Armed college students mean fewer victims

So, college students are less responsible @ 21 than are high-school dropouts and lower-middle-class blue collar workers? The practical application of permitting professors and college students' carrying wouldn't be that everybody in the class would be armed; however, there'd always be the POSSIBILITY that one or more in the class would be. (Not exactly the same environment as a mindless, liberal, airheaded-inspired "gun free" zone.)

I armed my youngest son when he was 18. He's 22 now, and a first-year law student, having graduated valedictorian of his undergrad class in Economics. So far, he hasn't shot up any classes, bars, malls, robbed any 7-11's, etc.

It's absurd to assert that there'd be more shootings in colleges, should professors and college students be permitted to carry concealed.
 
I armed my youngest son when he was 18. He's 22 now, and a first-year law student, having graduated valedictorian of his undergrad class in Economics. So far, he hasn't shot up any classes, bars, malls, robbed any 7-11's, etc.

Is your argument that he is an average student or that he is exceptional and shouldn't be used as an example of Joe College?
 
Okay, I go to college, and I fail to see how final exams at college are any more stressful than a big project at work. You'd also think that there would be a bit of self-selection, because I just can't see the test anxiety crowd wanting a gun...

If the person has a legitimate concealed carry permit, why not let them carry? I don't see how being in an establishment of higher learning has anything to do with it, except selecting a more responsible segment of the population than the average at that given age.

And don't point to the noteworthy exceptions of responsibility. If "overlapping bell curves" doesn't mean anything to you, well, that still doesn't chage the fact that they overlap :) . If it does... DUDE! :p
 
Hmmm...

I'm guessing his point is that college students are capable of more than most people give them credit for. Take for instance Mr. Cho. He killed 32. That's one end of the spectrum. Their are people at the other end. People that would stand up and fight and save 32.
 
Is your argument that he is an average student or that he is exceptional and shouldn't be used as an example of Joe College?

If the merits of my argument aren't evident to you, then I doubt that you'd provide meaningful dialogue with either my sons, daughter, or me. :rolleyes:
 
If the merits of my argument aren't evident to you, then I doubt that you'd provide meaningful dialogue with either my sons, daughter, or me.

You are talking about college students, then give an example of yours. I want to know if I was supposed to be using your example as exemplar for the class.

I know a 12 year old that is in college and is very responsible. He can't shoot worth a damn. Is he also exemplar?
 
They really are kids for awhile in many cases.

I agree that there are many who require more time to mature. But these students who might have a jealous mood swing, binge drink, or otherwise use poor judgment can legally buy/carry a firearm now. If they are already immature, what is going to stop them from bringing a firearm onto campus? Is it the school policy? If they are an underage drinker, then haven't they already decided to ignore policy? I'm not suggesting that we encourage every student to carry, but those, such as Abstract's child, who are encouraged and trained by responsible gun owners/parents are the individuals who could make a difference in another VT type situation.

I find it unlikely, due to a school policy change allowing firearms, that those irresponsible students with no firearm background would take it as encouragement to carry.

My children are 6+ years away from college, and I am considering the same issues. I will have to judge my children's personality and/or responsibility level before I encourage them either way.

Fly
 
gvf, drinking, drug, lack of maturity, & higher insurance premium

gvf said:
Well.....
I've taught university-students for years. In the long run - while a godsend for situations like VirginiaT - college students Carrying?.....well, I don't think it's a good idea in the long run and would likely cause regular shootings. It's an environment where youth for the first time are unsupervised, living in close-quarters with one to three roomates (and there are frequent problems between them), drinking to incredible excess at times or doing drugs in some cases - (and some have real problems with alcohol) and also learning for the first time what "true love" is (which of course it isn't) and its concomitant severe mood swings, jealousies, intense anger over rejections etc - plus the difficuties some have - very severe - with newly diagnosed psychotic mental illnesses (this is the age they "present")- and of course there are all the difficulties a good number can have with academics and the great stress this can cause; throw handguns into the middle of all that and......

For similar reasons, car-insurance companies charge an arm and a leg to insure this age-group - not real stable age.

An important point if you're in your late fourties and, more so, in your 50s, is that the age of maturity is continually being pushed back - and freshman and sophmores are more akin to what we were in mid-high school. They really are kids for awhile in many cases. I and many faculty have noted this the last few years. You may have an image of yesteryear in terms of maturity-levels. They mature markedly in most cases by senior year, but it's not there often for awhile.

gvf,

1. my understanding is that fundamental rights based on natural law such as right to life, freedom of speech, self-defense, religion, etc. was not intended to be restricted based on predisposition of WHAT THAT PERSON MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT DO.

BTW, rights based on natural law are different from priviledges granted by the state such as driving license allowing one to drive, business license allowing a business owner to operate, etc.

2. People respond to incentives, including old and young, even children. Even people who are addicted to alcohol and drugs.

This is known based on the fact that people who commit crimes change their behavior by shifting their preferences from personal to property crimes when potential victims are likely to be armed.

3. When data from the days of Wild West was examined (when both drinking and being armed was common), it was found that personal crime was relatively rare.

Similar pattern were found when crime data from old England was examined.

4. while it may seem related, insurance are bought as a risk transfer mechanism so that the owner of the vehicle does not bear the consequences of his/her action at the wheel IF AN ACCIDENT HAPPENS. The owner of the insurance reaps the benefit whether an accident happens or not, because consequences of a potential accident is now borne by the insurance company in return for insurance premium.

However, in the case of CHL/CCW, both the benefit and cost are borne by the bearer based on what he/she does, not based on probability calculated from underwriting process.

It would be easy to deny CHL/CCW to all males if CHL/CCW or any other rights can be denied based on what a person might do. For example, we know that most violent crimes are committed by males, hence, to reduce potential misuse, it should be denied to all males.

Similar argument can be made for denial based on lack of maturity based on some criteria, or denial can be made based on age due to deteriorating physical condition (possibility of having the gun taken away by the assailant or not being physically strong enough to retain the gun), etc.

5. I do know that I'm not wise enough or qualified in any way to deny others the natural right to life by denying them the means of self-defense. However, if you are that wise and mature, my hats off to you. You are infinitely wiser than I can ever hope to be, no matter how old or mature I get, or how much more accomplishment I achieve.

Best regards.

--John
 
Last edited:
Wild where is there a soned response Alaska

Now that is a little better to read...but not understand. What is reasoned response? I guess that is your meaning? Edited. I am saying that I try to read you little comments because they are above the signature line. I assume they are suppose to be part of you post? If they are just little ditties that have no meaning then I guess it does not matter. Anyway, if these are meaningful comments then you should use the space bar...always easier to read.

Enough said. I will not comment again...just a complaint (or advice).
 
Last edited:
gvf,

Granted, college students do not always exhibit the best of behaviors. We hear of college parties with plenty of alcohol, some of which get out of hand. Locally, it's not unusual to see a Frat party that overflows out front with most attendees holding the ubiquitous "paper cup" full of delicious amber beverage. Given that most students are 18-20 in college they are below drinking age, yet year after year this continues.

The question one needs to ask is why the atmosphere of college campuses allows such behavior. Why don't these schools take a hard stance againt underage drinking and drug use?

It seems to me that if college administrators were sincere in their statements that "a campus should be a safe place for study" when arguing against CCW's, they would excercise stricter discipline over students and fraternity and sorority activities as well.
 
Back
Top