If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   University of Colorado to Students: You're now welcome to have your guns on campus, as long as you don't have them where you live. Have a good day   (npr.org) divider line 86
    More: Asinine, Colorado, Jim Manley, student affairs, graduate students, mass shootings, guns  
•       •       •

3853 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Aug 2012 at 1:38 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-24 09:47:13 AM
Gun free zones... ensuring only criminals have guns.
 
2012-08-24 09:50:26 AM
How is this news? That's exactly how it was when I went to college.

We were required to check all of our guns in at Public Safety and they put them in their safes for us. When we wanted a gun we simply went to Public Safety and asked to be handed our guns. When we were done with them we took them back and asked them to lock them up again.

It's not rocket science and it's not all that big of a hassle.
 
2012-08-24 09:50:56 AM

AndyInvicto: I think one of the bigger issues that no one has mentioned is increasing trend of students coming to school who have mental/emotional issues. There is nothing that requires them to disclose if they have any problems. I've been working in housing at a university for about 5 years now, and I can tell you that suicide ideation is a very, very common occurance. One of the only reasons that you don't hear about more suicides on college campuses as you do is because students who attempt it aren't successful. Having access to a gun greatly increases the chance for a completed suicide attempt (there's no going back once you pull a trigger). It's the same reason that men are more likely to complete a suicide attempt then women because they are also more likely to use a gun.

TL:DR-guns shouldn't be on college campuses because of an increasing trend for students to come to school with mental or emotional trauma already present.


Your argument may be more compelling were you to reference actual data in support of it; as an example, if your claims are credible then substantial supporting data should be available from all state-funded colleges in Utah.
 
2012-08-24 09:52:45 AM

ha-ha-guy: The only gun ban I never encountered was in a couple labs where the rules were "no watches, jewelry, gun holsters, or anything else that could snag on the machinery".


How might my SmartCarry holster "snag on the machinery"?

/Difficulty: I would be wearing pants at all times.
 
2012-08-24 10:01:48 AM

Dimensio: ha-ha-guy: The only gun ban I never encountered was in a couple labs where the rules were "no watches, jewelry, gun holsters, or anything else that could snag on the machinery".

How might my SmartCarry holster "snag on the machinery"?

/Difficulty: I would be wearing pants at all times.


Where is the fun in that?
 
2012-08-24 10:27:28 AM

Joe Blowme: Dimensio: ha-ha-guy: The only gun ban I never encountered was in a couple labs where the rules were "no watches, jewelry, gun holsters, or anything else that could snag on the machinery".

How might my SmartCarry holster "snag on the machinery"?

/Difficulty: I would be wearing pants at all times.

Where is the fun in that?


"Fun" must be balanced with reducing risk of objects "snagging on the machinery".
 
2012-08-24 10:35:52 AM
In what way is this even a controversial issue? If you live somewhere that isn't your own personal property, you have to conform to the requirements set by the property owners or managers of that community. Any 2nd Amendment warrgarble has to come into conflict with the right of property owners to do what they want with the people who they choose to allow to live on their property. Unless you can come up with a reason why a public university, which has a greater level of legal responsibility for its tenants than most private property owners would, should have less rights to go with those greater responsibilities, this isn't even a hard argument.
 
2012-08-24 10:35:52 AM

cryinoutloud: I don't know how a lot of you can sleep at night. Doesn't your hold on your gun loosen then? You could be killed! Why are you sleeping?


How do you manage to leave your house with your crippling fear of armed, law abiding citizens?
 
2012-08-24 10:36:44 AM

Mr. Ekshun: flak attack: thomps: i can't think of a better place for guns than a freshman dorm where kids are experiencing the rigors of college, a lack of supervision, unlimited alcohol and drugs, and the social stresses of college for the first time.

Freshmen can't get concealed-carry licenses. You have to be 21. That's going to be mostly 3rd+ year students.

I didn't fact-check that because it's largely irrelevant. In Colorado you can open-carry if you're 18+.

How many gun shows have ever been robbed at gunpoint? How many banks?


But not on campus. You can only bring a gun onto campus if you are a cop or a concealed carry permit holder.
 
2012-08-24 10:39:28 AM

Noticeably F.A.T.: cryinoutloud: I don't know how a lot of you can sleep at night. Doesn't your hold on your gun loosen then? You could be killed! Why are you sleeping?

How do you manage to leave your house with your crippling fear of armed, law abiding citizens?


No, no... we're not afraid of you. We're baffled by your level of insecurity.
 
2012-08-24 10:39:30 AM

Leeds: How is this news? That's exactly how it was when I went to college.

We were required to check all of our guns in at Public Safety and they put them in their safes for us. When we wanted a gun we simply went to Public Safety and asked to be handed our guns. When we were done with them we took them back and asked them to lock them up again.

It's not rocket science and it's not all that big of a hassle.


Now you can request to be put in family housing, where you can store your gun in your room rather than with campus police.
 
2012-08-24 10:47:00 AM

Skirl Hutsenreiter: Mr. Ekshun: flak attack: thomps: i can't think of a better place for guns than a freshman dorm where kids are experiencing the rigors of college, a lack of supervision, unlimited alcohol and drugs, and the social stresses of college for the first time.

Freshmen can't get concealed-carry licenses. You have to be 21. That's going to be mostly 3rd+ year students.

I didn't fact-check that because it's largely irrelevant. In Colorado you can open-carry if you're 18+.

How many gun shows have ever been robbed at gunpoint? How many banks?

But not on campus. You can only bring a gun onto campus if you are a cop or a concealed carry permit holder.


To elaborate, state law bans having a gun on any school, university, or seminary campus, with limited exceptions, one of them being concealed carry holders. So 18 year old freshmen can't open carry on campus.
 
2012-08-24 10:48:48 AM

Skirl Hutsenreiter: Leeds: How is this news? That's exactly how it was when I went to college.

We were required to check all of our guns in at Public Safety and they put them in their safes for us. When we wanted a gun we simply went to Public Safety and asked to be handed our guns. When we were done with them we took them back and asked them to lock them up again.

It's not rocket science and it's not all that big of a hassle.

Now you can request to be put in family housing, where you can store your gun in your room rather than with campus police.


That's my experience too. Once I moved out of the dorms and into the Fraternity house I didn't check my guns any more.
 
2012-08-24 10:48:53 AM

XveryYpettyZ: No, no... we're not afraid of you. We're baffled by your level of insecurity.


Uh huh. It's not fear, it's a different response than yours to a potential threat. Not closing your eyes and yelling 'You can't hurt me if I can't see you!" does not mean a person is constantly pissing themselves, it means they decided that a different approach to the issue is probably going to be more affective.
 
2012-08-24 10:57:34 AM
I think the solution to the gun-free-zone and rampage killing correlation is simple.
Make the property owner liable for security breaches.

If you are at the airport, in a federal building, or in a classroom where security is provided then you don't need guns. You won't need them because if the security details fails to protect you, you can sue them.
In other places you are on your own and responsible for your own security. The property owner isn't liable for what happens.

...and there you go. Financial incentive for the powers that be to do more than post a gun free zone sign if they really give a damn about their customers.
 
2012-08-24 11:02:18 AM

way south: I think the solution to the gun-free-zone and rampage killing correlation is simple.
Make the property owner liable for security breaches.

If you are at the airport, in a federal building, or in a classroom where security is provided then you don't need guns. You won't need them because if the security details fails to protect you, you can sue them.
In other places you are on your own and responsible for your own security. The property owner isn't liable for what happens.

...and there you go. Financial incentive for the powers that be to do more than post a gun free zone sign if they really give a damn about their customers.


You really live in a wild-west fantasy, don't you? You're on your own? Yep, there have to be armed guards available at all times otherwise you're unsafe, citizen.
 
2012-08-24 11:36:56 AM

XveryYpettyZ: way south: I think the solution to the gun-free-zone and rampage killing correlation is simple.
Make the property owner liable for security breaches.

If you are at the airport, in a federal building, or in a classroom where security is provided then you don't need guns. You won't need them because if the security details fails to protect you, you can sue them.
In other places you are on your own and responsible for your own security. The property owner isn't liable for what happens.

...and there you go. Financial incentive for the powers that be to do more than post a gun free zone sign if they really give a damn about their customers.

You really live in a wild-west fantasy, don't you? You're on your own? Yep, there have to be armed guards available at all times otherwise you're unsafe, citizen.


A sign makes you feel safe?
 
2012-08-24 11:40:16 AM

StoPPeRmobile: XveryYpettyZ: way south: I think the solution to the gun-free-zone and rampage killing correlation is simple.
Make the property owner liable for security breaches.

If you are at the airport, in a federal building, or in a classroom where security is provided then you don't need guns. You won't need them because if the security details fails to protect you, you can sue them.
In other places you are on your own and responsible for your own security. The property owner isn't liable for what happens.

...and there you go. Financial incentive for the powers that be to do more than post a gun free zone sign if they really give a damn about their customers.

You really live in a wild-west fantasy, don't you? You're on your own? Yep, there have to be armed guards available at all times otherwise you're unsafe, citizen.

A sign makes you feel safe?


Nope. But I'm not the one hyperventilating about this restriction on guns in a farking dorm, am I?
 
2012-08-24 11:42:55 AM

Arcanum: fusillade762: "The Aurora theater where the Batman shooting occurred also had a gun-free policy,"

I think this has become the Godwin's Law of gun threads.

Why? It's a good point.

A lot of mass shootings are in gun free zones. That's because the psychos who commit mass shootings are attracted to defenseless targets. That's why when people discuss the difficulty of defending oneself in a shooting, pointing out the carnage that would ensue, they may be missing the point that many attacks would have been prevented.



If the shooter targets gun-free zones, and you eliminate half the gun-free zones, the shooter can simply go to the remaining half of the locations, instead. That doesn't prevent the shooting so much as relocates it.
 
2012-08-24 11:43:29 AM

XveryYpettyZ: You really live in a wild-west fantasy, don't you? You're on your own? Yep, there have to be armed guards available at all times otherwise you're unsafe, citizen.


Explain to me this then:
Say you are walking down the street and a stone hits you on your head. You look around and don't see who threw it, or where it came from. Can you sue the state for not saving you from that injury?

In most places the cops are not held accountable for not-saving you from a crime. You can hope they come when you call and catch the criminal, but they aren't liable if they don't. You are effectively on your own.

Now if you enter a building and a piece of its ceiling falls down and hits you, is the building owner liable?
Hell's yes. If he didn't warn you that this was a hardhat area, he can be sued for injuries caused by his building.

I'm only going a step further to suggest that if he has taken security upon himself, by telling you this is a gun-free zone, he should be liable if someone is attacked on his property. Especially if the attacker exploited poor security measures to do more damage.

Putting up a velvet rope is as good as taking down a "hardhat" sign.
 
2012-08-24 11:43:52 AM

Dimensio: AndyInvicto: I think one of the bigger issues that no one has mentioned is increasing trend of students coming to school who have mental/emotional issues. There is nothing that requires them to disclose if they have any problems. I've been working in housing at a university for about 5 years now, and I can tell you that suicide ideation is a very, very common occurance. One of the only reasons that you don't hear about more suicides on college campuses as you do is because students who attempt it aren't successful. Having access to a gun greatly increases the chance for a completed suicide attempt (there's no going back once you pull a trigger). It's the same reason that men are more likely to complete a suicide attempt then women because they are also more likely to use a gun.

TL:DR-guns shouldn't be on college campuses because of an increasing trend for students to come to school with mental or emotional trauma already present.

Your argument may be more compelling were you to reference actual data in support of it; as an example, if your claims are credible then substantial supporting data should be available from all state-funded colleges in Utah.


Well, Here is some information by NIMH about suicide in general. Their statistics show 50% of men who commit suicide use a gun- Link

Here is one article detailaing severe mental illness by the APA- Link
I'm sure there is more detailed information out there btw, but I am currently at work and my lunch break ends soon.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:15 PM

Sim Tree: If the shooter targets gun-free zones, and you eliminate half the gun-free zones, the shooter can simply go to the remaining half of the locations, instead. That doesn't prevent the shooting so much as relocates it.


That's not exactly an awesome argument against eliminating gun free zones.
 
2012-08-24 12:39:50 PM
As a private entity, CU Boulder is at liberty to allow (or not allow) concealed carry in their dorms and other residences. Gun nuts are free to attend a different university, or none at all.

The solution to gun violence, surprisingly, is not more guns .... incidents like the Aurora shooting are not going to be prevented by gun owners, nor are they the real issue, it's the 30 people a day who get shot by random people over trivial stuff, like complaining when the gun owner's dog shiats on their lawn, or walking with a bag of Skittles.
 
2012-08-24 12:46:38 PM

XveryYpettyZ: StoPPeRmobile: XveryYpettyZ: way south: I think the solution to the gun-free-zone and rampage killing correlation is simple.
Make the property owner liable for security breaches.

If you are at the airport, in a federal building, or in a classroom where security is provided then you don't need guns. You won't need them because if the security details fails to protect you, you can sue them.
In other places you are on your own and responsible for your own security. The property owner isn't liable for what happens.

...and there you go. Financial incentive for the powers that be to do more than post a gun free zone sign if they really give a damn about their customers.

You really live in a wild-west fantasy, don't you? You're on your own? Yep, there have to be armed guards available at all times otherwise you're unsafe, citizen.

A sign makes you feel safe?

Nope. But I'm not the one hyperventilating about this restriction on guns in a farking dorm, am I?


Fair enough.
 
2012-08-24 12:48:52 PM

AndyInvicto: Dimensio: AndyInvicto: I think one of the bigger issues that no one has mentioned is increasing trend of students coming to school who have mental/emotional issues. There is nothing that requires them to disclose if they have any problems. I've been working in housing at a university for about 5 years now, and I can tell you that suicide ideation is a very, very common occurance. One of the only reasons that you don't hear about more suicides on college campuses as you do is because students who attempt it aren't successful. Having access to a gun greatly increases the chance for a completed suicide attempt (there's no going back once you pull a trigger). It's the same reason that men are more likely to complete a suicide attempt then women because they are also more likely to use a gun.

TL:DR-guns shouldn't be on college campuses because of an increasing trend for students to come to school with mental or emotional trauma already present.

Your argument may be more compelling were you to reference actual data in support of it; as an example, if your claims are credible then substantial supporting data should be available from all state-funded colleges in Utah.

Well, Here is some information by NIMH about suicide in general. Their statistics show 50% of men who commit suicide use a gun- Link

Here is one article detailaing severe mental illness by the APA- Link
I'm sure there is more detailed information out there btw, but I am currently at work and my lunch break ends soon.


Well then, we need to place the same restriction on driving an automobile.
 
2012-08-24 01:28:21 PM

AndyInvicto: Dimensio: AndyInvicto: I think one of the bigger issues that no one has mentioned is increasing trend of students coming to school who have mental/emotional issues. There is nothing that requires them to disclose if they have any problems. I've been working in housing at a university for about 5 years now, and I can tell you that suicide ideation is a very, very common occurance. One of the only reasons that you don't hear about more suicides on college campuses as you do is because students who attempt it aren't successful. Having access to a gun greatly increases the chance for a completed suicide attempt (there's no going back once you pull a trigger). It's the same reason that men are more likely to complete a suicide attempt then women because they are also more likely to use a gun.

TL:DR-guns shouldn't be on college campuses because of an increasing trend for students to come to school with mental or emotional trauma already present.

Your argument may be more compelling were you to reference actual data in support of it; as an example, if your claims are credible then substantial supporting data should be available from all state-funded colleges in Utah.

Well, Here is some information by NIMH about suicide in general. Their statistics show 50% of men who commit suicide use a gun- Link

Here is one article detailaing severe mental illness by the APA- Link
I'm sure there is more detailed information out there btw, but I am currently at work and my lunch break ends soon.


Altering the subject of discussion from concealed weapons permit holders carrying firearms on college campuses (when not prohibited from doing so by policy) to an irrelevant subject of suicide rates amongst males will not support your position.
 
2012-08-24 03:48:12 PM
I'm a grad student at CU Boulder, and a gun owner. This is pretty cool in my book, because in typical Boulder fashion I believe in individual freedoms. That includes the freedom to have a gun. I don't carry (because it's pointless and dangerous) but that should be a choice people make for themselves.

Guns are an important part of American culture, and their recreational use should be encouraged. Hopefully CU is doing this through their new policy.

/my $0.02, as someone who is actually effected
 
2012-08-24 04:23:37 PM

dolphinburger: I don't carry (because it's pointless and dangerous)


The pointless part I don't have an issue with (I don't agree with it, but I don't take issue with it), but I am kinda curious about where you are getting dangerous. With the right equipment, carrying a firearm isn't significantly more dangerous than leaving locked in a case.
 
2012-08-24 04:39:35 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: dolphinburger: I don't carry (because it's pointless and dangerous)

The pointless part I don't have an issue with (I don't agree with it, but I don't take issue with it), but I am kinda curious about where you are getting dangerous. With the right equipment, carrying a firearm isn't significantly more dangerous than leaving locked in a case.


No shiat! WTF is dangerous?

A bathroom floor is dangerous but you don't hear people yelling about bathroom safety.

It a tool.
 
2012-08-24 05:57:02 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: dolphinburger: I don't carry (because it's pointless and dangerous)

The pointless part I don't have an issue with (I don't agree with it, but I don't take issue with it), but I am kinda curious about where you are getting dangerous. With the right equipment, carrying a firearm isn't significantly more dangerous than leaving locked in a case.


Firearms are inherently dangerous. If you own weapons and don't understand this, you are owning them irresponsibly. I don't claim this isn't true to some extent for everything (rubber ducks, bathroom floors, eating utensils), but it is especially the case for weapons. I'm not saying that there's no appropriate time for concealed carry: there absolutely is and I'm an advocate as I mentioned earlier. But responsible use of any weapon means knowing both when to use and when to carry (as well as tons of other safety stuff). In my particular case (around Boulder, the whitest city on the planet) there is little reason for me to carry. And yes I suppose that was racism, I'm not proud of it but I'm not going to deny it either.
 
2012-08-24 09:27:03 PM

dolphinburger: Firearms are inherently dangerous.


They are only as dangerous as you make them. I've been handling/using guns regularly for the last two decades, and carrying for the last 6-7 years or so. I've never even come close to getting hurt/hurting someone. That is because I've always been careful.

There is nothing 'inherently dangerous' about a gun. I will admit that their potential ability to cause damage tends to be quite a bit higher than most household objects, but that's not the same thing. 'Inherently dangerous' implies that there is a higher than normal chance of getting hurt, and that's simply not true. You are as likely to hurt yourself with a gun as you are with anything else you use, the only difference is how badly you're going to be hurt.
 
2012-08-24 09:39:23 PM

dolphinburger: Firearms are inherently dangerous. If you own weapons and don't understand this, you are owning them irresponsibly.


Meh, scardy cat. So are cars. Yet morans drive with on ehand on their phone and one carressing the wheel.

Pansies.

Stick it right up your ass.
 
2012-08-25 10:09:50 AM

Arcanum: fusillade762: "The Aurora theater where the Batman shooting occurred also had a gun-free policy,"

I think this has become the Godwin's Law of gun threads.

Why? It's a good point.

A lot of mass shootings are in gun free zones. That's because the psychos who commit mass shootings are attracted to defenseless targets. That's why when people discuss the difficulty of defending oneself in a shooting, pointing out the carnage that would ensue, they may be missing the point that many attacks would have been prevented.


Agreed. That's also why people prefer shooting up churches instead of NRA rallies, and suburban schools instead of dangerous ghettos. Attempting to shoot up places where the public is more likely to be armed tends to put a damper on the would-be shooters.

img21.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-25 01:12:23 PM
Surely there is no problem with violence in this country that cannot be solved by more guns, and more access to guns!

I cannot think of another country that is so utterly lacking in guns! Whatever will will do with the endless numbers of people running around here helpless and unarmed?

I am sure when every student, petite female and toddler has easy and unrestricted access to firearms we will all be perfectly safe!
 
2012-08-25 01:51:35 PM

MasterPlanz: I am sure when every student, petite female and toddler has easy and unrestricted access to firearms we will all be perfectly safe!


Why is it that only anti-gun folks float this idea?
 
2012-08-25 07:23:22 PM
we just need more laws to stop the insanity!!!!
keep drinking the koolaide!
 
Displayed 36 of 86 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report