General Categories > Information Arsenal

Who says criminals don't watch the news

<< < (4/5) > >>

armed and humorous:
I'd be okay with CHP holders carrying on campus.  At least they've had some training and background checks.  I'm not so sure the dorms are really going to be a targeted area for burglars and robbers, though, simply because it's a gun-free zone.  The fact is that the vast majority of home-invasion type robberies (not burglaries when the thief thinks no one is home), are not just random.  Most all result from knowledge ahead of time by the robbers that there are drugs, or drug cash, or other valuables, because the robbers know the victims, or know someone who knows them.  As in this case, pot was probably the target all along.  The victims only admitted to a small amount, but the truth might be there was much more.

DanClrk51:

--- Quote from: bradkoll on November 29, 2011, 10:39:21 AM ---I may be able to have an input on this considering I am a student at UNL, and actually looking to transfer to UNO next year... I have been on the fence with this topic for 2 reasons.

1. Drunk "kids" and firearms is a no no.
2. Some "kids" aren't responsible enough to store it properly and that could very well lead to theft.

I lived in a fraternity just off of east campus, and technically it was university property but my house was in a secluded neighborhood so we tended to have a little more freedom. Lots of farm kids in it and when hunting season rolls around there are all kinds of rifles and shotguns stashed in the house out of plain sight.  And living in a fraternity you see how much people can really drink and since these kids all grew up with guns there has never been an incident where they did anything with a gun while intoxicated because they know how to use them. However there are "kids" like me who were never brought up with guns who go to college and want to start buying guns. I owned a few guns while living in the fraternity and even began reloading my own ammo there (until some liberal thought it was dangerous and I had to stop). However most of us who had guns had them stashed in a closet somewhere not very secure, so the chance of a mishap is more likely.

Some of us young folk can be responsible with guns but the kid who has no friends in college could be the next loon to go off the deep end and start shooting people. I love the idea of concealed carry on campus, my chemistry tests are at night and when I'm walking across campus to my car I would feel more comfortable if I could carry (when I turn 21 in March). Seeing people on campus in my age demographic makes me feel that a large majority of 18 year olds wouldn't be responsible enough to carry anyways. Plus there is the problem of not being old enough to buy a handgun at 18. I support carrying on campus but if it were to come about the people who do it should have to take a course on how to properly store a gun and have pretty heavy consequences if not done so properly. Granted the majority of 21 year olds not in a sorority or a fraternity don't live on campus anyways.

I will probably get some heat along the lines of, "if they have to have it locked in a safe secured in a night stand how can they get to it fast to defend themselves against a robbery". That risk is not as high as some drunk minor with no experience with guns seeing an unsecured firearm and trying to show it off.

In conclusion, I support carry on campus for those qualified to do so with proper training through the university and/or police department on proper gun storage. There are booths around UNL that you can hit a button at if you feel nervous about someone loitering around but that would only bring an unarmed security guard to your help a few minutes later, I would feel better knowing I can better defend myself.

--- End quote ---

We could also argue that many people are not mature enough to handle driving cars. Car accidents happen every day and more people die from cars then from guns. We see drunk drivers breaking the law all the time and getting people hurt. Do we put down blanket restrictions on all drivers because of this? No.
Society has been taking the easy way out when it comes to guns, which has hurt only ourselves, by banning them, demonizing them etc.
College/University dormitory gun bans are unconstitutional since they prevent people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights in their dwelling place or place of lodging. Age restrictions on guns are discriminatory, the 2nd Amendment has no age limit. And the Nebraska State Constitution recognizes that ALL PERSONS have a right to keep and bear arms. Just a few decades ago there were no age restrictions on the sale and possession of guns.
So the issue is not the maturity. The issue here is our rights! If a court or the legislature would act to restore those rights on campuses today, then maybe it would finally cause society to do its duty by creating safety through education/training rather than demonizing guns and banning them.
And just because it will suddenly become legal does not mean every student is going to show up in their dorm with their arsenals. Those who want to have guns in their dorms will bring them and others will decide not to. And if everyone does show up with guns. OH WELL!............Then maybe society/colleges/universities/govt will finally do what they should have done in the first place: provide education, safety training and so forth. If colleges can make algebra (which only few people will use in their professions) mandatory for everyone then they can make gun safety mandatory for everyone.
A very crucial constitutional right is being violated in this country and it only seems to bother half the populace. Theres a problem there....
Like some have said above, maturity will likely come faster as a result of having to deal with this issue rather than ignore it. People will adapt.

As many have said before lets punish those that actually cause harm (drunk and reckless armed college kids in this case), not restrict everyone elses constitutional rights.

armed and humorous:
Dan:

You are right in that the second amendment, nor our state constitution mention age.  As for your analogy about driving, we do have "blanket restrictions" based on age for drivers licenses.  A person cannot get any kind of drivers license prior to the age of 14, and then only learners permits or provisional operators licenses that place restrictions on them above and beyond a regular drivers license.  The reason for this is well-documented evidence that the brains of young people are not fully capable of the same kinds of reasoning and judgement that most adults have.  Statistics show that the rates of teens having crashes are far higher than for adults, and the general conclusion is that it is the imaturity of the brain that limits their ability to make good decisions.  Afterall, most teens can see better, hear better, and have faster reaction times than most adults.  If there weren't for some other cause, they should fare better than adults when it comes to driving.

Even though I agree that kids should be taught about guns, even at an early age, I don't think I'd want children of any age being allowed to carry loaded fire arms around at their own discretion.  Granted, college age students may not be considered children any longer, and they can go to war and all that, but it doesn't change the fact (that medical science has claimed) their brains have not yet fully developed, leaving their ability to make good judgements less than optimal.

As much as I agree with you that our state constitution and the bill of rights does not specify an age when it comes to keeping bearing arms, I have a hard time believing that even our forefathers would have wanted children running around with guns.  I doubt if you are actually advocating youngsters of any age having guns, but one might surmise that from your argument.

I'm not arguing one way or the other as to the legality or wisdom of allowing guns on college campuses.  I'm just putting out some more information to ponder.  Personally, I'm undecided on the question.

Dan W:
It seems that the restriction (or disability) of minor's rights, have a basis in Common Law. I am not arguing in any way that that minors be allowed unrestricted access to firearms. But I do believe that such "disability" should be removed once the age of majority is reached

http://constitution.org/soclcont.htm



--- Quote ---Common Law recognizes that persons are born with disabilities of minority, and constitutions and laws typically define some age at which those disabilities are removed, such as age 18 in the United States for purposes of voting, although it may allow for such disabilities to be removed earlier, or retained past the usual age of majority, upon petition to do so.
--- End quote ---

DanClrk51:

--- Quote from: Dan W on January 03, 2012, 12:30:12 PM --- But I do believe that such "disability" should be removed once the age of majority is reached

--- End quote ---

And that would be age 18 in our country since you can own a home, rent an apt, raise a family, vote, fight in war, drive a car etc. At age 18 people here are adults and if the parents have the legal right to push them out of the nest then they should be able to own handguns and carry them like any other. Then there is the inconsistency with them allowed to own long guns but not handguns. Makes no sense at all. It is discrimination. Period.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page