Option not to carry a firearm

KingEdward said:
I believe nationwide (generally speaking), the CCW or CHL, or whatever your state calls it, the minimum age requirement is 21.

It seems that about 95% (sorry if not exact) of college students (4 year degree) are between 18 and 22/23 years of age.

Logically, this means that NO 18 or 19 or 20 year old college student would be able to get a CCW permit.

Unless I'm missing something, this leaves only Seniors and maybe a few juniors (21 yr olds) that could even qualify.

That means on most campuses that about 30% or so of the entire student body would even qualify. Of that amount, probably not even half would go through the process.

I picture most campuses having about 15% (best case) of the student body having CCW (if ever allowed on campus).

That kind of does away with the argument, "we just can't have kids running around with weapons at frat parties".

But IMO, 15% of the campus having CCW permit is a good thing.
Click to expand...

I think that's probably a very high estimate. I could barely fit food into my budget in college. Oddly enough, I had purchased a handgun about 3 months after I finished. :)

I'd also note that being a Criminal Justice major, meaning I constituted part of the tiny minority of the average university that may be somewhat conservative, I didn't speak to many students who even considered bringing their weapon to college. When your career is on the line, you really don't have time to worry about the miniscule possibility of a rampage when you are more likely to die from alcohol abuse, the commute to school, or the dire consequences of letting the administration know that you even sort of like guns. Most of us pretty much had a "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" attitude. Even if a campus allowed handguns, the general culture of academia would make you a target for scrutiny and you may find yourself on the bad end of a subjective grading system.

Here is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I know the source is not really impartial but I just googled it from memory.
 
I believe that many officers in Texas (DPS, Consatables, Police...) are considered on duty at all times. It would be unreasonable to go unarmed. That's my answer to your question.

Now my question. Who SHOULD have the right to nullify the 2nd amendment? And why should a University or any other school be different than other public places?

(Rant on)
In my opinion "Gun Free Zones" and "Zero Tolerance" are silly and irrational. And promote the idea that you are not able to defend yourself nor do you have the right.
(Rant off)

Dsllas Jack
 
Doc Hoy

But I have established the policy that we will not permit any weapons to be carried by our students on our campus unless they are authorized specifically by us. That means that those desiring to carry a weapon must prove to us that there is a documented and valid reason for the carry.
Click to expand...
[emphasis added]

Self-defense and defense of others are a valid reasons to possess and use a weapon. See District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___ (2008)

It is well documented that law abiding citizens bearing weapons are a deterrent to crime and in fact resolve life threatening situation in their favor much more often than unarmed citizens.

Creating a guaranteed "Gun Free Zone" is an invitation to predators that seek to ambush defenseless people.

It could be argued that in the face of such facts that a policy of having a "Gun Free Zone" which creates an environment that is more favorable (perhaps necessary) to the success of mass murderers is at best negligence and at worst criminal.
 
In a pure financial way, giving no one permission to have a firearm on campus
is truly the way for the Institution to go.... If a person begins to shoot students/staff, in the aftermath the Institution's legal team can truthfully say the shooter had no permission to have the firearm, nor commit the acts.
So while say 5-30 people are either Killed or wounded, and its certainly a trajedy, the school can say they had nothing to do with it, and had the same policy/ plan of actions/ warning signs as neiboring schools in the area.
Let so much as one student carry with the knowledge and blessing of the school, and he (or she) wounds another in an attempt to stop the aforementioned active shooter...that students parents will go after the deeper pockets of the Institution, and only give the would be hero a cursory raking over the financial coals( can't get blood from a turnip, as the saying goes)

The Institution is in a no "win" situation. We are living in very strange times.
Situations such as this will continue to crop up in schools, workplaces, and public venues. There is little public funds for those suffering from mental health issues, as well as patient privacy issues which will make it near impossible for a learning institution to determine the extent of a students ongoing personal crises, leading up to a greater problem incident.

Unfortunately, the inability of sociaty as a whole to successfully deal with
those having these episodes before they turn into critical incidents,
leaves the law abiding populas frustrated and feeling that the only defense they are assured on a given day, is that in which they themselves provide.
And they are correct, as no Gov't organization, nor public Institution is held by law any responibility to protect each and every individual.

Something has to give.


*In high school there was firearms on campus in plain sight in the rear windows of pickups, Hunter safety courses were taught in FFA, and I my self have gotten onto a school bus with a M1 Carbine and a AR15 Rifle for the teacher to talk about in History class. I had to take them to the Principles office for him to keep till the class, and had to return them to the office afterwards...till I got back on the bus with them. This was in the anchient year of 1979 in Texas. Nobody then would have dared clench a fist at a teacher, much less shoot a rifle on campus. Had a stranger showed up to the school and started shooting, a mass exodus to the parking lot would have occured, then the boys would have come back in armed to the teeth, and the bad bad man wouldnt have lasted till the Deputy Sheriff's and Highway Patrol got there. Country folk do what needs done.
I sure miss that world...."wuss-a-fication" of the western male has left much to be desired, and so little in return.
 
Last edited:
p99guy, while I understand your position about liablity I think it is another case of what COULD happen and hasn't been tested in court. In my humble opinion it is just as likely that someone will wakeup and sue the institution for not allowing them to defend themselves. (I am refering to after a mass shooting)

I am not sure that either has happened yet although some have went after the gun manufactures, and lost.

I try to stay away from any and all "Gun Free Zones" if at all possible.

BTW: Just to be clear by "Gun Free Zone" I am refering to Schools, Colleges...

Dallas Jack
 
Were the family of every victim injured by gunfire/ stabbing/clubbing that happened in a so called gun free zone able to sue the Institution into financial ruin for failing to protect every single person on that property ,or at least allow themselves to do so....the choice for the Institution would be quite clear. But at this time victims are throwaway cheap....and that allows
the present handwringing liberal response to remain firmly in place despite pressure.

My Position is that there is never a reason to disarm visiting law Enforcers, in any circumstance.
I have 20 years as a Texas peace officer, and would have completely refused an order to disarm
from a person not lawfully in my chain of command, a school administator is a private citizen, an apartment manager, or grocery store manager has just as much horsepower 10 feet off thier property. My position as an officer of the court doesnt wisp away when I pull on to ANY property.
Policy written on a memo,does NOT trump LAW
 
Last edited:
And yet when my children were young it was drilled into me. "We are responsible for your children as long as they are on school property"

On the other hand, which is more important? The fanacial state of the intitution, or the life of it's students and faculty.
Dallas Jack
 
Balance of Power

Why did the U.S and Russia not actually fight during the cold war?Balance of Power.Both sides had enough nuclear missiles to destroy the other side many times over.Neither side had the ability to shoot down all of the oppositions missiles so for any thinking commander,even sending one intercontinental nuclear ballistic missile to the US or former Soviet Union was suicide for their country.Fortunately,for us neither side had suicidal maniacs running the country!

Now look at this scenario.A bank robber pulls a gun and trys to rob the teller.No one is armed so the said bank robber is 'King can do what he wants and walks out with the money and shoots anybody his ego tells him to.
No balance of power.Not great in my opinion.

Now try this scenario out.The same bank robber pulls out his gun but everybody in the bank is also armed.Everyone except the teller who he has the drop on, pulls out a handgun and says 'How may I help you?'If the would be robber is lucky he just puts away his gun and runs out of the bank empty handed and scared for his life.More likely,he will take 30 or more shots to his center of mass and never take another step.He just committed suicide by attempting to use his weapon.No robber with any brains will ever try this and the really,really stupid ones will soon all be dead.

Which scenario would you like to see?( hint1.the robber has the advantage when no law abiding officer or citizen can be armed.hint2This is for the people who used to take the short bus to school.These scenarios work for ALL public places including Universities.

Regards,
brair
 
Last edited:
"Gun Free Zones"

"Gun Free Zones", "No Guns Allowed" are "Do Not Enter" signs to me and I go elsewhere to shop. I do believe the law abiding US citizens that bought on the average of 3,177,256 guns every 3 months in 2008 will not frequent the Gun Free Zones. There are an estimated 85,000,000 (85 million) firearms in the hands of private citizens. Their boycott will have a major impact on the sales/profit of the stores. In Florida there was 587,000 people with a CCW permits as of November 2008 with about 100,000 presently waiting approval of CC permits. This figure does not include local, county, state or federal LEO's. I have seen several large chain stores that had no gun signs posted that have recently removed them. I have also seen several "No Guns" signs changed to "No Loaded Guns".. I always inform the stores/facilities that do have a "No Guns" sign posted that I will not shop/visit the facility and the reason why. Most state that it is an insurance requirement, but I have not found one insurance provider that stipulates no guns allowed in their policy.

Boycott the stores that display any type of no guns allowed signs. I also suggest you inform the stores as to why you will not visit their store(s).
 
It is none of the reasons you mentioned.
Click to expand...
If it's none of those reasons then I would there is no valid reason for the policy.

...but maybe I'm missing something. Without getting into a lot of justification, rationalization or explanation, can you state plainly why you have decided to disarm the students?
 
Originally Posted by Doc Hoy
I can tell you I don't fear anything from my students, nor do my students fear anything from one another. I swear to you this is fact. I think this is true on the vast majority of campuses nationwide. It certainly was true as represented by those at the conference. At the conference, the people from California schools were worried most about earthquakes. The people from the corn belt were worried about tornados. At that time most were remarkably calm about swine flu. BY then we knew it was a fool's errand.
Click to expand...

Not true. I can't say that in college I worried constantly that that day we'd have a gunman/men on campus, but I understood that it was a real danger and I did think about it quite a lot. I wouldn't say it was a "fear" because just like being struck by lighting or other remote unlikely occurrences the distance of it dulls the fear, but I didn't stand under trees during thunderstorms either. I wasn't the only one though, others voiced concerns as well. Did any of us voice this to an admin? Nope, of course not, why would we?

You say that you don't fear anything from your students nor do your students fear anything from one another.

I'd like to point out that your experience as an admin is quite distanced from what students experience. In college there were numerous other students who's mental well being or lack thereof left me seriously concerned for myself and fellow students. There are a lot of college students who are nuts or on the verge of it. What can you do about it as a student? Absolutely zip. Hunt up admin Doc and tell him your concerns? You're joking right?

I would have liked to have been able to carry something other than a textbook to hide behind. Laugh if you may, but my SHTF plan was to take cover behind my $$$ textbook and hope 3" of chemistry would stop or slow the bullets enough to allow me to get close enough to hopefully club/knife/grapple with the gunman. A horrible plan I know and knew, but what else did I have to work with? Nada.

And lastly, you say statically an armed student would be in the center of the classroom. I virtually never sat in the middle of the classroom. Call me paranoid but I almost always was positioned by the entryway or somewhere with a wall behind me and a good clear range of vision. I think you'll find most CCW people instinctively position themselves differently than non carriers.

Just a bit of food for thought. I understand your side of the dispute too. It's a messy world nowadays.
 
KingEdward said:
It seems that about 95% (sorry if not exact) of college students (4 year degree) are between 18 and 22/23 years of age.

Logically, this means that NO 18 or 19 or 20 year old college student would be able to get a CCW permit.
Click to expand...

KE, where did you get that outrageous statistic? That figure is wrong. I'll do some research to find a more accurate number, but most of what I've heard for the last 20 years is that non-traditional college students (read older) are becoming the norm. My guess would be that around 50% or more college students are over the age of 21.

Just to let everyone know, I am a staff member of a local state-run university, and a graduate of the same institution.
 
Well, in my head I guess. Probably not right or up to date.

I was thinking of a couple of places here in town (Vanderbilt / Belmont)

there are night adult students and grad students but was thinking maybe the bigger majority of student ages were between 18-23.

Yes, lot of generalization.

I think though some folks see a CCW on campus passing and envision classes and dorms where a very high percentage can and will carry.

I think it's in the 20% range overall but maybe I'm way off and it is 50% or 60%

That would be terrific.
 
Trooper Tyree said:
I would have liked to have been able to carry something other than a textbook to hide behind. Laugh if you may, but my SHTF plan was to take cover behind my $$$ textbook and hope 3" of chemistry would stop or slow the bullets enough to allow me to get close enough to hopefully club/knife/grapple with the gunman. A horrible plan I know and knew, but what else did I have to work with? Nada.
Click to expand...

Hahaha, I had a similar thought process in college. My plan was similar, but I concluded the collective 8" of textbooks + supplies in a backpack would have made an excellent projectile or flail.
 
Here in Oregon, in the Thurston High Shooting, it was students attacking the shooter that stopped the shooting. Not hiding behind books and desks, but they tackled him and beat the poop out of the shooter. One of the guys saw the shooter kill his buddy, and got mad, and ran up and tackled him.

My sons are in college and high school. We talked about VaTech, and how the kids were killed hiding under desks. How they continued to hide while the killer reloaded. We concluded that dying with your boots on is better than dying while hiding under a school desk.

I carry. I carry on school campus, I carry to church (remember last year's church shooting that was stopped by an alert armed church member, admittedly a security team member), I carry when I go out to eat. If I go have a beer, the gun is in a safe in my car, even tho I can carry there, but it isn't far from me. In this state, private schools may prohibit carry since they are private organizations, but public schools and universities cannot.

In my opinion, if LEO's can carry off-duty, you should allow CCL holders to carry. I can't find the statistic right now (and it could be one of those internet faux facts), but I have read that the percent of CCL holders committing gun crimes is far lower than LEO's convicted for crimes. Again, I can't support that, but I can say that CCL holders as a group are law-abiding citizens. I would think you would like to have them around.

And I am sure there are more in your classroom than you know about, unless you are using metal detectors.

Finally, if you take away the gun, then might makes right. The 100# coed is defenseless against the 220# mugger or rapist. A skinny guy like me ain't any good against the beefed up bad guy. etc

I think it is bad policy to prohibit carry. CCL isn't the problem! It's the BG that doesn't care a whit about your rules that is the issue - prohibiting legal carry does NOTHING to stop the madness. Kinda like passing a law to outlaw illegal activity. It was illegal already, another law doesn't slow it a bit.
 
Charging the shooter is an interesting issue. It is better to die trying than cower? Except, that some folks did survive by playing dead and pulling bodies over them.

At VT, a student charged Cho and was shot to pieces. I'd prefer to say - be aware of options and do what may work to save your life. In Oregon, the classroom was small. In my standard classroom, getting to the shooter would be very difficult under fire. In fact, in a simulation, a decent shooter could put a round into the first row of students in a manner to screw up the Light Brigade charge.

Now, I'm not saying one shouldn't try but the much better solution is armed folks rather than trundling down the stairs of large lecture hall, over bodies and the panicked - waving your fountain pen and laptop. In another informal simulation, I found that a competent shooter (and some of these guys have practiced) can get off about 7 to 10 aimed shots before you can close your laptop, stand up and throw it. Also, the distances in many lecture halls preclude a throw unless you are Superman or an Olympic hammer thrower.

We should cut the crap about the unarmed or laptop charge. Yes, try - some shooters have been taken down if the room is small or when they reload.

However, if you want to stop a shooter who walks into a relatively large room and opens fire - the best method is someone with training who can draw and respond. Not some doofus like on Diane Sawyer's show who couldn't even get his gun out.

About the age thing - you have to think about the schools. Mine has very few older kids. Thus, the number equal and over to 21 would be small. However, there are faculty and staff. If they carry at the same rate as the general pop, if you look at the classroom as the unit - then the probability of an armed person is the same as the mall or church.

Some schools do have older students - more mature and that's a good reason.

Personally, I think the move should first be to faculty and staff to avoid the kiddie objection and then re-examine. Is this a negative for the students - yes but a gradual approach can work and is better than the righteous tantrum when you get nothing.
 
all colleges should allow any qualified professor to carry once they are approved in the state for the permit. It should be up to the university and
not a state or federal issue. Okay, maybe if a "state" school or whatever.

also, colleges could consider having an indoor range and offering safety
and shooting classes that the legal age students could take as an elective.

Instead of bowling or archery, taking firearms safety.
 
all colleges should allow any qualified professor to carry once they are approved in the state for the permit. It should be up to the university and
not a state or federal issue. Okay, maybe if a "state" school or whatever.
Click to expand...

Except there never seems to be enough approval to satisfy. There's always one more "okay but if you do THIS then we'll be satisfied". :barf:

I find Higher ed's attitude towards an armed citizenry especially odd since I work at James Madison University now (a place that screams constantly that it upholds the standards of Mr. Madison) but won't even consider second amendment rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top