<p>
</p>
<p>Okay but this isn’t the crux of the argument - our point is that people who already have CCW permits should be allowed to carry onto college campuses. You seem to be focused only on students, but the argument is about where people (anyone) who already has a permit can carry.</p>
<p>wow - I just read through that brady campaign site - those arguments have more holes than a golf course…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^ For example - this isn’t the reason that those organizations oppose increasing shall issue laws. If you look back, you’ll notice that those orgs flip-flopped on the issue right around the time HR218 passed. Before that, they were very much in favor of CCW and shall issue laws.</p>
<p>Second, I think you’ll find that the vast majority of the rank and file police officers are strongly in favor of shall issue CCW laws.</p>
<p>Not to mention that these statements are almost a non sequitur - it would make more sense if it said “that is why organizations X and Y advocate disarming police officers altogether” :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I think having some folks with CCW permits and guns and not others on campus puts far too many people at risk. I think there should be heavy fines for students who don’t carry, and for a second offense, they should be expelled. And if the rate of packing falls below a certain level the institution should automatically lose all federal funding for five years.</p>
<p>And if the students on meds are healthy enough to attend, they are healthy enough to be required to carry. Making exceptions puts everyone at risk. There are 70,000 student-on-student rapes and 600,000 sexual assaults on campuses every year, and now finally all students will have the wherewithal to defend themselves from grievous bodily harm.</p>
<p>
By that logic, police should not be trusted to carry firearms. After all, they commit murders and violent crimes as well. The only murder with a legal automatic weapon since the NFA of 1934 was by a police officer. I guess you can’t trust anyone!</p>
<p>
No system is perfect…therefore we must restrict everyone!../sarcasm
Overall, CCW holders have an approximately 0.1% crime rate. The Bureau of Justice estimates that 6.6% of the general population will serve time in prison. To me, that says CCW holders are BY FAR more trustworthy than the “average joe.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately for the police, they must approach, make contact with, and often wrestle with criminals. This greatly increases the risk that they will lose control of their weapon.</p>
<p>You really have to take statistics from the Brady Campaign, VPC, and the NRA with a grain of salt. The VPC cites dozens of cases as evidence for banning .50 caliber firearms. However, only one of their cited cases involved the use of a .50 caliber gun. They cite terrorists potentially shooting down helicopters as their primary motivation. The most common .50 caliber gun: a black powder hunting rifle! The Brady Campaign used the NIU shooting as a reason for a new AWB, even though there were no “assault weapons” used.</p>
<p>I laugh at a lot of the comments on this board. Do you people realize the arming time on a common handgun? If someone jumps you from behind I guarantee you you will NOT have time to draw a pistol and arm it. I’ll quantify it for you. Because it’s bound to be in a secure, not quickly accessible location, that’s 3-5 seconds right there. Arming it is 1-2 secs tacked onto that. You think someone trying to rob/rape/assault you is going to give you 4-7 seconds to get out your weapon? Not to mention the fact that if the criminal sees a gun they won’t hesitate to shoot.</p>
<p>Carrying a gun will NOT save you from any assault by any half-savvy criminal. In fact a better weapon would be a knife with auto-arming technology, which is quick, relatively silent, and much stealthier.</p>
<p>But mini, you better be joking because the last thing you want is for frat houses to be forced to possess handguns. There’s a huge difference from people who get CCW permits of their own volition and fratboys and other college kids who spent 50% of their time drunk.</p>
<p>“Overall, CCW holders have an approximately 0.1% crime rate. The Bureau of Justice estimates that 6.6% of the general population will serve time in prison. To me, that says CCW holders are BY FAR more trustworthy than the “average joe.””</p>
<p>I cry inside whenever I see ignorant people botch the use of statistics. You’d be 100% right if the two groups were from the same population, but they’re NOT. CCW holders are not a sample of the “general population,” nor are they even close. They’re a very concentrated demographic, especially considering the fact that if you simply eliminate the bottom 20% of America sorted by misdeeds responsible for the vast majority of the crime, you’d probably see a similar crime rate. So no, that statistic does not say much about CCW holders vs the “average joe.” What it does say is that they’re more responsible than the general population including criminals. Huge difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok well first lets use proper terminology - instead of “arming”, lets call it “chambering a round”. The simple fact is, 99.9% of people who CCW always carry their weapon with a round chambered. Second, your idea that it takes 3-5 seconds to draw from its “secure, not quickly accessible location” is way off.</p>
<p>Take a look at some of these (notice that these people can draw and fire in way less than that time):
[YouTube</a> - CCW Pistol Drawing HK P7 Under Sweater Strong Hand Only](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXDcuh-GqRw]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXDcuh-GqRw)
[YouTube</a> - <a href=“http://www.blackopsschoolofcombat.com%5B/url%5D”>www.blackopsschoolofcombat.com](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARFg-tJBeX4]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARFg-tJBeX4)</a>
[YouTube</a> - Shooting On A Hot August Day With Cover](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toeFDcCrgXo]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toeFDcCrgXo)
[YouTube</a> - CCW Pistol Drawing HK P7 Under Jacket](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o815Fit-Wts]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o815Fit-Wts)</p>
<p>As the description of one of these videos states, it’s all about practice and muscle memory.</p>
<p>You forget that if you’re under attack it is highly improbable you’ll be standing in optimal drawing conditions. I was mostly replying to mini and his assertion that pistols would prevent most assaults. If someone has a knife or a gun to you, there is no way you’ll draw faster than he/she will pull the trigger or gut you. Also, those videos showed around 2 seconds, not including the blackops one which is professional. You think someone can’t move their pointer finger 1 inch in 2 seconds? This isn’t even counting the extra time it would take if it’s winter and you have your jacket zipped up (which accounts for the upper range of 5 seconds). Either way, face it, you’re not getting your gun out in time if you’re assaulted by a sexual predator or thug. In the event of the first you’ll probably be on the ground anyway, and in the event of the second he/she will probably have a lethal weapon.</p>
<p>Second of all, no, 99.9% of CCW members do NOT keep their rounds chambered, at least unless you’re saying the ones I know are that .1%, which seems unlikely. Please don’t pull statistics out of your rear end. Second of all, you also have to disengage the safety which is the part most people forget when trying to draw in a hurry.</p>
<p>I’d ask what your self-defense credentials are (if any). I’ll post mine: 3rd degree black belt in karate and proficient with hunting rifles. My dojo spends a substantial amount of its time on weaponized defense. Some experience with handguns, though not much. I can attack with a concealed folding knife in <.5 seconds. If I was trying to rob you, do you really think your gun would matter?</p>
<p>Somebody proficient in hand-to-hand combat might do very well with a knife, but most people are not. I actually do know people who carry a knife for self defense, but most of us would be better off to maintain as much distance as possible. For home defense, nothing beats a gun.</p>
<p>“But mini, you better be joking because the last thing you want is for frat houses to be forced to possess handguns. There’s a huge difference from people who get CCW permits of their own volition and fratboys and other college kids who spent 50% of their time drunk.”</p>
<p>I especially would require every fratboy and every sorority sister to have a loaded handgun and CCW with them at all times. When they are drunk is precisely when someone is likely to take assault or otherwise take advantage of them. This might save them from grievous bodily harm.</p>
<p>We must make sure that EVERYONE is afforded full protection. Nothing beats a gun.</p>
<p>“There’s a huge difference from people who get CCW permits of their own volition and fratboys and other college kids who spent 50% of their time drunk.”</p>
<p>These folks are particularly in need of CCW and loaded firearms at all times, especially the sorority sisters. In that way they can stop the student criminals who rape and assault them. Yes, some students will get shot in the process. But they had it coming. Rape and sexual assault are serious offenses, and people should have the right to defend themselves by any means necessary, and maybe some of the fratboys will now be able to come to their aid.</p>
<p>Nothing beats a LOADED gun and people who have the right to use it.</p>
<p>As for drawing times, 5-7 seconds is WAY longer than average. It takes me 7 seconds to get out the blade on my multi-tool. That involves a 7 motion process. Which is why I would not consider trying it in an SD situation! Drawing a pistol from a concealed holster is more like a 3 step process, without as many small, precise movements.</p>
<p>Many people carry M1911 design pistols in condition 1 (round chambered, hammer back, safety on). Condition one is safe and easy to quickly bring into action, as the safety can be manipulated during the draw motion. Glocks and double-action revolvers are also popular. Glocks have the safety incorporated into the trigger, so it is even easier to quickly use. A folding knife might be quicker, but that is because they require a shorter motion to bring to bear, depending on how it is carried and its specific design.</p>
<p>Kbaloney, are you suggesting that we should not discuss self-defense because someone might not like what we say? That defeats the entire purpose of a discussion, and if someone took legal action, it would be a 1st amendment issue. I am not going to be cowed into silence because someone at Berkeley or MIT doesn’t like what evidence I present. </p>
<p>-John Sorce</p>
<p>Hey, the data suggests that some of those rapes and sexual assaults were at the Air Force Academy, and it would be a good thing if those female cadets were packing to defend themselves against the criminal element. Perhaps the school should require a particular kind of weapon so as to assure that it can be used to protect against grievous bodily harm.</p>
<p>Sigh… I said many posts ago that the issue is controversial and there are good arguments for both sides. The difference is that I am not mocking those whose opinions differ from my own. Why can’t those who favor a firearms ban allow people who favor the second amendment their opinions too? :rolleyes: Common guys! You have to admit that an intelligent person may hold either view.</p>
<p>The issue is not “Second Amendment” - it is how guns could help assure public safety. Logically, if a few guns are helpful, more would be better. We have an epidemic of rapes and sexual assaults on campus, and this would be a reasonable way to deal with it.</p>
<p>As others have said, “nothing beats a gun.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I probably should have said “the vast majority” - I assumed that 99.9% would be understood as hyperbole, but apparently not. I’ll spell things out next time. But I stand by my assertion, based on discussions on other pro-gun discussion boards as well as my own personal experience - everyone I know (and the number is significant) who carries every day does so with one in the chamber (if not a revolver).
On the safety issue, again please do some research and don’t speak as if all guns have manual safeties which must be disengaged. As Ramius noted, the most popular gun with a manual safety is the 1911 design. Many other pistols have safeties built into the trigger which do not require any extra action to disengage. And others, like my Sig-Sauer, do not have any manual safety, but rather have a heavy double-action trigger pull. Not to mention that even if your gun has a manual safety, you should have practiced enough that it becomes a muscle memory when drawing.</p>
<p>The point is that people with CCW permits by and large are law-abiding people and take the responsibility of carrying very seriously. I don’t want to play the “what if” game because that is exactly why people choose to carry.</p>
<p>
Actually, they are not separate issues. The founding fathers made many comments on firearms and public safety. That is a part of the reason they wanted the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed in the Constitution. The stated reason, and at that time most recent cause, was to ensure liberty. They are not mutually exclusive, but I will leave that for a different thread (hopefully).</p>
<p>Oh I know the official position of the school would be to disagree with me. But I also know that there isn’t a thing that they could (or would) do about it. And I think that you know this too.</p>
<p>The more guns you allow on a campus, the more innocent people are going to end up getting shot. Even if whatever permits are required, making them more accessible makes it more likely that those who SHOULDN’T have them WILL have them. Giving loaded weapons to young people - who are inexperienced and haven’t developed full adult judgement - is basically guaranteeing that the old-fashioned fist fight will be replaced by a shooting duel. For every girl that gets saved from rape because she had a gun, three will be killed or injured because of pointless shooting incidents.</p>