Underplayed Story of the Day

File under ideas that are bound to end not so well.

“Texas campuses are gun-free zones.” Well, only if the bad guys agree to follow the law.
.

I don’t own guns. But I have zero fear of licensed carriers of guns who tend to be very law-abiding.

.

I don’t see this as a big deal. Texas believes in gun rights, and is planning to extend it to campuses.

Note to self, make sure no child of friend or relative goes to school in Texas. What is wrong with people? Do you even think if the guy who shot up the nursing home didn’t have easy access to a gun maybe he wouldn’t have done it? If someone would come into a classroom shooting, I wouldn’t want a group of Daniel Boones trying to out shot him.

Here’s something worthy of a lot more coverage:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/30/aig-fp-strongarmed-donations-for-dodd/

Two words: Charles Whitman. Am going to add that to the post.

“Two words: Charles Whitman. Am going to add that to the post.”
.
While you are at it KT think of the keggers mixed with a little harmless law abiding drunk freshman armed to the teeth.

spob: As you know, I’m from Texas, and grew up around a lot of guns. My husband’s family was horrified by an extended toast at our rehearsal dinner that recalled the unresolved grievances left over from a major family fight over who got to inherit a particularly expensive rifle when my grandfather died. One of my female cousins carries a “gun purse.” And my kids love the fact that when they visit my aunt’s ranch, they get to shoot real guns at targets.
.
But campuses tend to have a lot of (1) kids with adjustment problems and (2) alcohol. I don’t think turning the place into the OK Corral is the answer. Also, I must admit getting creeped out these days when I have to go through a metal detector when I take my kids to Sea World, thanks to the Texas conceal/carry law.

If you have ever worked on a college campus you would probably know that the people you would not want to have armed would be engineering students, faculty members and newly created PhD’s. Just saying…

And I am sure declaring UT a “gun free zone” would have made Whitman go elsewhere to do his deeds.

Hey, this is the state W is from…why are we surprised. Mr. “dead or alive”…remember? Mr. “you’re either with me or again’ me”. Turns my stomach!!!!

Why are guns so well beloved and ingrained in the American national psyche? Most people in developed nations never own a real gun, and probably never even fired one in their lives. I guess Canadians have a really high rate of gun ownership too, but most of those are just collecting dust in cabinets or attics or whatever and never get taken out or used. My family had a .22 and a shotgun when I was growing up, handed down from my grandfather, but they were never used in my lifetime. I have no idea if they ever even worked. I’ve never fired a gun in my life. The only friends I have that have are Americans.

FYI: Gun purses:
.
http://mygunpurses.com/default.aspx?gclid=CMOHqJ-Cy5kCFRpN5Qod9TSpHA

Every murderer was once a non-murderer without a felony conviction, lawfully able to buy guns. Arming more people in more places just increases the odds of someone going off somewhere without warning.

“…students and faculty will live in fear of classmates and colleagues, not knowing who might pull a gun over a drunken dorm argument or a poor grade.”
.
This is a terrible idea. Some of the college students I know don’t understand how to use a shower curtain. Adding guns to the mix is a recipe for disaster.

This is a horrible business decision. How many students/faculty/staff will Texas schools lose over this? How many will they gain? Do the math – bye bye tuition and research grants.
.
That being said, they have a right to do it, it’s just really really stupid.

KT, I hear you. And my gun-toting days were limited to military service (at lot of fun to shoot things, by the way). And I understand the view that it could make things worse. But aren’t there places in the US where people can pack heat on campus? I haven’t heard of many problems. I’m not sure that the place would turn into the OK Corral.

“And I am sure declaring UT a “gun free zone” would have made Whitman go elsewhere to do his deeds.”
.
Wow. That’s deep. Never even thought of that approach to the debate.

In response to KT’s two words, I offer one: Texas. This “don’t bother me with the facts” thing is just what Texans do. Like this: Creationists on Texas School Board Prevail: Watered-Down Science Coming to Your Kids’ Textbooks
.
Yee hah!

Of course, gunny, the point isn’t that deep because it’s so obvious. Charles Whitman didn’t listen to a murder statute–ya think he was gonna listen to a “gun free zone” proclamation?

As a gun collector and holder of a concealed weapons licence here in florida I can tell you that this is a HORRIBLE idea. Here is the reason why, as tragic as the VT rampage is these kinds of incidents happen at a very low frequency. However fights and domestic violence happen almost daily on college campuses. You want to know what I had to do to get my concealed weapons license here? I attended a 3 hr class at a gun show and then was given a test that was basically just a recap of what we had just been taught, go to a gun range and shoot one time at a target and pass a background check. There was nothing about that class or the test or any other part of me getting this license that taught me how to be an officer of the law. With the high levels of stress and the great amounts of drinking that goes on in college campuses this is just asking for trouble. What happens when a student thinks another student has a gun and then shoots an unarmed man? Police officers make this mistake frequently, are we really supposed to believe teenagers won’t? What happens when a guy is rejected by his girlfriend and then he decides to “pay her back”? Or lets go to the worst case scenario. What happens if the police stop a guy and find a gun on him but he has a concealed weapons license so they let him go and later he shoots somebody? I don’t know about Texas but there is another thing about concealed weapons licenses here in florda that a lot of people don’t know. That is when you have a license you don’t have to wait for the normal 3 day waiting period many times called a “cooling off” period. The whole reason for having the waiting period is so that if you are about to buy a gun out of anger and do something stupid then after you have to wait 3 days hopefully you will have thought better of it. But I can walk into any gun store today and buy a gun and ammo and walk right out with it after they call in for a quick background check. A background check that never turns up recently ordered restraining orders.
.
Whether people understand this or not most times more guns in a situation means a higher likely hood innocent bystanders will get hit. And it should say somethinig that the guy who was involved in the VT incident is the one who is most against this law

sgw: Whether people understand this or not most times more guns in a situation means a higher likely hood innocent bystanders will get hit..
.
Like my sister, who was shot by a shopowner on 5th Avenue who was firing at a fleeing robber. With a 357 magnum. At lunchtime. In NYC.
.
Hit my sister in the hand. Ruined her career in commercial art, and she eventually became a lawyer.
.
A public defender, by choice.

“Of course, gunny, the point isn’t that deep because it’s so obvious. Charles Whitman didn’t listen to a murder statute–ya think he was gonna listen to a “gun free zone” proclamation?”
.
Spob-ask yourself to name one law would-be criminals follow? Then maybe you will be able to grasp how silly this argument really is and how unhelpful to the debate it is.

I have a carry permit. I had to go to a public town meeting in front of the mayor and the whole town council to get the right. I was proud I passed muster. This was in a very blue state.
-
But no, the NRA says any goof can walk into a gun show and grab anything he wants. God loves guns. The trust put in me means nothing. I’m a patsy for doing it “the hard way”.
-
spob, you have an orgasm about the thought of dozens of coeds opening up on a spree killer. Okay, five, six dead at most, not thirty. But if you add up enough drunken arguments, overreactions, nut cases with new opportunities, and cases of mistaken intent or mistaken identity you get a whole pile of little killing sprees and maybe a higher body count.
-
Look at the number of violent crimes and the number of violent criminals sitting in jails in the most gun friendly states. It is huge numbers. Look at the namby-pamby “anti-2nd amendment” industrial blue states of the northeast. Nice and quiet by comparison.
-
Again, I have a few guns in a blue state. Didn’t stop me and I met some very nice local police that helped process the paperwork.
-
Say KT, off subject… why is headline news on MSNBC off the air at 5:30 am before Morning Joe? It’s a rerun of Maddow now. Three 24 hour news networks and I can’t find out if the world blew up before I go to work… not that I’ll look at Fox.

Well, i am not the one who brought up Charles Whitman . . . .

The issue, as is obvious, is whether this policy would lead to more safety or less safety. The issue is not whether it would deter some lunatic bent on shooting up a campus. It wouldn’t. I guess it would make it marginally more likely that someone bent on harm would have a gun that he otherwise would not have, but it also would make people more able to defend themselves. I believe there are campuses which allow people to pack heat–what has happened there?
.

People seem to think guns are icky here. I don’t know. I’m not a gun person. I don’t really have a desire to own one. But I will say this, I’ve lived in areas where the possession of guns in homes was a given, and home invasions really weren’t an issue there.

“spob, you have an orgasm about the thought of dozens of coeds opening up on a spree killer. Okay, five, six dead at most, not thirty. But if you add up enough drunken arguments, overreactions, nut cases with new opportunities, and cases of mistaken intent or mistaken identity you get a whole pile of little killing sprees and maybe a higher body count.”

Does anything I have posted on this thread justify that quote? Anything?

KT:
.
Like many modern liberals these days, I (relatively quietly, given my priorities) support the Second Amendment.
.
I think that the Constitution enumerates the right of citizens to defend themselves from attack with arms, and not to depend entirely on agents of the state for protection from harm.
.
As a liberal, my interpretation of the Bill of Rights is expansive and not restrictive, as the guarantee of individual rights against the potential threats of tyrannies of majorities, corporate organizations and the state. This view applies to all of the rights enumerated in the constitution, which includes the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has recently upheld the notion that this right is held by individuals, and not solely by states, and I support that decision.
.
I do not actually see the relevance of the Charles Whitman incident to this case, KT. It seems that concealed carry policy would have had no bearing whatsoever on the circumstances involving that mass murder, either positive or negative. That terrible tragedy was a very, very unusual event, and not something that could be legislated or policy designed particularly well against. If we really were to take that episode as instructive and meaningful in terms of every day policy, we’d be doing more than taking our shoes off at the airport, we’d be living in an absurdly restrictive system of maximum safety. Concealed carry revocation would be far from the last step in assuring that a repeat serial murder of that nature could never take place. Shutting down the observation tower –as they did for 30 years or so– would be the first obvious course of action, and the efficacy of that vs the disadvantages would be debatable.
.
That all said, I do not think it should be permitted for university student populations to carry concealed firearms on campuses. I believe that the special environment of college campuses is sufficient reason to compel the state to overrule the primacy if individual Second Amendment rights in this case, much as airport terminals are quite lawful in their prohibitions against the individual possession of firearms. I agree with you, KT, that it’s a bad, bad, bad idea for kids to be free –licensed or not– to carry concealed firearms on their persons in the same setting as that of the Van Wilder films.
.
Principled support of the Bill of Rights is one thing; a rigid, ideological blindness to the reality that very special circumstances sometimes require practical exceptions is another.
.
Thanks for reading and considering this, KT.

Sometimes I give students bad grades, or have to explain why they aren’t going to graduate this semester, or why I had to turn their paper over to the honor council. They cry, they slam their books on the desk, they send hate mail, they threaten to sue me. There are a few I would hate to imagine with a gun under their jackets. Not a good idea.

Cent – thanks so much for the spob imagery.
.
ewwwww.
.
And just think of all the gun-crazies who watch Fox News’s Mad, Apocalyptic, Tearful Rising Star. I am greatly conflicted about that NYT’s story. It ends with: “He added later: “I say on the air all time, ‘if you take what I say as gospel, you’re an idiot.’ But that is what Limbaugh has always said, isn’t it? “I’m just an entertainer.” And there are vast numbers of idiots out there who take what Limbaugh says as gospel. And many of them, if not all, have guns.
.
Seemed to me that the Times story went out of its way to diminish the real threat posed by the incitements of Beck and Limbaugh and their ilk. They used the msm’s classic dismissive line: His comments have prompted several bloggers to speculate recently that the TV host may have been promoting an armed revolt. Yeah, and you know those crazy bloggers.

“And I am sure declaring UT a “gun free zone” would have made Whitman go elsewhere to do his deeds.”

That one, spob. That quote. No other answer from you then to let everybody be armed. If a killer can get into a “gun free zone” then let there be no “gun free zones”. Let Suzie Cheerleader pull a Glock from her pom-pom.

SZ, your post is somewhat self-contradictory. Something is either a right or it’s not. We don’t use things like “special environments” to undermine such rights.
.

And how many of these kids would pack heat on campus? My guess is that the number would be miniscule.

…well, okay…just as long as you keep marijuana illegal I reckon.

Wow, centfan, you sure are reading a lot into that quote. Whitman is irrelevant. (Although I suspect KT’s real point is to suggest that such a thing could make a Whitman scenario more likely.) The issue is whether someone who would not otherwise have used a gun doing so as a result of the policy–a sort of “but for” causation.

spob:
.
Something is either a right or it’s not.
.
So airport terminal prohibitions on firearms are unconstitutional?
.
What about on airplanes?
.
Have you given this enough thought, spob?

“People seem to think guns are icky here. I don’t know. I’m not a gun person.”
.
One thing I learned in the Marine Corp spob was that you never point a gun at someone unless you intend to fire it. Having said that we where also taught gun safety and how to effectively use the weapon. Weapons always pointed down range, safety on, how the weapons works, how to clean it, store it, even how to walk with it and so on. But the Marine Corps had and continues to have accidental shootings and not so accidental shootings and is a very small population compared to college campuses.
.
I don’t own a personal fire arm either and I have no problem with law abiding citizens carrying or owning one. I do have a problem with the lack of training standards though.

Here’s why I brought up Whitman: These things happen, yes. And the perps don’t pay attention to gun laws. But Whitman was ultimately subdued by the cops.

Imagine the additional chaos if the police were operating in a situation where, in addition to one insane person, there were any number of kids were wandering around campus armed, and liable to do who knows what.

cincy, with no personal experience of marijuana (yeah, I was a loser in high school and didn’t smoke weed, then off to military, where they have urinalysis), how likely is someone high on weed (by itself) to get violent? Alcohol is a much more likely trigger, is it not?

KT, first of all, I think they could legitimately ban guns in dorm rooms. I have a right not to live with someone who has a gun in the room.

Second of all, isn’t your scenario about cops having to deal with a lot of armed people a little fanciful? The cops probably would have to deal with this in Texas all the time. More to the point, the vast vast majority of students would not be armed.

Third of all, Whitman was “subdued” by the cops (actually he was shot dead, and probably in a manner that wouldn’t fly today, not that I care), but I believe that he got a lot of return fire from people who had rifles in their cars.

sz, there’s a compelling interest in airplanes and airport terminals—not so much on a college campus

Nice try.

Good god. Charles Whitman indeed.

Who seems to think that guns are icky, besides single-issue demagogues who appeal to moldy orthodox liberals like this jackass?
.

Carolyn McCarthy, A Potential Gillibrand Primary Foe, Gave $ To Her Campaigns
.
We’ve long understood, even before God gave us Rod Blagojevich, that there are some things you just can’t make up.
.
Here’s another one.
.
Even before her appointment to the Senate became official, when it was still in the rumor stage, Kirsten Gillibrand was attracting enemies within her own party, and none more so than her fellow member of Congress from New York Carolyn McCarthy. McCarthy was the Long Island housewife whose husband was murdered by a deranged gunman in a mass killing on the Long Island Rail Road in 1993. The tragedy — and her outrage that her congressman voted to lift the ban on semiautomatic weapons — propelled McCarthy into politics and national attention.
.
On Thursday, when Gillibrand’s name seemed to go beyond the rumor stage as the choice of Gov. David Paterson to fill Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat, McCarthy went public with her opposition. Focusing on Gillibrand’s 100 percent rating by the National Rifle Association, McCarthy said, “To have a senator representing the NRA for New York, that would be wrong. If it comes down to that, I will [run in the] primary in 2010.”
.
On Friday, Paterson indeed did name Gillibrand. And McCarthy didn’t back down.
.
McCarthy, in fact, was so outraged that … wait for it … she contributed $1,500 to Gillibrand’s congressional campaigns in both 2006 and 2008. Tom Brune of Newsday has the details:

McCarthy’s leadership PAC gave Gillibrand a $500 contribution for her first run for Congress in 2006, and doubled it to $1,000 for her re-election bid last June, according to federal campaign finance records.
.
McCarthy made the second donation June 5, months after Gillibrand had publicly signed on to a legal brief that drew attacks from McCarthy’s friends among gun-control advocates because it urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn Washington, D.C.’s, gun ban.
.
“Yeah, I gave her money. I didn’t know what her stance was,” said McCarthy, a Democrat from Mineola who has made gun control her signature issue since she first ran for Congress. …
.
McCarthy said she was trying to help a Democrat win an uphill race in a conservative Republican district. She insisted she did not know about Gillibrand’s strong pro-gun views.

The old “guns are icky” thing may still exist in some cultural quarters –most likely where people have never, ever been exposed to first-person shooter video games– but it’s not anywhere close to despicable NRA ethnic identity politics, and it’s a relic of a political time long gone, IMO.

Spob: Finally, as someone who was a student there (Fourlegs would probably back me up on this), I’m shocked that this would be under consideration, given the emotional and physical scars that campus still carries from that incident. I often shivered just a bit as I was walking across campus and glanced up at that beautiful tower. They reopened the tower only a few years back, and I went on a tour at one point. You can still see the bullet marks in the wall as you climb to the top.

spob:
.
there’s a compelling interest in airplanes and airport terminals—not so much on a college campus
.
I think that we’ll have to agree to disagree here.
.
If you read my comment carefully, I specifically said that there was a compelling interest (“…the special environment of college campuses is sufficient reason to compel the state to overrule…“), but I didn’t want to bore the hell out of the rest of the Commenters (as usual) by laying out the entirety of my argument, so I just did the next best thing by linking to the 2002 version of “National Lampoon’s Animal House”.

swampkid #1 and i officially start the college search over spring break next week. will definitely add local gun laws to my list of things to obsess over.

SZ
.
I don’t know if you know McCarthy’s story but I don’t think she deserves to be called a jack ass in light of WHY she is a gun control crusader
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolyn_McCarthy
.

On December 7, 1993, her husband, Dennis, was killed and her son, Kevin, severely injured, on a Long Island Rail Road commuter train at the Merillon Avenue station, when a mass murderer, Colin Ferguson, opened fire on random unarmed passengers.[4] Ferguson killed six and wounded 19 others.[5] McCarthy responded to the crime by launching a campaign for additional gun control measures that eventually propelled her to Congress in 1996 on the Democratic ticket.

SG:
.
Did you read my entire comment?
.
Please go back and read carefully, and you’ll see a similar description of McCarthy’s history laid out right there in the piece right before the reason why she’s a jackass –she gave money to Gillibrand right before she figured out that Gillibrand was unacceptable as a representative of the State of New York.

I thought this was an interesting part of the article:
.
“These are individuals who are already licensed and allowed to carry weapons. What marks the imaginary line of college campuses?” said Katie Kasprzak, a recent Texas State University graduate and spokeswoman for Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
.
Good point. What marks the imaginary line between the U.S. and Mexico? Or the imaginary line between Texas and New Mexico? Or the imaginary line between airport and not-airport?
.
Why not just do away with all these “imaginary lines” and have people carrying AK’s everywhere they go.

SZ
.
I was referring to this statement
.
Who seems to think that guns are icky, besides single-issue demagogues who appeal to moldy orthodox liberals like this jackass?
.
That whole single issue demagogue and jack ass thing just didn’t seem warranted. I feel like everyone could make a mistake. I definiely don’t think her push for gun control is a ruse in light of the loss and suffering she has gone through.

Of course, gunny, the point isn’t that deep because it’s so obvious. Charles Whitman didn’t listen to a murder statute–ya think he was gonna listen to a “gun free zone” proclamation?
.
I remember Charles Whitman – that happened the year I graduated from high school. From what I recall, I don’t think that he was overly concerned about being indicted with murder. Don’t think he intended to be around that long.
.
I grew up with rifles and was a decent shot in the military. But my opinion has always been this – someone who loses their temper or decides to settle a dispute with their fists seldom walks into a room and beats 10 people to death. And a haymaker that misses usually doesn’t kill someone walking 50 feet away.
.
We’re home here to one of the high schools that had a student walk in and try to shoot several students as revenge for bullying. Unfortunately, nearly all of the students killed and injured had nothing whatsoever to do with that. My wife worked with one girl who talked with a hoarse voice and had a scar on her neck. One other is confined to a wheelchair for life.
.
But, by all means, let’s defend our “right” as a nation to have this happen. Wouldn’t want common sense to intrude . . .

As much as it pains me to say this, SG is right on McCarthy. “Random”, though, is an interesting way to describe Ferguson’s selection of victims–given his racist motivation.
.

KT, I hear ya on the emotions caused by Whitman’s atrocity. But do we do policy for such reasons? I’m guessing that we shouldn’t. (I wasn’t really thinking of the UT-Austin symbolism when I posted about Texas and Texas law (thinking about all the colleges in Texas)). Should the happenstance of the location of a mass-murder dictate whether we ought to ban guns in that location and in similar locations? What if a female student shoots dead a rapist in her dorm room–would that mean we open dorm rooms to guns?

Texans believe in the ability to pack. Some legislators think that college campuses should be open to legally registered firearms with registered users. That doesn’t seem too remarkable. And, I might also add that while the UT-Austin campus is probably pretty safe, I’m guessing that not all campuses in Texas are safe–should college students be put at a disadvantage vis a vis all other Texans?

afguy, your post shifts the focus. Your post focuses on the larger issue of gun control because I am guessing that your school was a “gun free zone”. (Btw, I have zero problems with properly licensed teachers, principals packing heat. Not students.)
.

Guns lead to death. There is no question about that. But they also allow people to defend themselves and they deter violence too. Maybe if we could get rid of all weapons, then we could live in a gun free zone. But we cannot. And so the issue is not a choice between guns and no guns, but between a situation whether law-abiding people will be disarmed and outlaws will not, see, e.g., Washington DC, not known for being all that safe or whether both the law-abiding and outlaws will have access. I don’t own a gun–I have an alarm system. Not everyone is that fortunate.

My concern is that this piece of legislation is being considered more out of a devotion to particular idealogy than out of consideration for sound, reasonable policy. This bill would take the decision on hand gun policy away from the school and subject to the whims of people who won’t have to deal with the consequences of their decision.

As an aside, John Woods – the student cited in the article, has been a tireless advocate in trying make sure that what happened at VT and UT never happens again and his involvment goes beyond the hot-button issue of gun control. His views are based on his interaction with survivors at VT and his own experiences. They are well reasoned and evidence based. I wonder if the supporters of this bill can say the same?

SG:
.
I definiely don’t think her push for gun control is a ruse in light of the loss and suffering she has gone through.
.
That’s a very good point, and I certainly agree with you, and do not fault her for her advocacy.
.
I think that she’s a jackass for two reasons:
.
1) I don’t think that her single-issue advocacy focus lends itself to terribly efficient party-building (nor policy-making), as evidenced by the fact that she didn’t even bother to know Kirsten Gillibrand’s (of whom I’m not a huge fan) record before giving her money in political machine-like fashion
.
2) Her rationale “To have a senator representing the NRA for New York, that would be wrong.” implies to me, as it does to many other New Yorkers (having watched numerous local discussions on NY1, a local cable channel that features local political roundtables and news), that she’s reducing the debate to a regional-identity issue –just like the NRA and the Republicans.
.
It’s the same sort of cultural nonsense as “The Democrat party wants to take away yer gunz!” that feeds into regional chauvinism and stereotyping for its bases, instead of rational policy debate about what best serves the interests of constituents. It’s like a Southern Republican saying something like “To have a senator representing the ACLU for Alabama, that would be wrong“. It’s not good for the country, and it’s not good for New York to politicize cultural stereotypes.
.
I hope that this makes it clearer, SG. I don’t believe that her politics are a “ruse”, I believe they are wrong in multiple important ways.

afguy, your post shifts the focus. Your post focuses on the larger issue of gun control because I am guessing that your school was a “gun free zone”. (Btw, I have zero problems with properly licensed teachers, principals packing heat. Not students.)
.
spob,
.
I’m not even sure they knew what a “gun free” zone was (or knew why they would need one).
.
IIRC, they were participating in a pre-school day prayer meeting that was lead by the students, so the principal couldn’t be involved. The kid who did the shooting was the child of a prominent local businessman who had taken his father’s gun. The area was roughly circular and, I think the students were gathered in a circle.
.
My comment about the fists and haymakers was to make the point that it’s too easy to settle disagreements this way and the results to others can be horrifying.
.
Regarding the possibility of a girl killing a dorm rapist. Having been in college and knowing life there, I think it more possible that a drunken roommate or dorm-mate (unable to find their room key and being unable to think clearly) might be killed by someone, awakened from their sleep, frightened by the noise in the hallway and pounding on the door.) Also, imagine said drunken dorm-mate with a loaded gun and alcohol-impaired judgment.

Thanks, KT.

It boggles the mind that those who support the conceal-and-carry measure don’t understand the death toll would have probably been much higher if there had been a shootout in the classrooms.

afguy, I had already said that the school should be allowed to ban gans in dorm rooms, the point wasn’t that such an occurrence was likely, but rather that we don’t set policy as a result of an outlier.
.

I think we all know that guns get people hurt. The issue, of course, is whether we make it such that only outlaws have them.

…I had already said that the school should be allowed to ban guns in dorm rooms . . .
.
From the rooms, but allow them in the cars in the parking lot? I can see how that might be a deterrent in a few cases.
.
Same for banning from the classrooms, but not the campus as a whole. I think one point was also to allow the emotions to diffuse. If you’re refused a job or given a grade lower than what tyou think you deserve, the first option shouldn’t be to pull a gun from your pocket or got to your car and get one to address the injustice of it all.
.
Anger management classes might be appropriate for someone who took a swing at another student, but it’s kinda late for someone who left, brought back a gun, and killed half a dozen in the area. I don’t think that the parents of those killed or injured will necessarily be impressed by his legal right to be carrying that firearm. They may, however, be wondering about the widson of allowing that to happen.

Of course, a student could always go to his off-campus apartment and get his gun . . . .

In any event, here’s another interesting article in NYTimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?_r=2&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all

Of course, a student could always go to his off-campus apartment and get his gun . . . .
.
And one point is to make them think about what they are about to do and make it less convenient for them to act on pure emotion. Less chance of pre-meditation.
.
If they are completely off the rails, I’m sure the point could be made that they could make a legal purchase, endure the wait period, then come back and do what they intended.

and southernbell is smart enough to predict what would have happened had someone been packing heat . . . .

it’s unknowable.

We have other laws that are designed to protect the public against the irresponsibility of others.
.
For example, it’s legal to drink and be impaired if you’re over 21. It’s legal to drive. But it’s pretty much illegal everywhere to be legally drunk and drive at the same time.
.
I could make the point that doing that might save some lives. After all, a lot of drunks have survived horrific crashes because they are relaxed. But the potential for damage and loss of life to others is the primary concern, because we can’t be sure that they will just damage their own property or injure themselves.
.
I don’t see any outcry for repealing the drunk driving laws. After all, they do intrude on our freedoms and both actions are legal. Apparently, we DO see the reason for having them. Sad some can’t see the wisdom of the restrictions in this case and see it JUST as a 2nd Amendment issue.

Well, afguy, if you believe that 2d Amendment creates a Constitutional right, then that becomes the categorical imperative, just like belief in the exclusionary rule . . . .
.

Here’s a bit of news that should brighten everyone’s day:
.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29956301

Well, afguy, if you believe that 2d Amendment creates a Constitutional right, then that becomes the categorical imperative, just like belief in the exclusionary rule . . . .
.
Then why have ANY restrictions on what arms can be owned? Because IIRC, there are limitations on what arms we are allowed to possess. Aren’t there limitations on certain military grade weapons being allowed in the public domain? And aren’t fully-automatic assault weapons restricted also?
.
I fully agree that these are readily available – the world is awash in Cold-war era weaponry provided by both sides. Getting your hands on one with the right amount of money is pretty well a given.

Remember the Alamo!!

If you had read the article to which you linked you would see that civilians assisted the police by using their own firearms to pin down the sniper.

So your little snark unintentionally points out the value of armed civilians.

spob–you’re being a bit inconsistent. On the one hand you’re saying “Constitutional Right uber Alles”, on the other you’re saying “profs and deans but not students.”
.
The first amendment says freedom of speech, yet we have the “fire in crowded theatre” rules.
.
Guns are a right. I own a handgun–nice fullsized glock. I live in a state where you have the right to stand your ground and shoot an aggressor if you feel threatened; you can pick up a concealed carry license for a few bucks and a couple of hours.
.
I’m responsible enough to recognize that while I have a nice grouping at 10 yards, that aim is a result of being able to get in a proper stance and grip. Were I to have to shoot in a fluid environment, with my blood pumping and nerves racing, my aim would suffer accordingly. And a .45 travels a long way. With proper training this could be minimized, but such training is not required; neither is it the norm to be undertaken.
.
The fact that concealed carry licenses are upheld as constitutional (along with other restrictions) indicates that while we have the RIGHT to own firearms and weapons, that right is NOT a carte blanche statement. Much like a totally free market, or communism–these things look nice on paper, but fail the “human nature” test: we’re flawed, emotional, irrational, greedy, and shortsighted.
.
I have no problems with people owning guns. I have no problems with college students owning guns. However, I’ve been (and kind of still go) to college, and I know that people away from home from the first time+booze+guns would be a horrible mix. Keep them off campus, or locked up in some manner that makes them very difficult to access–the rationale behind the road rage laws equally applies here. Lack of opportunity to screw up=fewer screwups.

Hammerlock, I was talking about high schools–I don’t think that minor children have the right to bring guns to school.
.

And no, I didn’t say Constitutional right uber alles–that was SZ’s point. I am not convinced that the Second Amendment applies to the states.

.

It is inconsistent, though, to trumpet the Second Amendment as a fundamental right and then say that guns are banned on state college campuses. (Dorm rooms, different issue.)

I see this as just another ideological cat fight for which there is no absolute answer in a practical sense. In an ideological sense, the prevailing opinion of UT students, faculty, and leadership seems to be to leave things as they are. The legislature should defer to that, and get back to the other prevailing issues now, photo IDs to vote, and teaching “intelligent design” as an alternative to Darwin in biology classes.

KT, you are my favorite writer here on Swampland, but I wholeheartedly disagree with you here.

I am a current student at UT Austin. I was at this committee meeting tonight at the Capitol, the testimonies on this lasted roughly four straight hours, opinion was about evenly divided (and unpredictable, it was about 50% for students, faculty, younger people, middle-aged, etc).

The argument about alcohol and guns here does not make sense, because UT (and to my knowledge, all other major campuses in Texas) do not allow drinking in dorms or elsewhere on campus. Therefore, there are no parties (ie, with alcohol) on campus, they are all OFF campus (fraternity/sorority houses are off campus here as well). Since the campus ban on concealed carry does not apply to any area surrounding it, this is a complete moot point. Even if drinking was allowed in dorms, do you think a 20×30 room would make a good, fun environment for a kegger? Come on.

What frustrates me with this is that opponents of this and concealed-carry permits in general seem to think it’s easy to obtain one and just anyone can. Not true in the slightest. An intensive background check is conducted (which also checks psychological history, not just criminal), a train There are SEVERAL things that cannot prevent one from obtaining a CCP in Texas. To list a few: a felony conviction, certain misdemeanors, chemical/alcohol dependency, psychological history, there are others too. The type of person who has a CCP is the EXACT type of person you’d want to be around in the case of an emergency which required self defense. CCP holders in Texas have a staggering 14 times less crime rate than non-holders. And how many murders have been committed by CCP holders in Texas?

…….

ZERO

Also, take a guess at how many gun murders have been committed at the few college campuses that are not gun-free zones.

And Charles Whitman? Would a “gun-free zone” rule have stopped him you think? And as far as “students running around with guns” in this situation, Officer Ramiro Martinez, who confronted Whitman, specifically said that civilian shooters who assisted in the situation should have been credited, since they made it difficult for Whitman to aim and get a good shot off without being hit.

Do pro gun-control people think it’s a coincidence that the cities with the strictest gun laws have such high murder rates (Chicago, Detroit, Washington D.C.) ?

Sometimes I have to walk back to my dorm very late at night after studying or on weekends coming back from a friends place, and every once in a while I see either a single person or a group eyeing me, looking me over as if trying to decide whether to work me over. Whenever this happens, I think to myself, “I really wish I had a gun, but more importantly I hope they think I might have a gun”. With 4 armed robberies on campus and a rape just off of campus (if you leave on campus it’s not like you can take a gun with you when you leave), my fears are not unfounded.

typo* meant to say “a training course must be completed”, not “a train”

…and live instead of leave towards the end (the first one). sigh, it’s late, didn’t proofread, sorry.

Spob, you seem to be only partly aware of the particulars of the Whitman incident. It wasn’t just the body count that caused controversy. The other component was how amazingly easy it was for Whitman to pull it off. He bought the guns (a shotgun, M1 carbine, several hunting rifles, and several pistols) at a hardware store and a Sears, most on the morning before the massacre. He chatted with passed a security guard on the way in, and had to ask for assistance with the elevator from a campus employee. After mortally wounding a receptionist, he was passed by several people while holding a rifle in each hand, and he chatted with them as well. Then he started killing a lot of people.