# Concealed Carry on College Campus, your thoughts?



## carterrob (May 11, 2011)

Texas recently passed a law allowing CHL holders to carry on state-sponsored college campuses. This will not apply to private schools (like the one I attend). 

There are different opinions and much wailing and gnashing of teeth at UT Austin.
I understand the reluctance to allow weapons on campus, a place traditionally seen as a sanctuary.
I also understand Gov. Perry's rationale: Preventing another VT incident...

Your thoughts?


----------



## MLB (Oct 4, 2006)

While it's pretty self-evident that "gun-free zones" offer zero protection from mass murderers, I can understand the public's concern for college students access to firearms. Dorms are far from a secure place for storage, and the weekly parties that often involve alcohol increase the risk of a gun related accident.

I support allowing concealed carry on campus, but I also support a zero-tolerance policy for any infraction. Carry it, but if it's exposed, misused, left unsecured, etc, it (and maybe the student) is removed from the campus. We don't need "accidents" or immature people with guns in that environment. It just hurts the rest of us.


----------



## woodsong (Aug 16, 2011)

Actually, the law did not get passed. 

But -- the key word here is "CHL Holders", not students. Most students are ineligible for a CHL license, so the law really isn't permitting "students" to carry on weapons (as the law's opponents suggest).

The real concern isn't carrying a weapon on campus -- it's being able to carry between your car (probably parked off campus in a bad neighborhood) and campus.


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

My daugher is entering as a freshman this year so this issue is very close to me and I have spent a lot of time thinking this through and talking with my daughter about her views. I have a CCW and carry where legal to do so. 

1) Anyone over the age of 21 who has a concealed permit should be able to possess and carry concealed on campus except where the environment would prohibit it (i.e.-gymnastics, exercise, physed, most sports, glassblowing, medical facilities, etc.). 
2) Any student over the age of 21 can obtain a campus-carry permit after taking a college-level 2-semester program on safety, operation, self-defense practice, appropriate use, legal jeopardy, and legal restrictions. (I want my daughter to have the best training she can get and I don't want other college kids walking around with insufficient training.). They may take the class in the year they turn 20, but they cannot obtain the concealed permit until they turn 21. Handguns would be provided for classroom use only. 
3) STudents who have concealed carry must attend 2 hours of supplemental training and briefing with the campus police once a month.
4) STudents who possess guns may not live in campus housing (liability issues). 90% of college students over the age of 21 want to live off-campus anyway. 
5) Nothing would stop students from possessing guns legally off-campus as long as they do not bring them on campus until they obtain the student-carry permit. 
6) Any student who received a death threat or was raped or result of a hate-crime may obtain a student-carry permit between the ages of 18-21, subject to completion of a campus-police approved training program. 
7) Nothing would prohibit adults over the age of 18 from possessing and using firearms off-campus if they are legaly allowed to do so by the state.

The reason not under 21? While there are individual exceptions to the rule, the average student under the age of 21 does not have sufficient good-judgement to possess and carry on campus (or off campus for that matter). This is indicated by students use of illegal drugs, alcohol abuse, hazing behavior, and generally immature behavior. 

Also, I think the suggested rules above would be generally acceptable to moderates and some democrats, so it would be able to pass the legislatuires.

Thanks and Be Safe.


----------



## MLB (Oct 4, 2006)

The additional layers of training and permitting you propose seem to imply that the 21-year old person that is qualified to carry outside of campus is somehow not qualified to carry a weapon by stepping on college property. 

I suggest to you that the environment does not alter the person, he/she is either acceptable to carry a firearm, or not.


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

No, they are not. I actually don't think most (some individual exceptions) 21yo concealed-carry holders are qualified to step onto campus. They don't have enough training or good judgement. I think everyone, but especially people under the age of 21, should get adequate training on the defensive use of a handgun. We should take the example of how we issue drivers licenses....a learners permit....then after proving proficiency and having some experience and understanding legal liabilities...then a license. 

But, until that happens, I just think its not right to deny a concealed carryholder the right to visit a college campus who is otherwise legally able to carry in publicly funded university places. 

As more and more people are purchasing handguns for self-defense and more states are liberalizing concealed carry and open carry, I think we need to add proficiency requirements to concealed and open-carry permits. 

Every range operator I have talked to...and every gun salesman...have told me they are astounded at how unsafe and how untrained and how irresponsible so many handgun owners are. And, they have ALL said that concealed carry holders should receive much more training before they are ready to carry concealed and use the weapons for defensive carry. 

I support 2nd amendment right to self-defense in and out of the home. But it is in the best interest of gun-advocates to promote adequate training for defensive carry. The better people are trained, the more responsible they will behave and the better the public image will be of gun advocates. We want to see the liberalization of gun restrictions, and I think showing that gun-advocates are promoting training and proficiency will help to remove barriers to defensive carry.


----------



## MLB (Oct 4, 2006)

I tend to agree with you on the need for training in general, but don't understand how a university or college setting is any more important than the rest of the country. I'd think that if additional training were necessary or important, it would be required of the person, regardless of the location they occupy. 

An accidental or negligent shooting in WalMart is no less abhorrent than one on campus.


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

We gotta start somewhere. And, what better place to start than a place where education and training are central to their purpose?
Besides, it helps the University operators to embrace the idea...education and training they understand.


----------



## FNISHR (Aug 9, 2011)

One problem with using the VT tragedy as an example in this discussion is that it depends on too many hypothetical scenarios, with potentially different outcomes. It might be that the terrorist would have been quickly taken out, but it might also have been that an exchange of gunfire in a crowded classroom, with the defensive shooters being adrenaline-pumped, less-than-elite trained people, would have resulted in even more losses.

There are also too many other variables. It's my understanding that at least some of the victims in that atrocity died when the perpetrator burst in on a room full of freshman girls. If he'd jumped into a classroom occupied by the football team, presumably things might have been different.

Also, I heard somewhere that the classrooms were not fitted with dead bolt locks. Easy to see the difference that might have made.

Gosh only knows what other factors might be out there that could be material to a situation like that. I hold a carry permit myself, and generally support the concept of carrying, but I'm not really comfortable with the idea of carrying in a classroom. I know that these remarks are by no means a complete analysis of this complex subject. They are just one guy's thoughts, and I certainly respect the many of you who may disagree with me.


----------



## jakeleinen1 (Jul 20, 2011)

MLB said:


> While it's pretty self-evident that "gun-free zones" offer zero protection from mass murderers


This is the single most important reason guns and ccw should be allowed on campus

I go to the University of Iowa

On November 1,	1991 A FUCKTARD piece of fucking shit 28-year-old named Gang Lu murdered 4 university faculty and 1 student not to mention seriously wounded another student that bastard committed suicide.

Ive heard alot of stories about the shooting when I first entered the U of I because I was shocked to hear something like this happened in IOWA of all places, I asked questions and researched abit and I read some reports and witness articles about it. Apparently the cops could NOT get their fast enough (nor can they ever get anywhere fast enough for that matter) the response time was vastly longer than reported according to people who witnessed the attack.

Had there been ONE student with ONE gun, that asshole would be dead and 4 people would still be alive today


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

jakeleinen1 said:


> This is the single most important reason guns and ccw should be allowed on campus.
> Had there been ONE student with ONE gun, that asshole would be dead and 4 people would still be alive today


This proposition is 97% speculative.

Let's say that concealed carry was available for your campus in Iowa. There is no hard data on Iowa, but according to Blog O'Stuff: Percentage of Adults With Carry Permits in "Shall Issue" States, the best you would have hoped for is a 6% chance that a person with a CCW would have been present for the shooting. That doesn't include the calculation that the CCW person would have been in a position to draw and fire, or to be a good enough shot or may have not had the opportunity.

I estimate there is a 50% chance the CCW person would have actually fired and dropped the murderer.

Net result is that there is a 3% chance that any of those murders would have been prevented. Furthermore, since most states don't provide for CCW until the age of 21, the population of CCW carriers on campus would have been much lower than the average for the rest of the state. So, the percentage would likely have been closer to a 1% chance.

The best that can be said is that there would have been a small chance one of the murders could have been prevented. And, one life is one less murdered, so that is relevant.

But, The most compelling reason for CCW is not to prevent others from being murdered, but for YOUR OWN SELF DEFENSE, which the Constitution guarantees under the recent Supreme Court ruling. If any of those students would have been carrying, they would have had the ability to defend themselves. IMHO, that is a better argument to justify CC on campus.


----------



## jakeleinen1 (Jul 20, 2011)

cclaxton said:


> This proposition is 97% speculative.


Very good arguements

However the fact remained that nobody was allowed to CCW at the time, and therefore the chances were absolute 0.00% of anybody being able to defend themselves or others

0.00% is alot lower then my 97% speculative scanerio. Even had there been a 1% chance of a CCW student OR faculty for that matter having a gun and using it against the BD thats alot better, 1% > 0%


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

I would like to keep the focus on how to liberalize the gun laws and put in place laws/policies that will result in regulated concealed carry on campuses. They way to do that is to get educators and moderates to embrace the rules by which concealed carry would be allowed. They need to be reasonable to them.....then we might make progress towards carrying on campus.


----------



## kg333 (May 19, 2008)

A friend sent me a link to a recent article on this subject by a security magazine: To Carry or Not to Carry | Security Management

I thought page 3 was of particular interest:


> At the University of Utah, where concealed weapons are allowed, "there are some special procedures for entering athletic events," explains spokesperson Remi Barron. "For example, the person must declare they have the weapon and show a permit."
> *Barron further notes that "students in residential housing can opt to have a roommate with no permit or weapon," but no student has made such a request. The school has not had to arrest anyone for a weapons permit violation.* _(emphasis added)_


Utah may be a fairly conservative state, but that no one has requested to _not_ be roomed with a CCW holder, despite weapons being permitted in the dorms since at least 2007, is quite impressive.



cclaxton said:


> But, The most compelling reason for CCW is not to prevent others from being murdered, but for YOUR OWN SELF DEFENSE, which the Constitution guarantees under the recent Supreme Court ruling. If any of those students would have been carrying, they would have had the ability to defend themselves. IMHO, that is a better argument to justify CC on campus.


This is an excellent point that really should be brought up more often. CCW isn't really intended to prevent mass shootings such as Virginia Tech or the Texas bell tower shootings, but to deter violent crime against yourself. Fact is, the likelihood of a CCW holder being at such a tragedy is rather low, although it's been known to happen. The chance of having a CCW deter or prevent violent crime against the holder, however, is much higher, and _that_ is what CCW holders are being deprived of when disarmed on a college campus.

KG

EDIT: Also, for jakeleinen1 and any other students who would like to support CCW on their campuses, I'd highly recommend checking out the Facebook group for Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. At least at my university, they're far and away the highest profile group on the issue, and do so without becoming involved in other political issues.


----------



## DC88 (Sep 28, 2011)

I am currently a college student, and i have to say that i would like to see a law pass that allows concealed carry license holders to carry on campus. 

If some sort of incident happened to where the campus police was needed, it would take at least 5-7 minutes for them to respond to where the incident happened. That is just getting there, doesn't count the time it would take for them to actually enforce a plan and secure the school. So being able to carry in classrooms where a threat is possible, reduces the chances of you being a victim, and also may help save the lives of others around you. 

The classroom isnt the only place it can happen either. I find myself walkin back to my truck at midnight or so after completin homework or workin with a group and have only my pocketknife to depend on if the time every came where i needed to use it for self-defense. Being able to carry would at the very least put you on an even playing field when it comes to the criminal, and in many cases, put you in complete control of the situation.


----------



## TedDeBearFrmHell (Jul 1, 2011)

oregon appeals court just overturned the oregon university systems ban on firearms..... so now another place is a little safer


----------

