"soft target" terrorists concerns
- Thread starter sliponby
- Start date
Double Naught Spy
New member
Because the 21 year old cop isn't under the control of the college. The colleges think they are minimizing risk of NDs and intentional acts of violence by disallowing guns on campus for staff and students. So it isn't really just an age issue, though age undoubtedly comes into play for the majority of the population affected. The colleges have a greater fear of allowing guns and having someone with an allowed gun do something stupid that results in an injury or death than they are about somebody with a disallowed gun intentionally committing acts of violence.
I don't agree with it, but that seems to be the pattern I have seen at several schools now.
Double Nought Spy,
Oh, I realize that's the actual reason behind these prohibitions, I was just interested in seeing why ClayInTx and old bear thought that a 21-year-old male was old enough to lead a fire team in combat, drive a squad car, or have a CCW permit, but once he stepped onto campus he became a drunken frat boy with no judgment?
Oh, I realize that's the actual reason behind these prohibitions, I was just interested in seeing why ClayInTx and old bear thought that a 21-year-old male was old enough to lead a fire team in combat, drive a squad car, or have a CCW permit, but once he stepped onto campus he became a drunken frat boy with no judgment?
Old Bear
In Virginia it is a College rule, not a state law. Students who disobey will be expelled. Non students will be hit with a trespassing charge. No change to statue required.
At George Mason University (close to my house) there are over 100 combat veterans. So a combat Vet, over 21, with a state CCW, is not "mature" enough to carry?
In Virginia it is a College rule, not a state law. Students who disobey will be expelled. Non students will be hit with a trespassing charge. No change to statue required.
At George Mason University (close to my house) there are over 100 combat veterans. So a combat Vet, over 21, with a state CCW, is not "mature" enough to carry?
My son happens to be attending George Mason. He is a combat veteran, if you can count tankers, and is about 27. He hasn't the slightest interest in firearms.
The drunken frat boys are the ones that later on have the tailhook parties. It's something they learn in college, I suppose.
The drunken frat boys are the ones that later on have the tailhook parties. It's something they learn in college, I suppose.
one-shot-one
New member
$0.02
the problem as i see it is the death of personal responsibility in this country.
if everyone was held responsible for their own action, whether they are 21 or 91 this debate would be easier.
IE. if Preppy Troy "accidentally" shoots Suzy Cheerleader while trying to stop a "terrorist" shooting, Suzy's Parents & friends want to see him fry, while Troy's parents & friends want him to escape any judgment against him.
the laws need to be plain & simple as do the penalties. but our system allows for so much personal bias that it never seems to work that way......
the problem as i see it is the death of personal responsibility in this country.
if everyone was held responsible for their own action, whether they are 21 or 91 this debate would be easier.
IE. if Preppy Troy "accidentally" shoots Suzy Cheerleader while trying to stop a "terrorist" shooting, Suzy's Parents & friends want to see him fry, while Troy's parents & friends want him to escape any judgment against him.
the laws need to be plain & simple as do the penalties. but our system allows for so much personal bias that it never seems to work that way......
wildturkey76209
New member
This is a tired old argument that I think reflects the general feeling of LE in that they are not comfortable allowing anyone except themselves to carry. And it is absolutely more about liability for some ND or other incident versus the benefit of armed students repelling an attack, which is seen as unlikely at best.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The problem with the old tired argument is that is very powerful in the debate. Vivid instances of crazed college youth are hard to counter.
It is also a problem that gun storage in dorms is a particular problem, given security, sloppy kids, etc.
Liability is also a very tough one.
About 21 year olds serving, being police, etc. - that brings you into the training argument. Such fine folk are trained. That's not the case with the kid who just bought a gun and may not even have a class like the TX one.
I get folks who say they wouldn't mind if I carried as they know I put significant time into being responsible - they don't trust impulsive untrained young people or whacky old coots with guns.
Sigh - All these arguments are made against carry anywhere in general. But since schools have been designated as more unusual risks than the mall, we need arguments to counter it.
I guess my point is how do you deal with such beyond just being outraged. The SCOTUS has said special circumstance limit gun rights. So the job of the carry crowd is to move beyond just complaining about rights as pragmatically that won't work and defeat specific objections.
1. Liability
2. Untrained -young and old
3. Reckless youth (not supervised or trained)
4. Risk to innocents
5. General emotional rejection of guns as a part of a solution.
If you can't give high level cognitive rationales - you may not carrry the day in argument.
Difficult problem.
It is also a problem that gun storage in dorms is a particular problem, given security, sloppy kids, etc.
Liability is also a very tough one.
About 21 year olds serving, being police, etc. - that brings you into the training argument. Such fine folk are trained. That's not the case with the kid who just bought a gun and may not even have a class like the TX one.
I get folks who say they wouldn't mind if I carried as they know I put significant time into being responsible - they don't trust impulsive untrained young people or whacky old coots with guns.
Sigh - All these arguments are made against carry anywhere in general. But since schools have been designated as more unusual risks than the mall, we need arguments to counter it.
I guess my point is how do you deal with such beyond just being outraged. The SCOTUS has said special circumstance limit gun rights. So the job of the carry crowd is to move beyond just complaining about rights as pragmatically that won't work and defeat specific objections.
1. Liability
2. Untrained -young and old
3. Reckless youth (not supervised or trained)
4. Risk to innocents
5. General emotional rejection of guns as a part of a solution.
If you can't give high level cognitive rationales - you may not carrry the day in argument.
Difficult problem.
I also work at a College, we have had problems with gang people starting trouble outside the campus like shooting two others then running onto campus as a get away plan. We do have a police force here armed and we did go into lockdown. But I sure would feel better if I had a bit more personal protection, not to go out and find the bg but for my own safety here.
My nephew will be getting out of the corps then he plans to go to college and become a teacher. Why shouldnt he have the ability to be armed for his own protection if he chooses to do so? Course as a Marine he has drank a bit
but is a level headed guy.
I stay out of malls and other places large groups of people congregate.
My nephew will be getting out of the corps then he plans to go to college and become a teacher. Why shouldnt he have the ability to be armed for his own protection if he chooses to do so? Course as a Marine he has drank a bit
but is a level headed guy.I stay out of malls and other places large groups of people congregate.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Interesting divide also between the young students with no life experiences vs. the returning student who is older.
I've taught vets returning to school. So this might argue for more intensive examination of the gun carrier than just getting a permit?
Talking to young ones today - a fair number don't trust their young cohort and these aren't kids unfriendly to guns in general.
I've taught vets returning to school. So this might argue for more intensive examination of the gun carrier than just getting a permit?
Talking to young ones today - a fair number don't trust their young cohort and these aren't kids unfriendly to guns in general.
Double Naught Spy
New member
Of course they may be, and so too are they mature enough to realize they must abide by the rules of the college.
Colleges prefer not to have all sorts of rules sets for different categories of students as it makes a complicated situation of managing the student population much more difficult. Because of the drinkng age issue, there are schools that don't allow for the possession or consumption of alcohol on campus by any students, regardless of age.
redstategunnut
New member
Double Naught knows everything. Everyone else just shut up.
Tamara,
A 21 year old in the military is in a situation where his sergeant is watching over him. He does not get sent out on his own. Even shave-tails are watched over by sergeants.
I did not say a 21 year old was mature enough to “drive a squad car”. I don’t believe a 21 year old is ready to be a cop on his own. It takes maturity to be a good cop.
Males take a long time to grow up. I know; I was there.
A 21 year old in the military is in a situation where his sergeant is watching over him. He does not get sent out on his own. Even shave-tails are watched over by sergeants.
I did not say a 21 year old was mature enough to “drive a squad car”. I don’t believe a 21 year old is ready to be a cop on his own. It takes maturity to be a good cop.
Males take a long time to grow up. I know; I was there.
A 21-year-old person (even a lowly male!) is old enough to apply for and receive a carry permit in all but one state that issues them.
Yet somehow, when that same 21-year-old adult male with a state-issued carry permit walks onto college campus, he loses several dozen IQ points, and becomes capable only of drooling down his chin, barfing all over his classmates and falling in a drunken stupor against the woman he was date-raping.
Dayumn. Who knew going to college made people that stupid?
pax
Yet somehow, when that same 21-year-old adult male with a state-issued carry permit walks onto college campus, he loses several dozen IQ points, and becomes capable only of drooling down his chin, barfing all over his classmates and falling in a drunken stupor against the woman he was date-raping.
Dayumn. Who knew going to college made people that stupid?
pax
2cooltoolz
New member
pax said:
And whose bright idea was it to let them drive?!?
I've always had a gun. At least since I was about 13. I did a lot of that stupid college stuff. But, as stupid as I was, I never mixed guns and partying. And I was pretty stupid.
As a 21 year-old college student with a CPL I am offended by some of these posts! JK, some are just making me shake my head.
I like Glenn's posts, he has it right on. I think DNS sums up the college's viewpoint pretty well, too. For a lot of colleges it does come down to liability. If someone gets shot on campus they can say "Well we told them they couldn't do it!". We all know this is ridiculous but if shootings did happen on campuses and CPLs were allowed, we all know what the next thing out of some peoples' mouths would be: "Well maybe if they didn't let kids just bring guns into the mix of drugs, hormones, and alcohol we wouldn't have this problem!" That argument is just to easy to make for the Headline-attention-spanned crowd.
I also don't think there is an "age" of maturity. The connotation that a "xx-year old is old enough to do blank isn't old enough to other blank?" is just a fallacy within a fallacy. Go to a gun show, look at the old guys that muzzle sweep everyone, yell loudly about "WOMAN CALIBER PLASTIC GUNS" and wear CCW badges. Are THEY mature enough to carry a firearm? I don't think that's even the question at hand, the question at hand is: do they have a right to carry a firearm? The answer to that, whether a person likes it or not is "until they have proven otherwise, yes, they do have a right to a firearm".
Now how does this apply to college campuses? Well, it would still be illegal to consume alcohol and carry your sidearm. It would still be illegal to be high and carry your sidearm. It would still be illegal to shoot someone accidentally or without justification. It would still be illegal to be a felon (and certain misdemeanors) and posses a firearm. Allowing carry on college campuses won't change that. As Glenn alludes to, it will only allow people that already carry everywhere else to carry on campus. That is why those laws I mentioned above exist, because if they have broken those laws then they aren't responsible enough to carry everywhere else. In other words: there are ways the law can find out if someone is responsible, it is called a criminal history. And we cannot deprive rights based on assumptions and stereotypes.
Also sorry to jump in late in the conversation here, I've been following it and it's a good one.
I like Glenn's posts, he has it right on. I think DNS sums up the college's viewpoint pretty well, too. For a lot of colleges it does come down to liability. If someone gets shot on campus they can say "Well we told them they couldn't do it!". We all know this is ridiculous but if shootings did happen on campuses and CPLs were allowed, we all know what the next thing out of some peoples' mouths would be: "Well maybe if they didn't let kids just bring guns into the mix of drugs, hormones, and alcohol we wouldn't have this problem!" That argument is just to easy to make for the Headline-attention-spanned crowd.
I also don't think there is an "age" of maturity. The connotation that a "xx-year old is old enough to do blank isn't old enough to other blank?" is just a fallacy within a fallacy. Go to a gun show, look at the old guys that muzzle sweep everyone, yell loudly about "WOMAN CALIBER PLASTIC GUNS" and wear CCW badges. Are THEY mature enough to carry a firearm? I don't think that's even the question at hand, the question at hand is: do they have a right to carry a firearm? The answer to that, whether a person likes it or not is "until they have proven otherwise, yes, they do have a right to a firearm".
Now how does this apply to college campuses? Well, it would still be illegal to consume alcohol and carry your sidearm. It would still be illegal to be high and carry your sidearm. It would still be illegal to shoot someone accidentally or without justification. It would still be illegal to be a felon (and certain misdemeanors) and posses a firearm. Allowing carry on college campuses won't change that. As Glenn alludes to, it will only allow people that already carry everywhere else to carry on campus. That is why those laws I mentioned above exist, because if they have broken those laws then they aren't responsible enough to carry everywhere else. In other words: there are ways the law can find out if someone is responsible, it is called a criminal history. And we cannot deprive rights based on assumptions and stereotypes.
Also sorry to jump in late in the conversation here, I've been following it and it's a good one.
Wow!
What a can of worms I opened with this thread.
I see merit to arguments on both sides. Here in Alabama, one can receive a CCW in minutes. Go to local sheriffs office; background check; picture taken; pay your $20 and you're good to go. No instruction on safety, firearms handling, situational "shoot, don't shoot" discussion, or target shooting qualifying.
I'm all for any legal citizen having the right to obtain their CCP.
But, I would very much like to see AL enact some kind of class instruction and range qualification (fat chance of that). Some states do not recognize Alabama CCP because of the fact that their is no qualification other than not being a criminal.
Dr. Meyer, and others, have raised some very valid issues concerning training, or the lack thereof, of college age persons, or any age for that matter. Many of the college students in my town have firearms and usually keep them in their vehicles, much to the delight of car burglars. I read police reports everyday in the local paper and not a week goes by without at least one pistol being stolen from a vehicle. (fodder for a different thread). None of these students, that I know of, have had any training.
I own and manage student housing so I have close interactions with students daily. The overwhelming majority of them, by the time they reach 21yo, are quite mature and responsible. Now 18, 19, they've got some mistakes to make and growing up to do, just like we all did. But, don't sell them short on maturity at 21.
We're all basically of the same frame of mind here. We hold fast and strong to our 2nd amendment rights. We fear those who would love to take that right from us. I must err on the side of one having the opportunity to defend themself and others in a college setting. Certainly it is flawed and fraught with possible nightmare scenarios (I've heard reference to Johnny accidently shooting Suzy cheerleader). But, I'd rather they have the chance to defend themselves in the admittedly unlikely event of a crazed shooter(s) as opposed to resorting to throwing books and pencils at them...
What a can of worms I opened with this thread.
I see merit to arguments on both sides. Here in Alabama, one can receive a CCW in minutes. Go to local sheriffs office; background check; picture taken; pay your $20 and you're good to go. No instruction on safety, firearms handling, situational "shoot, don't shoot" discussion, or target shooting qualifying.
I'm all for any legal citizen having the right to obtain their CCP.
But, I would very much like to see AL enact some kind of class instruction and range qualification (fat chance of that). Some states do not recognize Alabama CCP because of the fact that their is no qualification other than not being a criminal.
Dr. Meyer, and others, have raised some very valid issues concerning training, or the lack thereof, of college age persons, or any age for that matter. Many of the college students in my town have firearms and usually keep them in their vehicles, much to the delight of car burglars. I read police reports everyday in the local paper and not a week goes by without at least one pistol being stolen from a vehicle. (fodder for a different thread). None of these students, that I know of, have had any training.
I own and manage student housing so I have close interactions with students daily. The overwhelming majority of them, by the time they reach 21yo, are quite mature and responsible. Now 18, 19, they've got some mistakes to make and growing up to do, just like we all did. But, don't sell them short on maturity at 21.
We're all basically of the same frame of mind here. We hold fast and strong to our 2nd amendment rights. We fear those who would love to take that right from us. I must err on the side of one having the opportunity to defend themself and others in a college setting. Certainly it is flawed and fraught with possible nightmare scenarios (I've heard reference to Johnny accidently shooting Suzy cheerleader). But, I'd rather they have the chance to defend themselves in the admittedly unlikely event of a crazed shooter(s) as opposed to resorting to throwing books and pencils at them...
Catfishman
New member
What's a "shave - tail"?
Catfishman
New member
This post warms my heart. It sounds like LE is learning that CYA policies don't always work best.
I sort of remember a nursing home shooting that was cut short by a police officer. If I remember correctly he was the first responder and just waded right in and shot the shooter. I think he was also shot. You just have to love someone who is willing to put their life and career on the line. We can't go through our lives trying to avoid mistakes at all costs. Inaction is a mistake too.