Committee kills guns-on-campus bill (LA)

[jpak]

http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20110601/NEWS01/110601030

A House committee Wednesday shot down a controversial bill that would have allowed guns on college campuses.

HB413 by Rep. Ernest Wooton, I-Belle Chasse, would have allowed anyone with a permit to carry a concealed handgun to have a weapon on public college and university campuses, including in classrooms and dormitories.

<snip>

During a verbal scuffle with opponent Rep. Barbara Norton, D-Shreveport, over whether his bill would make college campuses safer, he said “I can’t tell them they’re going to be safer.”

Norton said going to college “is not about packing guns. It ought to be about packing education.”

<more>

[av8rdave]

1. Now let's justs hope they get the same result in Texas!

[jpak]

2. It's dead in Texas too

:toast:

[av8rdave]

3. thank God!!!

[rl6214]

4. It's tabled in Texas

until the next session where it will most likely pass.

[jpak]

5. Dream on

yup

[rl6214]

24. No dream. Concealed carry was defeated, brought back and won

Same will happen with campus carry.

[spin]

6. You do realize that firearms have stopped school massacres in the past.

and that gun free zones attract mentally ill shooters like honey attracts bees.

Media Ignore Fact That Gun Owners Stopped School Shooter

Two of the three Virginia law students who overpowered a gunman in a fatal school shooting were armed and used their weapons to disarm the shooter. Yet of the 280 stories written about the shooting, a mere four mentioned the fact that the heroic students were armed and used their guns to halt the rampage.

***snip***


When the sound of shooting erupted, panic ensued. "People were running everywhere. They were jumping behind cars, running out in front of traffic, trying to get away," Gross said.

Instead of joining in the chaos, Gross and Bridges ran to their cars and got their guns. Joined by an unarmed Ted Besen, an ex-Marine and police officer, the three men approached the shooter from different sides.

"I aimed my gun at him, and Peter tossed his gun down," Bridges recalled. "Ted approached Peter, and Peter hit Ted in the jaw. Ted pushed him back, and we all jumped on."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/25/153427.shtml

Boston Media Deceived by "Stop Handgun Violence" Lobby

April 26--At a press conference by "Stop Handgun Violence" in Newton the media received a list of school shootings that occurred in 1997-98. But the media weren't told that two of these shootings were stopped by law-abiding citizens using guns long before the police arrived on the scene.

An assistant principal in Mississippi, for example, used his own handgun to stop a student from shooting other students. The principal then, with his gun, held the shooter to the ground for five minutes until the police arrived.

The Newton-based "Stop Handgun Violence" didn't mention those facts at its April 21 press conference following the school shooting in Colorado. The gun-control group also didn’t mention that a law-abiding citizen, using a handgun, had stopped another student-shooter in 1998 in Pennsylvania. In that case, the citizen restrained the shooter for 11 minutes—then the police arrived.
http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/other/4_Apr/shv.htm

[MyrnaLoy]

9. first story is bullshit

It was an off duty police office, not a CONCERNED CITIZEN WITH A HANDGUN PERMIT. Stay classy Newsmax reader.

[PavePusher]

12. Are you unable to read and respond honestly?

Two armed Citizens and "Joined by an unarmed Ted Besen, an ex-Marine and police officer,...".

The dissimilitude of your response seems quite mendacious.

[MyrnaLoy]

13. keep reading about those

guys, you'll love it

Mikael Gross, a police officer with the Grifton Police Department in his home state of North Carolina, retrieved a 9 mm pistol and body armor.<7> Bridges, a county sheriff's deputy from Asheville, North Carolina. Ted Besen, an ex-Marine and police officer,

Now you get it? Boy that bit you in that ass didn't it. NewsMax left those little deatails out didn't they.

[PavePusher]

14. Cite, please? You seem to be quoting another source.

If you are correct, I will retract my insult and apologise most abjectly.

On the gripping hand, if what you say is true, you still seem to hypothesize that mere Citizens could not accomplish the same, even though there are thousands of documented incidents of Citizens using firearms to stop criminals. Why do you ignore reality?

[MyrnaLoy]

15. I can do that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

The reality is citizens didn't stop this one so the story is bullshit correct?

[PavePusher]

17. You are correct that all three were LEO's. I most humbly apologize for the insult I gave.

However, I still do not believe that your evidence invalidates restoration of Citizens' Civil Rights on campus. They accomplish self-defense and stop criminals with the aid of firearms quite frequently off-campus, what would render them unable to do so effectively on-campus?

[spin]

22. So cops are not citizens?

And I have a question for you, why shouldn't an off duty police officer be allowed to carry a concealed weapon on a college campus?

I have no problem with requiring a higher level of training for campus carry than the average citizen with a concealed carry permit receives. After passing the training, a person could get an endorsement on his carry permit much like a truck driver who is licensed to drive an 18 wheeler has a higher level license than the average citizen.

What I definitely oppose is declaring a zone with a large number of people to be a gun free area. All that does is attract individuals with severe mental problems and a grudge against society to seek revenge. Such people see a college campus as a shooting gallery.

[MyrnaLoy]

29. not what we are talking about now

are we? You offered this bogus story about average Joes stopping a mass shooting. It was an untruthful post, these were not average joes, they were trained police officers. You want to change the discussion now?

[eqfan592]

33. Take this one then.

http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/19251374.html

Or there is the recent Walgreens shooting we were talking about that very well could have turned into a mass shooting had it not been for the actions of the employee in question.

Either way, the point is that such events have in fact taken place.

[MyrnaLoy]

34. I'll ask you this again

the last time time someone dug this 3 year old story up. Who is this guy....a 48-year-old Reno man who had a valid concealed weapons permit. What is his name and occupation?

[eqfan592]

37. No idea.

But the anonymity of the person in question supports the idea that this was a private citizen an not an LEO, and the fact that the person was arrested and held as a person of interest for a period of time immediately after the shooting (again unlikely in the event of an LEO).

The point is that permit holders do in fact successfully prevent these sorts of crimes. But really, that is not the only purpose of concealed carry, which you are well aware of being a permit holder yourself. Such mass shootings are rare to begin with. CCW is about personal protection more than anything else, and such defenses do happen on a regular basis by every day Joes.

[MyrnaLoy]

40. So

since we don't know who he is you'll just assume he's an average Joe correct? As long as it fits your goal you don't even need facts correct? Now when you read about someone shooting their family do you ask, "was he a CWP holder?" When someone shoots a driver on the highway in a road rage incident do you ask, "did he have a permit?"

We know you don't, facts are unimportant when it goes against your agenda. You want to be a responsible gun owner? Demand the facts, when you read about a shooting ask if it was a permit holder, be honest, don't hide. You know why we don't have access to those facts don't you? The NRA and GOP don't want us to know those facts. Ask yourself why.

Why would they want to conceal crimes committed by people with firearms when they are so quick to point out gang and/or drug relations? Why not let the public know when a permit holder used his or her weapon inappropriately? Are you afraid of those numbers? If not lets work together to get them OK?

[eqfan592]

43. Whoa, calm the F down!

Did I say anywhere that I "assumed" the guy was anything at all? I said the evidence available tended to SUPPORT the idea that he was an average Joe, not that I was ASSUMING he was such. There is a HUGE difference.

Shit, talk about not caring about facts! You don't seem to give a shit about facts from one post to the next!

And no, I don't think there is any conspiracy to repress this information because we can get the necessary information while still retaining the privacy of individuals. Is it really necessary to know the name, address, telephone and social security number of a permit holder just in case they commit a crime, or is it enough to know that a permit holder DID commit a crime?

[MyrnaLoy]

45. Do you want the truth?

"Is it really necessary to know the name, address, telephone and social security number of a permit holder just in case they commit a crime, or is it enough to know that a permit holder DID commit a crime?" Your words.

No, we don't need all that information. What we need to know is whether or not permit holders are committing crimes. Your above quote borders on the sensational, no one has asked for that information. In a news story we know the shooter because the reporter covered it. What we usually don't know is whether or not he was a permit holder, why? Do you not want us to know? If not why?

You want real numbers? Ask for the truth, don't suppress the numbers like the NRA and GOP want you to.

[eqfan592]

61. Please provide evidence...

...that the NRA is attempting to "suppress" numbers as you say. I have actually seen such numbers from various states. They are freely available out there for at least Florida, who publishes the number of permits that are taken away each year for criminal acts. These have been linked on here before.

And yes, people HAVE in fact asked for that information, on this vary forum, in the recent past in fact (maybe not SSN, which was me being snarky, but the rest yes).

Here is what I'm getting from you right now, MyrnaLoy. You are convinced that there simply MUST be more violent crimes being committed by permit holders than is reported, yet you cannot find evidence to support this feeling you have. Since you believe this MUST be true, the only conclusion left for you is to blame the NRA/GOP for suppressing such information. Do I understand correctly?

[PavePusher]

41. I'll ask you again....

Are non-LEO Citizens capable of self-defense, with firearms, on college campuses? If not, what makes their ability on-campus worse than their demonstrated ability off-campus?

[MyrnaLoy]

46. have you

ever actually looked at the violent crime rates on campuses compared to the crime rate of say Detroit? So to answer your question, no. We don't need a bunch of guns on college campuses.

[PavePusher]

54. You have not actually addressed any of my questions. Would you like to try again? n/t

[eqfan592]

71. This woman disagrees.

http://txlady706.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/nevada-rape-victim-pleads-to-allow-conceal-carry-on-college-campuses-sb-231-passes/

There is no evidence available that says that allowing students on college campuses to conceal carry will somehow lead to an increase in violent crime, but there is plenty that underscores that students do have a demonstrated need to be able to effectively defend themselves when found in situations such as the woman in the linked story.

[spin]

74. To me a cop is a citizen ...

Obviously a cop's training level is SOMETIMES higher than the average citizen but I have personally known citizens who were better martial art experts or who were far more proficient with firearms than the regular police officer. Cops are not superhuman. Most of these citizens were ex-military.

But we can argue back and forth about that difference all day and little will be accomplished or we might have a productive discussion which is unusual for the Gungeon. As a matter of fact, I am interesting in changing the discussion.

I asked your opinion of allowing off duty police to be allowed to carry on campus and how you would feel about allowing a citizen to carry if he had a higher level of training. I see this idea as a possible solution to mass murderers on college campuses. At a minimum, a deranged shooter would not believe that we would be facing unarmed victims.

[av8rdave]

16. My son, who is a grad student/teacher on a major University of Texas campus, made a good point

He said that the Va Tech kind of shooting can't really be foreseen or prevented....a true nutcase with a grievance will find a way to bring a weapon and inflict harm, regardless of what the local or federal gun laws say.

What he worries about is the kid who's parents expect him to get into med school/and/or graduate summa cum laude. When the pressure becomes unbearable, he/she will lash out at the first person that told him/her that their grades don't stack up, or that they don't have what it takes in general.

My son is an avid firearms enthusiast. Even he said those things have no place on a college campus!

[PavePusher]

18. So, what is stopping those people from doing so with weapons NOW?

Oh, right.... nothing.

[av8rdave]

19. I guess you're right..the more weapons the better. Better to have the wild, wild west on our campus

[PavePusher]

20. "wild, wild west"?

Cite to such, please.

Self-defense is a Civil Right. "...keep and bear arms..." is a Civil Right. Why do you want to ban Civil RIghts?

[av8rdave]

50. I'm all for those who are sane and like guns having the right to own them

I do feel there are places where they are not appropriate. A college campus comes to mind. Just my humble opinion.

[PavePusher]

52. So, you can guarantee my security in such "places"?

Please, explain how legal firearms, carried for lawful self-defense, are inappropriate?

[spin]

23. 70 campuses already allow concealed carry ...

Why haven't they turned into the "wild wild west?"

That argument has been used for years in opposition to "shall issue" concealed carry for states considering allowing licensed citizens to carry concealed.

It's called the "Chicken Little" argument.

[lawodevolution]

26. You sound like an anti. Was you sin story fabricated?

[lawodevolution]

56. son (correction)

[av8rdave]

73. Excuse me?

First of all, no, I am not an "anti." I do believe in the second amendment, although I believe there is a time and a place for everything.

Secondly, I do not fabricate. If you want to search me on DU, you will find plenty of photos of my son.

Nice accusation, though. Sort of has that Lyndon LaRouche ring to it.

[Euromutt]

91. I've never understood that mindset

Why is preferable to have all the lead flying in one direction, from the aggressor to the victims, rather than have some of the lead flying in the opposite direction? I'm oddly reminded of the arguments proffered for maintaining the arms embargo on the former Yugoslavia during the Bosnian war of 1992-1995, even though the primary aggressors, the Serbs, had access to damn near unlimited supplies of weapons and ammunition from the arms and munition plants in Serbia. Here's an example:

The British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, had already suggested this month that lifting the arms embargo would create "a level killing field" rather than the parity in weapons envisioned by some officials in the Clinton Administration.

God forbid there be war instead of a genocide! The only way I can see this argument even beginning to make sense is if you implicitly place equal value on the life of some mass-murdering football hooligan as you do on the lives of the people he's trying to kill.

<French Foreign minister Alain> Juppe said giving the Bosnian Muslims arms "would tempt the Serbs, who are the best armed today, and the Croats, who have resumed their offensive in recent days, to liquidate the Muslim resistance before it gets better armed than it is at present."

Right. Because the guys who have been committing genocide for the past year have in actual fact been holding back up till now, and if we let their victims have the means to defend themselves, the guys committing the genocide might do something worse!

I worked for the prosecution of the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for over three years. By the time I quit, I felt that if there were any justice, we should have been indicting the almost all the heads of government, foreign ministers and ambassadors to the UN of every country that had a seat on the UN Security Council between 1991 and 1995 for being an accessory to everything that happened.

But I digress. I reiterate: why is it preferable to create/maintain a situation in which a mass murderer doesn't have to worry about any of his victims shooting back?

[av8rdave]

21. I guess you're right....all the carnage on campus lately and all

obviously, we need more weapons!

[PavePusher]

28. Serious question....

Do you think reinstituting lawful self-defense tools on college campuses would increase crime? If so, why?

[eqfan592]

31. I have ten bucks....

...of imaginary money that says you will never get a serious answer to this question because the poster in question hasn't seriously evaluated the issue and has instead resorted to some sort of "gun feeling" that has no basis in reality. They have also clearly demonstrated a massive level of ignorance on the topic to begin with.

It is interesting to me that we see the same idiotic "wild west" references at play here that we saw at play during all the general concealed carry debates over the last two decades. It seems that no matter how many times it is shown that such statements are pure, unfiltered bull shit, people will keep on parroting them.

[av8rdave]

51. Well, hey...thanks for the "idiotic" reference!

This is one of the reasons I generally don't prefer to deal with gun enthusiasts, I suppose.

FWIW, I am not against the right to keep and bear arms. It does make me uncomfortable to see more an more of the citizenry in general "packing," and I'm not personally convinced we will all somehow be magically safer because everyone around us is armed. Yes, it's just a personal opinion. If that makes me an idiot, so be it.

[eqfan592]

62. People questioned you....

....on the subject and you came back with what is likely the most idiotic anti-concealed carry meme in existence with the "Wild West" reference.

If you had been interested in honest discussion on the topic, you would not have reverted to this idiocy. And it IS idiocy because it has never born out to be true anywhere concealed carry was allowed.

If your personal opinion was that the French pay for all their products in snails, this would be a wrong and idiotic opinion not based in reality. The same holds for the "wild west" crap.

So for the future, if you want to be taken seriously, then drop the idiotic memes.

[av8rdave]

63. Well, actually, I believe "wild west" is a fairly common euphemism

for an environment with a lot of armed people. I honestly had no idea it was so offensive to the weapons crowd.

[eqfan592]

65. It is a common euphemism...

...among those who have never bothered to look at the reality of the situation. Usually the wild west meme is used to imply that there will be shootouts between permit holders on some sort of regular basis. This has not born out to be the case. There is no "blood flowing in the streets" or any other such garbage.

I don't find it offensive, and I doubt many others here do either. I find it contrary to reality and idiotic. What is truly ironic is how low the actual crime rate was during the "wild west" time frame.

So to reiterate the point, if you want to have a serious discussion on the topic with people, don't open up with an idiotic "common euphemism."

[av8rdave]

67. Your point is well taken, although I would add

That "idiotic" is not a term that any better contributes to a discussion.

As far as the original issue goes, I side with the number of college officials who feel that concealed carry on campus is a bad idea. I can't help but feel it's a bad mix with the typical pressures of college, the prevalence of alcohol, and a lot of people who have not exactly reached an adult level of maturity (God knows I hadn't at that age).


I do not believe whatever potential safety benefit may exist outweighs the potential dangers.

[eqfan592]

69. Then how can you explain...

...that these problems you feel must be a reality for college students carrying concealed haven't manifested themselves at the over 70 college campuses that currently allow it?

EDIT: And for the record, I never actually said you were an idiot. I said the wild west reference was idiotic in general.

[av8rdave]

72. I may be wrong about this, but...

It is my understanding that the colleges you refer to are just about all (if not all) in Utah, where I have spent a fair amount of time. I can say with some confidence that if you want to go to college for the partying and binge drinking, you're wise to exclude Utah colleges from your search. There is far less of those behavior there, due largely to the influence of a major church and a very conservative climate, socially speaking.

I would like to add that, while I personally have no desire to carry, I am not against the concealed carry concept in general. It has been in place here in Texas for quite some time, with no real problems that I'm aware of. (I am not completely convinced of its effect in deterring crime, but it certainly has never become a gun safety issue). I am uncomfortable with weapons in certain environments where people's behavior/judgement can be compromised (i.e., by drugs or alcohol).

Between undergrad and grad school, my son has a lot of years at two major public universities (Alabama and now Texas). He served as an RA for 3 years at Alabama, a position that exposed him to some of the crazier things that go on sometimes at college, which I believe gives his opinion some weight. Even as a gun enthusiast, he is uncomfortable with the carry on campus idea, as is the President of the University of Texas.

"EDIT: And for the record, I never actually said you were an idiot. I said the wild west reference was idiotic in general." Again, point taken. Thank you.

[eqfan592]

76. Most, but not all are indeed in Utah.

However, many states allow concealed carry in bars as well, and this has also failed to become an issue, and bars due tend to have a lot of drinking and partying going on. ;)

I think something we have to keep in mind is that the vast majority of the people that go through the process of getting a concealed weapons permit tend to be some of the more responsible members of society. This is not to say that they are ALL always upstanding citizens, but the crime rate among those who have CCW permits is significantly lower than that among the general population.

I was a college student myself once, and I can understand some of the concerns that people have about how many college students behave, but I also think that it is wrong to deny those who would carry responsibly the right to do so, leaving them without an effective means of defending themselves, simply because some folks party too much at school. Treating all college students as if they weren't responsible enough to carry on campus (and lets keep that fact in mind, because many of these students can and do get permits and carry off campus already, typically with no issues) because of the behavior of others on campus is simply wrong IMHO.

[av8rdave]

77. A question:

Since I am not a carrier myself. I would assume the training for CCW includes education on issues like alcohol, drugs, crowd situations, etc. Are there any legal restrictions on these behaviors for those who carry?

The concern, in my mind, isn't so much those who carry, BTW. My son has taken the course, and says it's pretty good. But the environment and who is around concern me.

Another point...I'm not sure I would conflate the right to keep and bear arms with right to defense, although that I suppose is implied. My job takes me all over the world, often to cities that aren't exactly the safest. Perhaps it's just dumb, blind luck, but never once in my 53 years on the planet have I thought, "damn, I sure wish I had a gun right now."

[eqfan592]

78. That differs from state to state.

Both in terms of training and education and legal restrictions on drinking, drugs and crowd situation. Some states do not require training to get a permit, others do. Statistically there does not appear to be a major improvement in safety in states that require training, but that is neither here nor there. All states, so far as I am aware, do place some sort of restriction on carrying while under the influence. Some have the limit be the same as for driving a car, others are more strict than that. Some states do not allow CCW in places such as sports arenas, churches, etc. Others leave it up to the establishments to make the call on if they wish to allow it or not.

Our CCW laws are something of a patchwork in this nation to say the least. If you would like some more specifics, I highly recommend this site: http://www.handgunlaw.us/

If I may ask, what specific environmental factors concern you when it comes to concealed carry?

I don't know if I'd say you're particularly lucky or not. Maybe a little more so than the average person. But your personal experience may not be reflective of the situations people can and do find themselves in.

[av8rdave]

79. the environmental concerns are pretty much what I mentioned earlier

It worries me in areas where people's judgement and/or behavior can be adversely affected. Additionally, I have some acquaintances who carry, and frankly they scare me. Hopefully, they are all just talk, but they often say things that make them sound very short tempered and reactive - not to mention very racist and intolerant. That applies to two people I know, btw...I am not trying to attribute that behavior to gun carriers in general.

I agree with your comment that most people who go through the CCW process tend to be the good citizen types (and I hope it stays that way), but again, I know a couple of people that make me nervous. I also have some concerns about the presence of weapons in a crowd, where it might be hard to say how people (those not carrying) will react to a situation. A typical crowd is likely to give you the full range of personalities, from the calm, cool collected type to the panicky "yell fire in the theater" type.

A personal story that I think illustrates my thoughts: Many years ago, during my military days in Arizona, my ex wife and I (we weren't exes then) were at a drive in movie with some friends. Shortly into the movie, a car pulled out and took off down one of the rows at high speed, spinning tires and throwing gravel in the process. Obviously, nobody was very happy about it. About the time said car roared off the premises, a guy in a truck parked in the row ahead of us jumped out and drew a revolver. He didn't point it at anybody, he just held it where it could be easily seen, pointing at the ground. Why will always be a mystery to me. Anyway, my wife dug her nails into my wrist and hissed, "Why are you just sitting there? DO something about this, dammit!" I remained in the doghouse for the better part of two weeks because I didn't have some kind of loud, fast reaction to the display of a weapon.

My point is that I felt the best possible reaction (absent the weapon actually being aimed at anyone) was to shut the hell up, stay quiet, and not draw attention to it or create a scene where there probably didn't need to be one. My ex, on the other hand, is the type to jump, scream, point fingers, etc., and cause a needless situation. As it turned out, the guy eventually holstered the gun and returned to his truck without a word.

I guess I would fear a crowd situation where matters could be made worse by some sort of panic. Again, I stress that for the most part it's not the people carrying I would be worried about.

I have actively considered joining the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program for commercial pilots that want to carry arms on duty. I know it's a great program with great training, but I decided the scenarios that would require it are limited, and in my case I would better serve my passengers by worrying about flying the plane.

As you can see, I am not an "anti" as someone on the board suggested. I just have some reservations about how far we expand CCW.

(Edited for content)

[eqfan592]

80. I do understand your concerns...

...and can't really say I don't have similar concerns as well. But with that being said, I tend to lean on the side of individual rights over anything else unless and until it can be shown that such rights are far more detrimental to the society as a whole. I also tend to sympathize a great deal with people who have found themselves in situations where they were the victims of a violent crime in an area that forbade them from taking steps to effectively defend themselves (aka: carrying a concealed firearm). It's my belief that given the statistical evidence available we don't have the right (nor the need) to deny people that qualify the right to carry a concealed firearm in and around college campuses.

That being said, I do respect your different opinion and your reasons for holding it. My intention is not to say those reasons are invalid so much as to say that they do not stack up for me in the same way they do for you, if that makes sense.

EDIT: Oh, and you and I work in the same industry, just on different sides of the radio! I am a developmental ATC specialist. :)

[av8rdave]

81. Developmental ATC Specialist...

Is that associated with training, or is that more like airspace planning? (Or possibly neither?)

Who knows? We may have spoken at one time or another!

[eqfan592]

82. It's associated with training.

Instead of calling us "trainees" we are called a "developmental." Not sure why, but there it is. I'm currently working on getting checked out on the local control position at my facility. So depending on where you fly, it's very possible! I work at a level 7 facility though, so we don't see a ton of traffic. But it's a good place to get started.

[av8rdave]

83. I think it's a good time to get into that end of the business

Even when the economy is weak, there never seems to be a shortage of traffic!

I hope the "development" goes well...will you be handling major airline traffic in your initial position?

[eqfan592]

85. It was a bit of a career swing for me, that's for sure!

I had always been interested in aviation in general, but couldn't afford to go to one of the CTI schools for ATC nor for flight school to become a pilot. I liked the job I was in and it paid well enough, but I was keeping my eyes open to move beyond it. Then I saw that the FAA was accepting "off the street" candidates for testing to become air traffic controllers. That was back in 2008. It was a fairly lengthy process, but I'm damned glad I got in when I did, as the FAA seems to be moving away from the off the street program for a while.

The only airline traffic we get is regional jets, mainly Delta and American subsidiaries. Whenever we do get a heavy jet even the old timers reach for the 7110.65 just to make sure they have all the wake turbulence rules down pat because we see them SOO rarely. As for me personally, I deal with any traffic coming into the airport while I'm training on position, with the exception of something really out of the ordinary (like a Flight Check flight if you are familiar with them) that requires a lot of special attention.

So far things have been going well. I hope to be checked out on local in the next few months, then it's back to OKC for radar training.

[av8rdave]

88. If you're getting Delta's regional jets, that's probably something we had on mainline at one time

That's the airline version of outsourcing...using connection carriers to replace mainline flying. It actually makes sense in some cases, but not all.

Hope your checkout goes smoothly!

[eqfan592]

89. Yep yep, thats exactly it.

And thanks, I appreciate it!

[gejohnston]

84. It is historically incorrect

The west really was not that wild. Duels at dawn was not more common than "civilization" Books written by guys like Ned Buntline and the movies made made contract killers (which is what a gunfigher really was) and other criminals more "romantic" while their urban counterparts got what they deserved from history.

[lawodevolution]

25. Please present to us a case or news story in which a student attacked a professor for

Having a bad grade either by stabbing, punching or shooting. If you can't, I'm sure you are willing to inform your son about the fallacy of his argument.

Please give us a link.

[MyrnaLoy]

30. OK I will

a female professor was denied tenure at a university and shot up some people on campus recently. How ya gonna dodge this one, say it wasn't a student? LOL

On edit: http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/02/university_of_alabama_huntsvil.html

[eqfan592]

35. Did the person have a permit?

If not, did the lack of a permit seem to in any way restrain this person from taking such action? Honestly, this is evidence again that not allowing CCW on campus is a completely pointless and foolish gesture.

Somebody that is willing to snap to the point of using lethal force will do so with or without a permit to carry, and in spite of any sort of "gun free zone" signage that might stand in their way.

[MyrnaLoy]

36. exactly the point!

now do we want to make it easier for the people who snap? Do you hate waiting periods or do you think they work in some instances? Do you want to make it easier to kill someone or harder? Keeping guns out of angry hands can save lives.

[eqfan592]

38. But keeping guns out of hands that need them...

...for defense can cost lives. It's a two way street. You act as though defensive gun use shouldn't be factored into the equation, but it must be. So I say again, given that the lack of permits does anything to prevent those who snap from violating then what right have we to deny those who choose to do so the option of carrying for personal protection in such areas? And this isn't even taking into account the fact that, statistically speaking, CCW permit holders are more law abiding than the rest of the general population.

Sorry, but you are failing to allow for the benefits of DGU's, which is again highly surprising given that you are a permit holder.

[MyrnaLoy]

44. First I don't

believe the number paraded around here as defensive gun use, in some instances it is larger than the number of actual violent crime!! What is it, people are pulling their weapons defensively and not reporting it? That's stupid, not to mention it is dangerous for the next person walking by.

Second, numbers. How can you even have an accurate number when we don't even know how is using a firearm defensively? Are you one of the "don't let reporters know if he or she was a permit holder" crowd? You guys throw around some stupid .1% number from Texas when discussing permit holders who break the law. How do we look at that on a national level when most states won't grant access to reporters and statisticians? Once again, fake numbers.

So, defensive gun use numbers are a joke, all one has to do is compare that number to actual crime rates. It's an impossible number and silly. Now I know you're going to say most people don't report when they pulled their weapon defensively. Bad gun owner. Why not let law enforcement know there is a problem area? Please don't tell me you're one of those "defensive gun use = rabid poodle" guys, that's just sad.

Where are we? We are discussing invalid numbers because the NRA and the GOP want to keep the actual numbers a secret. Reporters can't get the information or don't ask and statisticians don't have access to the CWP lists in most incidents. Solution? Demand the truth. When you see a shooting story ask if it was a permit holder, don't ask demand. You want the truth and be responsible correct? You don't want to be afraid of the numbers do?

[PavePusher]

53. It is well known that many crimes do not get reported.

I've had my car broken into twice in my own driveway. Called it in. Never even had the reporting form mailed to me.

So I don't report stuff like that any more. Not difficult to extend that to more serious situations where the victim may not report for a variety of reasons.

[eqfan592]

64. Exactly.

Especially in cases where no property damage is done, no physical harm is done, and no shots are fired, it's not hard to believe a lot of people simply not wanting the hassle of calling the police and filing a report. This is especially so in areas where the police do not have the greatest relationship with the general population and are not trusted.

[PavePusher]

39. "Easier"?

How, exactly, is it any easier?

[rl6214]

42. You may have answered it before and I haven't seen it BUT

Why do you have a concealed carry permit?

Washington state, right?

[MyrnaLoy]

47. yes

and I answered it last week. I can buy a hand gun without the waiting period. I like to shoot. Now I also know where this is going, you are going to ask me what keeps me from snapping now that I don't have a waiting period. The answer, you don't. Just as I don't know if you will snap. I do believe that waiting periods have saved lives. I do know that I will never snap in a road rage incident because I don't carry a gun.

I enjoy shooting, I don't like waiting. I also don't live in any kind of fear. I know myself, I don't know the idiot in Idaho walking down the street with a .45 on his hip.

[oneshooter]

57. "I do believe that waiting periods have saved lives."

"I can buy a hand gun without the waiting period."

Sounds like a hypocrite to me.
I believe in the law, for others, but will go around it.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[SteveM]

93. Boy, if that doesn't dis-credit all that trumped-up compassion. Pheww. nt

[Euromutt]

92. You're venturing into magical thinking country, if you haven't crossed the border already

As I've pointed out to you repeatedly already, the notion of the "virgin killer," a person with no prior history of violent behavior who, when in possession of a firearm--and only when in possession of a firearm--will, so to speak, "go from 0 to 60" without warning is... well, there's no better way to say it, bullshit.

If there's one thing anyone who's watched the news at some point in the past few decades understands, however viscerally rather than intellectually, firearms are implements of lethal force; or, more crudely, guns kill. You don't aim a firearm at someone unless you want to put the fear of death into them, and you don't discharge it unless you're willing to kill that person. You have to be homicidal to do that, unless you're so fucking stupid that you can't be trusted with any item that isn't made of Nerf. Not that such people don't exist, but you're not going to save lives by denying them firearms, because they'll find some other way to kill somebody (e.g. by operating a motor vehicle), and all you can do is hope the first person they kill is going to be themselves, before they manage to kill anybody else.

As a result, just about everybody who might (if such a thing genuinely happens at all) suffer a sudden fit of rage that is sufficiently severe to cause them to point a firearm at another and discharge it, is ipso facto going to be in a sufficiently homicidal rage that, absent the firearm, they would resort to grabbing a chef's knife from the kitchen, or a baseball bat, hockey stick, TV tray table, or even trying to strangle the other with their bare hands. Speaking for myself, Christ knows I've had blazing rows with my wife, but I have never raised a hand to her, and I find it hard enough to credit that I'd try to kill her by some means other than a firearm, but I find it completely ludicrous that I would not try to kill her by some other means but would shoot her without hesitation. Am I adequately illustrating the distinction here?

And waiting periods? How the fuck are those supposed to work? I can have enough patience to (instead of getting knife from the kitchen or a hatchet from the garage) drive to the gun shop, fill out an ATF form 4473, wait for the NICS check to be completed, and drive back to the object of my ire, but I can't maintain that homicidal impulse for five days?

[lawodevolution]

58. Did the no gun zone stop her? This is another argument for ccw on campus

[hack89]

66. She broke several laws

She didn't have a legal permit and it was illegal to carry a gun on campus.

So explain to me how gun free zones protect people.

[av8rdave]

59. You're exactly right...I cannot

But do think there may be an increased chance with more students carrying weapons?

As far as informing my son of the fallacy of his argument, let me tell you a little about him:

He is a gun enthusiast, and owns several weapons, and goes to the firing range frequently. He is also a graduate student/PhD candidate, so his duties include teaching undergraduate classes. Here is how he sees the "carry on campus" issue: His worry isn't the guns themselves, but who may be carrying them. He often talks about the atmosphere at the campuses where he as studied and worked, and how different students react to different pressures. In the program where he is studying and working, there are a lot of premed students, as an example. He is amazed how many are there because they are expected to be by somebody else (imagine what that must feel like to a 19 year old kid away from home for the first time). Many of those kids freak out when they discover they may not survive the program. My son just feels that is not a prudent environment to have an unknown number of kids carrying weapons.

I tend to agree.

Sorry if you see this as some kind of infringement on the right to bear arms, but I guess I don't see it that way. College students can already have all the weapons they want. Do they really need to carry them to class?

On edit: Sorry for all the repeat stuff in this post. I was pretty tired (and possibly a little under the influence) when I posted the previous one, and completely forgot that I had already mentioned that stuff!

[spin]

75. In most states you have to be 21 to get a concealed carry license ...

so the 19 year old student away from home for the first time would be unable to get a carry permit.

Here's a couple of quick questions for you:

1) How would you feel about allowing off duty police who are students to carry firearms on campus?

2) Would you have problems with requiring a higher level of training for those who would be permitted to carry on campus? For example a truck driver who drives an 18 wheeler has an endorsement on his driver's license that shows he has far more training and passed a more difficult test then the average driver.

Driver License Classes and Endorsements
Commercial Driver Licenses (CDL)

CLASS A: Trucks or truck combinations weighing with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of 26,001 lbs. or more, provided towed vehicle is more than 10,000 lbs.

CLASS B: Straight trucks weighing 26,001 lbs. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or more.

CLASS C: Vehicles transporting placardable amounts of hazardous materials, or vehicles designed to transport more than 15 persons including the driver with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of less than 26,001 lbs.
http://www.flhsmv.gov/ddl/dlclass.html

A concealed weapons permit could have a college endorsement.

[rl6214]

27. What stops this from happening now?

"What he worries about is the kid who's parents expect him to get into med school/and/or graduate summa cum laude. When the pressure becomes unbearable, he/she will lash out at the first person that told him/her that their grades don't stack up, or that they don't have what it takes in general."

Certainly not a sign or a statement in a student handbook. None of those things has ever stopped a shooting.

[av8rdave]

68. True

Is it possible, however, that increased availability and accessibility to weapons raises the probability?

My son's concern may have some validity. He tells me about students he has personally encountered in the above mentioned situation (or similar) and felt relief that the student in question didn't have a weapon.

[PavePusher]

70. It doesn't seem to off-campus...

where real life is just as stressful as in an academic environment.

[ileus]

7. Opportunity lost....freedom put on hold. Sorry to our friends in La friends...

[Blown330]

48. Only temporarily.

This measure will keep getting pushed and it will get easier as some of the weaker minded representatives are voted out after their districts are heavily re-balanced. Just a matter of time no matter the level of hand-wringing by our lesser educated members. The 1,000 foot firearm-free zone around schools was changed last year to exempt CCW holders.

[MyrnaLoy]

8. Idaho killed it also

I'm glad some sense is being shown in this matter finally.

[eqfan592]

32. Actually it's a total lack of sense being shown.

The final quote in the story only serves to underscore this. But hey, given that you are the worlds largest hypocrite, I doubt that little things like "sense" and "rationality" mean a heck of a lot to you anyway. You are a self proclaimed holder of a concealed weapons permit, yet you consistently go out of your way to demonize those who also carry or who are attempting to ensure that this right is extended to those who it should never have been denied in the first place.

[MyrnaLoy]

49. is this

how you, a grown man, reacts when someone hands you your ass? Calling them names? Good luck with that.

[PavePusher]

55. "hands you your ass"?!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You haven't even found your own yet...

[lawodevolution]

60. You did not hand anything to anyone. You failed to come up with an incident in which a student

Attacked a professor. You did provide evidence that the no gun zone does not work. My claim is that if ccw was allowed on campus perhaps she would have changed her mind about shooting up the campus.

[MyrnaLoy]

86. actually I did

read the entire thread. Now you may want to say a non-tenured professor is not a student but you know it happened and it could happen to any under grad or grad student just as it did the non-tenured professor. I already know you'll dismiss it but you know the truth, you just won't admit it.

[eqfan592]

87. What exactly are you talking about???

Your reply with that story was not to me but to somebody else. And while I can't vouch for that person in particular, I think just about all of us understand that students are very much capable of attempting to use intimidation if need be. This, by itself, however, is not a valid enough reason to disallow campus carry, as any student willing enough to use a FIREARM to intimidate is not likely to be hindered by a "gun free zone" sign in the first place.

So no handing of ass was going on here. In fact, you bailed out of the conversation on that particular portion of the thread without ever responding to the last couple of posts. But hey, nice try though. My post was simply to underscore your hypocrisy for those who may not realize you are a concealed weapons permit holder.

[lawodevolution]

90. explain to me how the "no gun zone" kept her from taking a gun there.

I'm sure you can do this. It's your example

[WatsonT]

10. Good, this will prevent all those mass murders that occur on gun-free campuses

um . . . through the power of magic I suppose.

[krispos42]

11. It's not what things "ought to be"

It's about the way things are. I "ought" to be safe in my home, too, after a long day of work.



Doesn't mean I will be.



And letting CCW holders carry on campus as well as on the way to campus by no means is exclusive of education.


Duh.

[iverglas]

94. ah well

The right wing still has its speech to fall back on.

http://www.summeroftrust.com/2011/07/spreading-the-word-and-countering-the-antis-lies/

In the words of activists Courtney Ritter and May Silverstein:”Their graphic imagery argues that women are not simply Pat Buchanan’s ‘femiNazis’. Instead, women are Nazis. Women are racists. Women are terrorists.” (Cornell Daily Sun http://www.cornelldailysun.com/node/12706)

There are many fronts in the right wing's war, on campuses and elsewhere. All is not lost.

[iverglas]

95. oh well

Where the fuck did this get dredged up from ... and why?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x423465#455486