Editorial: Concealed weapons pose a threat to campus

The College Republicans are hosting fundraisers Oct. 7-8 in which club members and guests will pay to be guided through the process of gaining a concealed weapons permit. Trainers certified by the NRA will take those who sign up through the entire process, save only licking the stamp and mailing off the papers.

The UVU Review editorial board wishes to question this fundraiser and address what we consider to be some serious issues with its taking place on this campus.
First, any attempt to put more weapons into people’s hands can only make the risk of violent crime worse. Our school is no safer for having 30 more concealed weapons on it at any given time. Precisely the opposite is true.

The more guns, the more opportunity for accidents, for misuse, for intentional crime in our halls and for the unimaginable catastrophes which have unfortunately befallen too many schools in the recent past.

Further, the College Republicans are raising money by putting more guns into this school. Given the problems, are you comfortable with this? We certainly are not.
While we cannot deny the legal right to those who wish to get concealed carry permits, we can question using the resources of the university to do so. There is something perverse in using our own campus’ resources, for which all students pay, to put those same students at risk. Regardless of the legality of concealed carry permits, there is an ethical contradiction here and another venue should have been found.

We must acknowledge that those who will attend this fundraiser are likely to be those who are responsible in the use of firearms, as they are clearly seeking to obtain permits through the appropriate legal means and with the right training. However, we do not feel this diminishes the problems we point out.

Here are some Center for Disease Control statistics on gun deaths from the year 2001:

  • Suicide 16,869
  • Homicide 11,348
  • Accident 802
  • Legal Intervention 323
  • Undetermined 231
  • Total 29,573

Guns, far more than making us safer, make it easier to kill either ourselves or kill others.

We also wish to ask this question: For what reason would someone wish to carry a firearm? Of course, it is only too obvious to respond, “Because it is my right.” That is entirely true, but it is at best a partial answer.

We feel that beyond the simple right to bear arms, there exists a tendency toward mistrust and fear in their use and ownership – the use of firearms to create a sense of safety based not on their capacity to protect, but rather the capacity to cause terror in others. If others are afraid, perhaps they will leave you alone.

This is simply too easy, and does nothing to engage other people in the real forum where safety is created – civil society and community. Provo and Orem are not safe because there are more guns, they are safe because by and large we understand, relate, and communicate with each other better than other places do. Getting to know your neighbors does more than any weapon will ever do to prevent the need for having to brandish a weapon.

Given all of the above, we can only condemn this fundraiser taking place on our campus.

55 Responses to "Editorial: Concealed weapons pose a threat to campus"

  1. P. Henry   October 6, 2009 at 8:07 pm

    I carry a firearm for a living. Law enforcement cannot be everywhere for everyone all the time and it is up to the individual to prepare and care for their own safety and defense. I carry a concealed firearm for the same reasons you have auto insurance or a fire extinguisher in your home. I do not wish, hope, nor seek for situations to use my firearm, but I have it and have undergone extensive training in the event I need it. I carry a concealed firearm because I recognize the limitations of law enforcement and know there is a response time in any emergency and cannot afford a 24 hour personal body guard for me and each member of my family. I have been a student and employee at UVU for the…

    Reply
  2. P. Henry   October 6, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    last 12 years and have carried a concealed firearm on campus for many of them. Chances are good you know who I am or have at least seen me in the halls if you’ve spent any time in the business, administration, and library buildings.

    Because I carry a firearm, I have a higher responsibility in avoiding conflict. If a situation becomes heated and I feel the situation is becoming hostile and I have the ability to leave, I do so. The ONLY time I, and others, should reveal and use my firearm is under lawful defensive conditions of lethal force from another. Those that apply for the purchase of a firearm and/or CFP must pass a background check. Once the permit is issued, a background check is conducted every day to assure they are legally able to possess a firearm.

    Reply
  3. Corwin Fife   October 7, 2009 at 1:27 am

    * 42,900 people died in car accidents in 2001.
    * There is a death caused by a motor vehicle crash every 12 minutes; there is a disabling injury every 14 seconds.
    * Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for people ages 1 to 33.
    * The age groups most affected by motor vehicle crashes are 15-24 and 75+.
    * There were an estimated 5,800 pedestrian deaths and 90,000 injuries.
    * Walking in the roadway accounted for only 9% of all pedestrian deaths and injuries.
    * About 3 in every 10 Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related traffic accident at some time in their lives.
    * Bicycling resulted in about 800 deaths in collisions with motor vehicles.
    * SUV accidents accounted for only 3% of all accidents but 3 times that rate of fatalities because of rollover accidents.

    Driving kills a helluva lot more people than guns. Maybe we should condemn the selling of…

    Reply
  4. Corwin Fife   October 7, 2009 at 1:28 am

    …parking passes as they only encourage people to drive here.

    Reply
  5. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 2:50 am

    Wow, where do I start? I don’t want to insult the board (more than one person helped with and agreed to this?!?) but this editorial is a flippant, unresearched article. Let’s look at some of the statements in order.
    You say “First, any attempt to put more weapons into people’s hands can only make the risk of violent crime worse.”
    Wrong.
    Who do you think you are taking about – crimmals? No, you are talking about law-abiding citizens. Studies prove that when guns are in the hands of law-abiding citizens voilent crime goes down.
    Myth: Concealed carry laws increase crime
    Fact: Thirty-nine states, comprising the majority of the American population, are “right-to-carry” states. Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell (or did not rise) after the right-to-carry law became active (as of July, 2006). Nine states restrict the right to carry and two deny it outright…

    Reply
  6. Kaye   October 7, 2009 at 3:14 am

    I imagine, Corwin, that you were trying to make a sarcastic analogy between gun deaths and car deaths. What you don’t realize is that you have given a perfect argument for why people should use public transportation. Seriously, if people ride the bus, they are safer. Thanks for pointing that out.
    You have not done a thing to point out any problems with this article though. Shucks.

    Reply
  7. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 4:00 am

    I’ll continue in a moment…

    Reply
  8. Douglas Taylor   October 7, 2009 at 4:03 am

    UVU is a institution funded by the state. As such, it must be held accountable for the same laws that any other institution within the jurisdiction of the state are held to. This includes the right to keep and bear arms. That is the bottom line. That is precisely the reason that guns are permitted on campus.

    The articles used gun death stats to make a point that guns kill people. I’d like to see the stats on how many of those deaths were caused by people with concealed weapons permits. I’d also like to see how many of those people were clinically depressed (which means they aren’t allowed to have guns, by law). Also, how many of those killings were done by criminals using guns obtained illegally? I’d be willing to bet that 90-95% of all of those deaths fit what I just outlined. Guns being used improperly are done so by criminals. Criminals will always be able to get guns, but if…

    Reply
  9. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 4:04 am

    I disagree with UVU hosting a venue for a communist sympathizing student club (Revolutionary Students Union) that supports the philosophies of Marx, Lenin, and Mao. Furthermore, I disagree with UVU Review’s decision to essentially support the clubs’ false philosophies by printing an article on the RSU a few weeks ago. I do, “…question using the resources of the university to do so. There is something perverse in using our own campus’ resources, for which all students pay to put those same students at risk [with false and dangerous political ideas]. Regardless of the legality of concealed carry permits [political affiliation freedom], there is an ethical contradiction here and another venue should have been found.” The perpetuation of communism is more troubling to me and is a bigger threat to America than people learning about firearm laws for any and all legal use. UVU…

    Reply
  10. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 4:05 am

    UVU Continuing Education has been hosting CFP classes on UVU property for at least a few years that I’m aware of.

    I’m glad to see law abiding students taking the first step in spending their time and money to learn more about firearms, the proper use of firearms, and the laws in using firearms. The next step is to get further training and become familiar with their firearm(s). There are many great local clubs/organizations that provide excellent training (Wasatch Shooters, Utah Polite Society, Utah Pistol Defensive League to name a few).

    Reply
  11. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 4:06 am

    Guns prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes a year, or 6,849 every day (Targeting Guns, Dr. Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State University, Aldine, 1997). Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes are prevented just by showing a gun. In less than .9% of these instances is the gun ever actually fired (National Crime Victimization Survey, 2000, Bureau of Justice Statistics, BATF estimates on handgun supply). 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed (Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, James Wright and Peter Rossi, Aldine, 1986).

    Reply
  12. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 4:06 am

    I carry a firearm for a living. Though I am not on the payroll of any federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, I carry a firearm for the same reasons as those who are; to defend myself if the need ever arises (heaven forbid). All I want is for criminals to leave me alone and to be able to give my wife and children a hug and kiss at the end each day.

    Reply
  13. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 4:07 am

    Whew… glad that’s over. The UVU Review should consider allowing more characters to be posted. That way I don’t have to post 100 times.

    Reply
  14. shabz   October 7, 2009 at 4:39 am

    “false philosophies”
    how can a philosophy be false? i would rather see kids bullshitting about lenin any day.

    Reply
  15. Kat   October 7, 2009 at 4:48 am

    I for one do not feel in the least bit MORE safe with armed people on campus. I’m sorry. I just don’t. If you carry a firearm for a living I can only assume you are a law enforcement officer (good job and thank you) or you are a professional hunter (weird and why are you on campus so much?). Either way I don’t think the average student I share classes with should be armed.

    I don’t trust them to thoughtfully determine when I am at risk. I don’t trust they will provide a positive aid to law enforcement in the event of terrorist activity on campus. I think they would add to the chaos and flying bullets. I don’t think they have the skills to “talk down” an assailant.

    I do think they would be hopped up on adrenaline. I do think they watch a lot of action films. I do think they play a lot of “shoot ’em up” video games.
    None of this builds my confidence or makes…

    Reply
  16. Kat   October 7, 2009 at 4:54 am

    me feel safer.

    Reply
  17. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 5:01 am

    “how can a philosophy be false?”

    So, all philsophies are true?

    Reply
  18. Timothy McFoster   October 7, 2009 at 5:06 am

    I’m glad there aren’t unlimited characters allowed per post to enable P. Henry to tell us even more about his loaded fear enabler/dissuader. The types of situations that supposedly warrant a firearm are too tense and adrenaline-boosted to give a good reason to pack a gun — the trigger being pulled so easily by shaken fingers quicker than you can say, “oops.”

    Reply
  19. Vegor
    Vegor   October 7, 2009 at 5:14 am

    I did an article for the school paper a few years back about this very subject and the police chief at the time had some very interesting things to say. He was in favor of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens but thought that in a Virginia Tech type scenario those with guns would probably do more harm than good. He said if he heard gunfire and saw a person with a gun he would shoot first and ask if they had a permit later.

    Reply
  20. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:29 am

    Ok I’m back. I’ll continue from the beginning…
    Wow, where do I start? I don’t want to insult the board (more than one person helped with and agreed to this?!?) but this editorial is a flippant, un-researched article.
    Let’s look at some of the statements in order.
    You say “First, any attempt to put more weapons into people’s hands can only make the risk of violent crime worse.”
    Wrong.
    Who do you think you are taking about – criminals? No, you are talking about law-abiding citizens. Studies prove that when guns are in the hands of law-abiding citizens violent crime goes down.
    Myth: Concealed carry laws increase crime.
    Fact: Thirty-nine states, comprising the majority of the American population, are “right-to-carry” states. Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell (or did not rise) after the right-to-carry law became active (as of July, 2006)…

    Reply
  21. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:30 am

    Nine states restrict the right to carry and two deny it outright two deny it outright.
    Fact: Crime rates involving gun owners with carry permits have consistently been about
    0.02% of all carry permit holders since Florida’s right-to-carry law started in 1988.
    Fact: After passing their concealed carry law, Florida’s homicide rate fell from 36%
    above the national average to 4% below, and remains below the national average (as of
    the last reporting period, 2005).
    Fact: In Texas, murder rates fell 50% faster than the national average in the year after
    their concealed carry law passed. Rape rates fell 93% faster in the first year after enactment, and 500% faster in the second.285 Assaults fell 250% faster in the second
    year.286
    Fact: More to the point, crime is significantly higher in states without right-to-carry
    laws287:
    Fact: States that disallow concealed carry have violent…

    Reply
  22. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:30 am

    crime rates 11% higher than
    national averages.288
    Fact: Deaths and injuries from mass public shootings fall dramatically after
    right-to-carry concealed handgun laws are enacted. Between 1977 and 1995,
    the average death rate from mass shootings plummeted by up to 91% after
    such laws went into effect, and injuries dropped by over 80%.

    Reply
  23. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:31 am

    You say “The more guns, the more opportunity for accidents, for misuse, for intentional crime in our halls and for the unimaginable catastrophes which have unfortunately befallen too many schools in the recent past.
    Who do you think you are talking about? Are you actually trying to tell us that the law-abiding citizens that are legally carrying a weapon are misusing and committing “intentional crime”? Wrong bunch of people. It’s the criminals doing these types of acts. Then you say that the tragedies that have happened at schools are Concealed Weapon Permit holders? Really? On the contrary, many have been stopped or even avoided due to a law-abiding, armed citizen. How many lives could have been saved at Virginia Tech had the students that did have a permit been allowed to carry a firearm on campus?

    Reply
  24. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:31 am

    We will never know because of the university’s “no guns on campus” policy. Hey wait a minute, if they did have such a policy, why on earth was the murderer on campus with a weapon? No fair! The Trolley Square murders were stopped by someone that chose to carry a concealed weapon that day. The church shooting in Colorado was stopped by a lady legally carrying a firearm.

    Reply
  25. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:31 am

    You say “There is something perverse in using our own campus’ resources, for which all students pay, to put those same students at risk.
    Perverse? per•verse (p?r-vûrs’, pûr’vûrs’)
    adj.
    1. Deviating away from what is considered right or accepted.
    Then you go on to say “Regardless of the legality of concealed carry permits…” It is right and very much accepted in the state of Utah. Perverse???

    Reply
  26. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:32 am

    An “ethical” contradiction? Allowing a person to be properly licensed and trained to allow the weakest and oldest as well as the quick and strong to exercise their right to personal safety? No, not an ethical contradiction. Just because you uninformed about the meaning behind the 2nd Amendment and the right to protect yourself and your loved ones against violent criminals doesn’t mean it is un-ethical.

    Reply
  27. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:32 am

    OK, what’s next? Oh, this one is laughable, the ‘cut & paste’ of the google of the CDC & gun stats.
    Suicide – 16, 869, yep, a gun makes it quick and easy but perhaps 5 or 6 of those would have done it by other means. Or maybe 10,000 of them would, who knows?
    Homicide – 11,348 wow, you guys screwed up on this one. How many of these murders were committed by Permit holders? Now, how many could have been prevented by legally armed victums?
    Accident – 802 Dive into this number and you’ll discover that the lions share of these are by hunters with long guns that are much more deadly than handguns and that’s not what we are talking about here is it?
    Legal Intervention – 323 Cops and legally armed citizens protecting themselves. 323 bad guys dead because they were trying to kill innocents. As this number goes up, the “Homicide” above goes down.

    Reply
  28. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:32 am

    You say that if a concealed weapon permit holder is asked why he or she carries that they will obviously answer “Because it’s my right” Hog wash! Did you do that? Did you ask any one and get that answer? It’s your right to shave your head and glue multi-colored playing pieces from the game “Sorry” to your skull and go around singing “tip toe through the tulips” but people don’t do that and if they did it would not be “because it was their right”.

    Reply
  29. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:33 am

    The next paragraph is so wrong I can hardly address it but I’ll give it a whirl. You have mistaken “mistrust and fear” for being prepared and aware. Was it two days ago that an Orem man was stabbed and robbed while walking down the street. Look it up and check the address. No,no, could it be a few blocks from the Island of Invulnerability, the Sanctuary of Safety, the Last Bastion of Bliss – UVU?????
    800 East, 1200 South
    Yes, criminals are out there. Even here. Do I worry about it or mistrust everyone? No, and I don’t think about dying every second even though I have life insurance.

    Reply
  30. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:33 am

    Oh, and I love this part about “the real forum of creating safety, where everyone is civil and we understand, relate and communicate and getting to know your neighbors is better than shooting them” la-la la-la-la (musically sung). Super, I’ll all for it but if this is the answer to crime why aren’t the criminals listening?
    By the way, permit holders cannot “brandish” a weapon any more than a non-permit holder.
    Dang Republicans! Where is Michael Moore when you need him?
    The bottom line is proven in study after study (including FBI reports) proves that the more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens means less violent crime and you cannot twist the stats around to mean anything else.

    Reply
  31. Timothy McFoster   October 7, 2009 at 5:38 am

    S. Smith’s myriad and superfluous comments are mind-numbingly boring. Are you enjoying hearing/reading yourself speak/type?

    Reply
  32. S. Smith   October 7, 2009 at 5:56 am

    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

    Wish I had said it but it was some guy named Thomas Jefferson.

    Reply
  33. P. Henry   October 7, 2009 at 6:02 am

    “The next paragraph is so wrong I can hardly address it but I’ll give it a whirl. You have mistaken “mistrust and fear” for being prepared and aware. Was it two days ago that an Orem man was stabbed and robbed while walking down the street. Look it up and check the address. No,no, could it be a few blocks from the Island of Invulnerability, the Sanctuary of Safety, the Last Bastion of Bliss – UVU?????
    800 East, 1200 South”

    Or, what about the early morning attack with a screw driver at IHOP directly across the street from UVU where a man with a handgun put an extra hole in the attacker and stopped the attack and potential murder of a young woman having breakfast with her boyfriend.

    Hahaha… island of invulnerability. Nope, nothing ever bad happens here in Orem.

    Reply
  34. shabz   October 7, 2009 at 6:08 am

    p.henry – philosophies are systems and approaches to thinking. truth is one concept philosophy deals with from time to time.

    s.smith – please write a letter to the editor instead of pontificating…

    Reply
  35. william of Utah   October 7, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    P. Henry and S. Smith have their facts straight. Adults, excercing a RIGHT to keep (own) and bear (carry) their personal firearms for self defense against armed predatory criminals is the one way to provide some personal protection in a free country. The police are not your body guard as we could see at Columbine High School where armed criminals (you could call them terrorists) rampagaed through a school full of disarmed teachers and disarmed students murdering people at will. When the police finally arrived the defenseless population inside the school had been victimized already. Had one teacher (as was the case in Pearl, Mississippi) been armed, the armed murderers might well have been stopped early on in their rampage.

    Reply
  36. william of Utah   October 7, 2009 at 5:30 pm

    I have owned guns for 49-years, since I was eight years old and never had an accident with those guns that harmed anyone, nor used them to harm anyone. But, I have been glad I had them for self defense and protection of other innocents. For over a decade I’ve had a Concealed Firearm Permit here in Utah and often carred a loaded revolver in public, but never misused it. I have friends that have saved their own lives and the lives of others here in Utah because they had a concealed firearm on their person when danger arrived in the form of a criminal. Don’t college students deserve the same RIGHT to self defense as other adults in America?

    Reply
  37. william of Utah   October 7, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    Oh, BTW, I’m a graduate from UVU when it existed under another incarnation as UVTC. I never shot people on campus then, or now just because I owned and carried guns. What a myth.

    Reply
  38. william of Utah   October 7, 2009 at 5:37 pm

    Kat, we’re talking about freedom of choice here. You’ve chosen not to carry a gun, which is your Right. I’ve chosen to carry a gun, which is my Right. Apparently you feel safer unarmed, while I know I’m safer by being armed and able to defend myself or some other innocent person against armed attacks by predatory or deranged criminals and terrorists.

    You should also put up a sign at your house that reads “No Guns in this House” and I’ll leave my stickers on my windows that say “Home Owner is Armed.” Let’s see who gets a home invasion first, you or me.

    Reply
  39. shabz   October 8, 2009 at 1:42 am

    really, folks with the really long posts, write an actual rebuttal. more people will be able to see it

    Reply
  40. Caiti   October 8, 2009 at 2:56 am

    I agree with the editorial board and Kat. A few statistic: If you have a gun in the home, you are 72% more likely to be killed by a firearm, 22x more likely to be in a firearm related homicide (risk is tripled), suicide (five times more likely), or accident, and a abused woman is 6x more likely to be killed if there is a gun in the home. Those are just for guns in the home. It is also shown across the board that countries where citizens are not allowed to carry firearms have astronomically lower homicide and suicide rates. We all love the story of the 90yr old woman fighting off an intruder but, lets face it, that is not what the majority of these guns acquired after concealed certification are going to be used for. State money should not support gun violence.

    Reply
  41. P. Henry   October 8, 2009 at 3:46 am

    Hypocrite. You haven’t written anything to support anything at all.

    “p.henry – philosophies are systems and approaches to thinking. truth is one concept philosophy deals with from time to time.

    s.smith – please write a letter to the editor instead of pontificating…”

    and

    ““false philosophies”
    how can a philosophy be false? i would rather see kids bullshitting about lenin any day.”

    I fail to see your rebuttal in ANY of your posts.

    Philosophies are a set of ideas and beliefs. Of course a philosophy can be false. You cannot tell me that if I believe I can fly to the moon by flapping my arms fast enough, that you would tell me with a straight face that philosophy is true. Of the whole firearm topic, you chose this particular aspect to criticize and contribute nothing else of substance?

    Reply
  42. Kat   October 8, 2009 at 4:24 am

    Dear william of Utah,

    I appreciate your sentiments as they are the most well written and calm of those pro-gun arguments here. There is one misunderstanding however, I do own guns. I know confusing. We have several side arms (both my husband and I are retired officers – I’m naval, he’s army – long story.) My husband hunts and so we have rifles.

    What I don’t do is trust my fellow students to discharge firearms for my benefit. What I don’t do is think that schools, churches or public spaces benefit from armed citizens. We have plenty of gun laws and pitiful gun enforcement. We need to get more guns out of illegal hands and off the street, not arm civilians for battle.

    Reply
  43. P. Henry   October 8, 2009 at 5:10 am

    Caiti, I’d be interested in those sources if you have them. If I get the time, I will provide more statistics/studies than the ones I have already shared that contradict your statistics.

    Kat, I appreciate your service as I know the dedication and sacrifice that goes into military service. I currently have two brothers in the Marines, a father that served in Vietnam, and both grandfathers that served during WW2 (fortunate they didn’t see combat). Furthermore, I can understand your hesitancy to trust a meager student with such a high responsibility. I do encourage people that carry a firearm to get training. For example, I attend a well known training facility about 2 or 3 times a year for several days at a time where I shoot side-by-side with many L.E.O’s and military personnel, dry practice my skill at arms DAILY since May 2008, am beginning to shoot competitively, and will be…

    Reply
  44. P. Henry   October 8, 2009 at 5:19 am

    …submitting applications in early 2010 for the Utah state Highway Patrol Citizen’s Academy and FBI Citizens’ Academy.

    Should people be trained? Yes. Should they be stripped of the ability to defend themselves if they’re not? No.

    If a shooter is on campus, I will not be running down the halls trying to be a hero. I will take position in the doorway to the while instructing a student or professor to call 911 and give them a description of myself, the location of the classroom, the number of people in the classroom, and any other info. dispatch requests. Once L.E. arrives, I drop my firearm and follow their commands EXACTLY as they direct.

    Caiti I’ll dig up those statistics as soon as I’m able; I have a bunch of homework.

    Reply
  45. P. Henry   October 8, 2009 at 6:00 am

    It’ll save some time if I simply refer you to the website below:

    http://www.gunfacts.info/

    Reply
  46. M Hopkins   October 8, 2009 at 6:36 am

    From the get go a comment like “First, any attempt to put more weapons into people’s hands can only make the risk of violent crime worse” without any backing of data only smacks of political rhetoric. Regardless of sides, data should always be used to convince. I believe S. Smith puts forth enough data to solidify the point that trained individuals who legally carry weapons, end up making the environment safer. If you disagree, go do the data mining of his references to convince yourself. That would truly be educational.

    Reply
  47. Nathan   October 8, 2009 at 1:58 pm

    The character limit inflates the post count. It makes it look like people care and that it’s a hot topic when the post count gets so high. If I were trying to draw people to the comment board, I would want an inflated post count too.

    Reply
  48. Doug Taylor   October 8, 2009 at 2:57 pm

    Who are you Shabz, Caiti, Tim Foster, etc… to say that our RIGHT as citizens should be taken away? This is a country of freedoms. The more you take away from those freedoms, the easier it will be to take away more freedoms. The right to bear arms was given to us by our FOUNDING FATHERS!!! Who are you to take that away??? Be a victim if you’d like. If you don’t like guns, don’t buy them! Don’t tell me or anyone else what right they shouldn’t have just because you don’t agree. How about we take away the right of free speech next? That’s in the bill of rights too! What about the freedom of religion? Where does it stop?! Don’t ask me to save your liberal asses when some criminal starts shooting up your liberal sanctuaries.

    Reply
  49. Doug Taylor   October 8, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    They say the pen is mightier than the sword. In that case, it’s a deadly weapon. We should ban it. Burn it. Get rid of it. All for the sake of the children… Yeah, stupid huh?… That’s the road you mental midgets are going down.

    Reply
  50. Kaye   October 9, 2009 at 3:03 am

    Oh for Christ’s sake, Nathan. Let’s not go criticizing the webmaster just because people have a lot to say and can’t trim it down. Seriously. I think a character limit sends a pretty clear message: “Don’t say so much, you long-winded posters.” What’s inflating the post count are people who can’t hold their tongue and listen to others a little bit. If those on this thread really have that much to say, there’s a forum for it, and it’s called a letter to the editor.

    Reply
  51. Nathan   October 9, 2009 at 4:06 pm

    @Kaye “We don’t really care about your opinion… So shut up, or if you have to speak, keep it short!”

    That is a much better motive than inflating post count.

    Why you would allow comments at all if you weren’t trying to start a thoughtful discussion?

    If I don’t criticize (or in other words give feedback to) the webmaster, how would he/she tailor the site to users’ wants/needs? Heaven forbid the reader of an opinion piece additionally have an opinion about the forum itself.

    Reply
  52. Nathan   October 9, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    One more piece of feedback for the webmaster: Why is the server on UTC time instead of local? Do you expect a lot of international visitors to the site?

    Reply
  53. Jason   October 10, 2009 at 7:51 pm

    Ok, when people who really have malicious intentions decide to pull out a gun and start shooting, we will see how you feel then about not having the means to protect yourself. Perhaps you might be able to reason with them over the sounds of gunfire. That’s the power of positive thinking.

    Reply
  54. Russ   October 12, 2009 at 8:19 pm

    – “Save only licking the stamp” is how the training is done. Would you have them offer less training?
    – Your statistics have nothing to do with concealed carry permits, but they look pretty.
    – The resources of the University come from the taxpayers pockets. Yours. Mine, etc… If you’re going to take my money for public education, you’re going to also leave my constitutional rights intact.
    – Name one “accident” that has befallen other schools. If (and once) you do, please then show us how that even remotely relates to concealed carry permits.
    – Permit holders also have nothing to do with the number of firearms on campus. A permit is nothing but a permit.
    – Violent crime also has nothing to do with concealed carry permits or weapons for that matter.
    – Utah is also an open carry state. You don’t have to have a permit to carry a handgun, you just have to have a permit to…

    Reply
  55. Shaylene   October 12, 2009 at 9:29 pm

    I personally feel safer knowing there are good people on campus carrying guns. Better to put more guns in the hands of responsible law abiding citizens who have gone through background checks to make up for the bad kids carrying guns illegally. Schools are easy targets already for gangs and shootings, I’d like to be pre-paired with a small “army” of good kids on campus and in each class carrying guns. I’ve been in multiple classes with students wearing guns and felt safer, not threatened.

    Reply

Leave a Reply