Why Campus carry is important to me.

I'm 20 and I'm a responsible gun own who has been around firearms my entire life. I bought a rifle about a month after I turned 18. Yet, I can't buy a handgun and I can't carry it because I'm not 21. I can buy an ak-47 but not a .22lr pistol thats life I suppose. When I turn 21 next march guess what, I STILL won't be able to carry my handgun 90% of the time because I'm a college student. I have to sacrifice my ability to defend myself because I want a decent education and an ability to move up in life. If I want to own ANY firearms I'm going to have to continue to pay more to live off campus instead of in a dorm. I won't even be able to carry my firearm before and after college any day I go, because I can't keep it in my car on campus.

The message intended or not seems to be "Sure you showed intelligence and maturity through your willingness to take on debt and extra schooling now to have a better future, but we still don't trust you so fuck off kid we'll protect, maybe.". I did everything the government run school system told me I must do to be a good citizen. I never commited a crime, my grades are excellent and I'm moving toward a career that will benefit my nation. So why am I still being denied constitutional rights that I should have had 2 years ago, much less will receive 2-4 years from now?

:cry:

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Very progressive of you.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

rape on campuses which is apparently a really big problem. Maybe people having the right to carry on campus would cut way down on those rapes. I would hope so anyway.

They're acquaintance rapes; and the women have been taken by surprise, often in their own rooms. They don't have their guns out, ready to protect themselves from the guy down the hall.

with guns. Especially in this day and age. Things have changed! Someone has a bad day due to a bad grade, or due to being cheated on via Facebook, and suddenly everyone's life is at risk!

I'm really glad I'm done with college because I can't imagine going to class with a bunch of gun carriers. My alma mater is in Georgia and is 75% male so I'm pretty sure almost everyone would have been packing!

...with guns and most everything else. He seems to have a lick of common sense and a head not filled with imaginations so blown out of proportion as to be comical. I seriously hope you don't represent a significant population of those who went to college in Georgia. 75% males and all of them packing? That's not even close to the realm of reality.

They won't be handing out guns at freshman orientation. College students of age can ALREADY get CCWs if they can pass the requirements. That doesn't change. And those with CCWs can ALREADY carry to off campus activities. Off-campus is where all the parties are.

In reality very few early 21+ yr-olds will get permits. The most common age for first issue of a CCW is 52.

Nationally those who have CCWs have compiled an excellent safety record, better even than the police. Are you claiming that we are going to suddenly turn into crazed killers simply because we go onto campus.

BTW - How well did being gun-free work at VT?

Well I find Cobb County very interesting.

As far as on-campus carry is concerned; you know for sure that where it is prohibited, only the criminals are carrying. ;)

got it's CHL law (something I campaigned for very hard) and I was in my instructors 2nd class. I was one of the first that kinda got shafted by the state. They decided not to mail out the CHL's until the day the law went into affect. They were scared people would jump the gun and carry when they got the CHL and not wait till the day the law went into affect.

Drinking is a serious problem on campus, too. Do you seriously think that students (including under-age students) aren't drinking in their dorms? Get real.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=416652&mesg_id=417113

Things can get tense and emotionally charged in this atmosphere-- when higher ed is doing its job best, it challenges people and pushes them out of their comfort zones. I've seen students act out their frustrations in lots of destructive ways-- I'm awfully glad that guns are not routinely part of the mix.

True story. I once had an undergrad student approach me after class. He was older than most "traditional" undergrads, retraining for a new career. Anyway, he walked up to the podium while I was collecting my notes and stuff to ask some questions. We struck up a more general conversation, during which he confided that he "always carries" and I could count on him if I ever "needed anyone taken out." I was never so happy to see someone finish the class and move on.

People get emotional at work, in the home and in the parking lot. Why are colleges special no civil rights zone? What sort of message is that sending to the future generation?

...to conduct arguments or settle disputes. Guns are not an appropriate defense against most of the sorts of crimes one is likely to encounter in a place like this. As such, their presence is more likely to CAUSE tragedy than to circumvent it. That message is explicit and intentional. You have the right to gun ownership, but you do not have the right to endanger others by carrying your weapons in inappropriate places, at least on the campus where I work.

Would a firearm have been a appropriate defense against the sort of crime those women encountered in that place? I'm openly gay, sometimes bad things happen to openly gay students walking home from a class at night. I want to carry a firearm to protect myself from that, not from a professor who might give me a bad grade.

my weaponry is a perfectly appropriate way to settle the dispute.

"As such, their presence is more likely to CAUSE tragedy than to circumvent it." Got stats for that?

"inappropriate places" Do you have a list, and explainations for why they are so labeled?



Please name the institution you "teach" at, so I can keep my kids far away from it.

And, truthfully, most other public places.

Raping you daughter? That's fine if that is your decision but I will recommend my daughter to go to a school that respects the right of a woman to defend herself.

When it comes to a rapist, the best way to deal with him is to blow him away before he gets a chance to infect his victim.

it won't be by a stranger with HIV, but by a drunk "friend" in a dorm room. And she won't have her gun ready when she needs it.

I'd rather she have the option. Any female student can opt to avoid the party scene but she can't opt to stop Bubba from walking on campus and following her. Put a gun in her purse and at least she has a chance.

give to use campus security.

....if people were advocating the settling all disputes or conducting arguments with weaponry, which is not the case. Millions of people carry every day and yet we don't have these droves of random shootings because of "emotional disagreements" as you are in fear of. I'm sorry, but as a college professor, I would like to think you would be capable of looking at the subject material a bit more rationally and objectively. The simple fact is that having a gun doesn't suddenly turn somebody into a irrational, raving lunatic.

are still developing -- about 40% of whom, according to major studies, regularly engage in binge drinking.

The message that's being sent is that guns should only be used by responsible, sober adults.

able to carry off campus. If this demographic isn't behaving violently off campus, why do you assume they will do so on campus? Especially given that student-age people do not lack for access to firearms as it is, and yet the bloodshed at school-related events (even those involving alcohol) is minimal...

Seems to still be working.

If a state has rules for carrying a concealed weapon, then I can't think of one reason why students should be denied that liberty on a public campus. Places where campus carry is permitted have not had any major incidents with legal carry.

I understand. I've ended people's academic careers. I've been on appeals committees and written the letters that said a student couldn't return for more classes even though he was 3/4 done and thousands in debt. I've had angry students in my office take very threatening tones.

As your anecdote showed, guns are on campus already even when the rules say otherwise.

and have not been threatened, assaulted, harassed, had property vandalized, etc. I don't see any support for the assumption that the students who choose to exercise CCW are likely to act out violently, given that A) students are not generally acting out violently under the same stresses today, and B) CCW holders are not acting out violently in non-campus environments...

"6. well, as a university prof I'm SUPER GLAD that firearms are not allowed on my campus...."

When guns were not banned on campuses there were no mass shootings but after being banned the number of mass shootings at schools skyrocketed. How is it you keep your school gun free? Gates and metal detectors? If I am ever shot on a campus I am going to sue the university if they forced mento be disarmed.

is a major factor in choosing to carry.

Did you not think that maybe other people on campus might feel uncomfortable knowing that everyone else is packing heat and could hypothetically kill someone at any moment. Guns are weapons used for killing and students tend to not feel comfortable learning in a dangerous environment. I just dont understand why you think you have the right to make your college less safe by openly carrying around a dangerous weapon.

In Florida concealed carry is a reality and it isn't going anywhere. My question is why are colleges special? Why is my ability to defend myself at 21 significantly less than say a construction worker who never has to leave his firearm at home and walk down a dark street at night without it?

on campus than in the general population. Not a good place to have a lot of guns.

Young people's brains don't fully develop until the mid-twenties -- especially the part involved with self-control. That's why I don't think we should be trying young people as adults OR letting them own guns.

and the like. How many of those do you think don't already contain guns? And yet, the bloodshed is minute.

It seems to me that you're basing your points on a series of stereotypes as well as assumptions about gun owners in general...

their own age who aren't in college. That's backed up by a considerable amount of research. Binge drinking in particular is especially high among college students. College students are also more likely to live in close quarters among roommates. I would object to having a roommate who kept a gun in our room. If I was a college student, what recourse would I have? What liability would a college have?

I'm not sure what stereotype you're referring to about gun owners. As far as I'm concerned, they run the gamut from responsible to irresponsible, just like all people. It's the actions of the irresponsible ones I worry about.

in assessing how individuals should be treated, or how individuals might react (particularly in situations where drinking is irrelevant). The assumptions that opponents of campus CCW appear to be making are that legally-owned firearms, kept with lawful intent, create non-trivial danger for others, which is not born out by data. Also, that gun-owning students are likely to act out violently if allowed to carry. The flaws in that latter assumption are that students are not currently acting out violently under similar stresses, and that much of the drinking is already done in the likely presence of firearms. Further, the students who would be allowed to carry on campus are the same ones who are already allowed to carry off-campus, where they aren't behaving violently, so why would they be expected to resort to gunplay on campus?

As far as room-mates, the campus-carry proposals I've heard of still give schools the right to control how/where firearms are stored in dorms...

I mean, I'm fairly shocked by the amount of patronizing that gets directed at college students. Look at the common justification for campus "speech codes," which is that the poor little dears are too fragile to be exposed on unpleasant ideas, though of course they can't be trusted to decide for themselves what ideas they might find unpleasant; all too often, someone older and supposedly wiser makes that call for them. I'm sure I could come up with other examples if I thought for long enough.

The long and short of it is that you can't expect to treat someone like a child and expect them to behave like an adult.

why will they become violent on campus?

The law will have no effect at all on off-campus behavior. Why are you talking about off-campus behavior regarding an on-campus law?

I'm old enough to vote, to join the military and carry a fully automatic assault rifle, but my gosh darn brain just isn't developed enough to know not to be expected to blow away my prof over a C.

If instead of going to college I work a dead end minimum wage job, I can carry handguns till my heart is content. It is just the fact I thought of the future, kept my grades up and worked hard that keeps me from carrying a gun.

Now tell me how does that make sense?

and went into combat, I don't see why you can't carry concealed on campus if you are old enough to go into combat.

...to generalize about entire groups of people, instead of letting individuals stand on their own merit. In this case, it's college students.

10 million or so just can't do it. I think that's a pretty good indication of how society feels about gun toters.

Fortunately for all of us...

I am sure that you have seen the map that show the states changing from restricted/no-issue to shall-issue. They did that because society (voters) demanded it.

College students are. The situations aren't comparable.

Why do you keep bringing up stuff that isn't in the law?

and the mere presence of a firearm does not make for a "dangerous environment".

Its almost as if you had a talking point sheet or something.

In most states, people can't get a license until they're at least 21.

How many college students are 21+?

Of the demographic most likely to get a permit, only 3-4% actually do. At the tail end of the age bell curve, it's miniscule (1,190 in TX last year for people 21 yoa, of 102,000 issued- just over 1%). That's 1% of the permits issued, to the age which represents a minority at most college campuses (at least in on-campus housing.)

That's a hell of a lot different than "everyone else".

Out of sight out of mind. Besides, I seriously doubt more than a few will carry and do you have any evidence that the campus will be made less safe? Empirical and historical evidence not improbable what if nonsense. Should anyone care about your irrational fears?

A civilian-model AK is no different than any other semi-auto rifle, and les powerful than many.

covered with the dead bodies of a flock of deer. The shooters were a couple of older teens with semi-automatic rifles, shooting at night.

I don't agree with putting semi-automatic rifles or pistols into the hands of young people, unless they have undergone training as thorough as they're given in the military. The brand name isn't important.

And a single instance of such has little bearing on the vast majority, unless you can prove a trend.

And seriously, "flock of deer"? This does not reflect well on your credibility. I am curious as to why the deer didn't scatter after the first shot or two. Standing around would be rather atypical behavior for a herd. Curiouser and curiouser...


Edit: Don't think I didn't notice you dodging the original question...

....I've only ever once seen a small group of deer not scatter as soon as I pulled up in a car, and these deer where actually pretty deep into the city, so my guess is they were more used to vehicle traffic. But I can't imagine a bunch of deer just standing around as some kids gunned them down one by one.

That's the point. A couple of teens sprayed them with bullets from their automatic rifles.

...one, I highly doubt they had automatic rifles. Most likely they had semi-auto rifles. Two, it's hard enough to hit a deer when it's standing still. One that's running (which is exactly what they all would be doing after the first shot) is that much harder, especially if it was only a "couple of teens" with semi-auto rifles. Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

with a bright light. Have you ever heard of the deer in the headlights phenomenon?

They waited in the dark at a place on the ranch where the herd was known to pass through. When the deer showed up, they turned on the lights. You couldn't easily kill a few dozen deer with a regular rifle, but you can mow a herd down in seconds with a couple automatics.

I don't know why my using the word "flock" instead of herd makes any difference. The rancher said there were 30 dead deer and a bunch of beer cans. Disgusting.

If you had said 5 (maybe as many as 10 were I feeling generous), perhaps, but 30 pushes this tale into the realm of the ridiculous.

with automatic rifles can get off a lot of shots.

But you don't have to buy it. That's fine.

Are you saying that a couple of drunk teens mowed down 30 deer with machine guns? Any chance this rancher was pulling your leg?

for over 30 years. There isn't anything you can "teach" me on this subject. The story the rancher told you was highly embellished at best. The fact that he was upset is irrelevant and does not add any credibility.

My neighbor, an elderly dairy farmer, could become quite emotional as well. He didn't care for the spaceships landing in his lower pasture at night and frightening the cattle.

No, he didn't care for it at all.

might hit one or two, since they can't control the climb.

and you can tell it anyway you like. But if you want it to be believed, I suggest verification or a more gullible audience.

Semper Fi,

did they find shell casings? How do you know they were semi autos and not lever actions? Illegal full autos? Shot someplace else and dumped there? I hope the culprits were found and sitting on their happy asses in jail someplace where poachers are regarded someplace between crooked cops and pedophiles.

where I am from it is called spotlighting.

...even after shots were being fired? I can see this working on a handful, but a large group of 30 plus? I ask you because you seem more knowledgeable of the subject and appear to give it some credence, though like you said I would be curious to see how the determined it was semi automatic rifles if it was true...

was quite serious and quite upset at the time. However, this was at least 10 years ago . . . too late to get any answers now.

I heard they used AK-47's, but I don't know what the evidence was.

And the rancher was elderly and died since then, so I can't find out now.

...why it seems just a bit over the top that your supporting reasoning for why you hold the opinion that you do is based entirely around a tale told to you from an old rancher? Basically, the weakest form of anecdotal evidence? I'm sorry, but that sort of thing just doesn't make for a good basis when it comes to public policy.

On the first shot, even at night, the deer run. Your teens, firing semi-auto would have time for only a few sprayed shots, or only a couple of aimed shots. Spray shot will most likely miss.

I don't believe your story as it doesn't fit with what I know of deer or of guns.

If you could blind a deer into standing still you'd have but one maybe two spots if each shooter had a light. After the first shot then they'd just be blasting away at deer in a field running for the woods. Thirty deer shot dead would mean another 60 deer crippled that got away.

I can just make claims to without backing them up. Let's see. Anti-gun groups are brainwashing and coaching individuals to do mass shootings in order to increase their membership rates and income. There, I made a claim I can't back up also.

requires CLEO notification, fingerprinting, four month back ground check and a $200 tax if you can find one. Oh you mean a semi auto knock off? I miss your point then.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Children curse in social situations to get attention. Adults use curse words to express extreme agitation or annoyance, but only in places or at times where it is acceptable. Say with casual friends or perhaps on an internet forum where cursing is not only allowed, but common.

Now that you're (hopefully), done attacking either my grammar or my maturity. Maybe you'd like to explain to me why an adult, who is legally allowed to carry a firearm in nearly every other place in Orlando, isn't even allowed to keep a handgun in their car when they enter a campus. If you don't like concealed carry, that is fine, but why this double standard toward young people? Well not all young people, just the ones who decided to improve themselves through college. Pick apart my post for grammatical errors, attack my character again, but at least attempt to pair your childish antics with a real argument.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

a gun requires at least the same degree of brain maturity as drinking.

I don't agree with the drinking age being 21 either, but like 21 for handgun purchases the law is the law and I respect it.

He will also be of legal age to purchase a handgun, and acquire a permit to carry it concealed in public. However, when that times comes, his institution of higher learning will (barring any changes to the law) still not permit him to keep or carry it on campus.

I just thought I'd point that out.

in the room?

That's the kind of question colleges would have to struggle with. In the outside world, random people aren't thrown together in 10 x 16 dorm rooms.

But completely barring the otherwise legal possession of firearms on that campus is akin to swatting a mosquito with a sledgehammer. If one resident has an objection to a firearm being kept in his living space, surely gun owners can be paired off with each other or, failing that, with someone who doesn't mind his roommate keeping a gun in the room.

I should point out that the only college dorms I've seen in real life in the U.S. are those at Evergreen, where each building consists of four units, each housing four residents, who share a communal cooking/living area and bathroom but otherwise have their own rooms. Wait, freshman housing uses the setup you describe, but if we're talking freshmen, we're not talking CCW permit holders.

are extremely unusual -- and one of the real attractions of Evergreen!

If I MUST pay more for housing to protect myself, then I will. My safety means that much to me.

Once he gets his CCW he will be able to carry to all the off-campus parties that he wants to.

At least your making an attempt to be accommodating and I respect that even If I disagree with your other views.

Another thing he is being told (in essence) is "You do not share my view of guns, so you are immature."


Seems to me he is mature enough to judge by empirical, verifiable evidence (versus a reflexive dogma) that carriage of handguns

by properly licensed gun ownerson college campuses is not harmful, as forty or so colleges already allow this with no (IIRC)

problems so far.


I am willing to concede that the possibilty exists that it might be a problem, so accounts of such problems

should be posted to my thread here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x382537


Are we not rational adults who value hard evidence and verifiable statistics over faith and innuendo?

After all, "maturity is an important requirement for" voting.

200 million grownups walk around everyday without a gun, and see no need for one.

Otherwise, good luck to you.

I understand that owning and carrying a hadngun is a real responsibility, one even greater than owning firearms in general. Not only that, but they are heavy sometimes uncomfortable and even alters the type of clothes you can wear. I just view my safety as important enough to overcome those factors. I don't want it as a fashion statement.

He's perfectly comfortable letting the statistics fall by the wayside.

Statistically, you're more likely to be injured or cause accidental injury with your gun than to have an opportunity to use one to defend yourself.

Now you are either being wilfully ignorant, or outright lying. Neither speaks well of you.

And that you "exposed" nothing to me.

There is a huge difference between some gang member carrying and a legal carrier.

....laughably insane in fact.

EDIT: Actually, I think we may be talking about different studies. I was thinking of the Kellermann laugh fest of a study. This one sounds different, but no less flawed if it failed to differentiate between legal and illegal carry.

written by an economist and has never been released for peer review. He was paid by the Joyce Foundation, which is about as honest as climate change studies paid for by Koch brothers.

Individuals should be judged on their individual merit. Sounds to me like you are a responsible, highly motivated person working to build a positive future.

Abide by the law and become proficient in methods of self defense using other than firearms. No, it is not as good and No, it is not as easy, but it is the best available for you now. Further, that knowledge will be of tremendous benefit to you in avoiding or stopping a violent situation even when you are armed.

Remember how you feel now so that in the future you may be able to help those who follow.

Semper Fi,

This post makes me glad to have made this thread, even if other people have reacted very negatively to it.

Ya think?

...that he is probably more grown up than you. He certainly had more to add to this thread than you did.





Ya didn't think.

Being grown up is about a heck of a lot more than just some number in the age column.

It's O.K., should be easy, amIright?

Before then, the part of the brain that is connected with self-control is still developing. (The part that controls logical and abstract thinking is finished at a much younger age, which is why it actually makes sense to allow 18 year olds to vote, but not to drink.)

and the "mid-twenties"? And along the same lines, would you advocate a significant increase in the driving and drinking ages?

http://hrweb.mit.edu/worklife/youngadult/brain.html#beyond

Changes in Young Adulthood
At the same time that young adults are experiencing new levels of sophistication in thinking and emotional regulation, their brains are undergoing changes in precisely the areas associated with these functions. While it is not possible to determine cause-and-effect, brain and behavior are changing in parallel.

SNIP
"Executive suite": The cluster of functions that center in the prefrontal cortex is sometimes called the "executive suite," including calibration of risk and reward, problem-solving, prioritizing, thinking ahead, self-evaluation, long-term planning, and regulation of emotion. (See Merlin Donald, Daniel Keating, and others in References.) It is not that these tasks cannot be done before young adulthood, but rather that it takes less effort, and hence is more likely to happen.

20s and beyond

According to recent findings, the human brain does not reach full maturity until at least the mid-20s. (See J. Giedd in References.) The specific changes that follow young adulthood are not yet well studied, but it is known that they involve increased myelination and continued adding and pruning of neurons. As a number of researchers have put it, "the rental car companies have it right." The brain isn't fully mature at 16, when we are allowed to drive, or at 18, when we are allowed to vote, or at 21, when we are allowed to drink, but closer to 25, when we are allowed to rent a car.

How does some unspecified degree of continued myelination and adding/pruning of neurons relate to behavior? Can you point to a tangible difference in the level of responsible firearms-related behavior between 21 and 25+? Or a relationship between these processes and any other behavior?

If so, why should we not revisit all the other age-controlled behaviors - driving, voting, drinking, military service?

In reality, I'd say these age-limits have been set empirically rather than neurologically. Our experience over the years has indicated that humans are sufficiently mature for certain tasks at certain age limits - so your argument is really one of convenience rather than any sort of valid assessment of firearms trustworthiness...

Why do avoid the actual real life results of other states?

but simple, effective means of self defense are just too much for them to handle.

Your logic is teh phale.

So it makes sense that young people can be given that responsibility first.

Or have impulse issues with voting?

And what about all those outside colleges, you have been studiously ignoring them. My guess being because the stats on legal gun owners in the the same age-group that are not in college don't back up your assumption.

and drinking overall among 18 - 21 year olds who are not in college.

...the pros/cons of 18 year old people have the right to carry. I tend to be of the belief that if you are old enough to drive, vote and serve in the military, you are old enough to carry.

...and 31 year olds with none whatsoever. We as a nation agree that by age 18, they have enough self control to be handed a gun and placed into a combat situation. Given that, then how can we say the don't have enough to own a firearm legally? That thought process just doesn't click with me. It's wrong for us to legislate adults based on the worst kind of generalizations.

As for the part of the brain that is still developing at what ages, I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to support your numbers. Studies done by the National Institute of Mental Health place the time frame for the maturation of the frontal lobe (the area dealing with reasoning/self-control) somewhere between 16 and 23 (though the study included people as old as 30). There was nothing to conclude that the maturation process wasn't completed until the mid-twenties, and in fact some evidence to show it likely completes in the late teens to early twenties.

http://hrweb.mit.edu/worklife/youngadult/brain.html#bey...

Changes in Young Adulthood
At the same time that young adults are experiencing new levels of sophistication in thinking and emotional regulation, their brains are undergoing changes in precisely the areas associated with these functions. While it is not possible to determine cause-and-effect, brain and behavior are changing in parallel.

SNIP
"Executive suite": The cluster of functions that center in the prefrontal cortex is sometimes called the "executive suite," including calibration of risk and reward, problem-solving, prioritizing, thinking ahead, self-evaluation, long-term planning, and regulation of emotion. (See Merlin Donald, Daniel Keating, and others in References.) It is not that these tasks cannot be done before young adulthood, but rather that it takes less effort, and hence is more likely to happen.

20s and beyond

According to recent findings, the human brain does not reach full maturity until at least the mid-20s. (See J. Giedd in References.) The specific changes that follow young adulthood are not yet well studied, but it is known that they involve increased myelination and continued adding and pruning of neurons. As a number of researchers have put it, "the rental car companies have it right." The brain isn't fully mature at 16, when we are allowed to drive, or at 18, when we are allowed to vote, or at 21, when we are allowed to drink, but closer to 25, when we are allowed to rent a car.

....so are you then suggesting we push the driving/drinking age back? To be honest, in order to remain consistent in your position, you are almost required to agree to this....

18 would be better.

but for a different reason.

Most 16-year-olds don't comprehend the physics behind driving a car. At 18, they have a better chance to have aquired some of that specialized knowledge.

Then again, many farm kids (myself included) start driving from a much younger age than 16. It helps that my father is a science/math teacher...

...but he is a science enthusiast which he passed on to me. He was also a road examiner for the state of Wisconsin, so I had proper driving techniques grilled into me when I got my license at 16.

But to go back on topic, I think I would say that if we believe somebody is old enough to drive at 18, which is a huge responsibility, they are also old enough to own and carry a firearm, which is an equally huge responsibility.

What colleges are these, and for what reasoning? This is an honest question, as I've literally never heard of this.

given those stats, how do you feel about Canada allowing 18 year olds to buy handguns and 12 year olds to buy ammunition? (the ages are 21 and 18 here) In France, 16 year olds can buy long guns?

...that the parts of the brain affecting self-control are never done developing.

Parties + guns is not a good combination.


NEWARK, NJ SEPTEMBER, 2010:

http://www.thesetonian.com/news/student-dies-after-gunshot-incident-at-house-party-1.1647271

Sept. 27, 7:40 a.m.: According to 7 Online.com, one of the victims in Saturday's deadly shooting at a house party in East Orange is in stable condition at University Hospital in Newark – awaiting word on whether she may need surgery.
Sophomore Nakeisha Vanterpool, reportedly the roommate of slain classmate Jessica Moore, was shot in the chin on Saturday morning according to the 7 Online report. Doctors are reportedly unsure if surgery will be necessary to remove the bullet as they wait for swelling in her jaw to go down.
As The Setonian reported over the weekend, Moore jumped in front of Vanterpool when she was shot in the head at the party, according to multiple eyewitnesses. She died later that afternoon.
--
UPDATE as per the Associated Press, Sept. 26, 8 a.m.:
Other victims of yesterday's shooting in East Orange that killed one Seton Hall student and left two others injured include a 25-year-old male student from N.J.I.T., according to the Associated Press.

________________________________________________________

PHILADELPHIA, OCTOBER, 2010

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=7756399

NORTH PHILADELPHIA - October 31, 2010 (WPVI) -- It started out innocently enough - a Halloween party hosted by Temple University students on 17th Street, just a few blocks off campus. But, it turned ugly at shortly after 2:00 Sunday morning.
Police say is started with a fight inside the house. A verbal altercation turned physical and spilled out onto the street. Once outside, they say one of the young men pulled a gun and shot the other.
The 20-year-old victim was shot in chest. The gunman has been identified as 21-year-old Richard Dodds of Audubon, Pennsylvania.

__________________________________________________

MIAMI, JANUARY 2011

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2011/02/guns_at_college_father_of_girl.php

Ashley Cowie, a sophomore at Florida State University, was shot and killed last month after an AK-47 accidentally went off at a party at a property housing fraternity brothers. Clearly, firearms and college parties don't mix well, but a bill introduced last month would allow students at Florida state colleges to openly have firearms on campus if they have the proper permits. Cowie's father, Robert, offered tearful testimony this week urging against the passage of the bill.
Ashley died on January 9th after 20-year-old Evan Wilhelm began brandishing an AK-47 during the party. The weapon accidentally discharged and hit Ashley in the chest. Her twin sister Amy tried to perform CPR to save Ashley, but she died at the scene. The bullet also hit another student in the wrist after exiting Ashley's body.

allowed on campus? Or are frat parties all off campus where guns are legal and this bill will have no effect?

drinking is legal for students 21 and over, illegal for students under 21 -- but enforcement varies widely. Only a few campuses in the U.S. are dry for everyone. Read any college guide or talk to any college students you know -- alcohol is easily obtainable to students of any age at most colleges. Older students buy or provide alcohol to younger students, or nearby stores look the other way when students turn up with false I.D.'s.

And college parties with alcohol aren't limited to frats. Only some schools even have fraternities or fraternity parties -- but students in almost all schools engage in drinking and in parties.

In the study below, almost half of full-time underage college students not living with their parents engaged in binge drinking in the previous month, versus a third of those living with their parents.

http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k6/college/collegeunderage.htm

Full-time college students aged 18 to 20 living with a parent, grandparent, or parent-in-law were less likely to have engaged in binge alcohol use than full-time college students aged 18 to 20 who were not living with a parental relative (34.0 vs. 48.5 percent).

Parties are almost always off-campus. The proposed law has no effect on them.

Everybody I know that carry's doesn't carry if they intend on drinking heavily (or at all for that matter). This is in no small part because carrying while drinking is, shall we say, generally frowned upon to put it mildly.

But lets set that all aside. Have you looked at the college campuses where concealed carry is allowed to see if your fears manifested themselves in increased incidences of gun violence or firearms related accidents? Is there evidence other than anecdotal to support your position?

As far as I know, those studies haven't been carried out.

"Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies*, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes."

From http://www.concealedcampus.org/common_arguments.php

And this: "In reality, more than 70 college campuses currently allow concealed carry on campus, including all public universities in Utah and multiple college campuses in Colorado. According to crime statistics and inquiries to campus officials, there hasn’t been a single reported instance of shootouts, accidents or heated confrontations resulting from concealed carry on campus. In fact, Colorado State University’s crime rate has declined steadily since allowing concealed carry. While no one can irrefutably claim this is due to concealed carry, we can at least state with certainty that allowing concealed carry does not increase risks to a campus population and may even help."

From http://www.marfdrat.net/2011/04/19/concealed-carry-on-university-campuses-arguments-against-it-are-emotional-not-logical/

So it is both wide spread enough and has been going on long enough that had your fears been warranted we would have seen some uptick in violent crime or firearms related accidents tied in with allowing concealed carry on campus. However, neither of these have occurred.

EDIT: You'll also note that I cannot find the above claims being disputed even by the Brady Campaign. In fact, the only thing the Brady Campaign has tried to bring against concealedcampus.org was that it was funded by the NRA and the gun industry, an accusation they have never been able to support, in spite of a direct challenge from the organizers of concealedcampus.org to provide such evidence.

because of the preponderance of non-drinking Mormons. The rate of drinking, heaving drinking, and binge drinking is all lower on campuses in Utah than in other states -- in fact, laughably lower, at an average of 1 drink per week.

And the law only recently changed in Colorado to allow guns on campuses.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695194216/Utah-student-drinking-low-but-still-worries-legislators.html

College students in Utah consume far less alcohol than their national counterparts, but the average one drink per week is still a concern for state legislators.
"There may not be a lot of people here who drink, but it's a problem as long as there are any kids involved in this type of behavior," said Rep. Carol Spackman Moss, D-Holladay.

A report on substance abuse and binge drinking on Utah college and university campuses was presented to the Higher Education Legislative Task Force recently, and although their reaction was one of relief, they were still worried about national statistics and national trends.

SNIP

Nationally, 49 percent of full-time college students binge drink and/or use prescription and illegal drugs, according to 2006 statistics compiled by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. Researchers found that between 1993 and 2001, there was no real decline in the number of students who drink and binge drink on college campuses.

SNIP

...how is that not long enough to gain an idea of what impacts there might be? And as for your concerns about drinking, I'll also point to the many states that allow concealed carry in bars and the fact that they also did not see any uptick in firearm related incidents either.

Utah does at least underscore that people in that age range are responsible enough to carry, minus as heavy an influence on alcohol. Colorado has proven that the addition of alcohol also failed to result in any increases in firearms related crimes or accidents.

This data cannot be dismissed nor ignored when reviewing the merits of laws such as this.

Students with CCWs can ALREADY carry to off campus parties. That has been explained to you several times. But you continue to try to use it as a talking point. The proposed law will work no change to what students can ALREADY do. Stopping the law will not stop students from being able to legally carry, if they have CCWs, to those off-campus parties. In general colleges don't allow such parties on campus for legal liability reasons, among others.

for students who are 21 and older; and most of the time they look the other way when younger students consume alcohol on campus.

Utah colleges are among the rare colleges that are "dry" for all students, although even they recognize that at least some drinking goes on anyway.

The point of showing what happens at off-campus parties where students can already carry (and where students die every year in gun related incidents) is that the same thing would be happening on campus if students were allowed to carry guns there. Students have parties both ON and OFF campus; student partying isn't limited to frats off-campus.

Thus, drinking parties on campus aren't going to be a norm anywhere.

Both in their rooms, in other students rooms, and even in common areas.

In fact, underage drinking on campus is the norm EVERYWHERE except a handful of dry campuses. And even there, it happens -- just less. Also, 18 year old freshman have higher rates of abuse than older students. Use actually decreases over the four years.

Administrators are dealing with this in various ways. Here's one example:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14031513

New students heading to college this year have worked hard to get to their new schools, but many often have one critical gap in their education: how to handle alcohol. Although the legal minimum age for buying alcohol is 21, many colleges turn a blind eye to the drinking that goes on at their campuses.

John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College, wants to change that. McCardell heads Choose Responsibility, a nonprofit organization that argues for a legal drinking age of 18 years old, administered through a graduated, licensed-to-drink program.

"You know, the reality is that alcohol is a part of the lives of 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds," McCardell says. "We can deny it, we can try to legislate it away, but in fact, it is a presence."

McCardell says the way laws are currently written, college administrators and parents have two choices when it comes to underage drinking. One is simply to look the other way, which he believes is irresponsible. The other is to punish students for drinking, which drives students to hide the practice and limits possibilities for monitoring their safety.

SNIP

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa58.htm


Drinking on college campuses is more pervasive and destructive than many people realize. The extent of the problem was recently highlighted by an extensive 3-year investigation by the Task Force on College Drinking, commissioned by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). The Task Force reports that alcohol consumption is linked to at least 1,400 student deaths and 500,000 unintentional injuries annually (1). Alcohol consumption by college students is associated with drinking and driving, diminished academic performance, and medical and legal problems. Nondrinking students, as well as members of the surrounding community, also may experience alcohol-related consequences, such as increased rates of crime, traffic crashes, rapes and assaults, and property damage. For example, each year, more than 600,000 students are assaulted by other students who have been drinking (1). Yet efforts to reduce student drinking have largely been unsuccessful, in part because proven, research-based prevention strategies have not been consistently applied.
This Alcohol Alert presents key findings from the Task Force’s landmark report, A Call to Action: Changing the Culture of Drinking at U.S. Colleges. It describes the factors that influence college drinking, approaches to help college administrators address the problem, and resources for more detailed information on this important topic (2).

The Culture of College Drinking

Alcohol consumption on many campuses has evolved into a rite of passage. Traditions and beliefs handed down through generations of college drinkers serve to reinforce students’ expectations that alcohol is a necessary component of social success (2). The role of alcohol in college life is evident in the advertising and sale of alcoholic beverages on or near campuses. This combination of social and environmental influences creates a culture of drinking that passively or actively promotes the use of alcohol. In a recent survey that questioned students about patterns and consequences of their alcohol use during the past year (3), 31 percent of participants reported symptoms associated with alcohol abuse (e.g., drinking in hazardous situations and alcohol-related school problems), and 6 percent reported 3 or more symptoms of alcohol dependence (e.g., drinking more or longer than initially planned and experiencing increased tolerance to alcohol’s effects). Although it is true that most high-risk student drinkers reduce their consumption of alcohol after leaving college, others may continue frequent, excessive drinking, leading to alcoholism or medical problems associated with chronic alcohol abuse (4).

SNIP

Certain campus characteristics also reinforce the culture of college drinking. Rates of excessive alcohol use are highest at colleges and universities where Greek systems (i.e., fraternities and sororities) dominate, at those where sports teams have a prominent role, and at schools located in the Northeast (8). In the local community, tolerance of student drinking may permit alcoholic beverage outlets and advertising to be located near campus. Likewise, there may be lax enforcement of the laws prohibiting alcohol sales to persons below the minimum legal drinking age and penalizing underage students who use fake IDs to obtain alcohol (9).

SNIP

it doesn't mesh with anything I've seen or heard at any school I've been associated with. :shrug:

Beyond that, however, you are continuing to make a series of unsupported leaps:

1) Irresponsible firearms behavior off campus, where no-carry laws don't apply, is actually not at significant levels (in fact, two of the three examples you posted above involve non-student shooters),

2) The fact that college students drink is a general point (a stereotype), and can't be extended to a conclusion that individual students who choose to obtain/exercise CCW will drink to the point of irresponsible gun use;

3) Drinking party frequencies on campus are not comparable to off-campus events, and even if they were, proposed carry laws don't appear to require campuses to allow gun possession in campus housing;

4) Underage drinking behavior isn't relevant, as these students wouldn't have CCW anyway (in fact, the entire alcohol tangent is a red herring in the CCW debate);

5) The age group that would be allowed to carry on campus is already able to do so off campus, and that demographic slice of CCW holders is not displaying an abnormal rate of irresponsible behavior.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=416652&mesg_id=417113

Also, it doesn't matter that some of the shooters at campus parties have been non-students. Under the proposed concealed carry laws, it wouldn't matter whether the permit holder was a student or not.

And it very much does matter that students aren't generally resorting to guns off campus, where they already have access to them - it completely undermines the argument that they would resort to guns if they were allowed to bring them on campus.

You're building a house of cards - what blows it over is that a) students aren't shooting the place up off-campus, b) the students who you suggest are most likely to behave poorly (the underage drinkers) aren't the ones who would have CCW, and c) the places you're most concerned about (dorms) aren't covered by the proposed laws anyway...

they'd have to expel most of their students; according to numerous studies over the years, 40-50 percent of freshman engage in binge drinking on campus, and even more drink at least to some extent.

Half a million alcohol related injuries are occurring to college students each year; it's ludicrous to suggest that adding guns to the mix wouldn't increase this number.

And, as you know, the OP is advocating for under-age concealed carry on campus.

He's not advocating "under-age C.C.", he's advocating changing the age limit.

Please be honest and accurate if you want to debate this issue.

The effect is exactly the same. Younger college age students drink more than older ones. Putting guns into their hands is idiotic.

Your initial description would be a criminal act, the reality would be a change to the law.

And you have yet to present any evidence that your predictions would come true. Just more of the "any day now" schtick. It's quite tiresome.

He is about to turn 21 and will not be allowed to carry on campus. That is what he is complaining about.

I'm also guessing that "on" in your first line doesn't actually mean 'on-campus', but rather 'at college.'

By "ludicrous" I take it you mean 'according to so-called common sense,' which is another way of saying a claim has no real basis in fact. Guns are already part of the most alcohol-soaked segment of the mix (off-campus private housing), and the problems are far from substantial. And as has been shown repeatedly in this thread, campus carry proposals relate only tangentially at most to those parts of the mix where you envision problems. You continue to base your argument on stereotypes, generalizations, and unfounded assumptions.

I don't get "underage concealed carry" from the OP at all - looks like he's talking about when he's 21...

The law won't change that.

You are crying about a law that has no effect whatsoever on such parties. I am amazed that a college prof has such difficulty understanding that.

& most college students and faculty don't want guns on campus

It's called the "real world"

deal with it

yup

There are no real studies on how many well informed students support or are against this bill

yup

:rofl:

They are pointing out that academia can easily hold outdated and silly notions about the world they claim to understand.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary...?

Oh wait, I forgot. You don't do "evidence". My bad.



yup

actually joined the conversation, and this nonsense is the best you could come up with? :eyes:

Somebodys village is missing it's idiot!

:)

Yup