What do you think about guns on campus? Pros, cons? http://www.thecowl.com/commentary/b...08350219_4820588_350262118345478#.T16YL3k38-L
Ayuh,.... A Ban would not have changed the outcome in Va.... Actually, if there were armed students, it may well have ended sooner, with less blood lost... And,... Groupin' an entire age group into "are nowhere near mature enough",.... Is just Unacceptable...
Agree. Agree. Once again, the gun grabbers want to blame an inanimate object for the misdeeds of an irresponsible individual.
College campus full of young juvenile adolesents, who are day dreaming about parties and getting drunk with friends, rather than their school work. And you want to give them guns?
Guns are already not allowed on campus.. they are gun free zones. The guns that are brought in by the shooters are illegal.. as is shooting people. Making things illegal cannot prevent something from happening. A valid argument i've heard is if there were CCW holders allowed in the universities, criminal shooters might think twice about going in & attacking people. The shooters know it is gun free, & know they have all the power & no resistance. Another armed person in there could change that & even save lives. The anti gun crowd makes it sound like the govt (or the nra) is going to issue guns to kids as they enroll, with their books & parking passes. No one is suggesting that. My son in law has a ccw in utah. He is also a student. I'm sure he does not carry on campus, but if he could, i would not have a problem with it. He is a very mature, responsible young man. If a campus crazy was going through the school shooting people, i would trust him to diffuse it. He, & others like him would not let some murderer on a rampage kill indiscriminately. Yes, there can be irresponsible people who can get guns & use them illegally. Laws do not prevent that. The laws only restrain honest, law abiding citizens. I think the 'gun safe' zones do not accomplish the desired effect, & they are unconstitutional. They 'infringe' the right of honest, law abiding citizens to 'keep & bear arms'. Armed people are free. No state can control those who have the machinery and the will to resist, no mob can take their liberty and property. And no 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically right. Guns ended that, and a social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. ~L. Neil Smith
I am interested in the pro gun view to this topic. Why would anyone in their right mind, give juvenile kids guns. When at their time of life, they flip out in anger to irrelevant facebook content. God knows what they do with firearms.
I am not pro gun, i am pro freedom & pro constitution. Keeping & bearing arms are part of those freedoms. No one is suggesting issuing juveniles guns.. a reasonable age can be placed, as with alcohol, driving, watching movies, etc. Young men & women are given guns all the time. The military takes impressionable men & women 18 & 19 yrs old, arms them with deadly weapons, & send them out to kill people in questionable conflicts having nothing to do with our national security. Yet you want to prohibit the same age from legally possessing a firearm for self protection? I don't have a problem with some fair regulations.. perhaps a ccw course, as is done now all over the country. But the complete banning of weapons has only given the criminals an edge. They have no opposition when they go into gun free zones, & they know it. Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest. ~Mahatma Gandhi
No one is giving them guns. They can already purchase firearms, they can already own firearms. Not all of them are the immature types that flip out over Facebook. If you own a gun and possess a CCW permit, and carry everywhere else, why not campus? It is not like it is legal to be intoxicated a carry a firearm anyway. Your argument is a strawman.
Think back to when you were that age. I know what i was like in college/universty and I woulden't trust myself with a Gun at that age.
This is usually what the argument against freedom boils down to, self doubt. The problem with that view is that just because you may have been immature at that age does not mean that everyone else was.
Everyone is 'immature' at that age. Apart from the very few kids who are old before their time. It is part of growing up. Getting it out of ones system. Experincing the finer things in life before responcibilities. But of course when we do have kids of our own, they will tell us how responcible they are and like our parents did. We try and believe them.
Sure some are responcible with guns i give you that. But i fail to see how allowing guns in colleges would be a wise idea.
.... How old do you think I am? I do trust myself with a firearm, I do have a CCW permit, and I do not engage in the "juvenile" actions you listed. Age has less to do with than maturity. As my Buddhist friend says, "you have a very old soul".
46? Just a guess, i have no idea. Nevermind, i just seen the rest of your post. Btw, i was told once. "I have a very old soul" By new age fortune teller. Either a psyhic genius or just making up nonsense to get paid.
Rather like the inanimate object that was supplied by the US government to a military volunteer who used it for the same purpose. Anyone doing that must be insane prior to psychiatric examination, even if they are trained to deliberately do it in differing circumstances. Yes, I get the drift.
Do any of you really think that the person who decides to shoot a bunch of people at school will have the gun because the school allowed him to? No. Do you think the people who shot the murderer would have their guns because the school allowed them to? Yes. The truth is, the only people that this ban would effect would be the honest ones. The same goes for government-regulated gun control.
This article is nothing more than a biased rant. It is not based in fact or even common sense. While ever one is entitled to their opinion. To support a writers point of view that is based on ignorance. Would suggest your point of view maybe based on that as well. Guns should be banned on all college campuses. First, it would stop fatal events like the Viginia Tech shooting, from happening. When you show your bias and lack of research in the first two sentences, you lose all credibility. Virginia Tech was a Gun Free "Safe Zone". Yet it obviously did not prevent it. Invoking the incident was no more than trying to encourage people to use emotion in making a decision. It was a horrible tragedy yet to not present it correctly dishonors the victims. To prevent the same error on my part. I will provide a brief summary of the tragedy. On April 16, 2007 Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and himself. Cho had a history of mental illness dating back to middle school. Due to federal privacy laws the University wasn't informed. Cho was accused of stalking two female students in 2005 and was declared mentally ill by a Virginia special justice. Cho used two hand guns a Glock 19 and Walther P 22. He was allowed to purchase them due to flaw that was corrected by NICS H.R. 2640. That small amount of information will have to suffice. Much more is availble online if anyone wants to research. One thing almost anyone should agree on in this incident it would not had made it worse. Second, college students are no where near mature enough to handle guns. This again shows a lack of thought. They are judged mature enough by the military, and for private ownership by the government. Even if the researcher is correct would that mean they shouldn't be allowed to drive. Should they be allowed to drink. To my knowledge you have to be 21 to purchase a handgun in all states. That would mean traditional freshmen, sophomores, and most juniors would be excluded. Seniors, employees, and non-traditional students would be the only carriers. Where I live children start using firearm well before they turn 10 years of age. Hunters have to be at least 6 before they harvest large game. Regardless if you think they shouldn't the facts are they do and will handle guns. To deny that means you not thinking clearly. If one person decides to pull out a gun to shoot someone, and five other people pull out guns to "stop them." I think that would only encourage them to act quickly. That is about the stupidest reasoning I have ever heard. The incident a Virginia Tech was two separate attacks by the same man. Even if the assailant acted quickly they would not kill 32 people. That was a extreme case however I do not believe anyone can argue in that instance having legal guns on campus would have made that incident worse. The reporter also refers to a story by CNN Global Public Square "Why does America lead the world in school shootings.". It is a good article with good information. Yet he fails to mention the gun issue was listed last with 5 other reasons above it. I would recommend reading it to anyone that really cares about this issue. In larger events it would be useful yet in isolated incidents it might make it worse. While I think private university should make there own rules. State run universities should be governed by state law.
Sounds like you could have used some counseling. I've been around guns all my life and own several now. I've never even considered pointing so much as an unloaded gun at another human being.
Obviously you never grew up around guns? Both my kids had guns at school. especially when they lived off campus. I never worried a day about it. matter of fact, we bought them the handguns.
