Monday, February 21, 2011

Texas to pass guns on campus

Texas is set to pass guns on campus allowing HCP holders to carry.

From the Huffington post article...

Texas has become a prime battleground for the issue because of its gun culture and its size, with 38 public universities and more than 500,000 students. It would become the second state, following Utah, to pass such a broad-based law. Colorado gives colleges the option and several have allowed handguns.

Supporters of the legislation argue that gun violence on campuses, such as the mass shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007 and Northern Illinois in 2008, show that the best defense against a gunman is students who can shoot back.

"It's strictly a matter of self-defense," said state Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio. "I don't ever want to see repeated on a Texas college campus what happened at Virginia Tech, where some deranged, suicidal madman goes into a building and is able to pick off totally defenseless kids like sitting ducks."

Until the Virginia Tech incident, the worst college shooting in U.S. history occurred at the University of Texas, when sniper Charles Whitman went to the top of the administration tower in 1966 and killed 16 people and wounded dozens. Last September, a University of Texas student fired several shots from an assault rifle before killing himself.


Hat tip: Ben Cunningham

10 comments:

  1. I trained police force should take care of these issues, not vigilantes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why is someone who get a carry permit and carries a vigilante? So if you care about your own defense, you are a vigilante? Grow up. The police have no legal requirement to protect you. Plus, the police can't stay with you 24/7. You alone are responsible for your own safety. Stop punishing those of us who understand this fact and do something about it because you "feel" unsafe when a law abiding citizen is next to you with a firearm.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Matt
    The police DO have a legal requirement to protect you. What I fear is the very distinct and experienced reality of friendly fire. Being a combat veteran I have a full appreciation of the concept of "line of fire". Do you? Untrained and inexperienced carriers have NO business opening fire in my "A O" in any circumstance. Firing at a harmless target is no substitute for live fire training. Most, if not almost all carry permit holders have inadequate training in my humble opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bringdown, where do you get that police are required to protect people?

    2005, US Supreme Court - reported in the NY Times (is that credible enough for you?)
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

    "a Colorado town, Castle Rock, for the failure of the police to respond to a woman's pleas for help after her estranged husband violated a protective order by kidnapping their three young daughters, whom he eventually killed."

    Maybe the woman now carries a handgun, I don't know but a wise man learns from other peoples mistakes.

    Here is another one straight from our nations capitol:
    "By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

    ReplyDelete
  5. And second thought -

    Captain, how many police officers have what you call live fire training, and what number of carry permit holders have live fire training?

    Something tells me that a good percentage of permit holders are also combat veterans. They have probably seen more shooting around real humans than the number of police there are. Facts are that there are a quarter million HCP in Tennessee, numerically they outnumber cops.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Capt. Bringdown aligns himself(?) with the usual tact taken by law enforcement in these matters. That is, pit themselves against the law-abiding, non-felon citizens who are willing to endure the infringement of their 2nd Amendment right and pay for a carry "permit" from the state. I don't understand why they don't want help from the good guys, won't admit they cannot possibly guarantee to protect you from the bad guys, expect the good people they just insulted to continue funding their existence, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Actually the police do not have a legal requirement to protect you. So says the United States Supreme Court in Castle Rock v Gonzalez and Warren v District of Columbia among others.

    You as an individual however do have a responsibility to protect you--and if you are unwilling to defend yourself no one else should in my opinion.


    Allowing students to carry firearms into Post Secondary institutions and onto post secondary campuses, and technology schools only makes sense--your rights should not end at the entrance to a college or university. I would love to see Tennessee allow campus carry as well as Constitutional carry--along the same lines of an Alaska or Arizona type carry law where no permit is required to carry a handgun.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Captain--you speak of your A O--your "area of operations"--you're not in the military Captain are you? You speak of "untrained" people--ask those 32 people who died at Virginia Tech whether they would have liked to have had the opportunity to defend themselves against a violent offender who will NOT and as we all saw--DID NOT obey the laws...I would dare say they would and should have had the RIGHT to defend themselves--but instead they obeyed the rules, they followed the law, they did as they were told as good sheeple often do--and for that they made themselves easy targets for a man with no conscious, and they paid with their lives--lives which ended all too soon, while everyone held their breath waiting on "trained" people like you to come riding to the rescue like the 1st Infantry Div....and while your "trained" people were gearing up--how many died needlessly?


    Generally by the time the police show up it is after the fact, when all is said and done--and the people should have the opportunity to defend themselves, even in YOUR "A/O" Capt...And personally speaking--if that is the price we pay to live in a free society where we don't have a police state where cops interpret the law as they see fit, and where the people have the RIGHT to both KEEP and BARE arms for their defense even in YOUR A/O--then I'm all for it, and it is a price I am willing to pay to live in a free society.

    So Capt. how many of your "trained" people have live fire training? Do you have medics riding with you? How many hours a week do you personally spend at the range doing live fire? How about those under you--how many hours?

    You see Capt., it isn't about what you want or don't want--it is about giving the people back their RIGHTS--and that includes the basic fundamental right to a fighting chance, even if you don't like it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's a reasonable example. If there is a gun man on campus and the police are responding and they see other students with their guns out, what are they to do? They say " Police! Put the gun down!" and then the citizen turns towards them with the gun out, what's going to happen. Now, the police will have to take down each citizen with a guy out just in case. They will have to arrest that person until it if found out that it was not them. This may take up time on catching the real shooter.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Zack,
    the problem with your theory--is that it is exactly that--a theory. I have heard this same worthless argument time and time again. The police cannot protect you--that is obvious from the Virginia Tech massacre. Would you rather wait on them to do it--or would you rather have the chance to fight for your life against a shooter while the police are busy responding with their "plans"?

    Here is the thing--if a shooter is on campus and you see a whole LOT of people with guns out pointing it at a single individual-that should give you at least SOME clue as to who the bad guy is...Come on, accept responsibility for your personal safety and quit depending on others to do it for you. Because I'm here to tell you--it isn't the job of the police to protect you--they have absolutely NO Constitutional or legal requirement to do so--so said the Supreme Court.

    The second issue is--would you trust your safety to people who have absolutely no stake whatsoever in whether you go home at night? Something happens to a citizen--the police may very well show up--but it is a job for them and nothing more, they go from call to call to call. My personal safety means more to me than trusting it into the hands of people who have no stake whatsoever in whether I go home at night or not.

    It is a natural human and God given right to be able to defend yourself against violent attack--unless of course you are a liberal, gun hating fanatic who thinks that only the police and the criminals should have guns.

    ReplyDelete

Here are the rules for comments. Know them. Live them.

http://lastcar.blogspot.com/2011/04/rules-for-comments.html?m=1