Typical anti-gun argument:

"Guns are bad, 'm-kay?"



[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 11:01 AM. Reason : ]

1/30/2009 11:00:37 AM

well no shit

1/30/2009 11:11:53 AM

Quote :

"Would there be cause for alarm if I was allowed to carry when I was teaching? I don't think so."

i actually know a guy that had a gun in his car that was a teacher (at a middle or elem. school) and he ended up getting canned and can never teach again...

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 11:20 AM. Reason : someone would be alarmed... most likely a parent.]

1/30/2009 11:13:06 AM

^READING COMPREHENSION FAIL

read before you post. that was in reference to it being legal for teachers/admin to carry in schools.

1/30/2009 12:04:36 PM

yeah, you mean in reference to my last post? i obviously didnt understand it..

1/30/2009 12:37:13 PM

well if it were legal and used, there would be no alarm. There is only alarm now (and people being arrested/losing jobs) because it is illegal...

so if you didn't understand, what's your point?

1/30/2009 1:56:21 PM

OK, first off, I know 30,000 people aren't going to start carrying guns. But no one knows one way or the other if the number of people with weapons on campus will increase, So shut the hell up. You're assuming everyone is going to follow the rules which is a stupid idea. I'm accepting that they aren't all going to follow the rules. You have no idea how many students without cc permits have guns at home that they don't bring around because they aren't allowed. I'm saying that out of 30,000 students, the chances are pretty decent that a FEW will bring guns on campus AND IT ONLY TAKES ONE.


Secondly, I am not saying that the tailgating incident was a big defining moment for our college. I know it was a an unfortunate mistake, so what? It happened once and the overwhelming overreaction to that incident, I think, will happen on campus if or when it happens here. Look at the shit storm that happened as a result of the racist comments being posted on the free expression tunnel (excluding the threat to the president, which was dumb and warranted looking into... but I digress). I don't have any evidence to say that all the things that I said were at RISK for happening WILL happen, but the school has a record for overreacting. That's the second point I was trying to make.


Thirdly, every scene of violence that involves guns is going to have to be reactionary. Luckily, cops can react differently to situations than you can. Are you saying you'd pull a gun and shoot anyone on campus you see with a gun? Or are you going to go all vigilante and start demanding that other students you see with guns show you their permit all the time? If person B pulls a gun on person A for some justified reason and a third party sees this and, without knowing exactly what's going on, pulls a gun and shoots person B in an attempt at protecting possibly themselves and those around them. The point of that story being that misunderstandings can and will occur, but it doesn't matter if the end result us a dead guy who didn't deserve it. You can't jump the gun (no pun intended) on when to use yours. "Well, I'm not that stupid" is not a good enough counter argument for everyone who will have a gun on campus. You have to react to someone else, that's the way it works. The guy at the tailgating party hadn't done anything wrong until he pulled the trigger. Only a cop could have legally stopped that from happening, and if there was one around maybe he could have. Cops act in reaction to things like that, but their reactions are different from yours. He has that right because he has more than just the training to judge when to shoot his gun and how to use it safely. You're not a police officer, you don't have the training to defuse the situation or the right to shoot the guy until someone else got hurt, fatally in this instance.


Fourth, no amount of training will keep accidents from happening. You think that ALL the people with guns will all be well trained, capable, mentally stable people? Yeah, right. And even if they were, mistakes are still going to happen. Youtube will show you occasions where even trained police officers screw up and hurt people.

Fifth, Allowing concealed carriers would make it easier for people to have guns without permits because if having a gun is normal then you aren't going to question anyone. Hell, if I saw someone with a gun I wouldn't ask to see their permit, especially if I wasn't armed. And having a gun doesn't make you a police officer, so you can't go around demanding to see other peoples licenses, a problem that could (note, I said could) lead to escalation. I submit that if you pretend you belong somewhere it's pretty easy to get really far without being called out. there need to be more police around to enforce carrying if it's allowed.

Sixth, Not allowing weapons on campus has been a pretty good deterrent in the past. Only in the last decade have acts of violence like this started springing up on campus more often. It seems to me that introducing more guns to the situation is a terrible idea. I think I've made enough points to show that there is a possible (probable, in my opinion) big dark downside to allowing people to carry guns on campus that make it not worth it. It's a risk you have to be willing to take if you're in college.

If I was a little unclear with the points I was trying to make earlier, then I apologize. But to make asshole comments about me making opinions with no backing is kinda hypocritical, mostly because all of you are making assumptions in the other direction with no backing. We're all guessing as to the effects of adding guns to the campus environment, because it's never been done. I think you should be able to carry concealed weapons if you have the permit, but not on campus. There is my side, I think it's more correct than yours. If you want to convince me otherwise, flaming my post is the least likely way to get that done. Feel free to send me some decent argument for why you should be able to have the. "Only the people with the intelligence and training to use them" is not a fact you can prove. "I can carry weapons off campus, why not on?" is a better one, my only response to which is "While the number of violent occurrences on campuses nationwide are at the level that they are, it's safer for the masses to not have weapons."

good luck.


PS - gun violence happens all over the place. Not to mention incredibly NEAR campus. Guns are NOT being effectively kept out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and that will never be the case. You're calling me dumb because I think in opposition to your way of being, but I think you're naive if you really think the people who shouldn't have guns aren't getting them. For God's sake, the dude who bought the guns for the VT incident had a mental health record and he still got them. So, again, to all of you people who flame me... Shut the hell up. You're not looking at the big picture

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 2:14 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 2:09:55 PM

You aren't even addressing the arguments. It's largely not simply a difference of opinion--you are completely missing almost every point, to such an extent that you largely aren't even talking about the same things as we are. I don't know how to convey it with more simplicity or clarity, dude. In a couple of other cases, you are simply completely ignorant of the subject. I don't even know where to start.

I'll try again later...probably tomorrow, actually, to explain things again if you genuinely want them explained. It's exasperating, but at least it's largely an argument that can be "won", instead of going in circles because you simply don't view things the same way. You don't see that from your vantage point, I understand, but that is because you grossly misunderstand a number of things that I will do my best to clear up.


For starters, though, what makes a college campus fundamentally different from any of the myriad other places that people carry concealed?

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 2:27 PM. Reason : asfd]

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 2:31 PM. Reason : saasdfa]

1/30/2009 2:20:10 PM

WAIT A SECOND.

The reason we should be allowed to carry is because people that shouldn't have guns are getting them and using them. CCP holders aren't the ones attacking you, so what's your point? Keep the current laws and law abiding citizens disarmed and keep allowing criminals to bring guns to campus and not allow others to defend themselves?

Why is crossing that magical line onto campus such a big deal? People are CC'ing right off campus and you don't hear of them killing or attacking people, so what's different about me carrying on campus?

1/30/2009 2:35:32 PM

^,^^ I think the rest of the world is fundamentally more grown up place, which is generally much more spread out than a college campus. Consider campus to be a place where you get stuck in relatively close proximity to anywhere from hundreds to several thousand people. Then you shouldn't be able to carry a weapon onto a school campus for the same reason you can't carry one into a professional sports game.

^ The reason you can't carry a weapon on to campus, as I stated in my last post, is because it makes it easier for people who shouldn't have them to have them also. Let me show you the scenario I mean. If NC State says next week, "People with cc permits can carry weapons on campus," then 200 people start carrying weapons on campus in the next week. I'll assume those are all people who already have cc permits and the right to carry, are responsible, etc. Now I have a gun at home, I hear, "People can carry guns on campus," and I bring mine. I don't have a cc permit. How do you separate me from the people on campus with permits when we're all walking around with guns? If I was someone who wanted to walk on campus for the purpose of killing people, how do you pick me out before it's too late? At this point in time, if you are found with a weapon on campus then you're dealt with like a criminal, period. The line is much clearer this way, we just need people to police it.

Now, if you'll go back to my last post you'll see also that there is entirely too much room for error and any situation where a kid dies on campus is incredibly bad, period. Those are the responses to your questions

I'm not missing your points. I'm making counter points which are meant as reasons that your points aren't strong enough to be good ones.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 3:05 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM. Reason : ..]

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 3:07 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 3:04:39 PM

Quote :

"If I was someone who wanted to walk on campus for the purpose of killing people, how do you pick me out before it's too late?"

How is that any different than the way it is now?

I think you miss the whole point of concealed carry.

1/30/2009 3:13:58 PM

^ Hey, I've said from the beginning that my ideal method for solving the problem would be to have more people around looking for that stuff. No, not harassing people, but getting actual constructive work done. NOT allowing more people to have guns, thus making the process more of a duck-duck-goose game of picking out the felons. PLUS, murderers can get cc permits, too.,

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 3:16 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 3:15:57 PM

Quote :

"Column: Absolute safety is impossible"

well no shit captain obvious, should i get private parts to alert major issues and general apathy?

1/30/2009 3:24:05 PM

What exactly can they "look for" that doesn't involve harassing people? It's not like these guys walking around campus mugging people have their guns openly holstered on their hip. And, how in the hell do you figure a murderer can go about getting a CC permit?

1/30/2009 3:26:14 PM

You have to look for signs, do some investigative work. Hell, keep track of people on campus who have bought a gun, that stuff gets recorded, right?

And murderers get cc permits BEFORE they become murderers. After that, they just walk around with guns in places where people are allowed to have them with the general understanding that, since they don't look out of place, they can get away with it.

1/30/2009 3:35:23 PM

So you're going to follow around people who legally purchase a gun? What about the dealer on the corner who doesn't purchase one legally?

You lose your CCP if you get a DUI, you really think they'll let you keep it after you murder someone?

How would someone with a concealed handgun look out of place, unless they were at some sort of open carry rally?

1/30/2009 3:39:56 PM

Quote :

"So you're going to follow around people who legally purchase a gun? What about the dealer on the corner who doesn't purchase one legally?"

"Absolute Safety is impossible"

Quote :

"You lose your CCP if you get a DUI, you really think they'll let you keep it after you murder someone?"

Who says you need a ccp to carry a concealed weapon? See post above

Quote :

"How would someone with a concealed handgun look out of place, unless they were at some sort of open carry rally?"

I'd hate to keep quoting you, but didn't you just mention the difficulty of telling who in a crowd of people were carrying a concealed handgun? Or are you forgetting the general implications of "concealed"?

Giving guns to more people doesn't solve the problem.

1/30/2009 3:47:01 PM

truly incredible, dude. there's a lot to address. I hope i hit some of it- i'll leave it to wdprice3 and theDuke866 to get the rest later.

murderers cannot get cc permits. neither can retards, crazies, felons, wife beaters, or anyone else deemed unfit. I think you underestimate the depth of the 4-5 SEPERATE background checks that are done before an individual is issued a permit.

I can say with a relatively high level of certainty that, should I have felt so bold, I could have carried concealed throughout my entire undergraduate education and never even been given a second glance. What prevented me from doing so is that I am a law abiding citizen. What makes you think that the guy you passed in the free expression tunnel at 9 pm wasn't carrying?

As a permit holder, your first obligation is to retreat (except in your own home- see "Castle Doctrine"). again, no one is looking to be a hero. so, if bob has a gun pulled on steve, lets say, outside the bookstore, and I see it going down, I'm going to walk/run away and call the police and let them deal with it. no sense in being reckless with my personal safety or that of others. now if bob runs me down and is threatening to shoot me, i'm going to defend myself as is legally appropriate.

no permit holder is going to ask someone they notice to be carrying to see their permit. that's retarded. even if you were carrying without a permit, it's not my place to confront you about it, and a good lawyer could twist that to seem as if i was the instigator in the situation, thereby forfeiting my right to use deadly force.

Should the State of NC ever decide to allow permit holders to carry on campus, you'd better believe that there will be a metric shit-ton of press to precisely interpret what the law allows, which will be made ever more clear by each individual university. there will be no gray areas. and, should you look at the law and assume you are allowed to carry without some formal training, then you are willfully breaking the law and deserve what's coming when you get caught.

most gun crimes are committed with stolen weapons (look up the stats on your own). people with cc permits are, 99.99% of the time (damn, that's better than some birth controls), exemplary citizens. they also make up less than 5% of the population of individuals age 21 and over. not a significant portion of the university.

most days, i'm on campus until after dark. less people are around me than in the grocery store, or waiting in line at Bojangles. but, because there are less people around, there are also less witnesses, and our university isn't known for being a well-lit campus. that's why the large majority of crimes in and around campus are committed at night. this is when it would be advantageous to be allowed to carry.

the other guys can handle the rest.

don't be anti-gun for the sake of being anti-gun. just like i'm not pro-gun for the sake of being pro-gun. i have justified reasons backed up by what the State and the US Government consider to be sound judgement. people who are anti-gun tend to do a better job of inciting fear than making a point. unfortunately, i feel you have done more of the latter than the former.

1/30/2009 4:00:22 PM

The more you reply, the less and less sense you are making. Are you just grasping at straws at this point? You mention that you want more constraints placed on people who legally purchase a gun and when I respond asking how you intend to do that, you say that "absolute safety is impossible," basically saying that doing what you intially proposed would be impossible? What type of logic is that?

Of course you don't need a CCP to carry a concealed weapon, but you do need one to do it legally. This is one reason why we have CCPs in the first place, so law abiding citizens have the God given right to protect themselves.

And for your third point, did you even read the bit that you quoted? That is exactly what it said. You can't tell who in a crowd has a concealed weapon, so how would someone who did have one look out of place? Damn, I feel like I'm having to explain this shit to a third grader.

Quote :

"Giving guns to more people doesn't solve the problem."

You got a link to prove this statement?

1/30/2009 4:00:56 PM

Quote :

"murderers cannot get cc permits....I think you underestimate the depth of the 4-5 SEPERATE background checks that are done before an individual is issued a permit."

Not that that's even the point. I don't mind cc carrier being able to carry weapons. The whole point that I've been making since I started posting was that allowing people to carry on campus makes it easier for ANYONE to carry on campus because it becomes significantly harder to enforce. PLUS, you can't promise that the problem won't come from a cc permit carrier, or that these people are all good people.

Quote :

"I can say with a relatively high level of certainty that, should I have felt so bold, I could have carried concealed throughout my entire undergraduate education and never even been given a second glance."

That's what I mean. People need to give second glances.

Quote :

" What prevented me from doing so is that I am a law abiding citizen. "

A statement that can't be generalized to everyone OR to the set of people carrying concealed weapons permits, regardless of how righteous you think they are.

Quote :

"As a permit holder, your first obligation is to retreat... "

Again, a rule you can't assume every ccp holder is going to follow.

Quote :

"no permit holder is going to ask someone they notice to be carrying to see their permit. that's retarded. even if you were carrying without a permit, it's not my place to confront you about it, and a good lawyer could twist that to seem as if i was the instigator in the situation, thereby forfeiting my right to use deadly force. "

Right, I certainly thought I alluded to that in the post. But again, my point is that with people who CAN have weapons on campus now, the idea of seeing a threat from people with weapons now comes with a "false-negative" being that you have a ccp.

Quote :

"Should the State of NC ever decide to allow permit holders to carry on campus, you'd better believe that there will be a metric shit-ton of press to precisely interpret what the law allows, which will be made ever more clear by each individual university. there will be no gray areas. and, should you look at the law and assume you are allowed to carry without some formal training, then you are willfully breaking the law and deserve what's coming when you get caught."

...So? You said yourself you could carry a cc around NOW and not get caught. What makes you think it's gonna be any different once the rule passes? The point is that you can carry a weapon on to campus and kill people regardless.

Quote :

"most gun crimes are committed...."

Yeah, go ahead and back that up. Even if it's the case, the VT shooter (and, don't flip, this is just an example) bought his guns from a pawn shop downtown. See how keeping tabs could have been helpful there?

Quote :

"most days, i'm on campus until after dark. less people are around me than in the grocery store, or waiting in line at Bojangles. but, because there are less people around, there are also less witnesses, and our university isn't known for being a well-lit campus. that's why the large majority of crimes in and around campus are committed at night. this is when it would be advantageous to be allowed to carry."

True, but I don't see the merit in a "you can carry after dark" rule. The reasons are ultimately the same.

Quote :

"...unfortunately, i feel you have done more of the latter than the former."

Just because I make points that you don't like doesn't mean that I think gun rights are bad. I said in a previous post, I think you should be able to carry guns off campus, and compared having a gun on campus to having a gun in a "professional sports stadium" feel free to revisit my posts.

And there you go insulting me again for having a differing opinion.

Quote :

"You mention that you want more constraints placed on people who legally purchase a gun..."

I never said that. Reading comprehension fail?

Quote :

"...so law abiding citizens have the God given right to protect themselves."

It's not God-given, it's given to you by the government, but I digress... You are generalizing people with cc permits as law abiding citizens, which is not a global statement you can make. Plus, the point is that people WITHOUT cc permits are the main problem. But again, you can't guarantee someone with a cc permit isn't going to be the problem.

Quote :

"And for your third point, did you even read the bit that you quoted? That is exactly what it said. You can't tell who in a crowd has a concealed weapon, so how would someone who did have one look out of place? Damn, I feel like I'm having to explain this shit to a third grader."

You said, "How would someone with a concealed handgun look out of place, unless they were at some sort of open carry rally?" Which seems like a pretty dumbass thing to say, unless a) an open carry rally isn't a bunch of people running around openly carrying weapons or b) the person is concealing their weapon. Of course they won't look out of place. If you'd see what I put under the post, I was asking you why you were making such a retarded comment. But we seem to be on the same page here that you can cc and not look out of place. SO let's get back to attempting to make some progress, shall we?


Do I have any proof for the statement that giving you weapons doesn't solve the problem? Of course not. Do you have any proof to the contrary? Of course not. Touche. Would you like to have a coherent, civil debate now?

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 4:23 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 4:22:07 PM

Quote :

"Not that that's even the point. I don't mind cc carrier being able to carry weapons. The whole point that I've been making since I started posting was that allowing people to carry on campus makes it easier for ANYONE to carry on campus because it becomes significantly harder to enforce. PLUS, you can't promise that the problem won't come from a cc permit carrier, or that these people are all good people."

how does allowing concealed carry on campus make anything harder to enforce? is it harder too enforce gun laws every where else because of concealed carry? concealed carry is concealed. the whole argument that you are missing is that the law banning concealed carry on campus only stands in the way of law abiding people, bad people will bring a concealed weapon already if they wanted to.

no, you can't promise that cc permit holders are good people, but they are statistically less likely to commit a crime than even cops are. in addition, if someone wanted to commit a crime they wouldn't even worry about having a ccp, they would just bring a gun and do it.

1/30/2009 4:43:00 PM

That's a fair point. It IS hard to enforce. I just don't think the net gain is worth it. I think it could cause a lot of problems. The only gain is that, in the slim to none chance that you have a gun pointed at you, you have the opportunity to fire back. You're still not really gonna stop anyone.

On the other hand, what if someone sees a student with a gun? Will it embolden criminals to come on campus with guns? Will it spark problems where these people with guns make angry/stupid/some sort of mistake and choose to use it? How do you respond? How will the school respond? Is the general protocol to assume that someone with a gun has a permit, or to call the authorities? If it's to assume they have a permit, surely that can become bothersome. if it's to call the authorities, than isn't it unnecessary for you to have a gun?


Let's assume we have some reasonably sized force with a <1 minute response time to anywhere on campus. Would you then accept that cc on campus is unnecessary? Is there some scenario where you would accept that?

Am I missing something about the benefits of the ccp rule? If you are going to give me statistics can you give me sources? Thank you for a post that attempts to be constructive.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 4:54 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 4:53:02 PM

Quote :

"That's a fair point. It IS hard to enforce. I just don't think the net gain is worth it. I think it could cause a lot of problems. The only gain is that, in the slim to none chance that you have a gun pointed at you, you have the opportunity to fire back. You're still not really gonna stop anyone."

If someone has a gun pointed at you, he wins. It's as simple as that. They go over that when you go through the course to get a CCP. That doesn't mean you won't have an opportunity to draw your weapon and defend yourself.

Quote :

" On the other hand, what if someone sees a student with a gun? Will it embolden criminals to come on campus with guns? Will it spark problems where these people with guns make angry/stupid/some sort of mistake and choose to use it? How do you respond? How will the school respond? Is the general protocol to assume that someone with a gun has a permit, or to call the authorities? If it's to assume they have a permit, surely that can become bothersome. if it's to call the authorities, than isn't it unnecessary for you to have a gun? "

You are not supposed to see a CCP holders gun. If you do, then yes, you call the police because they are breaking the law.

Quote :

" Let's assume we have some reasonably sized force with a <1 minute response time to anywhere on campus. Would you then accept that cc on campus is unnecessary? Is there some scenario where you would accept that?"

No, I prefer to have the ability to protect myself rather than to depend on other beings to do it for me. It also doesn't matter what the response time would be. If someone observed a violent crime being committed, by the time they called the authorities, it would already be over. The only thing left for them to do is fill out their paperwork.

1/30/2009 5:08:37 PM

He is arguing that we can't give good guys more rights, because the bad guys already break the rules.

And, the government/ state DOES NOT give us the right to carry. The CONSTITUTION explicitly states that it REAFFIRMS the right to bear arms. The ability to protect yourself is greater than the government and restrictions. Unfortunately, there have still been restrictions placed on my ability to protect myself.

I am sure some people carry on campus. They are breaking the law. Have you ever seen a gun on campus that wasn't in the possession of an officer? Well, you still wouldn't.

Can we prove that crime decreases with a greater presence of weapons. YES.
North Dakota had ZERO gun deaths in 2008, and has the most lax gun laws and one of the highest number of guns to residents ratio.
New York, Illinois, California all have some of the strictest gun laws and regulations, yet have some of the worst crime in the country.
This is a pattern that is repeated all over the US.

You keep saying that people won't follow the law. How is this different than every day.
You say that if we allow CC on campus, people may not follow the law. Then they become criminals. It is that simple. People with a CCW are less likely to break the law than police officers. That is a fact. I believe that should have a heavy weight to you, and cancel your argument.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:15 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:10:54 PM

^^I was referring to the incredibly small chance, statistically, that you are the person being aimed at versus it being someone else. You're not gonna deter someone from shooting someone else, though.

That's not the point, it doesn't matter if they are or aren't a cc permit holder. What are the ramifications of it happening is the question here. Will it cost the school thousands of dollars to put out a wolf-alert, will the PA system have to announce to everyone to hide, will classes need to be canceled in that area of campus, does the person pose any real threat. How much money is going to be wasted investigating the person, how much time is that going to take away from the police who should spend their effort solving real problems, how many people are going to need student health services counseling or drugs to help them calm down, are the any legal grounds for being sued because of the distress, etc.

How many people are going to feel safer because of this rule? Only the incredibly small amount of people who have cc permits. Is that worth it? To you, I'm sure the answer is yes. But you have to bow to majority rule, here. There has to come a point where you trust in the system. It's not going to be perfect, but this proposed change is going to have a big enough positive impact to be worth it.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:17 PM. Reason : ^^]



^Those are hardly valid statistics... North Dakota has a population of 641,481, and a density of 9.3 people per square mile. New York has 19,490,297 people, a density of 408.7 people per square mile. That's hardly fair grounds for conducting studies like that. I could just as easily say that there are incredibly fewer deaths in North Dakota than there are in New York because there is a higher percentage of non-religious people in North Dakota (see the census bureau). Your using similarities in unrelated data to make a point, that's not fair.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:23 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:16:11 PM

How is it going to be different for ANYONE?
Concealed weapons are never seen unless there is an imminent and serious threat of great bodily injury or death. No one will know if there is a weapon in the room ever.

If you see a gun, you call the police. That will not change.

1/30/2009 5:20:41 PM

Look at my cost/benefit analysis above. Conclusion: letting ccp holders have guns benefits an incredibly small minority over the entirety of campus. It's not worth putting it in

1/30/2009 5:25:14 PM

This is gonna be choppy since I'm in a hurry and can hardly read astral's posts:

- I can't even figure out what AstralEngine is arguing. I'm not trying to be a dick, but learn what CC is and how you go about getting a permit. It sounds like you have no idea what you are talking about.

- You haven't made one logical point yet.

- Have spies on campus looking for people carrying guns? Really? Big Brother much? Impossible, to say the least.

- Murders can't get CCP's, this goes to show that you are just making shit up.

- And sure, anyone can CC, legally or not. So why let criminals have the upper hand?

- You do know the meaning of concealed, don't you? As in, can't see it, not visible, you don't know someone is carrying, etc. So how does allowing CCP holders to carry make it easier for everyone else to carry? That makes no sense. If you can't see it, how do you know it's there. Not to mention it's already easy enough to CC on campus (illegally though). I bet you anyone one of these guys could CC on campus everyday and no one would ever know. So again, how does making it legal make it easier?

- You need to do some research first, then come back here an argue. I'll give you $10 if you can actually make a logical, sound, and factual counterpoint.

- And as for:

"Now I have a gun at home, I hear, "People can carry guns on campus," and I bring mine. I don't have a cc permit. How do you separate me from the people on campus with permits when we're all walking around with guns? If I was someone who wanted to walk on campus for the purpose of killing people, how do you pick me out before it's too late? At this point in time, if you are found with a weapon on campus then you're dealt with like a criminal, period. The line is much clearer this way, we just need people to police it."

1.) You're an idiot for breaking the law and should be punished.
2.) Why do I need to separate you from anyone else? If you illegally CC for your own protection, then why does that endanger me? I would hope you get caught for being stupid though.
3.) If you come to campus to shoot people, you can do that regardless of what campus gun laws are. You have a higher chance at being a VT shooter copy cat with no campus carry than with campus carry. believe me, if you tried to prance around this campus and murder people, and campus carry was legal, someone would drop you in a hurry, compared to you running around for 2.5 hours and no one can do a thing about it with the current laws

Quote :

"How is it going to be different for ANYONE? Concealed weapons are never seen unless there is an imminent and serious threat of great bodily injury or death. No one will know if there is a weapon in the room ever. If you see a gun, you call the police. That will not change."

Truth! If CC became legal on campus and you saw someone holding/waving/etc a gun, call the police, hell I would. Just like it was said above - you're not going to see a concealed weapon until it's being used. If some moron is just waving it around on campus with no ill intentions, that person deserves the shit from the police.

As for your analysis - it's pure garbage. CCP HOLDERS AREN'T WAVING THEIR GUNS AND YELLING, "LOOK AT ME, I'VE GOT A GUN, SO ALL YOU CAN KISS MY DICK!"

CC = CONCEALED. Do you know how often a CC'er reveals his weapon in public for no reason? It doesn't happen.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:29 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:25:33 PM

i'm not insulting you. i'm attacking what you are saying. believe it or not, there is a difference, and I too, like you, am entitled to my opinion. don't be pissed because i disagree with you, be pissed because what I have said is largely supported by mounds of statistical evidence.

also, picking apart someone's statements and analyzing each piece seperately reduces the overall message the person was trying to convey. don't nitpick- you aren't going to prove anything that way.

i really don't know why i didn't provide this link earlier:

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

there is no information to suggest that legally approving one individual to carry will automatically result in many unapproved individuals carrying. so that arguement is out the window.

states and countries with more permissive gun laws generally experience lower crime rates. you would be less likely to attempt to mug me if you had to wonder whether or not i was carrying.

you have played very heavily into the whole "mass incompetence" arguement. this is one of the favorites of anti-gun advocates. this is because it is an easy arguement to make, and is one that is generally well received by the public due to our "bad news is good news" world of media and many people's tendency to be too lazy to research the facts. playing the "mass incompetence" angle doesn't give you much ground to stand on. in additon, you have to answer ALL of the law-related questions on the cc exam to pass. mass incompetence, out the window.

the fundamentals of cc training stress the use of deadly force as a last resort at every turn. anyone who has had instruction knows the legal shitstorm they could potentially face just by discharging their firearm, much less actually hitting anyone/anything. no heroes, no vigilanties, no wanna-be cops. court costs are ridiculous enough for a speeding ticket, much less a civil suit. taking matter into your own hands... out the window.

it is reasonable to believe that criminals would be less likely to prey on members of an institution, such as our university, should a campus carry law be passed. criminals are opportunistic. they are more likely to snatch a handbag from the 105 lb sorority girl than to try to wrestle a wallet away from a 200 lb guy in workout attire. easy marks mean a better chance at success. but, if you have no way of knowing whether or not that 105 lb sorority girl is carrying a .38 and knows how to use it, you would knowingly be taking a pretty big gamble by trying to go after her, thereby reducing your willingness to engage in criminal activity.

you are right to say that is is not a God given right, but a government given one. that doesn't make it any less of a right. out the window.

pawn shops are less likely to do thorough background checks, which is unfortunate. but that just lends itself to the criminal community- not the law abiding citizens who want to legally protect themselves. you get caught with a stolen weapon, one with a scratched off serial number, or any other less than legal form of acquisition, and you're screwed- permit or no permit. permit holders are well aware of this.

Quote :

"You said yourself you could carry a cc around NOW and not get caught. What makes you think it's gonna be any different once the rule passes? The point is that you can carry a weapon on to campus and kill people regardless."

i would like you to look at this statement again. byt he way- where you say "cc", i assume you mean weapon. this statement has no bearing on the arguement at hand, other than the fact that permit holders would be able to defend themselves from those carrying illegally. and your first reaction is not going to be to shoot the assailant. it will be to flee the situation. if that is not possible, then the right to use deadly force may come into play.

i am legally allowed to carry concealed into Bojangles. that does not mean EVERYONE going to Bojangles for delicious cajun biscuits is going to be carrying a weapon, just because a very limited group of individuals is allowed to do so. that portion of your arguement also holds little weight, and is incredibly presumptuous.

if people are allowed to carry on campus and they notice that someone else is carrying, then they will have to assume that person is permitted to do so. now, if the person in question is engaging in suspicious or less thasn legal activity, the observer should and is obligated to notify the authorities- not engage the person in question- remember, you retreat first.

people with permits ARE law abiding citizens. that's what the multiple background checks are for. if at some point they decide they no longer require that title, then at that time their cc permit will be revoked.

you are right to say that i can't guarantee that a permit holder will never commit a gun crime on campus, just like i can't guarantee that you won't be killed the next time you drive to the grocery store. but if i had to bet on one happening, odds are better that you will die on the way to the Shitty Kitty than they are that I will be shot by a permit holder as I leave geological oceanography.



i would like to say that the majority of your arguement has weight, but the facts don't support it. it isn't right to be angry at me or anyone else in that regard.

1/30/2009 5:31:26 PM

Quote :

"That's a fair point. It IS hard to enforce. I just don't think the net gain is worth it. I think it could cause a lot of problems. The only gain is that, in the slim to none chance that you have a gun pointed at you, you have the opportunity to fire back. You're still not really gonna stop anyone."

i'm confused, you seem to blow off people being able to protect themselves as some kind of minor thing. that is exactly why we want to be able to carry on campus.

i don't get what you said at all

Quote :

"That's not the point, it doesn't matter if they are or aren't a cc permit holder. What are the ramifications of it happening is the question here. Will it cost the school thousands of dollars to put out a wolf-alert, will the PA system have to announce to everyone to hide, will classes need to be canceled in that area of campus, does the person pose any real threat. How much money is going to be wasted investigating the person, how much time is that going to take away from the police who should spend their effort solving real problems, how many people are going to need student health services counseling or drugs to help them calm down, are the any legal grounds for being sued because of the distress, etc."

"look everyone, don't protect yourself ok? it may be inconvienent so don't do it"
permit holders understand the process and potential costs to themselves in the event that they had to use their weapon to protect themselves. its one of the things they go over in the class, its another reason a permit holder is only going to use their weapon as a last resort.

Quote :

"How many people are going to feel safer because of this rule? Only the incredibly small amount of people who have cc permits. Is that worth it? To you, I'm sure the answer is yes. But you have to bow to majority rule, here. There has to come a point where you trust in the system. It's not going to be perfect, but this proposed change is going to have a big enough positive impact to be worth it. "

what? your point makes no sense at all. if you care, then get a permit and carry concealed. if you don't care, then why is it an issue. the proposed change is needed because for some magical reason our 2nd amendment rights are being denied on campus.

Quote :

"Look at my cost/benefit analysis above. Conclusion: letting ccp holders have guns benefits an incredibly small minority over the entirety of campus. It's not worth putting it in"

your reasoning is so retarded and off base that i don't even know where to begin to start a response. you have actually succeeded at making me feel stupid because i can't figure out stupid reasoning.

1/30/2009 5:31:56 PM

How about you catch up on the conversation before you continue being an asshole. I've answered all of those questions already and you're not making counterpoints or being productive. My arguments are valid and sound, and you need to see the big picture of the argument before you continue making unjustified claims like an asshole.

I will argue with you that you won't EVER see a concealed weapon carriers weapon EVER. I don't see it happening. You gonna wear your jacket zipped up every day? You gonna tuck in so far in your pants no one sees it? It's bound to happen eventually, how many times is necessary for the rules to get changed again?

- whether or not you have a cc is not even important douche bag, get out of the conversation or start paying attention.

- I make all sorts of logical points. Read them without being a prick

- not spies, the police force calls them "profilers" and gun purchases are logged regardless

- Keep reading, you get a cc and THEN murder someone. That makes you a murderer and you did it without breaking the rules. I don't see how you can honestly think someone will catch a guy, "Oh, no, you can't have a ccp, you're going to kill a guy with it"

- Because it's not worth letting you have guns either, see the posts dick

- you can't honestly think that no one will EVER see a concealed weapon carriers weapon, EVER, a point I've already addressed. and besides, we're only concerned about it happening once

- That falls under the "It's not worth it to help the incredibly small minority"

All of these are points I've already made, so shut the hell up.

1/30/2009 5:34:44 PM

Quote :

" I will argue with you that you won't EVER see a concealed weapon carriers weapon EVER. I don't see it happening. You gonna wear your jacket zipped up every day? You gonna tuck in so far in your pants no one sees it? It's bound to happen eventually, how many times is necessary for the rules to get changed again?"

i stopped reading at this

let me ask you, how often do you see a concealed carry weapon CURRENTLY. have you ever noticed someone carrying concealed, this is not a problem EVERYWHERE ELSE WHERE IT IS ALREADY ALLOWED and will equally not be an issue on campus

1/30/2009 5:36:40 PM

Quote :

"- Keep reading, you get a cc and THEN murder someone. That makes you a murderer and you did it without breaking the rules. I don't see how you can honestly think someone will catch a guy, "Oh, no, you can't have a ccp, you're going to kill a guy with it""

this is so retarded

IF YOU ARE GOING TO MURDER SOMEONE YOU AREN'T GOING TO TAKE THE TIME AND MONEY TO GET A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT, THAT WOULD BE RETARDED

there is not an epidemic of ccp holders murdering people (in fact it is the opposite) SO IT WOULD BE EQUALLY NOT AN ISSUE ON CAMPUS

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:39 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:37:57 PM

Quote :

"you have actually succeeded at making me feel stupid because i can't figure out stupid reasoning."

lolz. I feel the same way

And as for the people feeling safer - do you feel safer when police are around? probably - but why? not because they have flashing lights, or a shiny badge. You feel safer because they have a weapon, they have a certain power, they have the ability to deter, prevent, and stop crimes. Guess what, CC'ers have this same effect - just the fact that people are carrying deters crime. I would feel much safer knowing that my buddy was CC'ing on campus, because that's one more guy on the right side of the law. You do realize that many NC police departments consider CC'ing a wonderful thing; as if they have quasi-partners all around?

Quote :

"you get a cc and THEN murder someone"

Uhh, if you are going to murder someone, you probably don't want that paper trail following you, since you probably want to get away with it.

Not to mention, if you're bound to kill somebody, there are other ways to do so, such as:

legally purchase a gun with a HPP
illegally purchase a gun
strangulation
smothering
arson
poisoning
bat
pencil/pen
knife
sword
snapping a neck
electrocution

and the list goes on. and i can perform many of those anywhere in the world, I can conceal many of those, etc. So...... why does cc = murder again?



[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:42 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:38:38 PM

^it doesn't even matter if it does or does not deter crime, it is about having the right to protect yourself if you need to

1/30/2009 5:40:27 PM

I know that, just pointing out another positive effect of campus carry

1/30/2009 5:43:19 PM

How the hell do you make people feel safer IF NO ONE KNOWS YOU HAVE A GUN? I won't argue with the fact that people feel safe around cops because they have guns, but THEY are allowed to wear them on their hip and not hide them.

Oh, that's a big list of ways to kill someone. Hey, if someone pulls a gun on you, why don't you try to protect yourself one of those ways?

You've all said you're just gonna run if someone pulls a gun, then why the hell do you need one?



You have to know NC State is not thinking about your right to protect yourself. I'm not being idealistic with this analysis of whether or not you should be able to carry a gun on campus. NC State is covering their own asses, and that means making the 30 or 40 of you in this thread get over the fact that you can't have a weapon.

Your ONLY arguments are, "I should be able to protect myself" and "campus is just like everywhere else, why can't I carry there when I can carry everyone else." When it comes right down to it, there are lots of other places outside campus you can't carry either, get over it. It's sure as hell not gonna change. Why? Because it's going to cost NC State way more than the benefit you'd get from the rule. Your warm and cozy feelings about your safety are irrelevant. Get over yourselves.

You are not that special. You do not have more rights than you're given, and you sure as hell aren't changing my mind on the subject. Those of you who've posted and been cc permit carriers have only shown me that you're the same self-righteous, indignant assholes who try to change the world and serve their own purposes with their own gun-rights tinted version of reality. You've been douche bags and I think with behavior like you've shown in this thread, you should fail one of the background checks that give you your ccp. I don't think you have the moral fiber for it to be trusted with guns.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:45 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:43:50 PM

^^i'm just saying, don't fall for the red herring

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:44 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:44:38 PM

lol, it's the internet. people don't have to be nice/pc.

and this has nothing to do with NC State policy. Campus carry would be a statutory law... so it would be any public campus in NC....

It is my right to bear arms. It is my right to CC. These rights have been wrongfully taken away, slowly, but surely. Yes, there are other places we can't carry, but that doesn't mean we don't argue to carry in those places as well. It used to be that you could carry anywhere. Overreactions and morons have come up with laws to limit where you can carry.

And my right to life, my right to defend my life, my right to safety, is above all other rights.

^I gotcha. I'm just stating what has been observed in the past. Citizens with guns = crime deterrent.

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:48 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:47:58 PM

Money has nothing to do with it really, but i'll go ahead and bite: Why would it cost the university anything to allow concealed carry?

Quote :

"You do not have more rights than you're given, and you sure as hell aren't changing my mind on the subject"

you're right, but I SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHTS GIVEN TO ME BY THE CONSTITUTION. A RIGHT THAT JUST THIS PAST YEAR THE SUPREME COURT AFFIRMED IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT.

Quote :

"You have to know NC State is not thinking about your right to protect yourself. I'm not being idealistic with this analysis of whether or not you should be able to carry a gun on campus. NC State is covering their own asses, and that means making the 30 or 40 of you in this thread get over the fact that you can't have a weapon."

i'll agree that the university probably doesn't think about my safety much, i will agree that they often are acting to cover their ass
how does that lead to your conclusion?

1/30/2009 5:48:39 PM

It's going to cost them a lot of money on the occasions when someone DOES See a "concealed" weapon


And no, you don't get your rights, because time and again you prove you can't be trusted with the responsibility

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:50 PM. Reason : .,]

1/30/2009 5:48:55 PM

^explain how I can't be trusted?
how often do you see a CC'ers weapon in public?

The state of NC, the SBI, and the FBI say I am responsible enough...

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:50 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:52 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:49:27 PM

Keep that up until you die... And then I'll agree you were an exception

1/30/2009 5:51:40 PM

someone's getting fussy because he's backed into a corner with no factual evidence to get him out of it.

places besides educational institutions that you are prohibited from carrying are typically places that traffic money, alcohol, and healthcare, require paid admission for entrance, or are government buildings or property.

odds are you will never see a gun crime in progress, nor will you ever be the victim of violence. unfortunately, that's exactly what is necessary for you to accept a two-sided view of this arguement. for example- i am all for campus carry, but all against carring in bars, concerts/sports games, and courthouses.

we are legally allowed to carry. plain and simple.

oh, and don't add a picture of yourself to your photo gallery. after this thread, if i know who you are, i will be far less likely to consider sticking up for you should you be in any of the aforementioned situations.

1/30/2009 5:53:00 PM

Well I don't plan on:

killing someone
raping someone
committing sexual assault
becoming a felon or fugitive

so, how can I not be trusted. you do realize that in NC you have to get a new CCP every five years? Thus if something happens to cause you to be unfit to CC, then they won't give you a new one...

really, how hard is it not to break the law, especially laws related to sexual and/or violent crimes and DUI?

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:55 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2009 5:53:21 PM

Quote :

"It's going to cost them a lot of money on the occasions when someone DOES See a "concealed" weapon"

it would be inconvenient, but if this is really a problem why doesn't it happen all the time already

1/30/2009 5:55:38 PM

^^ actually you renew every five years. also, the sheriff's office in the county where you are registered keeps tabs on your background check material, so should you stray, they'll be among the first to know.

1/30/2009 5:56:32 PM

^^^^

Hey guess what, NC STate is a place that traffics money and healthcare, and are government buildings or property.


You can't trust people in bars but you can trust thuggish teenagers who will fight at the first sign of a problem?

That sounds like you should either be FOR it or AGAINST it entirely, and not situationally.

Hey, techincally if you have a ccp you aren't supposed to. So I am not worried about it. Also, that's a very childish way to act having that sort of responsibility in your hands, you sure you wanna make claims like that? Maybe you shouldn't carry a gun

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:56 PM. Reason : ^]

[Edited on January 30, 2009 at 5:57 PM. Reason : ^]

1/30/2009 5:56:32 PM

Quote :

"Hey guess what, NC STate is a place that traffics money and healthcare, and are government buildings or property. "

and those that are ok with those restrictions would probably be ok with placing restrictions in the cashiers office and health center

1/30/2009 5:58:18 PM

ALL of the buildings are state property, as well as the space between them

1/30/2009 5:59:14 PM