA county W/ out a permit period

This is the last thing I'm going to say dude , I'm a machinist. I did it for 8 years and now I'm going back into the medical field. You could take every gun in the world and dump them in the a volcano today and I could make one tomorrow. The only way you will ever get rid of guns is if you get every single person on this planet to agree to live W/ out them, so you need to find a different solution.

[friendly_iconoclast]

108. Doesn't seem to be slowing them down too much, does it?

Looks like the gangbangers have made the decision that carrying firearms illegally makes more sense than not
carrying, the threat of imprisonment notwithstanding.

[Euromutt]

111. If carrying is illegal but it still happens...

...then those cities are not "places in the world where you can go to escape the constant specter of gun violence," are they?

You're missing a fundamental point here, which is that gun violence is not caused by the presence of guns, but almost entirely by the presence of criminals. I'm sure you can find quite a number of American rural communities where guns are plentiful but gun crime is minimal or even non-existent. By contrast, there's probably not a major city in the world where there's no violence, gun violence included, simply because cities attract crime (it's where the victims are) and criminals will get guns if they feel they need them.

I might add that "the constant specter of gun violence" bothers me significantly less than the specter of violence in general, and frankly, the latter affects me more when I'm visiting urban parts of north-western Europe than either does in Seattle or Portland, OR. Actually, I've come closer to being shot twice in The Hague, NL than I ever have in the US.

[PavePusher]

96. And all of those places have gun crime. n/t

[paulsby]

105. do you have any evidence

that campuses that allow concealed carry are LESS safe than those that don't?

it's legal in WA state, and i think utah as well (don't quote me on utah. i haven't researched it)

WA state college campuses are plenty safe.

heck, seattle as a city, in a SHALL ISSUE CCW state is quite safe. do you want to compare crime stats between seattle and vancouver even? two roughly equivalent cities.

so, are WA state college campuses in a state of anarchy? i was on the UW campus a while back. i saw no anarchy. it looks like yer average campus. but guns are legal, and they are carried.

[Euromutt]

119. Say, the École Polytechnique de Montreal, Concordia University or Dawson College?

Do I really need to point out that every mass school shooting in the United States has occurred in institutions that were notionally "gun free zones"?

At my own college--The Evergreen State College in Olympia, WA--it's a violation of the student code of conduct to have a firearm on school grounds, including in your dorm room or in a vehicle parked on campus. And yet, the campus police have recently revamped their "active shooter" response protocol and acquired "patrol rifles" (that's what you call an "assault weapon" when it's in the hands of an agent of the state, rather than a private citizen). Two years ago, a student was raped at gunpoint in her dorm room, probably by someone from off-campus.

The primary obstacle to living a "life without guns" is that it doesn't depend on you alone, or on your fellow law-abiding citizens. All it take is one fuckhead who's decided the social contract doesn't apply to him to bring your little idyll to an abrupt end. I've spent most of my life in the Netherlands, which has way tighter gun laws than Canada (let alone the U.S.), and still I've arrived at my post office to find it closed because two gun-wielding thugs robbed the place ten minutes before, or two drug dealers settling a business dispute with lead on an intersection the tram I was on had passed through twenty minutes earlier.

You want to know what's "antithetical to free thought"? It's not the possibility of some fellow student with a concealed carry permit having a handgun on his belt in class (not that you'd know, with it being concealed). Seriously, if you can find me one example--one--of a student with a concealed carry permit at an American institution of tertiary education shooting a fellow student or faculty member in class over a mere verbal disagreement, I will be very impressed indeed. What's antithetical to free thought is being incapable of thinking because you're brain dead as a result of taking a bullet from some loser campus shooter engaged in some perverse self-validation by harming as many defenseless people as possible before offing himself like the cowardly piece of shit he was.

It actually occurs to me--and I acknowledge I'm not directly addressing anything you said--that every assertion that a CCWing student or faculty member couldn't have stopped a campus shooter like Cho Seung-Hui (or Kimveer Gill, for that matter) actually feeds the mythos that every campus shooter seeks to create about himself. He wants to think that he's invincible, that the only person who can stop him is himself. Why else would so many spree shooters shoot themselves, if not to die with the delusion intact that they were invincible? There'd be nothing to take the glamor off committing a spree shooting like a couple of would-be spree shooters being stopped in their tracks by someone who was supposed to be nothing more than a victim, but turned out to be capable of shooting back.

[Treo]

59. Do you believe in Karma?

If you do it to them don't get pissed when they do it here.

[Monk06]

61. Not sure what your driving at with that comment. What did I do to whom??

[Treo]

67. Didn't you say you were trolling the FREEPERS?

if you do it to them don't complain when they come here

[Monk06]

71. Now you are just being silly. It is a point of honour to troll FR and pull thier whiskers

I'm just saying that certain issues bring out the
FR trolls on this board. This is one of those issues
This and Roman Polanski.

[Treo]

73. I'm not being silly

I really believe in Karma. they'll never respect us if we don't respect them. I used to be a FREEPER dude I voted for Bush twice before I wised up.

[Monk06]

74. Well I haven't posted there since 2005 when I got kicked off and came back here

It was worth the battle for me because I only
waded in when they lied about Canadian health
care or slagged the Canadian military.

When I took on the gun lobby that was the end of
it, I was banned immediately. I also had a post
on Urban Dictionary scrubbed when I mentioned
FReepers, Buckhead and Godebert by name. That
gives you an idea how determined an enemy the RW
is.

[Treo]

78. Totally off topic but

It's the extremes at both ends the center doesn't have much difference. I've been on both sides and I'm probably farther right than you but I don't see a whole lot of differnce either way. Maybe it's a gunny thing.

[Odin2005]

31. +1 for the 1st Amendment.

I'm for concealed-carry, BTW. We have it here in Minnesota. Flame away if you must.

[Trajan]

40. ooooooh ...

Guns in GD ....

How exciting !

[Dinger]

86. Why The Fuck Is This Thread STILL Here?

[TankLV]

50. So the fucking Gun Nuts want to carry GUNS on CAMPUS?!!!!

And the fucking idiot Gun Nuts here on DU are actually supporting this insanity?!!!

I AM taking names the next time there's a massacre on a campus...

This is fucking NUTS!!!

[Treo]

62. In case you haven't noticed

massacres don't happen on campuses that allow concealed carry

[proteus_lives]

65. I support it.

And I carried on campus back when I was in school.

Put me on that list.

[AtheistCrusader]

92. Make sure you check to see if the next shooter was lawfully carrying concealed on campus.

None of the shooters to date, were. Shitbags all.

And won't you feel silly if a mass shooting is stopped by a student with a lawful CPL.

[PavePusher]

97. Is the validity of your post...

determined by the amount of profanity and lack of proof?

[paulsby]

104. plenty of campuses allow carry

they are legal on every college campus in WA state. i have yet to see ANY evidence our college campuses are less safe than those in states that prohibit campus carry.

but this thread is about SPEECH, not campus carry. the student was repressed because the public college admin's didn't like his speech.

and FIRE won the case.

it's all about speech. i don't care WHAt the kid was advocating, the school had no right to suppress him or exercise prior restraint

[beevul]

109. Taking names?

And can we trust that next time theres a massacre at a campus that does not allow guns on campus, that you'll likewise be taking the names of those that support a "ban" - those that enable an environment of defenselessness in that context?


Be honest.

[TheKentuckian]

77. The desire to cut off free speech for positions people disagree with is disgusting

I fucking despise the klan but I'd fight to the death to defend their right to spew their vile hate and ignorance because they are the same rights that allow me to speak my mind. These rights are for everyone.

How not holding or even strongly opposing a position has been distorted to the point that people brashly will now oppose even the right of a citizen to advocate for beliefs and policies they disagree with is so far past wrong and absolutely unAmerican. These same folks would cry a fucking river if anti-gun people we're stopped from being able to advocate their beliefs.

Values don't change because of underlying issues. There are people in this thread who call themselves Americans, democratic, and most absurdly liberals that are against freedom of speech. That is automatic BULLSHIT. Apparently, there are people on either side of the spectrum that are enemies of the most basic democratic principles. What possible freedom do any of us have when we attempt to legislate and codify repression of ideas?

Then to have the gall to even discuss freepers when you want the same thing they do! Wow!

[Name removed]

84. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BillDU]

88. Might hate me for this.

If some nut is going to be on campus with a gun to potentially kill people without good reason.
What is wrong with intelligent, rational people having guns to be able to defend themselves from these assholes.

[Jackson1999]

99. Because not matter how much....

training you have, or how many background checks you go through, many here consider you just another "potential murderer."

BTW-I am willing to be that most CCW holders have more range time than most cops.

[Jackson1999]

98. Wow. This thread has brought out the closet right wing republicans..

You know, the ones that oppose freedom of speech.

[paulsby]

103. there are a lot of people here who oppose free speech

ime, LOTS of people on the left oppose it. opposition to free speech knows no political ideology.

i can't tell you how many threads i see here where people have practically no respect for even basic principles of free speech. it's always "fire in a crowded theatre" over and over again.

the fact that this thread was placed in the guns forum is also silly imo. this is NOT about guns. it's about speech.

if the college had prohibited a kid advocating for reproductive choice from passing out pamphlets, there would be outrage. and justly so.

this is a PUBLIC school, and thus as govt. actors they cannot impinge on free speech like this.

the case is obvious and thank god that FIRE took up the case and got the school to rescind their policy.

[Douva]

100. About Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

Q: Who started Students for Concealed Carry on Campus?
A: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_started_students_for_concealed_carry_on_campus

Q: Is SCCC affiliated with the NRA?
A: http://www.concealedcampus.org/pdf/sccc_package.pdf#page=78

Q: What does SCCC believe, and what are its goals?
A: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16488074/Students-for-Concealed-Carry-on-Campus-SCCC-Handbook

[friendly_iconoclast]

107. +1 for the First Amendment, and -1 for those confirming the old joke:

"Someone who will defend to the death your right to agree with them"

Sad to see some DUers conforming to the old stereotype of a liberal...