On Campus Carry

[ExSniper]

In every case of an active shooter (killer) in US schools, no one was killed or injured, other than the perpetrator, after the killer was confronted by armed response. Usually they stopped shooting others and killed themselves or they were taken out by the armed responder. Check out Col. Grossman's articles on this at www.WarriorScienceGroup.com or http://killology.com .
Encourage your state representatives to change the law to allow all SDA permit holders to carry on college campus and elementary/secondary/vocational schools.

 

[rawhide]

In every case of an active shooter (killer) in US schools, no one was killed or injured, other than the perpetrator, after the killer was confronted by armed response. Usually they stopped shooting others and killed themselves or they were taken out by the armed responder. Check out Col. Grossman's articles on this at www.WarriorScienceGroup.com or http://killology.com .
Encourage your state representatives to change the law to allow all SDA permit holders to carry on college campus and elementary/secondary/vocational schools.

Also see www.davekopel.com He has published a research paper on gun free zones.

 

[SevenSixTwo]

This is what I am talking about. I now know that I can ask permission to carry on campus, but I shouldn't have to, and I'm sick of these intellectiual politicians and school administrators ignoring facts so they can continue on with their agenda of control. I wanted to to get a discussion going so that those of us who are active shooters, police, military, etc...can find a way to change the status quo in our state. I know there are people on this forum, or people that we all know, who could point us in the right direction to get the ball rolling. All it took in DC was a few people who gave a darn, it was the same in Chicago. I understand that Heller and McDonald weren't screaming successes, but what exactly were they? We now have judicial precedent declaring that the 2nd amendment is an individual right. I for one think that this is a fantastic first step in protecting our rights from the gungrabbers. The question is what can we do here in Oklahoma? What can we do to carry the momentum of Heller and McDonald? What can we do to promote a 10th amendment declaration like Montana and Tennessee? I don't want to just sit here and hope that we get left alone...

 

[SevenSixTwo]

You are up against an entrenched liberal mindset against guns being carried by responsible adults (notice I did not say "students"). This may be the predominant faculty view.

You may also be up against some self-serving calculation (on the part of college administrators) that the odds of a ccw holder killing an innocent person are greater than the odds of them saving lives. Of course this goes directly against the experience of colleges in others states where ccw holders are allowed to carry concealed. Are administrators willing to consider the experience of other schools allowing ccw? No.

Campus security may believe that they can respond fast enough to handle an active shooter. Think that they would care to accept a challenge to see what their response time really is? Of course not.

Self-defense a basic human right recognized in the second amendment? No, colleges think they are special.

Lots of money and effort is being poured into identifying unstable people before they become active shooters. Can you prove this is wasted? Of course not.

Politicians respect college administrators and see campuses as their turf on which they are the experts.

Don't waste your time asking college presidents for permission to ccw on their campus.

College students can start to change the public mindset by inviting friends out to the range and starting shooting clubs. This is your best option in my opinion.

Oh... and vote for Brogdon for Governor!

Funny thing is that on the campus I plan on attending the security guards don't even carry pepper spray. All they can do is write tickets for illegal parking or speeding. For anything else they call the cops. I totally agree with you about starting shooting clubs and inviting kids out to the range, but that can't be the only thing that we can do...

 

[vvvvvvv]

I understand that Heller and McDonald weren't screaming successes, but what exactly were they? We now have judicial precedent declaring that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.

Actually, they didn't. They only declared the right to own a handgun for self-defense in the home exists in the Second Amendment. All other conceptions of a right to keep and bear arms are subject to the strict scrutiny of the Court via Due Process.

I for one think that this is a fantastic first step in protecting our rights from the gungrabbers.

I think it was a step toward handing over what remains of our right to keep and bear arms to the "gungrabbers". You will see this when Nordyke makes its way up again. Nordyke hinges on the fact that Heller and McDonald consider traditional and longstanding prohibitions as Constitutional, including the prohibition of firearms in "sensitive places" such as government offices, schools, and areas where a larger than usual crowd is gathered.

Justice Thomas had it right. We needed to go back and revisit Slaughter-House. Slaughter-House (and descendant cases) effectively neutered the Privileges and Immunities Clause by basically striking the "immunities" part.

If you want to read more about that, check out the Nordyke thread.



In light of Heller and McDonald, I think the campus carry fight (both college and K-12) just got tougher.

 

[SevenSixTwo]

Actually, they didn't. They only declared the right to own a handgun for self-defense in the home exists in the Second Amendment. All other conceptions of a right to keep and bear arms are subject to the strict scrutiny of the Court via Due Process.



I think it was a step toward handing over what remains of our right to keep and bear arms to the "gungrabbers". You will see this when Nordyke makes its way up again. Nordyke hinges on the fact that Heller and McDonald consider traditional and longstanding prohibitions as Constitutional, including the prohibition of firearms in "sensitive places" such as government offices, schools, and areas where a larger than usual crowd is gathered.

Justice Thomas had it right. We needed to go back and revisit Slaughter-House. Slaughter-House (and descendant cases) effectively neutered the Privileges and Immunities Clause by basically striking the "immunities" part.

If you want to read more about that, check out the Nordyke thread.



In light of Heller and McDonald, I think the campus carry fight (both college and K-12) just got tougher.

I guess I haven't done my jurispridence on this very well. Thanks for the help and the link. I will check it out. So what do you recommend that we do about this? How do we get the courts to revisit Slaughter House? Is it even possible? You have given me food for thought, but a pretty bleak outlook on where we might end up in the very near future. So are we a hopeless dying breed?

 

[vvvvvvv]

I guess I haven't done my jurispridence on this very well. Thanks for the help and the link. I will check it out. So what do you recommend that we do about this? How do we get the courts to revisit Slaughter House? Is it even possible? You have given me food for thought, but a pretty bleak outlook on where we might end up in the very near future. So are we a hopeless dying breed?

I think Nordyke will pretty much be the nail in the coffin on ever revisiting Slaughter-House.

We don't have a Court right now that has the balls for such an endeavor, and I don't think that we ever will. What's sad is they even admitted that Slaughter-House is flawed, but they can't revisit it and keep their precious Due Process stance.

Due Process allows the Courts to control your rights, and that's what this has been about all along... CONTROL. Unfortunately, many Americans are quick to buy the NRA hype that these were somehow victories for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (although, in their view it is, especially considering their history of promoting "responsible" gun control).

Some say that I am just being too pessimistic. Personally, I think I have a firm grasp on reality. I like to read this type of stuff (SCOTUS opinions, legislation, laws) and think about what the next move is in eroding our Rights as Americans. As long as the Courts insist on Due Process, our Rights will be subject to the scrutiny of a few appointed officials.