Concealed Carry at the University of Utah
I’m certain that this will lead to a rash of students shooting each other over parking spaces, grades, and whatnot. At least, that’s what the anti-concealed carry folks tell me.
The senior at the University of Utah gets dressed and then decides which gun is easiest to conceal under his clothes.
If he’s wearing a T-shirt, he’ll take a smaller, low-profile gun to class. If he’s wearing a coat, he may carry a different weapon, he said.
He started carrying a gun to class after the massacre at Virginia Tech, but the student says he’s not part of the problem of campus shootings and could instead be part of a solution.
Nick, who asked not to be fully identified so his fellow students wouldn’t know he carried a gun, he says he has had a concealed weapons permit for more than three years. But it was Seung-Hui Cho’s murderous campus rampage that made him take a gun to class.
“Last year, after Virginia Tech, I thought ‘I’m not going to be a victim,’ ” Nick said.
He’s taking responsibility for his own safety and security. Good for him.
This guy’s posing a danger to his fellow students—and he wants it kept quiet? If he’s so proud, why won’t he identify himself? I’d be pissed if I was sitting next to this guy and the gun accidentally discharged.
Posted by Michael Mathias on February 21, 2008 at 1854 hrs
It will no more lead to parking space shootings than it will lead to citizens defending themselves against rampaging madmen.
Posted by scott on February 21, 2008 at 1924 hrs
Right, because guns that are properly taken care of just “go off” of their own accord all the time right?
He’s safer now, but you two refuse to believe it. If the worst happens, he can do more than play dead on the floor and hope the cops show up in time.
But somehow, that’s a bad thing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2008 at 2039 hrs
But how will he keep it from shooting other people, particulalry innocent people? Those other studuents are in danger from the gun shooting them, right? They should be informed so they can get an injunction against the gun to prevent the gun from coming to class. The gun should not be allowed to go wherever it wants so it can shoot innocent people.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 0336 hrs
Get guns out of society.
This is WAY out of hand!
The NRA is a bunch of liars.
Guns do kill.
And we have had enough.
I am,George Vreeland Hill
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 0512 hrs
People have a natural right to defend themselves. In Maryland courts it has been stated that the government has no legal obligation to protect you… perhaps it has an obligation to do an autopsy and investigation .. not protect you (just ask Yvette Beakes)
http://www.attorneyblogg.com/node/17592?PHPSESSID=18011429b02801314311d9f00cc7d091
http://www.wftv.com/news/3618760/detail.htmlThe second amendment is not outdated. It is one of the bulwarks against tyranny…against a government monopoly on the use of force.. the Nazis and Stalinists have demonstrated what happens when they have that level of control.
http://www.suijuris.net/forum/office-information-retrieval/7214-government-has-no-duty-protect-anyone.html
The Capital News Paper, Tuesday, March 7, 2006County denies liability in killing
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 0714 hrs
I believe Utah has allowed concealed carry for years. Also, over half this country has laws that allow licensed firearm owners from carrying concealed. You don’t see reports daily about gunfights over parking spots or the last chocolate bagel - you do however hear stories about lone gunmen in gun free zones.
Isn’t it interesting that a majority of the gun crime in this country happens in areas where law abiding citizens are disarmed?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1112 hrs
Come on, that’s baloney. You have data indicating that the more liberal the gun laws the safer people are from gun violence? Show me. That would be “interesting.”
Necessary disclaimer for the ten gun nuts who are about to write furious tirades against this gun hata: i am in favor of concealed carry. I just happen to think it’ll have pretty much no impact on gun crimes or public safety either way.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1121 hrs
This guy’s posing a danger to his fellow students—and he wants it kept quiet? If he’s so proud, why won’t he identify himself? I’d be pissed if I was sitting next to this guy and the gun accidentally discharged.
Do you get pissed when you are standing next to a cop? do you worry that his gun might accidentally “go off”
Good grief…
Also, over half this country has laws that allow licensed firearm owners from carrying concealed.
Come on, that’s baloney. You have data indicating that the more liberal the gun laws the safer people are from gun violence? Show me. That would be “interesting.”
Yes Scott, that data does exist. And i have another prediction. As soon as someone cites it, you’re going to go clamouring that the source is biased blah blah blah.
that’s how these gun debates typically go. And in thread after thread, you guys post conjecture and emotion based arguements. Someone takes the time, does the research to spoon feed you guys the data, and then you just blow it off cause it doesn’t support your emotion. It happens time and time again. Its WEEKLY.
To be honest, its pointless. You don’t want the truth.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1136 hrs
As soon as someone cites it, you’re going to go clamouring that the source is biased blah blah blah.
Try us. I’m not anti-gun, after all. I have no dog in this fight except that I don’t care for irrational or otherwise BS arguments—which most of them on both sides seem to be.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1208 hrs
Me either. I like punching holes in things with a large caliber handgun. At the same time, I think there are way too many guns in the hands of criminals and crazy people. This is the very definition of an intractable problem. We’re never going to appreciably reduce the number of guns in circulation, but I truly don’t think it’s going down some slippery slope of totalitarianism to at least try and keep tabs on them and require thorough training to carry one.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1252 hrs
Here we go again with the broken record…
Laws require compliance. Without compliance you have no effectiveness. Criminals by the very definition are willing to disregard the law.
Any suggestion that ‘keeping tabs’ or ‘requiring training’ would have ANY affect on gun crime is absolutely devoid of rational thought.
Lastly, the cold hard truth that you guys won’t accept is the right to defend youself WITH A FIREARM is a basic human right. Not granted by the constitution but SPECIFICALLY protected by it.
All this talk about what you guys want to do and what is or isn’t going to help is just noise.
If you want to infringe on people’s HUMAN RIGHT to carry a firearm for personal protection, amend the constitution.
Our founding fathers believed the right to defend yourself with a firearm was inherent. Thus they protected that right with the bill of rights. If you disagree with them. Amend the constitution.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1302 hrs
If you’ll look again, I DID NOT SAY that people couldn’t protect themselves with a handgun. I DID NOT SAY that registration and training would have ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER on criminals’ use of firearms (ooh, the Caps Lock is fun).
Of course people have the right to defend themselves however they see fit, and if a handgun is the way they want to do it, that’s fine by me. But just because you know how to use one and I know how to use one doesn’t mean everyone else knows how to use one. Suppose someone who’s never even held a gun before witnesses a crime and gets scared. He buys a gun. I want him to know how to use it before he starts carrying it around where he might put me in danger with his ignorance and inexperience. Why is it such a leap from licensing drivers to licensing firearm owners? No, it won’t stop criminals, and nobody with a lick of sense thinks it will. Why is it such a bad thing, other than your normal antipathy to all things governmental, for there to be a little oversight? The second word of the amendment is, after all, well-regulated.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1400 hrs
Dear George,
Once again you have posted this same comment other place sos I will send you my same message again. I’m afraid you are being rather naive. I know it is redundant but guns do not kill people, PEOPLE kill people. A gun is an inanimate object it does not just get up by itself and arbitrarily decide to off someone on a given day.
Parents need to get their butts out from in front of the television, computer or video game and actually pay attention to their children. Teach children the value of life and not to be bullies. There is value in everyone even the little bespectacled kid everyone likes to make fun of, so do not bully this child.
If you have a child that requires help then get them help and I said help, NOT DRUGS. Prescriptions are the lazy society’s way of dealing with recalcitrant children.
ADD is a parental disorder and should be called LAD - Lack of Adult Direction. We have millions of children in the US placed on unnecessary prescriptions because mom and pops just do not have the ‘time’ to deal with junior. Granted there are a few children that may need a prescription but the medical studies reflect an inordinate amount of US children on prescriptions drugs, especially little boys. There is something wrong with a society would rather use a pill than deal with their kid.
I, for one, do not want to be at the mercy of some little snot who purchased his/her gun off the street because I, as a law abiding citizen , cannot purchase a weapon legally. You can say what you want about the NRA but they did not lie when they said guns don’t kill.
I have reread this post and with a sinus infection and my fuzzy brain it makes sense but please excuse any spelling errors.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1641 hrs
Well I thought I checked better but ‘sos’ is supposed to be ‘so’.
Excuse the error - sinus infection/meds and blogging do not always go together LMAO!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1645 hrs
S Miller, I find it extremely ironic that you’re calling someone else “naive” and then proceeding to write all the other things you went on about, because frankly I think many of them are extraordinarily naive.
ADD, while it is almost certainly over-diagnosed, is a genuine condition that—get this—often affects children of completely responsible and upstanding parents. And teaching one’s children not to give a wedgie to the class nerd is really not a terribly sophisticated or valuable response to the problem of, say, gun violence among inner city youth.
With all that said, I agree that guns are not the problem, per se. I have no problem with registrations, background checks or other sensible regulations on their possession and use, but neither do I have problems with concealed carry. As I said before, most of the gun debate is all ideology and no practicality. Put another way, it gets people really heated, but doesn’t actually have anything to do with solving or preventing any of the problems we actually have.
Posted by scott on February 22, 2008 at 1652 hrs
Philosophically I am opposed to CC based on my desire to live in a civil society. It is insane that some of us feel we have to arm our selves to be safe when going to the mall. It is a step backward to have a society where we all need to be armed. That is not the society I want to live in, but as a rationalist I recognize that maybe it is safer to have the John Wayne wannabes among us packing heat.
I agree with Scott that it likely does not make us safer one way or the other.
The only statistics I need are the ones I have seen about the number of guns we have in this country and the rate of gun violence. Compared to any other comparable country we are in a league of our own. You can’t tell me that we would have the same rate of homicide if criminals could only get their hands on clubs and knives.
It is common sense that given our current situation with so many guns floating around, banning them from the law abiding is not going to make anyone safer. That does not mean that simple restrictions can’t make us slightly more safe.
The only thing that is going to make us slightly safer is more common sense gun regulation. Simple regulations that can be imposed that will not jeopardize the safety or the rights of the law abiding. Things like mandatory trigger locks, mandatory registration and more comprehensive background checks.
Anyone that denies we have a gun problem in this country is simply denying reality.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1737 hrs
How about anyone convicted of a gun crime loses their trigger finger in addition to the existing jail sentence?
Posted by Matt on February 22, 2008 at 1742 hrs
Dear Scott,
Every time one of these school shooting incidents occur they talk about what kind of drugs the person who committed the crime was on, what kind of music they listened to etc, etc, etc. So the things I talked about were not naïve.
I used ADD as an example, and yes I am well aware it is a genuine condition. Hence my statement, there are a few children that genuinely need the medication. But my statement still stands. Too many children are placed on prescriptions they do not need – even the AMA has published studies stating this to be true especially for little boys. Too many parents have a rambunctious kid and they do no want to deal with it. We live in the world of the drive thru mentality – if junior won’t listen I’ll take him to the doctor and many doctors are too willing to distribute drugs to kids. Also whether you care to admit it or not bullying is schools is a problem. More than one school shooter has made the statement “They were tired of being bullied”. The Columbine shooters wrote statements to the same effect in their journals. Quite frankly I think we were better off when kids just slugged it out in the schoolyard.
The problems with gun violence with inner city youth are too numerous to go into here but if you would like to explore the poverty, poor educational system, the screwed up way our government distributes money to schools, drugs, gangs and the and all the other issues we can. We are talking about kids coming from middle class homes going to school and blowing away some of their classmates. Yes, I do find it odd that many of these school shooting incidents are middle class kids not inner city kids. Middle class kids that do not have both parents hanging out smoking crack.
You are correct in one respect about the gun debate being ideology but the second Amendment gives me the right to keep and bear arms. I realize this subject does set people off but I am not ‘heated’ about it. I have a nice collection of guns my father left me and they are locked up away from my kid. When she is old enough I will teach her about guns – safety and proper use, etc just like my father did for me.
But when I said George was being naïve about taking all the guns away I meant it. I can purchase a gun anywhere from a guy selling them out of the back of his car. Stabbings are the cause of a good percentage of deaths in America also so do we get rid of all the knives? Cars are an issue especially when drunk drivers and cell phone users are behind the wheel, do we outlaw them as well? People will find a weapon if they want one and guns, like all other weapons are inanimate, it takes a hand to wield them.
Do not get me wrong Scott I am by no means attacking you or George. I have no reason, need or want to.
Again I reread this to check for errors but if I missed them please excuse them – a sinus infection/meds and blogging do not always mix well as your brain gets kind of fuzzy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1759 hrs
That was weird - my word to type in to post the above message was ‘death’ - lmao too funny.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2008 at 1800 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 105
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 03:12 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).