Do you think college students should be allowed to carry guns on campus?

20 Comments

  • Jann - 10 years ago

    I think all responsible citizens that take a class and get their concealed carry permit should be able to carry a gun in any place that they deem necessary other than courts or government buildings. To get a permit means a background check and a class to learn about guns and laws. Criminals just carry and do what they want without a permit or learning like responsible people do. It is a proven fact that when criminals don't know if a person is armed he/she is less likely to attack someone. Many lives have been saved by a concealed carry person when they or people around them were attacked by criminals. If I'm with a person who carries I feel much safer.

  • Bob - 10 years ago

    WHEN will these anti-gunners look at the Facts and numbers? They claim to be educators, some are our representatives at State Capitals and in D.C. . When are they going to start following the will of the People? We no longer have a Representative Gvt. We have a Gvt. bought and paid for by special interest groups and big money. If everyone in this country carried a gun the crime rate would drop to zero. How many theives would think twice if they knew there was a 99% chance of getting a 45 thru the head for the 7 dollars in a purse?

  • don lavrich - 10 years ago

    its a great idea. as long as the people that are packing have a thorough background check and a mental evaluation. this could prevent another columbine massacre.

  • James - 10 years ago

    I think it's great that students & teachers can now carry!! It levels the playing
    Field & besides that- campus security & the police can't be everywhere at once &
    The criminals carry anyway & don't care about the rules!! & your not a bunch of
    Sheep people-& the bad guy gets the chalk line drawn around him-instead of a
    Bunch of innocent people trying to learn!! I'm not afraid of law abiding citizens carrying -Just the nut-case Felon!!!

  • Thor Odinson - 10 years ago

    Take it from a retired cop who worked in 2 states and 3 cities. Some college toens. We can't respond to a call fast enough--much less "campus cops"--to save a life. I carry concealed all the time--am I special? No

  • Thor Odinson - 10 years ago

    Take it from a retired cop who worked in 2 states and 3 cities. Some college toens. We can't respond to a call fast enough--much less "campus cops"--to save a life. I carry concealed all the time--am I special? No

  • emily - 10 years ago

    Let them carry guns, not bullets though

  • The Redneck - 10 years ago

    I'll tell you what, any one that thinks that they're going to take away America's guns is going to have to look down the receiving end of quite a few of them befor they do. We have a constatutional right to bear arms, guns that is. I beleive that if a college, or business doesn't allow guns, thats their business, and their right to do so... I just wont go there, and I'll call them up and tell them that they're losing my business there because of it, and if enough people start doing that, then you'll start seeing alot of those "No Guns" signs come down. But the government has no business in telling us that, just because they don't think that we need them there, we cant take guns anywere. And if you say any thing about... really anything you'll probly offend somone. It's getting so bad that you just about cant walk down the street and sneeze without offinding somone.

    Lets keep our guns, and our safety, sovernty, and sanity will stay with them...

  • Kris Kirby - 10 years ago

    The simple fact of the matter is that people have a *natural* right to self-defense against aggression. Not all uses of firearms are offensive -- some are defensive. However, to be effective in defensive use, they must be able to be used as quickly as one would use one offensively.

    People don't believe it and have a hard time grasping it -- but when there are more guns, the people are safer and more secure in their possessions. Crime goes down. It doesn't turn into the Wild Wild West... Usually, it was the wild wild west before people started arming themselves.

    We were required by law from 1792 until 1953 to keep a rifle/musket and 50 rounds to be ready for defense of the nation; it was the Militia Act of 1792.

    It's not taking law into your own hands or being a vigilante; when your life is threatened, you have a right to self-defense using any and all things present. Your brain, your muscles, and any tools that allow you to leverage force. Gunpowder, brass, and steel are more effective than steel and muscles. This is why we carry guns and not swords. A 90-lb woman can't weild a broadsword to defend against a 6'5" 300 lb linebacker-sized aggressor. But a .357 Magnum levels the playing field.

    It's not about hatred, it's not about aggression; it's about protecting from those things. It's not about wearing your dick on your belt; it's about being a man and being prepared for anything that comes your way, good or bad.

    Imagine, if you will -- If Bull Connor had been met with M1 rifles instead of unarmed men sitting in a park. It would be the shot heard 'round the world -- not men, women and children sprayed with high-pressure water from hoses and bitten by police dogs.

    It's about civilization, taking responsibility for self, and being a supporter of our society.

  • peg - 10 years ago

    as long as they're 21, and trained, i don't see a problem. i voted no because, school is no place for a gun. it's the place not the right...

  • ONTIME - 10 years ago

    Law as we know it is being undermined by over funded government agencies, this WH administration and a judiciary that seems petrified to stand up for the Constitution. Police have had their hands tied and are being told not to enforce law against ethnic groups that preach violence and overthrow, violate our traditional laws and steal the country blind by getting help from government agencies that have run amuck.
    The laws affecting gun control seem bent on protecting insanity instead of those in need of self defense and the innocent being preyed upon by criminals. Students cannot depend on campus police to detect or protect them from stalkers, rapist, serial killers or campus lunatics but the students are being told to stand down on the right to carry and being set up for unwarranted attacks. When you legally carry the whole idea of premeditated attack by a law breaking individual has sudenly changed, the incentive for a easy kill no longer is there, the probable attack has a much less chance of putting that thought into a working mode or succeeding.

    Right ot carry can put politness, manners and forethought back into a threatened society.

  • Gene - 10 years ago

    This is NOT an open invitation for EVERYONE to carry a concealed wepon. This is to allow those people who already qualify to carry to be able to carry on the campus. These people must meed the QUALIFICATIONS and TRAINING to carry concealed weapons. I would feel safer knowing these people were allowed to carry and armed around me.

  • Jeff Taylor - 10 years ago

    Why would anyone want to take away the students ability to defend themselves?? what are these muppetts thinking??? Gun laws affect only the law abiding,, the notion that a criminal who is willing to commit violent acts would be stopped by a gun law is beyond ridiculous.

  • mitch - 10 years ago

    More guns wrong headead? Strange, the facts and statistics seem to say the exact opposite. More guns=less crime=safer citizens

  • Tortugaveloz - 10 years ago

    "banning guns" is a misleading terms that seems to imply you are banning the guns when in reality you are actually banning only those that obey the law, from carrying guns. You are not banning guns: you are disarming law abiding people while doing nothing to ban guns to criminals. Why would you want to implicitly make things easier for criminals? And who gives you the right to deny me my right to defend my own life against an attacker, using any and all means necessary?

  • peterkuck - 10 years ago

    Oops, I forgot just what in the sam hill is this, a democratic state legislator wants Non-existing laws enforced? Thats what we call tyranny.

  • peterkuck - 10 years ago

    Why would you let some bozo state legislator limit your constitutional rights in this mater, would you let her limit your right to freedom of religon? Would you let her limit your right to free speech? How about letting her her limit your right to due process under the law?

    No, I think you need to limit her desire (not right) to serve in any political office until she learns to respect the Bill of Rights.

  • Orlando - 10 years ago

    You do not make law-abiding people safer by disarming them while criminals carry guns. Common sense.

  • Lazybum - 10 years ago

    Well, I guess any lunatic gun-law breakers that want to thin out the crowd will have to select an different state to lose control in.

    Did you ever notice that the sickos that go on rampages NEVER seem to lose control in places where they might receive return fire?

  • Joey - 10 years ago

    Interesting how anti-gun politicians such as Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, claim to be concerned about "the people's" safety, but when you ask the people what they want, they want more concealed carry, exactly opposite of what D-bags say is the "right" thing to do. Ask yourself if your "rep" really represents you next time you vote.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment