Quantcast Royal Purple
College Media Network

Students should be allowed guns

Abstract:
The recent school shootings across the country have brought about many questions about school security. If the students cannot be protected by the university, do they have the right to protect themselves?...

  • Displaying 1 - 25 of 25

Dale Lamminen

posted 5/07/08 @ 12:02 AM CST

There may be campus retrictions but although it is unlawful to carry a concealed weapon there is no Wisconsin statute that prohibits the visible carry of firearms in order to exercise the constitutional rights contained in Article I section 25 of the Wisconsin constitution.

"The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose".
Post a reply to this comment

Kendra

posted 5/07/08 @ 2:45 AM CST

Wow, this is a serious topic! I've never thought of the need for a carry/conceal law, and I'm pretty sure that we shouldn't pass one. (I never thought that it would be something that we would ever have to think about, but in this day and age...)

I don't know about the majority, but I would feel more threatened that anyone could be carrying a weapon and I wouldn't know if we had such a law. I feel very safe on this campus, and in this town, where I've lived for 18 years. I think having a gun in your home may be okay for protecting you and your family, but ON you? That seems more like an invitation for egos and boastings to lead to trouble. I'm not saying of course that people will do something bad if they have a weapon, but what happens if two people start fighting, and all of a sudden its a first person shooter video game? Human emotion tends to override logic. Then, that fight that would have been thrown punches could turn into a homicide. Then of course, there would be a worry about our safety lol.

I think that the police do a good job, and I don't want to see another virginia tech before something gets changed, but I don't think allowing concealed weapons in a learning environment is the way to do that. I pray that nothing like the school shootings of our lifetime happens here, but again, weapons on person could be even more dangerous. (Not to mention, there would probably be more incidents of people accidentally shooting themselves in the butt! lol)
Post a reply to this comment

Pointman

posted 5/07/08 @ 10:05 AM CST

Great story. I think the push should be for open carry, since law-abiding students have nothing to hide. Regardless, plenty of people who don't own guns know people who own several guns. The anti-gun non-owners should ask the gun owners how many people they've shot throughout their life. Of course, the answer is almost always zero, and if it's not, it's probably because they're an officer or ex-military. Bad people hurt other, whether it be with a gun, knife, pipe, fist, or something else. Good people don't. Your friends don't beat you up because they have fists, or stab you in their kitchen because they have a knife; they're not going to shoot you because they have a gun.
Post a reply to this comment

Tom Kane

posted 5/08/08 @ 11:30 AM CST

Originally posted by

Pointman

 Great story. I think the push should be for open carry, since law-abiding students have nothing to hide. Regardless, plenty of people who don't own guns know people who own several guns. The anti-gun non-owners should ask the gun owners how many people they've shot throughout their life. Of course, the answer is almost always zero, and if it's not, it's probably because they're an officer or ex-military. Bad people hurt other, whether it be with a gun, knife, pipe, fist, or something else. Good people don't. Your friends don't beat you up because they have fists, or stab you in their kitchen because they have a knife; they're not going to shoot you because they have a gun.


The notion of allowing students to carry guns on campus to better protect themselves is ludicrous! These students are uninformed as to the facts. They base their so-called evidence on emotion and not factual documentation.

My name is Tom Kane. I am president of The College Safety Zone, www.collegesafetyzone.com and author of the book, Protect Yourself at College. I would debate these folks or anyone else who thinks students carrying guns on campus would be safer and help protect their fellow students.
Post a reply to this comment

Andrew

posted 5/07/08 @ 6:58 PM CST

Having guns on this campus is unnecessary and should not be allowed. It is true that someone could access weapons no matter what legislation exists. However, who can honestly say that carrying a gun is needed to be safe on our campus? Somehow the thought of more guns shares the living daylights out of me. That harmless looking guy strolling past you on Prarie Street may be holding more than you can imagine in that Whitewater hoodie. Violence could occur at any point in time, and as we have seen with NIU, any place in our country. Flooding our community with handguns is quite the facade of a solution, and I applaud our state for taking a firm stance.
Post a reply to this comment

I'll no longer read your stories

posted 5/08/08 @ 12:45 AM CST

Very interesting, you would actually feel safer if other people were allowed to carry weapons on campus? I don't understand how not knowing who is carrying a gun and who isn't would make you feel safer. Could you please explain why this would be better than banning something that can kill other people with one click of a trigger is safe?
Post a reply to this comment

Danny

posted 5/08/08 @ 6:57 PM CST

Yeah!! Just what we need, now instead of just having drunk wankster douchebags who start drama by at the bars every weekend, we can have drunk wankster douchebags with concealed weapons! Sign me up!
Post a reply to this comment

Allison

posted 5/10/08 @ 5:11 PM CST

I love your sarcasm.

Originally posted by

Danny

 Yeah!! Just what we need, now instead of just having drunk wankster douchebags who start drama by at the bars every weekend, we can have drunk wankster douchebags with concealed weapons! Sign me up!
Post a reply to this comment

Kendra

posted 5/14/08 @ 1:44 AM CST

Originally posted by

Danny

 Yeah!! Just what we need, now instead of just having drunk wankster douchebags who start drama by at the bars every weekend, we can have drunk wankster douchebags with concealed weapons! Sign me up!


no kidding. the barfight that would have ended with bruises would now be the one that ended with a triple homicide.
Post a reply to this comment

Matthew

posted 9/24/08 @ 10:22 AM CST

Originally posted by

Danny

 Yeah!! Just what we need, now instead of just having drunk wankster douchebags who start drama by at the bars every weekend, we can have drunk wankster douchebags with concealed weapons! Sign me up!

Are there bars on campus? The last I checked there are not. What do privately owned and operated bars have to do with weapon restrictions on an university? Looks like a drunk wankster douchebag stumbled onto royalpurplenews.com
Post a reply to this comment

Eric Cramer

posted 5/09/08 @ 12:52 AM CST

I think that it is a phenomenal idea to have every person carry a gun. There was a study done a while back where a town in the Northern part of the United States banned guns and in protest to this a town in the South forced everyone to carry a gun (both towns were of similiar size and ethnic make up). A study came out later and it showed that there was significantly less crime in the Southern town that there was in the Northern town.
Post a reply to this comment

Jim

posted 5/09/08 @ 5:28 PM CST

Did you read the article? There will be screenings for who will be allowed to carry guns... If someone wanted to come and shoot people they would, preventing a concealed weapon law wouldn't stop that in the least. Think about it, if you wanted to shoot up your campus are you really going to stop and apply for a concealed carry license?

The only people with concealed weapons will be those trained to use them and who have passed the screening. And I'm sure the police would rather they had more officers on patrol every day/night so why is it so awful that responsible people with the skills to use a gun may in fact have a gun?
Post a reply to this comment

Allison

posted 5/10/08 @ 5:09 PM CST

Um...no, they shouldn't! Students having guns can get out of control, just like occurrences in our own country have shown us. Yes, American citizens have the right to bear arms, but there is an EXTENT TO THAT.
Post a reply to this comment

Diane

posted 5/11/08 @ 1:32 AM CST

Guns don't protect people, they kill people.
Guns should be banned.
There is no protection with guns, only ugly power play and death.
Post a reply to this comment

Ikania

posted 5/11/08 @ 1:38 AM CST

Guns don't protect people, they kill people.
Guns only provide ugly power play, they do not provide any protection. Be realistic dudes. Guns should be banned.
Post a reply to this comment

Evan Greenman

posted 5/11/08 @ 7:49 PM CST

Judging by the comments on here, I can safely conclude no one actually read the article. It's shocking that these are the college kids of today. But fortunately, not everyone is like you.

Some of us are responsible and smart enough to carry concealed weapons in a safe way. Concealed carry in many states is given only after an intense criminal background check, a psychological evaluation, as well as firearm safety and training. Not only that, but it is illegal to consume alcoholic beverages while carrying a firearm or being under the influence while carrying. Domestic violence charges immediately make you ineligible for a concealed carry license, as does being a convicted felon.

However, did you know that Alaska has no formal requirements for the carrying of a firearm? Neither does Vermont. In fact, you can carry concealed in Vermont at age 16. I've never once heard of a massacre or blood bath caused by firearms in either state, oddly enough! Please someone, explain that to me. Oh wait, you can't! Violent crime is nearly non-existent in both cases. Oops!

In response to whoever wrote "That harmless looking guy strolling past you on Prarie Street may be holding more than you can imagine in that Whitewater hoodie."

Are you serious? Just how dumb are you? Having a concealed carry license does not give you the right to play "The Matrix" under your clothes. People with concealed carry licenses are not ticking time-bombs waiting to go off. These people are psychologically evaluated and trained.

I am sure your alcohol-and-Hollywood shoot-'em-up-movie-action-movie-addled brain has warped beyond anything usable, so I'll try to go slow here.

It is really hard to actually conceal one gun let alone a whole arsenal under that hoodie in an accessible manner. You can't just stick a gun in your waistband and go out the door. You know, I really just can't go on, this is too ridiculous for me.

Think about this fact: What separates you from the average police officer, who openly carries not only a pistol but often times a taser, a can of pepper spray or mace, a collapsible baton, and many times a back up gun in an ankle holster as well as body armor?

Almost nothing. About 60 college credits, a pledge to be there to protect you as soon as they can get to wherever you are, a shiny badge, and a few weeks of firearm training as well as a... wait for it, background check and psychological evaluation AT THE MOST! Hey wait a minute! That sounds a lot like someone with a concealed carry license, minus the badge, uniform, and ego/authority complex/drug and alcohol abuse. (Yes believe it or not but Officer John Smith, after years of being underpaid, overworked, and having to see and deal with things people just should not have to see and deal with for years and years, could possibly have a drug or alcohol problem!)

I've known a lot of people who after high-school ended up going to the local community college to become local police officers because they had nothing better to do with their lives. They were just about the lowest common denominator and many had different behavioral and anger issues. If you want those people to protect you, more power to you. Don't project your own inability to defend yourself on someone who is physically, emotionally, and mentally able to.

I don't demand you give up your right to free speech or any of your other silly rights, so why should you have the ability to tell me I don't have the right to defend myself?

You kids really need to get back to class and try to learn something.Please leave politics and the discussion of issues that follow to people that actually know a thing or two about them.

To the representative from gunsafetyzone.com - Thanks for enabling the tragic massacres at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Northern Illinois University, just to name a few, all of which were gun free zones. You have a lot to be proud of! If it were up to me, everyone of you who supports anti-gun legislation, anti-concealed-carry legislation, and gun free zones should be charged for the murders the perpetrators of those crimes committed, because it is no one's fault but your own for empowering criminals and stripping good and decent people of the ability to protect themselves.

Why do people pass anti-gun legislation? Do they not trust the average citizen? It's pretty interesting that the same politicians who through their actions say you as an average person are not on the level of trust needed to carry a firearm, yet they will gladly take your money and more importantly your votes to keep themselves and their friends where they are.

As a parting gift to entertain the morons, I give you this interesting fact. Senators Charles Schumer and Diane Feinstein are rabid anti-gun legislators. They do not support concealed carry for the average citizen and do everything in their power to try to put an end to it on a national level.

And yet, BOTH OF THEM have a concealed carry license. Senator Schumer has an unrestricted concealed carry license in his home of New York City, where it is nearly impossible to get even a Target-shooting license or a Job-related gun license (For jewelers, bankers, etc.) He also requested and was assigned an armed police escort for himself.

Senator Feinstein ALSO has a concealed carry license, in an equally impossible state to obtain one in, California. After she participated in a city-wide firearm turn-in "One of her police body guards let it slip that she contributed a cheap model for the meltdown, while retaining her .357 magnum revolver for her own personal self-defense." (Source below)

Wait, she has police body guards AND a weapon she carries? I'm sure she's just testing it out before we all get both of those, right? WRONG.

If you can't understand it, i'll make it clear. These elitists has two rules for America: One for them, and one for you.


Sincerely,
Evan Greenman

Source: http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kouri/050924
Post a reply to this comment

Kendra

posted 5/14/08 @ 1:55 AM CST

Originally posted by

Evan Greenman

 Judging by the comments on here, I can safely conclude no one actually read the article. It's shocking that these are the college kids of today. But fortunately, not everyone is like you.

Some of us are responsible and smart enough to carry concealed weapons in a safe way. Concealed carry in many states is given only after an intense criminal background check, a psychological evaluation, as well as firearm safety and training. Not only that, but it is illegal to consume alcoholic beverages while carrying a firearm or being under the influence while carrying. Domestic violence charges immediately make you ineligible for a concealed carry license, as does being a convicted felon.

However, did you know that Alaska has no formal requirements for the carrying of a firearm? Neither does Vermont. In fact, you can carry concealed in Vermont at age 16. I've never once heard of a massacre or blood bath caused by firearms in either state, oddly enough! Please someone, explain that to me. Oh wait, you can't! Violent crime is nearly non-existent in both cases. Oops!

In response to whoever wrote "That harmless looking guy strolling past you on Prarie Street may be holding more than you can imagine in that Whitewater hoodie."

Are you serious? Just how dumb are you? Having a concealed carry license does not give you the right to play "The Matrix" under your clothes. People with concealed carry licenses are not ticking time-bombs waiting to go off. These people are psychologically evaluated and trained.

I am sure your alcohol-and-Hollywood shoot-'em-up-movie-action-movie-addled brain has warped beyond anything usable, so I'll try to go slow here.

It is really hard to actually conceal one gun let alone a whole arsenal under that hoodie in an accessible manner. You can't just stick a gun in your waistband and go out the door. You know, I really just can't go on, this is too ridiculous for me.

Think about this fact: What separates you from the average police officer, who openly carries not only a pistol but often times a taser, a can of pepper spray or mace, a collapsible baton, and many times a back up gun in an ankle holster as well as body armor?

Almost nothing. About 60 college credits, a pledge to be there to protect you as soon as they can get to wherever you are, a shiny badge, and a few weeks of firearm training as well as a... wait for it, background check and psychological evaluation AT THE MOST! Hey wait a minute! That sounds a lot like someone with a concealed carry license, minus the badge, uniform, and ego/authority complex/drug and alcohol abuse. (Yes believe it or not but Officer John Smith, after years of being underpaid, overworked, and having to see and deal with things people just should not have to see and deal with for years and years, could possibly have a drug or alcohol problem!)

I've known a lot of people who after high-school ended up going to the local community college to become local police officers because they had nothing better to do with their lives. They were just about the lowest common denominator and many had different behavioral and anger issues. If you want those people to protect you, more power to you. Don't project your own inability to defend yourself on someone who is physically, emotionally, and mentally able to.

I don't demand you give up your right to free speech or any of your other silly rights, so why should you have the ability to tell me I don't have the right to defend myself?

You kids really need to get back to class and try to learn something.Please leave politics and the discussion of issues that follow to people that actually know a thing or two about them.

To the representative from gunsafetyzone.com - Thanks for enabling the tragic massacres at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Northern Illinois University, just to name a few, all of which were gun free zones. You have a lot to be proud of! If it were up to me, everyone of you who supports anti-gun legislation, anti-concealed-carry legislation, and gun free zones should be charged for the murders the perpetrators of those crimes committed, because it is no one's fault but your own for empowering criminals and stripping good and decent people of the ability to protect themselves.

Why do people pass anti-gun legislation? Do they not trust the average citizen? It's pretty interesting that the same politicians who through their actions say you as an average person are not on the level of trust needed to carry a firearm, yet they will gladly take your money and more importantly your votes to keep themselves and their friends where they are.

As a parting gift to entertain the morons, I give you this interesting fact. Senators Charles Schumer and Diane Feinstein are rabid anti-gun legislators. They do not support concealed carry for the average citizen and do everything in their power to try to put an end to it on a national level.

And yet, BOTH OF THEM have a concealed carry license. Senator Schumer has an unrestricted concealed carry license in his home of New York City, where it is nearly impossible to get even a Target-shooting license or a Job-related gun license (For jewelers, bankers, etc.) He also requested and was assigned an armed police escort for himself.

Senator Feinstein ALSO has a concealed carry license, in an equally impossible state to obtain one in, California. After she participated in a city-wide firearm turn-in "One of her police body guards let it slip that she contributed a cheap model for the meltdown, while retaining her .357 magnum revolver for her own personal self-defense." (Source below)

Wait, she has police body guards AND a weapon she carries? I'm sure she's just testing it out before we all get both of those, right? WRONG.

If you can't understand it, i'll make it clear. These elitists has two rules for America: One for them, and one for you.


Sincerely,
Evan Greenman

Source: http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kouri/050924



Wow, here's with the personal attacks. Tom Kane did not deserve that. "To the representative from gunsafetyzone.com - Thanks for enabling the tragic massacres at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Northern Illinois University, just to name a few, all of which were gun free zones. You have a lot to be proud of!" How the hell can you dare to blame that man for those tragedies? What he does is try to protect people. Its quite difficult to protect people from madmen, okay? I still believe that it is dangerous to allow weapons in a safe learning environment! Your ranting and insults have done nothing but piss me off.

And thanks, I'm pretty sure we can read, jerk. Our comments are our personal opinions, just like your unfortunate one. I can tell you that I've read some pretty stupid comments, but it doesn't warrant an attack on all of us! "You kids really need to get back to class and try to learn something.Please leave politics and the discussion of issues that follow to people that actually know a thing or two about them."

So, I suppose all I have to say is...those elitists don't have their heads shoved as far up their butts as you do! lol
Post a reply to this comment

Dave M.

posted 5/13/08 @ 11:56 PM CST

I agree with Eric and Jim. I think its a good idea.
Outlawing guns will accomplish nothing, the criminals will easily obtain them. And people will not be able to protect themselves.
If guns are outlawed then only outlaws will have guns.
Post a reply to this comment

J. H.

posted 9/10/08 @ 9:23 PM CST

I hate to bring this up again, but I feel compelled to do so as some people seem to mis-understand what goes into obtaining a cc liscense in other states.

First of all, there are 9 colleges in the U.S. that allow cc on campus. All seven public universities in Utah, Colorado State University, and Blue Ridge Community College in Virginia. NONE of those nine have had a single issue with gun theft, gun violence or cc permit holders acting out since they began to allow cc on campus. For more information regarding cc on campus, I strongly urge you to visit http://www.ConcealedCampus.org
There you can find answers to FAQ, arguements for and against cc on campus and links to sites that have non-partisan research.

Finally, I would like you all to read the following ten points, I did not write them myself, but I fully stand behind all the points.

1. We don't carry firearms so that we can ignore other basics of personal safety. Every permit holder that I know realizes that almost all dangerous situations can be avoided by vigilance, alertness and by simply making wise choices about where one goes and what one does. We don't walk down dark alleys. We lock our cars. We don't get intoxicated in public or hang out around people who do. We park our cars in well lighted spots and don't hang out in bad parts of town where we have no business. A gun is our last resort, not our first.

2. We don't think we are cops, spies, or superheros. We aren't hoping that somebody tries to rob the convenience store while we are there so we can shoot a criminal. We don't take it upon ourselves to get involved in situations that are better handled by a 911 call or by simply standing by and being a good witness. We don't believe our guns give us any authority over our fellow citizens. We also aren't here to be your unpaid volunteer bodyguard. We'll be glad to tell you where we trained and point you to some good gun shops if you feel you want to take this kind of responsibility for your personal safety. Except for extrordinary circumstances your business is your business, don't expect us to help you out of situations you could have avoided.

3. We are LESS likely, not more likely, to be involved in fights or "rage" incidents than the general public. We recognize, better than many unarmed citizens, that we are responsible for our actions. We take the responsibility of carrying a firearm very seriously. We know that loss of temper, getting into fights or angrily confronting someone after a traffic incident could easily escalate into a dangerous situation. We are more likely to go out of our way to avoid these situations. We don't pull our guns to settle arguments or to attempt to threaten people into doing what we want.

4. We are responsible gun owners. We secure our firearms so that children and other unauthorized people cannot access them. Most of us have invested in safes, cases and lock boxes as well as other secuity measures to keep our firearms secure. Many of us belong to various organizations that promote firearms safety and ownership.

5. Guns are not unsafe or unpredictable. Modern firearms are well made precision instruments. Pieces do not simply break off causing them to fire. A hot day will not set them off. Most modern firearms will not discharge even if dropped. There is no reason to be afraid of a gun simply laying on a table or in a holster. It is not going to discharge on its own.

6. We do not believe in the concept of "accidental discharges". There are no accidental discharges only negligent discharges or intentional discharges. We take responsibility for our actions and have learned how to safely handle firearms. Any case you have ever heard of about a gun "going off" was the result of negligence on somebody's part. Our recognition of our responsibility and familiarity with firearms makes us among the safest firearms owners in America.

7. Permit holders do their best to keep our concealed weapons exactly that: concealed. However, there are times with an observant fellow citizen may spot our firearm or the print of our firearm under our clothes. We are very cognizant that concerns about terrorism and crime are in the forefront of the minds of most citizens. We also realize that our society does much to condition our fellow citizens to have sometimes irrational fears about firearms. We would encourage citizens who do happen to spot someone carrying a firearm to use good judgment and clear thinking if they feel to need to take action. Please recognize that it's very uncommon for a criminal to use a holster. However, if you feel the need to report having spotted a firearm we would ask that you please be specific and detailed in your call to the police or in your report to a store manager or private security. Please don't generalize or sensationalize what you observed. Comments like "there's a guy running around in the store with a gun" or even simply "I saw a man with a gun in the store" could possibly cause a misunderstanding as to the true nature of the incident.

8. The fact that we carry a firearm to any given place does not mean that we believe that place to be inherently unsafe. If we believe a place to be unsafe, most of us would avoid that place all together if possible. However, we recognize that trouble could occur at any place and at any time. Criminals do not observe "gun free zones". If trouble does come, we do not want the only armed persons to be perpetrators. Therefore, we don't usually make a determination about whether or not to carry at any given time based on "how safe" we think a location is.

9. Concealed weapon permit holders are an asset to the public in times of trouble. The fact that most permit holders have the good judgment to stay out of situations better handled by a 911 call or by simply being a careful and vigilant witness does not mean that we would fail to act in situations where the use of deadly force is appropriate to save lives. Review of high profile public shooting incidents shows that when killers are confronted by armed resistance they tend to either break off the attack and flee or choose to end their own life. Lives are saved when resistance engages a violent criminal. Lives are lost when the criminal can do as he pleases.

10. The fact that criminals know that some of the population may be armed at any given time helps to deter violence against all citizens. Permit holders don't believe that every person should necessarily be armed. We recognize that some people may not be temperamentally suited to carry a firearm or simply may wish not to for personal reasons. However we do encourage you to respect our right to arm ourselves. Even if you choose not to carry a firearm yourself please oppose measures to limit the ability of law abiding citizens to be armed. As mentioned before: criminals do not observe "gun free zones". Help by not supporting laws that require citizens to be unarmed victims.

Yes, I live in Wisconsin. Yes, I go to UWW. Yes, I fully believe that I have every right, provided by the government to defend my own life. As such, I am unable to obtain a cc permit because the act that would allow that in Wisconsin was vetoed by Gov. Doyle.
Post a reply to this comment

Kasie

posted 9/12/08 @ 9:57 AM CST

the last thing uww needs to think about is bringing guns into the school. focus on getting across the street; they're seems to be quite the problem with that in ww.
Post a reply to this comment

JH

posted 9/15/08 @ 8:55 PM CST

Kasie,
I absolutely agree that getting people across the street should be number one right now. I understand that cc on campus can only start to seriously be talked about once Wisconsin passes a law allowing qualified people to cc. However, if the past is any indication, this will be passed soon. As such, this is something that should be looked at. Feel free to talk about that on another thread, once again, it should be as that is a major concern at this point (pedestrians, that is). However, if someone wants to discuss this, calmly, this is the place for it and I am completely willing to do so.

Originally posted by

Kasie

 the last thing uww needs to think about is bringing guns into the school. focus on getting across the street; they're seems to be quite the problem with that in ww.
Post a reply to this comment

Colin Steinke

posted 9/16/08 @ 12:41 PM CST

You're an idiot.

I have nothing more to say than that. I can't believe that you'd actually waste paper and our time to print something so ridiculous.

What next? Free tazers for everyone? Every freshman gets a katana in his/her welcome pack?

Idiot.
Post a reply to this comment

JH

posted 9/23/08 @ 3:03 PM CST

Originally posted by

Colin Steinke

 You're an idiot.

I have nothing more to say than that. I can't believe that you'd actually waste paper and our time to print something so ridiculous.

What next? Free tazers for everyone? Every freshman gets a katana in his/her welcome pack?

Idiot.


This is a great way to prove your point. Call someone an idiot. Allowing students to conceal carry on campus isn't about giving everyone guns. Far from it, in fact. What I would propose is first, Wisconsin's Governor allowing cc throughout the state, with in depth background check like the 48 other states (minus Illinois, who is currently in the same boat as Wisconsin). Then, those who are 21 and over (please note the 21 mark) and qualify and go through the proper training will be allowed to carry on campus as well as everywhere else in their lives (minus the court buildings, airports, etc... just like the other states). Also, please keep in mind that this isn't just about preventing just the large scale attacks like that of VT or NIU. This is also about trying to stop yourself from being the victim of a strong armed robbery, a car theft, a rape, etc...

Finally, I strongly urge you to look over the previous post I put about the 10 things you need to know about those who carry.

Thank you for your time, even if you think it is a waste.
Post a reply to this comment

KatanaMaster

posted 9/24/08 @ 1:18 PM CST

Originally posted by

Colin Steinke

 You're an idiot.

I have nothing more to say than that. I can't believe that you'd actually waste paper and our time to print something so ridiculous.

What next? Free tazers for everyone? Every freshman gets a katana in his/her welcome pack?

Idiot.


Idiot.

It would be pretty hard to conceal a Katana, so those are probably out.

Idiot.
Post a reply to this comment

Keith

posted 9/26/08 @ 12:08 AM CST

I have been reading all of these comments about guns and how people just because they happen to have a gun might just start shooting up the place.

How about we expand this concept a bit. I read an article in the current editorials about lowering the drinking age. I didn't see all that many responses, however, it could be easily argued that any idiot that has a drink might drive and therefore has a wish to go kill people on campus, and therefore we should bann all alcohol everywhere.

How many people in WI own guns of some type? We definitely as a state, I would be willing to bet, have a very large quantity of ownership of guns per capita compared to other states. Does this mean we have the highest murder rate per capita as well? Obviously we do not.

Also, If there is screening, a background check, a psych test, training, etc. you won't have a bunch idiots flashing handguns like some gangsta rap video talking about putting a cap in someones backside. You will have sane logical people who believe in personal safety.

Also, I don't recall ever feeling threatened by the presence of a police officer with a gun. Why? Because they were properly trained.

The question that most of you all are obviously missing is one simple fact. A psycho hellbent on going on a shooting spree is not going to follow any laws. Almost anyone can buy a gun these days. Are there enough police so that every classroom can be protected? Obviously not. So, which classroom do you think the psycho is going to hit first. The one that might have a conceled gun in it, or one that definitely does not have a gun.

If we were dealing with sane, logical people the argument to keep guns off campus would be simple. This would be as simple as the "should the university bann smoking on campus" debate, but obviously, we are not talking about cancer sticks here, we are talking about psychos and the best way to stop them. We are not talking about guns, we are talking about the psychos. And a third time, it is not about guns, it is about psychos! The only way to possibly keep guns off campus is to fence in the whole place and treat it like an airport or military facility and do screenings of everyone every day. Not a very logical solution and even then, if a psycho is willing to sacrifice their life to take you all out there is nothing we can do to stop them.

The thing that separates good logical people from the rest is that we value life and we all value living. When you have a culture that values death and martyrs like the terrorists seem to there is no logic that will work with them.
I for one believe in the good of people and I hope that I am lucky enough to be around good people all of the time, however, in the event of a psycho invading a bar, school, public place I know I will be grateful when/if some gun carrying individual stands up to defend the rest of us from mindless slaughter.
I would like to have any one of you say you wouldn't have been happy to hear at Va Tech that the gunman was stopped in his tracks before killing everyone because someone in the first classroom had stopped him.

This is a discussion about who is to blame and who is responsible. The bottom line is no one is better at taking care of me than me. No One effects my life more than me. I personally will defend my family when/if the time comes because I hopefully have the ability to do so.

Lets all stop being such wimps about this subject and realize that if a terrorist wants to get us, they will. However, if the terrorist knows we are protected, they will think twice about it.

In the end, it comes down to responsibility. Some of you want to believe that the police will always be there to keep you safe. This is just simply not true. They will be there to clean up the mess, but they won't be there to stop it. I believe that if someone believes like I do that the police will not be there when we need them, then that person should be allowed to protect themselves!
Post a reply to this comment
  • Displaying 1 - 25 of 25

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Advertisement

Poll

What benefits do you think UW-Whitewater will gain from the new online voting?
Submit Vote

View Results

Advertisement

Sections

Options

Links