Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Building a 21st Century Electric Grid Requires a 21st Century Regulatory System
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and a big Statehouse roundup
Posted in:
* People are mostly keeping their tempers in check in comments, so let’s try one more of these.
Another front in the battle over concealed carry is what to do about college campuses. The schools want to be completely exempted from having to allow concealed carry. Several establishments are already exempt, including sports stadiums, taverns, schools, casinos, child care facilities, etc. Proponents like sponsoring Rep. Brandon Phelps and the NRA are willing to talk about a compromise: Exempt buildings within college campuses, but not the campuses themselves…
Phelps said the debate over colleges and universities is whether to ban weapons within the boundaries of college campus or just in individual buildings on a campus.
He favors barring guns from buildings.
“What would happen if you’re dropping somebody off or picking somebody up on campus and you have your gun with you?” Phelps said.
Laws regarding concealed weapons vary by state. A 2008 study by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities found that 26 states prohibit guns on public college campuses, while 23 allow the schools to determine their own weapons policies. […]
Todd Vandermyde, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, says banning concealed weapons from an entire campus is impractical because many universities are spread across large areas of a community and often straddle busy state thoroughfares.
Vandermyde told Lee Newspapers that the NRA will “not accept” a total campus ban.
* The Question: Should concealed carry be forbidden on entire university campuses or just in campus buildings? Take the poll and then make sure to explain your answer in comments. Thanks…
* In case you were wondering, 61.9 percent of you said yesterday that businesses should not have to face liability if they ban concealed carry on their premises and a concealed carry permit holder is injured during a crime.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:55 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Building a 21st Century Electric Grid Requires a 21st Century Regulatory System
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and a big Statehouse roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Criminals and terrorists ignore bans. Bans just don’t work to prevent violent crimes. Ask the people living in Chicago, Cook county, and the District of Columbia. The set of people who would be legally permitted to exercise the right to carry would not be the same group of people who commit drive-bys, armed robbery, or murder. The anti-carry people just don’t understand and appreciate this important distinction.
Comment by burningspear Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 6:53 am
We shouldn’t have to subject college students to the risk of “wild west” type shootouts.
I’m in favor of the exception. Schools should be safe places that are for learning.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 6:57 am
Since Todd and Bran-done can’t pass the bill they really should not worry about amendments….perhaps they could try to “look reasonable”
Just a hint.
Fire,Aim, Ready
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:08 am
Campus-wide ban. On campus there will be the potential for many situations where emotions can rapidly escalate, and where you might see a drunken brawl today, if you add gun availability to that, someone is more likely to pull a gun to settle the fight instead of duking it out or running.
That’s one of my main problems with handguns. They short-circuit the mental math that two individuals have to do, when they are ticked off enough to fight, and they have to grapple hand to hand. When you grapple hand to hand with punches and kicks, you know you may get hit as much or worse than you hit the other guy, and so the fight tends to be short and end in one party giving up and moving off. A handgun lets you hurt the other guy from a safe distance, no need to get close enough to get hurt yourself. Moreover, if you have the gun, and they don’t, your reflex is to protect yourself with it if anybody gets closer to possibly try to take it away. Those factors all create a situation where you lose some of the “think it over” time in a fight, some of the empathy of shared physical pain from proximate combat, and you will have more reasons to shoot. Having the gun available in that situation encourages using it by actually shooting, not just brandishing it. And when the gun becomes part of the fight, the chance for bystanders to get hurt escalates dramatically. I just do not see an upside to non-security personnel being armed on campus. Between drunken fights and suicidal people having a bad day, it only makes things worse by shortening the thinking time.
Comment by against handguns Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:10 am
Well said Burningspear !!
Comment by Razer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:15 am
Where’s the “no ban anywhere on campus” option?
Who honestly believes that banning law-abiding citizens from carrying protects anyone? How well did that work out at NIU? Or U of Texas? Or U of Iowa? Or San Diego State University? U of Arkansas? Or Virginia Tech?
Banning the law-abiding from carrying doesn’t stop the psychopaths or criminals.
Comment by mark Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:17 am
I see no reason why concealed carry would be necessary in any learning environment.
Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:18 am
I’d honestly like to know the line of thinking. What’s the logic in this?
If banning the carry of weapons is going to keep our campuses safer, then shouldn’t Chicago (where carry is banned everywhere) be the safest place in the nation? Why are there still “wild west” shootouts in my old neighborhood?
Could it be because the violent degenerates don’t obey the laws? Hrmm….
Comment by mark Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:21 am
I’m with mark on the “no ban anywhere on campus”, but with some reservations; bullets and binge drinkers, newly-experimenting binge drinkers at that, would be a terrible mix.
The military doesn’t allow most junior enlisted to keep guns in their barracks rooms.
Comment by Returning Dog Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:27 am
One note on this — the problem that I have is that the GA has opted itself out of CC. If the GA can decide that they do not want guns in there, why can’t my business? If CC was allowed but business owners could decide whether to allows guns in, I would get behind it. But right now, they have a lot of meaningless distinctions that don’t take into consideration the needs of my business. Allow business owners to decide and I will back the bill. If not, then not.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:27 am
-I see no reason why concealed carry would be necessary in any learning environment.- Wensicia
How about Virginia Tech or N. Illinois for a reason?
Unless a location sets up a security perimeter, screens individuals for weapons, and provides for the safety of those who are allowed inside (i.e. a court house) it is not a ’sensitive place.’ The individuals whom this type of restriction intends to prohibit probably will not be dissuaded by a written law or well placed sign.
I voted for a building only ban only because there was not an option for no prohibition on campus. Each individual, being responsible for their own safety, should be allowed to employ the most effective means of self defense. We are talking about law abiding citizens who have undergone training and background checks, remember?
Comment by 05FLHT Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:36 am
Why not give the students and faculty a fighting chance against criminals who will not obey ANY ban on weapons ANYWHERE? THere is already a ban on carrying firearms outside the home - and you can see what good it does concerning criminals/gang members. Having a firearm on your person may not help in all situations, but at least you would have more of a chance of survival.
(Jasper, that was yesterday’s question.)
Comment by Rich Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:42 am
the question is how to make things work practically. I go to pick up my son from college. when i pull in to pick him up I have to stop take off my gun unload it, toss his bags in then once off campus stop and reverse the process.
what about someone on foot going down RT51 in carbondale? both sides are college campus in parts.
driving through parts if Bloomington or Champaign parts of some roads are “campus” it simple becomes unworkable.
as faras the arguement about drunks, well you cant carry into a bar, and you have to be 21 to get a permit. possession by a minor would be a felony if memory serves me right. enhanced if they do it on campus.
so it’s not an issue. it more makebelieve by the administrators
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:57 am
Keep ‘em off campus.
Consider the other establishments that are already exempted: sports stadiums, taverns, schools, casinos, child care facilities, etc.
What are their characteristics? They feature emotional situations, immature individuals and lots of drinking.
I admit I’m not a recent college grad, but I don’t remember any aspects of university life that would have been improved by the addition of firearms.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:05 am
I am with Mark. I would not vote for either of the two choices offered. There needs to be a third choice.
Comment by Slick Willy Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:20 am
Here is another tidbit on how lucid the NRA folks are……
President Obama has asked the gun lobby and gun safety groups to sit down together in a series of sessions this week. The National Rifle Association, however, has answered the invitation with a rather caustic RSVP. “Why should I or the N.R.A. go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?” said the group’s CEO Wayne LaPierre. While Obama called for “a new discussion” in a Sunday editorial in an Arizona newspaper, there seems little incentive for the politically dominant N.R.A. to parley. LaPierre emphasized that “it shouldn’t be a dialogue about guns; it really should be a dialogue about dangerous people.” It seems that Obama is with him on that familiar talking point, however, with the White House pointing out that Obama wants to “focus on the people, not the guns.” The New York Times reports that the political climate, economy, and international difficulties make it unlikely that Obama will take the lead on gun legislation any time soon.
Sure makes us feel comfortable about the “leaders” of the concealed carry group
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:29 am
I guess the passing through argument makes some sense, if I am driving on some roads near NIU am I ‘on campus’ if the campus is on both sides of the road, just one side or two corners, or three corners?
Am I ‘on campus’ if I am in the parking lot of a building that a school shares with another entity (like remote campuses in the burbs) is that campus?
It seems way too confusing. If you ban them from all buildings on campus you basically ban them from campus for most folks anyway.
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:32 am
Even the most ardent proponent of concealed carry should think twice about arming hormone-driven, binge-drinking frat boys on campus, if for no other reason than the fact that allowing concealed carry on college campuses would drive suicide and accidental discharge rates through the roof, and make concealed carry to appear even more dangerous than it is.
Comment by 44 Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:34 am
I am just taking a minute to go back to some of the decisions that I made in college, let alone some of the decisions made by those around me in college. Adding firearms to this situation seems entirely irresponsible.
Comment by Obamarama Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:37 am
I can see the “passing through” argument but think it should be limited to publicly-owned streets and sidewalks. If you are walking through the center (e.g., quad) of a private campus, the college should be able to decide whether you can carry a weapon.
Comment by ChicagoR Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:47 am
Are either of these options enforceable (think “trust but verify”) and what would that cost?
Comment by Hmm... Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:50 am
I agree that anpassing through exception makes sense. I don’t think we need students or teachers armed in the classrooms or dorms.
Comment by Fed up Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:50 am
Campus police need to protect the students at the campus, walking between buildings included. The existence of concealed weapons anywhere on campus would cause more accidents. Keep your gun at home. Most new cops have difficulty using a weapon in a stressful situation, I doubt any “trained” man on the street can do better.
Comment by Bonsaso Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:56 am
(Jasper, that was yesterday’s question.)
No it didn’t. Try to keep on track, people. Yesterday’s involved civil liability. Today’s involves campus carry.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:01 am
If someone has a concealed weapon you really think they are going to avoid going on campus because they have it with them? Ya going to pat down everyone coming on campus? Plenty of goofy behavior in college already. This will not help in any way.
So, if a campus bans concealed weapons, a V-Tech situation starts, and a person with the concealed weapon stops the situation while saving lives, is the concealed weapon person going to be prosecuted? Pretty idealistically thought out concept.
Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:07 am
Forget about college campuses, I can’t wait to write the mailer that says:
“Dan Duffy voted to allow concealed handguns in our playgrounds, museums, zoos, and other places where children play.”
Don’t get me wrong. I’m tough on crime. But when so much of our crime is being driven by drug trafficking, it makes absolutely no sense to me that we are wasting our time on concealed weapons while blindly cutting programs that reduce drug addiction.
You want to stop the violence, deal with the 10,000 plus people currently on waiting lists to get treatment for drug addiction. Yep, people come to us and say “I want to stop using cocaine today” and we tell them to come back in six months. Its bassackwards.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:07 am
Whether you agree or disagree with me philosophically, the biggest problem with the bill is that in order to obtain a license, you only have to receive a “passing” grade on the shooting range.
A “Passing” grade, for those who don’t know, means that you hit a non-moving target under ideal circumstances from 21 feet. 11 out of 20 times.
That means that under IDEAL circumstances, 9 times out of 20 your bullets hit something else.
Now imagine that same person with their adrenaline rushing, people screaming and running about, a moving target. I’d hate to be the family standing 20 feet behind that Bronson-wannabee’s intended target.
Heck, in order to be an instructor, you only have to hit the target 80% of the time in order to train people in making life-and-death decisions. Would you want B- students teaching in our medical schools?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:10 am
Joining Obamamrama in thinking back to my own college days, I definitely saw some things that I would have liked to be able to shoot at - if I could manage to operate my hand.
I didn’t even vote on this one, but it seems like a reductio ad absurdum to me. College students packing makes the world a safer place? Gimme a break.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:15 am
I am opposed to concealed carry and, especially, guns on campuses. YDD’s info just adds an exclamation point to my opposition. I can think of many situations back in college where adding a concealed gun to the mix would have been a recipe for disaster.
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:18 am
I’m with Wayne, why sit and argue with people who want to ban guns when the pro-freedom side has the upper hand?
CCW on campus, sure, why not? Someone might need to protect the students from one of the students.
Comment by John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:24 am
We ban Sex offenders from school that have paid their dues. We should also ban guns from school. Signed Endowment Member NRA
Comment by Tom Smith Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:27 am
A building-only ban seems like a reasonable compromise. “Campus” is too informal of a distinction, legislatively speaking. Take DePaul, for example. If you are standing on the corner of Sheffield and Fullerton, are you “on campus?” Most of the students would say yes, because there are university buildings in every direction. But the street itself is a public way. I don’t know how it is in Champaign or DeKalb or Macomb, but that’s something to think about.
Comment by grand old partisan Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:29 am
Raging hormones, alcohol and loaded weapons. Sounds like a good combination to me.
Comment by LouisXIV Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:30 am
Those few who are too radical to even accept the NRA compromise aren’t going to get their own question. Period. Move along.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:33 am
-Even the most ardent proponent of concealed carry should think twice about arming hormone-driven, binge-drinking frat boys on campus, if for no other reason than the fact that allowing concealed carry on college campuses would drive suicide and accidental discharge rates through the roof, and make concealed carry to appear even more dangerous than it is.- 44
Would you like to provide any factual support for your opinion?
Comment by 05FLHT Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:35 am
At my campus recently, a student was killed by another student during a fight at a frat party. The victim had the upper hand when the suspect allegedly pulled out a knife and stabbed him.
I fail to see how the presence of guns would have improved that situation. With all of the stressors present in college life–alcohol, hormones, finals–it would be a foolish decision to introduce guns onto college campuses. The benefits of safety in preventing mass shootings (which happen rarely) are outweighed by the risks present in introducing firearms into the already heated campus environment. I support conceal carry generally, but not on campuses–keep it to the real world.
Comment by Ben Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:49 am
Yes, I’m against conceal-carry on campuses. Also on playgrounds, swimming pools, Little League diamonds, etc.
Even the sponsors recognize a societal need to keep conceal carry out of many places. Like the General Assembly (except for themselves and their lobbyist buddies). Why should a I be a second-class citizen, prevented from carrying my gun in the Capitol, if legislators and lobbyists can?
Apparently, the sponsors don’t believe conceal-carry advocates, as a group, are responsible enough to carry their guns anywhere alcohol is served — taverns, ballparks, arenas.
I’ll tell you one thing: I’ve seen a lot more crime and violence in taverns and ballparks then I ever did in history class. By the zealots logic, taverns should be at the top of the list where you can carry a gun for “self-defense.”
Proponents are shooting for the moon in the hopes that “compromise” in a few area will make them look reasonable. It’s all p.r.
How’s this for reasonable? Private property owners maintain their property rights without added liability. Public governing bodies decide where guns are and are not allowed.
There’s never been an absolute right in this country to carry your gun wherever you wanted. Don’t believe the hype.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:52 am
So many people seem to be missing that this is mainly concerned with “passing through” a campus area. It’s about not having to drive 5 miles out of your way to get to work, when your normal route takes you through “campus”.
Clearly, if a student is taking classes, he/she must enter a building and therefore be disarmed….which means he.she wouldn’t be carrying in the first place.
I am faculty at an IL college and I am OK with folks “passing through”….There is a weapons ban on campus now but I know that there are vehicles driving on our “campus” (public) roads with guns in their cars or trucks. No one is removing their legally owned guns from vehicles to pass through our part of town.
I can also say that our college admin is OK with RTC on campus (for properly licensed adults), but I know that isn’t the case everywhere in the state.
No one is talking about handing out handguns during registration here. It’s a provision to allow someone who drives through “campus” on a public road to avoid prosecution.
Comment by milkforme Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:55 am
===It’s a provision to allow someone who drives through “campus” on a public road to avoid prosecution. ===
Not necessarily.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:57 am
campus wide ban. Guns have no place on campuses whatsoever.
Comment by shore Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:58 am
People on these comment boards scare me sometimes. It is the height of irrationality to allow guns on any college campus. I wouldn’t let my child attend a college that allowed guns on campus. People are so hell bent on not just concealed carry, but on letting people carry guns any dang place they want to. This is why the whole idea of concealed carry is a bad one.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:01 am
From a practical standpoint, the “buildings only ban” makes sense. For those of you who are worried about the drunks, hormone enraged, nut-jobs that may be on campus; you can find them anywhere. Have you been to and looked around Walmart lately? The reality is Illinois and Wisconsin are the only states, along with DC that do not issue some type of concealed carry permit. Being linked to Wisconsin and DC (locations of many that we’ve questioned their thinking) should be enough to make us run to pass the bill!
Comment by Both Sides Now Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:03 am
Concealed carry in general is a bad idea. Be proud, people!
Keep your gun in a holster at your side, above your clothes. Why do you feel the need to hide your gun? If you want to carry a gun, do it with some pride, instead of hiding it in shame.
Exercise your second amendment rights with some pride people! Open carry all the way!
Comment by jerry 101 Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:04 am
Chicago high schools send the kids through the mags, so guess
we’re headed in that direction for education post high school.
Comment by amalia Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:14 am
I cannot think of one instance where concealed carry on a college campus makes sense. As a parent of college age kids, I expect some reasonable assurance that my child will be safe on campus. It’s bad enough that in today’s society we have to worry about our daughters and date rape. The thought of someone fooling around with a loaded gun at a party or in student housing makes me shutter with fear.
I think the likelihood of accidents heavily outweighs any possible benefit.
Comment by Because I say so Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:33 am
That we are even having this debate says that something has gone terribly awry with our society to create such anxiety and fear. There is more to the equation than a fear of crime but something ideologically and spiritually darker that we just won’t confront. It is another example of our letting technology rule us and determining our fate instead of creating alternatives to such a foreboding future. Westerners conquered many native peoples with guns, germs, and steel. Our fate may be similarly determined. Insanity! Guns on campuses? For gawds sake!
Comment by vole Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:35 am
been listening to Pancho and Lefty again, huh, Jerry
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:36 am
===Apparently, the sponsors don’t believe conceal-carry advocates, as a group, are responsible enough to carry their guns anywhere alcohol is served — taverns, ballparks, arenas. ===
If this is our response for compromising, should we even bother?
Comment by Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:39 am
I could be misunderstanding, butbanning in only buildings would seem to be impractical - gunracks next to the bike racks? Plus I thought gun-rights activists argue that guns are needed in buildings because that’s the way to stop a mass killing.
Comment by Robert Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:41 am
The ISU spokesperson said that “we are of the opinion that [a building-by-building approach] might be difficult to manage.”
Really? It would be more difficult to enforce a ban within enclosed buildings that it would be to enforce one within a loosely defined geographic area with no physical boundaries or check-points? Does anyone really believe that??
Comment by grand old partisan Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:43 am
Schnorf, look what happened to that bandit boy, Pancho. And Lefty’s living in cheap hotels in Cleveland.
Haunting, mesmerizing tune by Townes Van Zandt, and only Willie and Merle could have pulled it off.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:44 am
AS a parent with two in college–one at NIU–I can’t even fathom the concept of a gun anywhere on a campus. Have any of you been on a campus recently?? While I might trust a young person to go hunting–a relatively controlled situation where the gravity of the situation can be enforced–living on a campus does not promote the gravitas one wants in connection w/ a firearm.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:49 am
–If this is our response for compromising, should we even bother?–
Not my call. Depends on whether you really want to pass something or just keep the issue alive for fundraising.
But if you really want to pass something, my guess is you’re not there, yet.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:59 am
I am really glad I don’t have kids — not on campus.
Comment by Belle Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:00 am
I came late to the party but…
=44=Even the most ardent proponent of concealed carry should think twice about arming hormone-driven, binge-drinking frat boys on campus, if for no other reason than the fact that allowing concealed carry on college campuses would drive suicide and accidental discharge rates through the roof, and make concealed carry to appear even more dangerous than it is.= And yet that didn’t happen in the other 48 states that have CC. I realize not all allow CC on campus, but the ones that do did not have any experience like “44″ describes.
Comment by Springfield Skeptic Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:09 am
I think that in Illinois carrying an unconcealed handgun should be required of everyone. Then I can move out of state and watch the carnage on YouTube!
Comment by formerpolitico Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:11 am
As a current student at the U of I, I’ve seen first hand the amount of violent crime on campus over the last few years. I live on the busiest street on campus (Green for those of you familiar with UI) and have seen people assaulted outside of my own windows. Some of the crimes do happen to completely innocent people minding their own business on their way home from the library, but the majority of them are simply drunken brawls where emotion runs too high. Allowing concealed carry on campus could easily change a drunken fight between 2 or 3 students into a Wild West style shootout on the streets between the bars.
I know some of you have said that guns would already not be allowed in bars, but the majority of students don’t drink in bars. The majority of students drink in apartments or frat houses and then leave at some point in the night to go visit another friend or party. Adding in drinking and guns to the mix would not end positively for anyone.
Comment by UIUC Student Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:16 am
Formerpolitico, what state are you going to move to that doesn’t have some form of carry allowed? Why would there be carnage in Illinois and not those states?
Comment by Give me a choice Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:19 am
== Depends on whether you really want to pass something or just keep the issue alive for fundraising ==
More importantly, it’s about whether you really want to provide real security or just cling to the illusion of it.
It’s understandable that college administrators don’t want to pony up the cost of metal detectors and guards to monitor them at every entrance to every building on campus. But simply drawing a line on a map and telling people not to bring a gun across it does nothing more than provide a very false sense of security.
Comment by grand old partisan Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:24 am
Wasn’t it the NRA’s lobbyist Todd Vandermyde who said the NRA would BBQ any legislator who agreed to a potential Madigan-style compromise?
That means no compromise.
Comment by Seeking Middle Ground Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:26 am
Colorado has a complete Ban on carrying weapons into a Cmapus, they also ban carrying them into a buisness, Mall etc. and that seems to work well.
To much alcohol and raw emotion on a campus; there are enough problems with fights and alcohol related vandalism on a campus which offset any miniscule benfit of carrying on campus.
If the buildings are exmpted already what benefit enures to carry on campus which offsets the safety risks.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:52 am
I would definitely like more research on what other states like Colorado are doing and their experiences.
Knowing that some of the kids I went to college with could legally pack a weapon scares the daylights out of me. Tempers, drugs, alcohol, etc. Taking an urban or suburban 18-21 year old kid with little or no gun experience other than what’s necessary to obtain a concealed weapon permit, and allowing them to carry a concealed weapon on campus, worries me.
I do have a FOID card and sometimes hunt and shoot.
Comment by Mark Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:28 pm
I looked up the campus crime stats and the raw crime numbers are decreasing at the same time enrollments are increasing.
In 2007, there were 45 murders on campus nation-wide. In 2008, there were 13. In 2009, 17. In 2008, there were 18,248,000 students enrolled in higher ed. That means less than 1 murder per 1,000,000 students nation-wide.
Sorry, no crime wave!
I’m not opposed to CCW in general, but I think it’s a solution looking for a problem. It’s unfortunate so many people out there are so frightened.
On campus, it is unnecessary.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:29 pm
I could support a ban on allowing people from carrying a gun into certain buildings. Particularly either an academic building or an administrative building. Or just letting the universities in general determine their own weapons restrictions.
Comment by levois Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:33 pm
Pot calling kettle, a solution looking for a problem? Really? The problem is, if you’re a law abiding person every criminal knows they can attack, beat, rape and rob you and you are defensless. You aren’t allowed to protect yourself. To me, that’s a pretty big problem.
Comment by Give me a choice Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:35 pm
Word, yeah, but he wore his gun outside his pants
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:36 pm
===On campus, it is unnecessary.===
This is, of course, ridiculous. Crime rates got nothing to do with this. As long as the crime rate is above 0, it is necessary for someone.
The real question is, if you find yourself the victim of violent crime, are you better off having the option to employ armed self-defense or not?
Look, even while packing a gun you can choose to cower under your desk if you want. Or, if an opportunity presents itself, you can opt to attempt to remove an active threat. This is not a hypothetical…if you desire, I can trot out a series of links to this exact scenario throughout the nation.
Speaking to the guy criticizing our stand on not accepting a ‘Madigan-style’ compromise: we won’t accept a do-nothing type of carry such as seen in Hawaii, for instance. Or one like NY where NYC gets to opt out. We will only accept a bill like what we see in our neighboring states: IN, MO, KY, IA.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:40 pm
Allowing college students who often abuse alcohol and sometimes drugs to bring firearms with them in a relatively safe campus environment is a bad idea. The colleges and universities should be exempted from the CCW bill.
Answer to Mark 12:28
Colorado State University is one of only four colleges or universities in the entire country (out of nearly 5,000) that permits conceal carry, the other colleges in Colorado do not.
Response to those worried about being arrested when you pass through campus:
Many states that do permit conceal carry also prohibit it on college campuses, but they allow a non-student adult who is a CCW permit holder (such as a parent or other visitor) to keep the weapon locked in their car when visiting campus. That’s a compromise that makes sense to me.
Comment by Paul Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:42 pm
The college campus issue simply points out the obvious: if this bill is going to pass, the proponents are going to have to allow various organizations and business owners to prohibit carrying firearms with no penalty.
But campuses do raise some interesting angles. Most campuses ban alcohol in dorms. How’s that ban working out for you? Not very well obviously. The cost of metal detectors would cause tuition to go way up. Many campus security staff aren’t even armed. Why should students at these schools be armed?
Someone earlier mentioned DePaul as an example of a campus that blends with the city. If you’re carrying, stay on the sidewalk and the public way, and you’re fine. Don’t pretend that a campus ban is too confusing for you.
It should be up to each individual school to decide, just as it should be up to each property owner to decide. If you want this passed, you’re going to need to include a penalty-free “opt out” clause.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:42 pm
Vandermyde told Lee Newspapers that the NRA will “not accept” a total campus ban;…and he is in charge because? Give me a break! How about alcohol, emotions, and more alcohol?!?!
Comment by South of 80 Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:42 pm
–We will only accept a bill like what we see in our neighboring states: IN, MO, KY, IA. –
What the ISRA will “accept” really isn’t the issue. It’s what they may be able to “get,” assuming they really want a bill passed.
Someone who won’t take half a loaf ain’t really hungry.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 12:50 pm
Speaking purely as someone who works for a university, I’d rather there not be any guns on campus.
Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:01 pm
Don’t see any reason to arm highly emotional kids. Their mood swings are up and down the chart at that age and giving them a permit to carry a loaded gun on campus is tantamount to carrying a can of gas to a cookout.
Might consider arming the teachers. Could keep the students attention a bit more focused?
Comment by Justice Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:17 pm
I agree with Mark’s comments.
“Because I said so” makes a great point about rape; but I believe with the wrong perspective.
“As a parent of college age kids, I expect some reasonable assurance that my child will be safe on campus. It’s bad enough that in today’s society we have to worry about our daughters and date rape.”
There are a lot of rapes on campus, mostly unreported. If I had a daughter going to college, I would most certainly want her to carry for self defense in all places. In fact, it would be one of the criteria in a campus for which I’d search.
I have listened to detailed accounts of the NIU and VTech situations. I am convinced that an armed student or teacher could have saved many lives during those incidents.
Other states are now considering allowing carry on campus. I think most people’s fears here are irrational. Some here apparently were a lot wilder and less responsible in college than I was and that most CCW’ers would be.
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:19 pm
people fearing things that haven’t happened in, oh, 48 other states.
Like innocent citizens successfully defending themselves? I don’t have a strong opinion on this issue one way or the other but I do think the proponents are living in a fantasy world.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:20 pm
My problem with having concealed carry on campuses is not a crime issue its a teaching issues. I taught political science at an Illinois university for a few years and the debates in my lecture classes frequently involved highly contentious social and economic issues. Any professor or teacher worth their salt attempts to incorporate current events into lecture to make things more understandable and to more effectively engage their students.
Putting weapons in lecture halls or on campus makes heated, though respectful, arguments a bit more frightening. Things became really heated several times during my experience. Never to the point of getting physical or abusive, but adding another element of concern to the classroom makes actively engaging students harder. I’m for concealed carry on the whole, but combining college freshmen, contentious political debate, and firearms makes me exceptionally uneasy.
Comment by Victor Kingston Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:22 pm
Has anyone thought about the question of what will happen if unionized workers (professors) want to bargain on whether people can bring guns into their workplace (classroom)?
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:30 pm
Don’t worrry about NRA “accepting” this thing is sinking like a rock….Good job Bran-done and Toddie
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:34 pm
Victor, does it make a difference in your opinion if you would have to be at least 21 to get a concealed carry permit? I beleive most college freshman are straight out of high school which would put them about 17 or 18. I’m sure there are exceptions to this but I think the majority of college freshman would not be able to obtain a permit.
Comment by Give me a choice Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:34 pm
- Some here apparently were a lot wilder and less responsible in college than I was and that most CCW’ers would be. -
Laughable. I’m not necessarily against concealed carry and I am a gun owner, but my redneck gun loving high school buddies are some of the wildest people I’ve ever known. Not saying concealed carry proponents are more wild in general, but they’re certainly not less.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:35 pm
didnt’ Cal Skinner propose arming teachers years ago?
Comment by piling on Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:37 pm
Lets see college freshman, hmm they seem to be 18 or 19 under the bill younhave to be 21 to get a carry permit. You cant carry into a bar nor can you carry into a building on campus,that would inlcude dorms.
But right now, if you live off campus and are 18 you can have a rifle or shotgun. If you’re 21 a handgun in your trailer or apartment and there is not much the school can do about it. I met my share of students who giude duck hunts during the season
So lets recap, no guns in class or cafeteria. Cant be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Cant carry into a bar and younhave to have spent $250 bucks and at least 8 hours ofntraining to get it after your 21
Some people cant seem to get past the emotion of it. I suggest some counseling and prozac
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:43 pm
I think the most frightening part of this discussion is the absolute paranoia of many that are posting. There seems to be an assumption that the majority of college students are incapable of making an intelligent decision based on their current location. What about those of the same age that elected not to go to school and are working instead? Do they not have hormones, drink, maybe do drugs, have sex, etc? Sure, and so do many aged 22 to +60! The point here is we have determined these college kids are mature enough to smoke, drink, vote, and go to war and die for their country but you are short-changing them on their ability to make a smart choice about guns. And yes, I have a 20 year old and 21 year old. One in college and one working. NOT in the NRA and don’t have a FOID card. Just have more faith in today’s youth than apparently do most of you.
Comment by Both Sides Now Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:44 pm
Let’s recap by reviewing which states allow students to carry guns on campus, in buildings or not, by state. Please enlighten us, oh ISRA one.
Comment by amalia Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:48 pm
Todd, emotion? Your whole argument is based on emotion — that people are inadequately safe in our society unless they carry concealed weapons. Experience and violent crime statistics aren’t on your side.
To bolster your argument, you focus on isolated crimes that occurred over the course of years — NIU, VaTech, Shepard — and conclude that guns would have prevented them and that you need to be able to carry a gun all the time, virtually everywhere.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:53 pm
Give me- It makes me feel less concerned but the base concern still exists. While the fear of broaching sensitive topics may be difficult to quantify or accurately discuss, I know that I would instinctively be more careful in the topics I brought up in class. Not to mention much less likely to let passionate debate to run its course in the classroom.
Comment by Victor Kingston Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:59 pm
==I have listened to detailed accounts of the NIU and VTech situations. I am convinced that an armed student or teacher could have saved many lives during those incidents.==
There are equally plausible scenarios where more lives would have been lost. There is really no way to know how the situations would have played out differently.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:00 pm
- Logic not emotion - Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 1:19 pm:
You said “if I had a daughter.”
Well I do, four daughters as a matter of fact. One of their best friends was the victim of date rape on campus. Knowing what I know about the incident, I don’t see how a gun would have helped her. If a young man can overpower a girl and forcible rape her, he can grab a gun away and possibly inflict more harm.
I know this is taking the discussion in another direction. No one will ever convince me that there is any benefit to allowing concealed carry on a college campus.
Comment by Because I say so Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:01 pm
On 09-18-10, at approximately 3:10 AM, a female student was walking through the College Avenue/Main Street underpass on campus, when she was approached by an unknown suspect. The suspect asked the student personal questions, including if she had any money in her purse. Without warning, the suspect struck the student in the face, knocking her to the ground. The suspect removed property from the victim’s purse and fled the scene on foot. The student had minor injuries and reported the incident to the police on 09-20-10.
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:04 pm
Interesting the talk of emotion coming from Todd.
This from a guy who believes that people are calm and rational enough to return fire during a mass shooting, but those same people don’t have enough sense to go someplace if the “no guns allowed” sign over a door makes them concerned for their safety.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:06 pm
Not sure the point of Todd’s last post. When exactly was the victim to pull her gun?
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:09 pm
I support this legislation.
We don’t have enough grade inflation on college campuses as is. Students have lived in fear of their professors for too long. It’s time to help reverse this imbalance.
Comment by ZC Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:11 pm
This idea is simply not going to be work in the real world. What if the college exists in a town that has a handgun ban? What about the number of students today with emotional issues such as depression? After sending two kids to college, my opinion is that there is enough craziness on campuses today without adding this anxiety to the list that parents and students have to contend with in order to become college educated…
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:15 pm
Hey i’m just looking at what the bill does, what isnallowed and what is not. And jasper i dont like “gun free zones” but realize that i dont want top worry about weapon retention on a rollercoaster
Yea i believe people can and do protect themselves and beat thme bad guy when they are armed and have the means to defend themselves
I think the college types and those who dont like carry are getting way out there wuth the emotion
On January 23, 2011, at approximately 1:00 AM, a female ISU student was walking by herself on the ISU Quad, when she was approached by two unknown subjects. The suspects asked the student a question before striking her in the face. No property was taken and the student received minor injuries.
No so random events and not isolated
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:15 pm
Todd, why do you get to decide whether a business allows guns? Do you think customers are able to make a rational choice for their own safety when entering a business?
And again with your “woman at night” example. Under the facts presented, when was she going to shoot the bad guy?
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:19 pm
*On January 23, 2011, at approximately 1:00 AM, a female ISU student was walking by herself on the ISU Quad, when she was approached by two unknown subjects. The suspects asked the student a question before striking her in the face. No property was taken and the student received minor injuries.*
Again - when was she suppose to pull her gun out?
Or are you saying that they never would have approached her if concealed carry is the law on campuses?
Or would we simply be adding that they hit her, stole her gun, and now we have one more gun in the hands of criminals?
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:19 pm
You know what’s already banned on university campuses? Alcohol.
If you can’t walk around campus with a beer, you shouldn’t be able to walk around with a gun.
They go together like apple pie and Chevrolet.
Legalize both and it’ll take care of the MAP funding problems.
Comment by piling on Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:24 pm
Montrose, I sort of imagined her (if in Toddville), with her weapon out, and then sort of bouncing around like the scene in Animal House when they taking the horse into the Dean’s office. Not very efficent time-wise, but maybe she would see her attacker and be able to identify the attacker as a real threat and to pull the trigger only after she has determined that it is a legitimate threat and not just somebody wandering home. In Toddville, stuff like this happens six times a day and he will give you stats to prove it. And the only reason to disagree is if you are overcome with emotion.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:25 pm
Todd, I’m sure I could come up with more serious examples than those simple assaults from last September and January, and I’m not in favor of guns on campus.
That ain’t selling it.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:33 pm
I find it interesting that 18 year-olds are already trusted enough to vote, drive a car, and join the military, yet when it comes to carrying a firearm, they become harbingers of death and destruction, to some.
If the young adults can’t be trusted to legally carry a weapon, they probably can’t be trusted to drive around a 2,500# piece of metal with 12 gallons of gas in it, or pick our elected leaders.
Comment by BaatheCat Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:35 pm
===Let’s recap by reviewing which states allow students to carry guns on campus, in buildings or not, by state. Please enlighten us, oh ISRA one.===
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=states+that+allow+concealed+weapons+on+campus
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:44 pm
Jasper under the concept disparity of force she may well have been justified in using a firearm to defend herself. And a lot of people who are approached and acosted do draw their firearm and use it.
The currwnt statute says when in fear of grave bodily harm or death. Goes to the victims state of mind and reasonable belief.
If appraoched like decscribed, i wouldnhave attmpted to move along, if they blocked my path i would have moved to protect and retain my firearm and ifmit escalted from there it would have been a decision to draw with mulitple attackers.
I would see most women thinking the same way that carry. They no longer have to worry about being at the mercy of their attacker
And word, im notmto worried about what your buying or not. You dont get to vote on it.
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:55 pm
STL: I based my estimate on CCW’ers being more responsible based upon reported crime rates in other states by CCWers as compared to general population at large within those states. Based upon those, the people who go to the cost and effort of getting a license to carry are much more responsible and law abiding than the general population.
Pot: I don’t think the facts or logic of the situations really support conclusions that it would have cost more lives. I guess both our perspectives are somewhat based upon hypotheticals; but there have been documented instances where individuals with weapons have prevented or minimized the carnage of intended mass shootings.
Victor: Using a handgun is a much bigger mental step for someone. If you haven’t had any fist fights or stabbings yet; why would you expect shootings?
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 2:57 pm
–You dont get to vote on it–
Nope, I’m just a citizen, like yourself. No more, no less.
Curious, though, did you have a hand in including the language that registered lobbyists could carry firearms into the Capitol, as opposed to the rest of us non-voting rabble?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:01 pm
Just what is the fascination w/ carrying a gun. Ignore the legitimate hunting w/ normal weapons. I know what Freud would say and many of these comments seem to support that. All the studies about self-defense/self-protection are a wash. For every anecdote of the girl in the underpass there is a kid playing w/ a gun. So it basically seems to come down to some quasi-religious belief in “Second Amendment Freedom”. Despite what the USSC said, there is absolutely no historic bases to support Scalia, et als. conclusion that the founders expected individual citizens to have the right to carry Saturday Night Specials or Machine Guns anywhere they wanted to go. Further, even the history of the six-shooter in the Wild West has been grossly exaggerated. So what is this quasi-religious obsession…this “cold dead hand” over something that is so…irrational??? Now there is a question for the day!!
Comment by D.P. Gumby Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:22 pm
Todd the two case studies you provide are fascinating, but, ultimately, pointless. Those two young women might well have been armed (with pepper spray, taser, gun, throwing stars, who knows) and unable to use their weapon. They may have been trained in martial arts. If they were so armed and/or trained, in these cases they were unable to utilize those defenses. If they were not so armed and/or trained, what reason is there to believe they would purchase a gun and go through the training?
This is really about a group of people who are already armed and trained wanting to expand where and how they can bear their arms. It has little, if anything, to do with everyone else. If you want to carry a concealed gun so you feel safer, please advocate for yourself. Bringing in hypotheticals to bolster your case is pointless.
What I would like to see is a the relationship between crime stats and concealed carry states.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:26 pm
According to the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus website, “There are 24 states that expressly prohibit concealed carry on college campuses by persons with a valid concealed handgun license/permit” and “15 “Right-to-Carry” states leave the decision of concealed carry on college campuses entirely to each college/university.”
Comment by Both Sides Now Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:31 pm
Pot there are a lot of people who want to be able to have a firearm for self defense. Its not about me or a dozen others.
I’ll try and find some stuff in other states some say it goes down what is easier is that doesnt go up. Which i think as rich has looked at is the real issue. There are no extra gunfights becuase people get p$$$$ed off.
The differance is that now people have a chance against violent attackers. Hey youmdont want to carry fine but its time we joined the 48 other states with something and 40 with shall issue
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:35 pm
Where angels fear to tread, here I go.
20 years ago maybe even 10 I considered myself a proponent of reasonable gun control laws. But even at that time I had a nagging queasy feeling about the fact that, since criminals are by definition people who break laws, it wouldn’t do a lot to effect criminal behaviors.
I did believe gun control laws surely, if only anecdotally, prevented some number of rage, alcohol, or mental illness driven capital crimes of the instant by making guns generally less available. And, I believed that lower overall availability of guns surely somewhat lessened the casual availability of guns to criminals.
And, at that time I certainly thought that concealed carry was a bizarre concept in a civilized society.
I believed that a big factor in how people felt about gun control in general was a result of the difference between rural and urban life experiences. If someone is driving thru my neighborhood at 4 AM with guns in the car or truck, it is almost certainly hunters getting an early morning start not gangbangers looking for trouble.
I still believe that those of us who grew up downstate and were regularly exposed to lawful use of firearms see the situation differently that city dwellers do.
But criminals don’t seem to have any trouble getting guns. My expectations of frightening results from concealed carry just haven’t come true around the country.
I still am uneasy with the idea of someone on the street who thinks I stole their cab away from them on a rainy day having a gun, of knowing that at least some of the people around me in everyday situations are armed. But, there is no indication from nationwide experience that those fears are reasonable.
I no longer am certain that I was right before, yet I am uncertain of whether I was wrong. Unlike most on here I just don’t know what the right answers are.
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:45 pm
===What I would like to see is a the relationship between crime stats and concealed carry states.===
Pot, google is your friend. Here is a study done after 6 years of shall-issue Concealed Carry in Michigan.
http://www.mcrgo.org/mcrgo/doc_pdf/michiganconcealedcarrystudy.pdf
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:55 pm
I can understand people being nervous when people mention “guns on campus,” but you seem to be under the illusion that a campus-wide or building ban would keep guns off campus. If someone intends to commit a crime, they are not going to abide by any bans. Right now, even though guns cannot be carried anywhere, criminals are carrying weapons. I agree that anyone drinking alcohol should not carry a weapon, not because they will suddenly forget right from wrong and kill someone, but because if a crime does occur, their reflexes and coordination would be reduced and risk the lives of others. However, being a student should not remove a person’s right to self defense. If they are 21 and legally able to carry a firearm, then it shouldn’t matter where they are. Walking into a school, restaurant, mall, capitol building, etc. is not going to turn someone into a mass murderer because they are carrying a gun. The theory of “wild west shootouts” is tired and disproved. I was a college student a few years back and I can’t remember any highly emotional situations where someone would decide to kill another.
Comment by tak1885 Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:55 pm
*Pot, google is your friend. Here is a study done after 6 years of shall-issue Concealed Carry in Michigan.
http://www.mcrgo.org/mcrgo/doc_pdf/michiganconcealedcarrystudy.pdf*
Really? You offer a study from the self-described “Largest State-based Firearms Advocate in America” as your source for unbiased data?
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 3:58 pm
==I no longer am certain that I was right before, yet I am uncertain of whether I was wrong. Unlike most on here I just don’t know what the right answers are.==
Thanks for the honesty. I see it like this: based on results in other states, government can no longer justify this restriction on personal freedom (and the onus is ALWAYS on those for the restriction to justify it - you don’t have to justify exercising your freedom). Yet, in most situations, civilians wanting to walk around armed seems like a genuinely nutty thing to want to do.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:09 pm
However, we do get to the question of what to carry. First, you want to put someone down with one shot, so definitely a large caliber. However, they could be swarming from all sides, so capacity is a factor. With large caliber revolvers you are generally looking at 5 round capacity. That argues for the .50 Desert Eagle as your primary sidearm. 7 rounds, and a definite stopper. You may walk a little awkwardly, and need some of your clothes let out to accommodate this 10 inch 5 lb defender, but what the hey.
As a backup, the best bet may be a small frame .327 Federal Magnum. You get six rounds, not just the 5 you would get with a .357, and almost as much stopping power as the .357, certainly more stopping power than a 9mm auto, where you would get more rounds, but, after all, this is a back-up.
Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:10 pm
Montrose,
All data in the study is cited to FBI and other similar sources, unlike the google-fu being passed off as ‘research’ by the folks at the VPC.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:14 pm
Pot: You mention about desiring more info about relationship of crime stats and concealed carry. I’m not sure of Rich’s policy regarding posting book references or links to other websites. I’ll go ahead and post and Rich can delete it if it is not ok.
The preeminent research on this was done by John Lott Jr. He is not without detractors; but I believe his research has probably had the most peer review of any and found to be much more credible than most (some studies - particularly those in favor of gun control - have been found totally invalid). His findings are summarized in the title of his book, “More Guns, Less Crime”. If I recall correctly, the synopsis is that allowing concealed carry benefits the population as a whole by reducing violent crimes such as robbery, rape, and murder; but increases non violent crime such as burglary (where no one is home).
I believe that most of the more recent, reputable studies show that concealed carry might have a slight impact in reducing violent crime; but definitely does not result in more crime.
I have read books by Lott, Kopel, Kleck, Schulman, and many others as well as reviewed law enforcement criminal statistics. There are a lot of nuances in the data; but I do think the objective evidence indicates that a policy more liberally allowing access to and carry of guns would have either a neutral or net positive effect (reduction) in violent crime rates.
Aside from the policy issue is the rights issue. The US Supreme Court has determined that the 2nd amendment is an individual right that also applies to states and their political subdivisions (via Heller and McDonald). Rights should only be restricted when there is clear and convincing (perhaps even overwhelming) evidence that doing so is required for the public good. Evidence. Not fear. Not emotion. The evidence is simply not there to justify restricting the right. In fact, the evidence seems to suggest the public good is best served by expanding it (like most states are doing).
A quick search popped up this website. I’ve seen others and I’m sure you can find others too with a quick search; but here is one website that looks at the stats some…
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
Rich: If not ok to post book references or links, please delete and accept my apologies.
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:24 pm
Steve Schnorf, your post of 3:45 was wonderful. I come to a similar confused conclusion.
I always start out thinking that gun control only impacts people who are legit and that bad guys will get guns anyway. Bad guys are already concealing. Why not let the good guys too?
Then I read comments here such as Todd’s, where he suggests that if you come up to him late at night to ask directions, he’s perfectly justified in blowing you away (assuming he really really really thought you were a bad guy and not just lost) and then I end up thinking that no guns at all should ever be allowed anywhere.
It is the rare issue where the worst people are the people on the side that I started out with in the beginning. They seem intent on showing he that I was wrong.
And like always in the gun arguments on Cap Fax, I end up having no opinion at all (but can conclude that Todd is pretty bad at convincing people when he doesn’t have a checkbook in hand). If you worry about Todd writing a check to your campaign or to your oppoents, then you listen to him. If not and all’s he got is reason and logic, you conclude that he’s he off his gourd.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:30 pm
Logic, if you believe your interpretation of the Supremes rulings are correct, why do you need a state law for conceal carry?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:31 pm
Logic Not Emotion:
Lott? Are you serious? He’s the gun nut’s worst enemy. He’s out of his mind. He’s the one who poses as woman to write letters supporting his cause. When he’s your best friend, you better hope for some weak enemies.
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:32 pm
To start off I carry a foid card own guns and used to hunt. So I am not anti-gun nor do I spend my evenings cleaning and admiring them. To the question at hand. If this concealed weapon law is passed then why should a college be exempt. These young folk are there to transition to the real world. Just another fact of life to deal with. Having said all that I would like to see this question on the ballot. Just to see if it is as popular as those in favor say.
The “everyone else is doing it we should to” line does not sway me much. Things were quite popular in the past that were not right. Once apon a time most thought the world was flat and we were the center of the universe. There was a time down south when folks thought owning someone else was okay. I am not sure everyone packing will be the utopia some advise. NRA is on a roll so maybe I should just get used to it. Happiness is a warm gun.
Comment by Bemused Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:36 pm
Steve — i appreciate your honesty
Maybe this will help you with your delema:
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.
Word i do believe the surpemes are on our side on this issue. I think heller spelled it out clearly that to keep and bear means to keep and carry in case of confrontation. But we are trying the legislature before we go to court
And if we have to do that and prevail, then the bill we are working on will be scrapped and we will get much more.
And if the colleges want to keep bucking it, lets see how they done when a female student sues to keep a gu in her dorm room as itnisnher dweeling/residence which is specificaly covered under heller
Fact is the world has changed in our favor.
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:39 pm
Todd, have you hijacked Ghost’s keyboard?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:42 pm
“But we are trying the legislature before we go to court”
Oh, Todd, you are SO reasonable! /snark/
I’m calling BS on that one. When has the NRA ever hesitated from running to court? Who do you think you are arguing with here, Todd?
Comment by Jasper Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:43 pm
I’m waiting….
Comment by D.P. Gumby Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:45 pm
Logic not emotion: you said many other states are looking at the issue - Florida just rejected it:
“No guns on college campus, say Senate Republicans” - Miami Herald, 3/8/2011
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/09/2106830/no-guns-on-college-campus-say.html
Also John Lott Jr. famously doesn’t look at accidental shootings in the home or other places. He mostly looks at crime stats. I think that accidental shootings of unintended victims is one of things people fear most about allowing CCW on college campuses. The example in the Miami Herald article I linked above was an accidental shooting. Yes the shooter was under 21 and probably not permitted but for me that is besides the point. For me it says we should not have guns in a college environment.
We’re also not going out on a limb here. Most of the states that allow CCW strictly prohibit it at professional and collegiate athletic events and from all educational institutions.
Comment by Paul Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 4:46 pm
Todd, have you hijacked Ghost’s keyboard?
No im still trying to learn my ipad
Jasper since i am working with our counsel and found the plantiff i know what our plans are since you do not, you can call what ever you want but its true and your wrong
We have a nice old lady willing to take the fight up in the 5th district.
The votenhas never looked better and with almost all of the law enforcement groups coming on board, i like the odds.
We will pass as much as we can. And it will be a good balanced bill.
Someone asked earlier about business, they can post and decide they dont want guns in their place and there is no liability, as we agreed to take that out. So there is. No issue there. They are free to make theirnown decisions
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:00 pm
–Word i do believe the surpemes are on our side on this issue. I think heller spelled it out clearly that to keep and bear means to keep and carry in case of confrontation. But we are trying the legislature before we go to court
And if we have to do that and prevail, then the bill we are working on will be scrapped and we will get much more.–
Todd, my head is spinning on that one. If, as you contend, the U.S. Supremes have ruled there is a right to conceal carry, who is the ISRA of all people, or anyone else for that matter, to attempt to negotiate it away at a state level?
I don’t think the federal system works that way.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:02 pm
“We will pass as much as we can. And it will be a good balanced bill.”
So what’s with the Pat Collins demonizing of anyone who doesn’t agree with you 100 percent? Seems you could negotiate toward your stated goal and perhaps not rile the public so much into thinking everyone not with you is evil?
The take no prisoners approach doesn’t really quell my unease on the gun issue.
Comment by piling on Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:09 pm
Todd, my head is spinning on that one. If, as you contend, the U.S. Supremes have ruled there is a right to conceal carry, who is the ISRA of all people, or anyone else for that matter, to attempt to negotiate it away at a state level?
I don’t think the federal system works that way.
Word — the court said reasonable regulation. They said airports schools and such. So the carve outs in the bill comport with that. But start reading on about page 10 of heller and you will see what i am saying. When i get to a real computer i will be happy to poat it and youmcan go read state v reid from tha alabama supreme court which they cited fom 1875 give or take a few years
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:19 pm
Building Only. Is there anyone out there who really believes that right now there are no guns on any college campus in this state? Of course there are. There are also students who are attacked, beaten, raped and robbed. Why do they not deserve the right to protect themselves from these criminal attacks?
Another note: If students at SIU were allowed to carry concealed weapons, the deer attacks a few years ago would have been drastically reduced.
Comment by SO IL M Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:20 pm
OK, SO IL M has convinced me.
The deer attacks were in fact heinous.
Comment by piling on Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:22 pm
Piling on—I figured it was time for a bit of humor in here…glad someone appreciated it
Comment by SO IL M Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 5:30 pm
Did I miss it? did Todd provide for us the names of the states which allow students to take the gun to college? I just want to know what is legal in other states since it looks like the proposed law would make us more open on carry than in Colorado.
maybe an NRA link to carry laws by state?
Comment by amalia Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 6:58 pm
Amalia, google is your friend.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 7:05 pm
Just a few found via a quick search…
Campus carry related sites
http://www.concealedcampus.org/
http://www.campuscarry.com/supporting-facts-arguments/
Gun laws
http://www.nraila.org/gunlaws/
http://gunlaws.com/
http://www.handgunlaw.us/
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 8:59 pm
Proponents of Concealed carry in Illinois need to get behind every exemption and constraint on concealed carry that is proposed. I doubt this bill is going anywhere in the Senate, and I know it isn’t going anywhere unless it is the most watered down version of concealed carry ever introduced.
In a blue state like Illinois conservative issues have to be taken one step at a time. To summarize my point, Republicans, and conservative democrats need to take whatever we can get, because even though the facts are on our side, the votes are not.
Comment by John A Logan Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:11 pm
I am a professor at the University of Illinois. If guns are allowed on campus, I can tell you that I would never, ever, agree to meet with a student in person to discuss a grade. Ever.
Comment by Concerned Professor Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:18 pm
John: You may be right; but hopefully you are wrong. If the liberals don’t adequately consider other viewpoints, more voters will switch parties until their voice is heard. If you look at the gubernatorial election county map, you’ll see that Illinois remains a blue state only because of Cook County.
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:21 pm
I know this is off track, but the last two comments brought it to mind. Am I the only one who finds it really funny the right wing GOP types have embraced being the REDS.
I am sorry but I grew up at a time when those were the bad guys. Those long haired hippie types were were commie pinkos. What do you do to merit Pinko status now?
Comment by Bemused Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 9:45 pm
===Todd, why do you get to decide whether a business allows guns?===
As Mayor Daley said to the FAA after closing Meigs Field, “because I’m the one driving the bulldozer”.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:30 pm
The study I am looking for would link concealed carry to a reduction in crime rates.
Illinois has seen a dramatic reduction in crime over the last 30 years (with an increase only in burglary), all without concealed carry.
While I understand some folks FEEL safer with a gun at their side at all times, I’m not sure they ARE safer. The case examples provided by Todd are no good for supporting his point because those victims would have carried pepper spray in lieu of the gun they were denied had they felt such protection necessary. Since pepper spray was not used, the victims either were not able to get to it, or did not feel the need to carry it. Either way, a gun would not have helped them. The first study I was so kindly provided indicates that CCW folks are no more likely to commit crimes, but not that the overall crime rate was lower due to CCW. The second study indicated little or no effect, and, curiously the trend cited mimicked the trend in Illinois of lower crime overall with an increase in burglary.
I have no doubt that some CCW folks have prevented crimes, but, if there were a study that clearly showed CCW results in lower crime rates, this would be a slam dunk.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:39 pm
===Todd, why do you get to decide whether a business allows guns?===
As Mayor Daley said to the FAA after closing Meigs Field, “because I’m the one driving the bulldozer”.–
Odd to imagine some sort of dictatorial powers for the ISRA lobbyist, like it’s a good thing. Todd, I guess you’d better deliver.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 10:45 pm
Pot, feel free to dig them up. I’d start by comparing the drop in crime rates in shall-issue CCW states to may-issue or non-issue states. Frankly, it isn’t our job to do your work for you if you need convincing.
And also frankly, as I’ve stated on this thread or the prior thread, it doesn’t matter a damn whether crime rates go up or down due to CCW. What matters is whether the victims of the crime that does happen have recourse to use the best possible self-defense options.
Lastly, we don’t base our respect for civil rights on whether or not crime goes up or down due to them. Racists responding to mixed couples with violence doesn’t cause us to revisit our laws allowing mixed race marriages.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Tuesday, Mar 15, 11 @ 11:46 pm
–Lastly, we don’t base our respect for civil rights on whether or not crime goes up or down due to them. Racists responding to mixed couples with violence doesn’t cause us to revisit our laws allowing mixed race marriages.==
?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Mar 16, 11 @ 6:35 am
word — I don’t represent the ISRA. Yes I do drive a bulldozer, have for over 20 years
here are the heller quotes:
At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to
“carry.” See Johnson 161; Webster; T. Sheridan, A Complete
Dictionary of the English Language (1796); 2 Oxford
English Dictionary 20 (2d ed. 1989) (hereinafter Oxford).
When used with “arms,” however, the term has a meaning
that refers to carrying for a particular purpose—
confrontation. In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S.
125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of
“carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE
GINSBURG wrote that “[s]urely a most familiar meaning is,
as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate[s]:
‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing
or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and
ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict
with another person.’ ” Id., at 143 (dissenting opinion)
think that JUSTICE GINSBURG accurately captured the
natural meaning of “bear arms.” Although the phrase
implies that the carrying of the weapon is for the purpose
of “offensive or defensive action,” it in no way connotes
participation in a structured military organization.
From our review of founding-era sources, we conclude
that this natural meaning was also the meaning that
“bear arms” had in the 18th century. In numerous instances,
“bear arms” was unambiguously used to refer to
the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia.
The most prominent examples are those most relevant to
the Second Amendment: Nine state constitutional provisions
written in the 18th century or the first two decades
of the 19th, which enshrined a right of citizens to “bear
arms in defense of themselves and the state” or “bear arms
in defense of himself and the state.” 8 ….
Without the preposition, “bear arms” normally
meant (as it continues to mean today) what JUSTICE
GINSBURG’s opinion in Muscarello said
c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of
these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee
the individual right to possess and carry weapons in
case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed
by the historical background of the Second Amendment.
We look to this because it has always been widely understood
that the Second Amendment, like the First and
Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The
very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes
the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it
“shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v.
Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), “[t]his is not a right
granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner
dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The
Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed
. . . .”16
Comment by Todd Wednesday, Mar 16, 11 @ 7:14 am
==Frankly, it isn’t our job to do your work for you if you need convincing.==
I disagree. If you want to change the law, you need to provide some good reasons for changing it. Since you, Todd, and other proponents say it will prevent crime, I’d like to see the stats.
==What matters is whether the victims of the crime that does happen have recourse to use the best possible self-defense options.==
My point is that most don’t avail themselves of the options currently available, so either this would have no impact on them or they want to carry a gun for some reason other than self-defense.
==Lastly, we don’t base our respect for civil rights on whether or not crime goes up or down due to them.==
The “basic civil right” to keep and bear arms is not what we are discussing. We are discussing the regulation of place and manner. I generally keep my guns at home; I respect that a business or college campus, or state legislature might not want me to bring my weapons onto their premises.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Mar 16, 11 @ 9:28 am
If Pepper Spray was such an effective tool you’d see police using it more. One issue with it concerns the wind, which can cause one to spray themselves.
Comment by David Lawson aka Federal Farmer Wednesday, Mar 16, 11 @ 9:36 am