The Campus Carry Work Group is offering an open forum on the implementation of the campus carry law Tuesday from 3 to 5 p.m. in the Student Center South Theater.
According to a news release from the group, the open forum will provide an opportunity to discuss the development of a campus carry policy that will address the safety and welfare of the campus community and be compliant with the new campus carry law.
The Cougar talked to students about their thoughts on the campus carry law and specifically asked what safety measures they thought the University should implement when campus carry becomes legal Sept. 1, 2016. Check out the gallery below to see their responses.
As you can see, the DC is making an attempt to manufacture public opinion. The only guy the DC could find that supports the thing wears an apron.
Or, perhaps only 1 of the 8 students they asked in the student center that day think campus carry is a good idea.
You should check on your tin foil hat; I don’t think it’s on correctly.
Or perhaps … the students who are afraid to go against the will of the SocDem DC … will answer against campus carry, fearing reprisals via cyber bullying (allah UH SocDemBullies) , union bullying (allah SEIU) or bad grades from Communist profs.
Ooh, Jones, I think you’re using aluminum foil, not tin foil. It’s a common mistake, but you better fix that if you don’t want your mind to be taken over by the socialist, evil Daily Cougar.
All based on emotion and not reason.
Oh, you means like the kind of debunked reasoning by John Lott who manufactured statistics and people, in order to sell his book? You mean that kind of reasoning? His work was thoroughly vetted by his peers and found seriously wanting. Or maybe we should go with the more reasonable assumption such as the well-worn myth supported by La Pierre that all it takes to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun? Which now gets parroted by every gun nut in the country. One small problem: that guy havs never once shown up when there’s a mass shooting — a simple fact guns advocates always seem to overlook in their odd claims about needing a gun for self-defense. Never.
I submit the following, knowing it will have ZERO impact on your thought process and you likely won’t read it. Most of the fear and deflection in your comments above, I believe, can be attributed to you and your kind’s inherent ignorance and fear of weapons in general and not specifically Campus Carry. Those who carry concealed are far more responsible than you give credit for.
https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/Reports/ConvictionRatesReport2013.pdf
A not insignificant personal cost in terms of money and time is required to obtain a CHL. Even in a shooting that is ruled justified, a license holder can accrue in the neighborhood $20,000 in legal expense just to prove it. Additionally, violation of the existing laws carries a heavy penalty not only in terms legal liabilities and financial burden, but also loss of many of the other Constitutionally guaranteed rights such as freedom, voting, ability to obtain particular jobs, and so on. Instructor can bust a candidate out at any point in the licensing process if it is felt that said candidate has personalty or mental deficits that would be a risk to society.
Both sides of this debate are exceedingly passionate, however, the anti side has their beliefs informed by fear and emotion, the other by reason and logic. While your statements above contain an element of truth, they are not completely true, rather like a half-truth or if you prefer, a half-lie. People in support of Campus Carry can and do provide official law enforcement data and statistics, not opinions and feelings. One person legally licensed and carrying can, in fact, stop a bad man with a gun and whether this is a one on one situation or in a area filled with potential victims makes little difference. The act of providing personal safety can result in preventing harm to all those around you. The threat has been stopped.
There are certain principles and natural laws within a truly free society that are not up for debate. One such obvious principle, for example, is your natural right to breathe. Yet, one equally important principle, is your natural right to defend your right to breathe — to defend your life. The natural right to self-defense is obvious via nature itself. If animals are so equipped then how can a human being not be? Clearly, if the possible enemy threatening your life, family or property is using a certain tool to encroach upon your right to breathe and defend your life, then you have the natural right to be able to defend against that possible attack with equivalent or better tool, else the principle of self-defense becomes a moot one. The bottom-line is that the rights to self-defense and to the use of necessary effective tools to this defense, such as firearms by lawful-law-abiding citizens, are non-debatable.
I agree.
We wouldn’t be going through the long, slow process of changing the law if we weren’t going to follow all the other laws that pertain to carrying. We WANT to be legal, that’s why we’re investing our time and energy to change the law so we can carry legally on campus.
“One small problem: that guy has never once shown up when there’s a mass shooting — a simple fact”
Please tell me you see the irony in this statement.
I’m not in favor of it either. Where can I buy kevlar clothing?
They sell plates your your backpack. A level 3 plate will stop all pistol calibers. Only $120 bucks, and that’s less than a CHL!
http://www.man-pack.com/bulletproof-backpack-insert.html?gclid=COKnvcSlmckCFZKBaQodHWwNVg
Yup, that’s what we’re having to talk about now: bullet-proof backpack inserts.
not at all. I’ve heard about these for years. It’s a response to people shooting up schools with illegal weapons, not lawful, licensed, and safe people carrying (like they do nearly everywhere but school right now)
whoa, a post!
https://www.facebook.com/SCCUH/