Empty holsters on campus

[Ret10Echo]

Students Strap On Empty Holsters to Protest Gun Restrictions on Campus
Wednesday, October 24, 2007

By Melissa Underwood


College students across the country have been strapping empty holsters around their waists this week to protest laws that prohibit concealed weapons on campus, citing concerns over campus shootings.

"People who would otherwise be able to defend themselves are left defenseless when on campus," said Ethan Bratt, a graduate student wearing an empty holster this week on the campus of Seattle Pacific University.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, a group of college students, parents and citizens who organized after the deadly shootings at Virginia Tech University in April, launched the protest.

A national debate over gun laws on campus began in the wake of those shootings, in which a deranged student killed 32 people in a classroom building before committing suicide. It was the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

Campuses are prime targets for people intent on harming others because laws prohibit concealed weapons there, Bratt said.

But others believe college is no place for firearms.

"You don't like the fact that you can't have a gun on your college campus? Drop out of school," said Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

When someone pulls out a gun and starts firing in a crowded environment, it's more likely that additional victims will be harmed, Hamm said.

"Let's be grateful that those holsters are empty," he said.

A group of 12 students chose to wear empty holsters to class this week at the University of Idaho as part of the nationwide protest.

Aled Baker, a junior, said he loses his constitutional right to protect himself and others when he steps on campus.

"It's null and void when you go on campus," the mechanical engineering student said.

Baker, a sportsman and hunter, has a license to carry a concealed handgun and hopes the protest will get people talking about the issue.

Many universities, like George Washington University, prohibit carrying concealed handguns on campuses.

"We do not allow weapons on campus for the safety and security of our student body and faculty," said Tracy Schario, spokeswoman for George Washington University in Washington, D.C.

Justin Turner, a senior in criminology and history at Florida State University, also wants the ability to carry a concealed handgun on campus.

"I'm hoping that people actually realize that this is something that college students are serious about moving forward and realize that it's not about taking the law into your own hands; it's about taking personal responsibility for yourself," said Turner, chairman of the Florida State chapter of Students for the Second Amendment.

Congress is considering legislation that would tighten background checks and give states funding to submit information to a national database that would prevent guns from being sold to dangerous buyers. House lawmakers passed the legislation, but it remains in the Senate.

"It fixes the problem that the states are not submitting the necessary records of people who have been found by a court to be dangerously mentally ill," Hamm said.

Family members and survivors of the Virginia Tech shootings recently visited members of Congress to urge lawmakers to pass the legislation they believe could help prevent future tragedies.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304806,00.html

[82ndtrooper]

I'm surprised that they have not been detained and asked questions by campus security. It's halloween and it's just apparel.

I suppose we'll hear of that later.

[Tuukka]

You don't like the fact that you can't have a gun on your college campus? Drop out of school," said Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

When someone pulls out a gun and starts firing in a crowded environment, it's more likely that additional victims will be harmed, Hamm said.

"Let's be grateful that those holsters are empty," he said

Jesus f***ing christ, this really rates #1 at "The all time stupidest words uttered by an anti-gun sheep"

Drop out of school, right..

And if a crazed lunatic starts firing on innocent, defenseless students, gee Mr. Rocket Scientist, you dont think that "additional victims will be harmed"

[Maytime]

A group of 12 students chose to wear empty holsters to class this week at the University of Idaho as part of the nationwide protest.

Aled Baker, a junior, said he loses his constitutional right to protect himself and others when he steps on campus.

"It's null and void when you go on campus," the mechanical engineering student said.

Baker, a sportsman and hunter, has a license to carry a concealed handgun and hopes the protest will get people talking about the issue.


Aled is one of my best friends, and I am one of those 12 students who are wearing empty holsters this week here at UI. I'm glad we got some sort of media attention.

[82ndtrooper]

Jesus f***ing christ, this really rates #1 at "The all time stupidest words uttered by an anti-gun sheep"

Drop out of school, right..

And if a crazed lunatic starts firing on innocent, defenseless students, gee Mr. Rocket Scientist, you dont think that "additional victims will be harmed"

Peter Hamm is notorious for opening his mouth and inserting his left foot when he is quoted from the Brady camp.

This is merely the ill concieved perception of gun owners by the Brady following and their staff. "Thank God those holsters are empty" However, if your in uniform, serving as campus security then thank god their stuffed with a firearm :rolleyes: Why ? because their trained to use them. Really ? Where? Who trained them ? When was their last qualification and how was that qaulification conducted ? Just because you wear the pistol on your hip doe's not qualify them to be any better prepared than you or I when faced with a deadly threat. I'd go so far as to say that on my campus, I am probably more trained than any one of the campus security police. I can document my training and it isn't just a week at the academy. I'm no super jedi master SF soldier or Navy SEAL, but my training has come from those very same soldiers and sailors. I'm sure some here will agree with me and some will not.

I have heard Peter Hamm say that "If teachers had guns on campus they could lose them" I have to wonder where they find representatives like Peter Hamm for their cause. The perception is that all we gun owners want to do is shoot something with two legs. That we'll be become gun toting crazed nuts due to the fact that a gun has super cult like powers that whisper in our ear "shoot someone now, it's fun"

When Peter Hamm is faced with statistics and facts from sources like UCR or USDOJ concerning violent crime with guns he generally resorts to attacks on gun owners, rediculous scenarios where the gun owner would disarmed, and that the gun owner would resort to shooting into a crowded area.

The lack of understanding is much like that of zombies in "Night of the living dead" We're all just a bunch of crazed gun nuts and we will cause more harm than good. Of course there is no qaulified or qauntifed data to support his rediculous claims of how you or I would respond in a deadly threat situation.

In other words, Peter Hamm just makes stuff up as he goes along during debates concerning the RKBA and it's protection under the 2nd Amendment. If the only debate talking point that Peter Hamm and the Brady bunch have is guessing on human behavior, then I'm afraid their entire cause is a colossal waste of contributors dollars. They have alway's had scant data, influenced their data with eronious numbers included that should not be, and flat out lied about crime data in the past. What makes today any more valuable for them ?

Remember, Jim Brady was shot with a .22Lr revolver, not a Tec-Nine, Glock, H&K, UZI, MP5, AR15, SKS, SPR, M60, .50 BMG etc.

[The Reaper]

If students who want to carry guns can just drop out, could we have separate (but equal) school for students and faculty who believed in self-defense?

Why not just tell students who are afraid of the guns to just drop out?

And maybe illegal immigrants will just go home?

I wonder if he knows how many fellow students are packing illegally around him every day?

TR

[echoes]

If students who want to carry guns can just drop out, could we have separate (but equal) school for students and faculty who believed in self-defense?

Why not just tell students who are afraid of the guns to just drop out?

And maybe illegal immigrants will go home?

TR

TR,

Well said Sir!

I know that a couple of my Profs were carrying. Hell, one of them had a bayonette in class (for discussion)...Said Profs of course taught American History, one was former CIA, the other prior Army.

All-in-all, If a fellow classmate has a permit, bring it! The hallways and stairwell from my third floor classrooms are mighty tight.

JHMO,

Holly

[hunteran]

Why doesn't Peter Hamm just leave America? It fits his logic (or lack thereof)

[CoLawman]

Aled is one of my best friends, and I am one of those 12 students who are wearing empty holsters this week here at UI. I'm glad we got some sort of media attention.

Good for you and your friends Maytime!

[peepee1]

I wonder if he knows how many fellow students are packing illegally around him every day?

TR


I know I did/do... I guess I would rather apologize for defending myself and living and pay the price. Its better than not doing so and dying... IMHO.

[82ndtrooper]

One thing I am wondering though, let's say on one of these anti-gun campuses some nutjob draws a gun and starts shooting people, and someone else pulls out a gun and shoots that person, thus saving many more people, since that person technically violated the campus law, will they still go to jail? Or would the law take into consideration the 1) stupidity of the campus rules and 2) that the person saved lives...?

It depends entirely on the outcome, at least in my opinion.

I'm currently attending a University, though I'm constricted largely to the biological and medical sciences building due to the nature of my academic studies. This university is of course a "no gun zone" Although the campus chief of security has stated to me that my firearms are in fact allowed to be locked in my glove box of my personally owned vehicle per states rights under our current states constitution. In other words, where I'm usually parked, is roughly 100 yards from the front door of the sciences and medical building.

I have often thought of just tucking my pistol with an extra mag into my carry bag in it's side pouch. This is of course highly illegal and I do not carry even though It has crossed my mind. No one would know, and it may save my life and others if another campus shooting should take place in that particular building. The outcome of such an act would dictate the punishment or lack there of if I were to exercise an engagment with positive results. Negative results are surely going to get me or anyone else the full treatment of the judicial system.

I'm not confident that I could place a surgical shot from the second floor down into the atrium of the cafeteria if a crazed nut was holding his ex girlfriend at gun point. However, if the crowd disapated in the chaos of the gun fire, it just may well leave an open and protected back drop to engage the gun man from higher ground. If I stopped his assault with two shots to the chest and only one of his targets was injured then I suppose the public court of opinion would play into my favor. If I miss and engage with a poor situational awareness of the back drop then I'm probably going to face the full force of the judicial system.

We're talking about "heroism affect" But, we also be talking about the "criminal affect" We just may become the poster boy for further gun control and infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. Or, we could become the reason that legislation is passed to allow individuals the right to carry on a college or university campus.

I didn't really answer your question, but it's something I've thought of many times since returning to school for another degree. Maybe one of the attorney's here can give a brief but detailed outline of how this may play out in the court of law and the court of public opinion.


Disclaimer: I am in now way shape or form advocating the illegal carry of a concealed deadly weapon on any college or university campus. I strongly urge all gun owners and concealed carry permit holders to obey current gun laws and no gun zone regulations per federal and or state law.

[Defender968]

Always remember that most laws and the enforcement thereof is left up to two sets of people, District attorneys who try cases and LEO's who bring the bad guys and their cases to the DA's. Either of which can be swayed either towards prosecution or against it by common sense, and/or public opinion/outrage. Think where there's a will there's a way... to either prosecute or keep from doing so.

Now the reason I bring that up is if I as an LEO were to go to a school shooting situation at a college campus, where A. crazed lunatic starts shooting at fellow students and other innocent bystanders, and where B law abiding student/citizen with no criminal history draws his concealed although illegal hand gun and drops A where he's standing without collateral loss of life or injury. I'm not arresting B, I will most likely detain him, I will secure his gun, I will question him at the station to be sure, but I'm not arresting him, and I would venture to say no DA who wants to keep his job would press to have charges brought either.

Now with that being said I'm not telling anyone to go out and carry illegally. If you do realize IF you save the day you'll probably be ok, all laws can be set aside by the action or inaction of one or more of the right people. Also keep in mind the converse side of that equation, if you miss and hit an innocent bystander..... well you're screwed, period. You'll lose everything, to include your freedom most likely. Just my .02

[CoLawman]

[QUOTE=Defender968;186717]Always remember that most laws and the enforcement thereof is left up to two sets of people, District attorneys who try cases and LEO's who bring the bad guys and their cases to the DA's. Either of which can be swayed either towards prosecution or against it by common sense, and/or public opinion/outrage. Think where there's a will there's a way... to either prosecute or keep from doing so.

I understand what you are saying but I would disagree with you. The decision of a person's guilt rests with the jury or with the judge (trial by court). Their role(s) are the most important in our system.

In this particular scenario the officer investigates and presents the facts, regardless of his personal feelings. The District Attorney makes the determination on whether to proceed with the case based on the facts, evidence, and elements of the crime presented. If the elements of the crime are provable he is required to bring the case forward, again regardless of his personal feelings.

[The Reaper]

I understand what you are saying but I would disagree with you. The decision of a person's guilt rests with the jury or with the judge (trial by court). Their role(s) are the most important in our system.

In this particular scenario the officer investigates and presents the facts, regardless of his personal feelings. The District Attorney makes the determination on whether to proceed with the case based on the facts, evidence, and elements of the crime presented. If the elements of the crime are provable he is required to bring the case forward, again regardless of his personal feelings.

I would say that you have described the situation as intended, which unfortunately suffers in practical application.

Witness the numbers of cases mishandled every year, like the Duke Lacrosse rape case.

Furthermore, our founding fathers felt that the jury could try the law as well as the accused, and find the defendant not guilty if they felt the law was unjust. Modern jurisprudence denies and discourages that practice.

TR

[mdb23]

[QUOTE]

I understand what you are saying but I would disagree with you. The decision of a person's guilt rests with the jury or with the judge (trial by court). Their role(s) are the most important in our system.


To second TR, the DA is the single most powerful and important person in the CJ system.... hands down.

The DA has discretion on whether or not charges are filed (regardless of the evidence or lack thereof), what charges are filed, whether to offer a plea or force a trial, what sentence the state asks for (within the guidelines), etc......

He can drop or file a case at any time, issue an arrest warrant and have you brought in, and Detectives and Investigators have to go through him in order to get a search warrant.

I work in the system, and it is my position that the DA is the most powerful person in the entire chain. The jury? Hell, they are just along for the ride. They only hear what the judge allows them to hear, and make decisions based upon half assed evidence and the desire to get home before "Dancing with the Stars" is on.....

Just my .02

[dmgedgoods]

#

[Fonzy]

How about edged weapons? I was pulled over by campus police for having a pocket knife. Being honest with the officer, I told him I had an additional blade on my person and one in my pack. Upon further discussion, he found out I was a soldier and dismissed me, telling me ANY edged weapon on campus was illegal. I was stunned to hear that, even for a California school. Where can the line of self defense be drawn? Concealed guns on campus here would give people heart attacks, but this seems to raise some serious concerns...The first concern being my personal safety.

Kudos to the students standing up for what they believe in and what is supposed be our right as an American. Too bad nothing more than bad press will probably come from it. :mad:

Shawn

Ever think of carrying an extendible asp? Not edged and would give you a little extra reach, not to mention people tend to think twice when you flick your wrist and it extends out a foot.

[dmgedgoods]

#

[Defender968]

[QUOTE]

The decision of a person's guilt rests with the jury or with the judge (trial by court).

In this particular scenario the officer investigates and presents the facts, regardless of his personal feelings. The District Attorney makes the determination on whether to proceed with the case based on the facts, evidence, and elements of the crime presented. If the elements of the crime are provable he is required to bring the case forward, again regardless of his personal feelings.

Sir I see what you're saying however I never said anything of a person’s guilt or innocence that alone is left up to a jury, however whether they ever see the case is up to other folks, specifically the DA and to a lesser extent the LEO's involved. What you've said is technically correct in terms of the way the system is supposed to work. But with your experience you now that is not how it works in practical application.

The reality is that the way the report is written specifically and the "facts" and I use the term loosely that make it to the DA through either the report or the news in this type of case are what will determine what direction the case takes. And as others have said the DA ultimately holds nearly all the power. If he wants to push the issue he can, or he can drop it, regardless of the merits of the case. The Duke Lacrosse case is a perfect example.

[JustinW20]

dmgedgoods:

You indicated that you were living in California. Be careful. Expandable batons are considered deadly weapons and are illegal for anyone other than law enforcement in our fine state. You’re much better off with simple pocket knife. Might get hassled at the university, but at least you won't be doing time for carrying a concealed weapon.

[dmgedgoods]

#

[MAB32]

dmgedgoods,

Have you looked into one of these?

http://innercityandtravelsurvival.com/_wsn/page2.html