The average American citizen will be unlikely to encounter a situation that would warrant the need of a gun even once in their life, let alone multiple times. [/quote]
Well then basic logic then states there is no need to control the sale and ownership of weapons then, because the average gun will not be used in a situation that harms an American citizen.
[quote]BeefEater wrote:
So if we take into account all these events you have a less than 1% chance of encountering a situation that would require the use of a gun.[/quote]
Which means there is less than 1% reason to infringe on our rights, because if only 1% are being harmed, then what is the hubbub about?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Your exam argument is compelling, but in this case your 1st ammendment rigths weren’t infringed upon. Instead their were consequences if you used your 1st ammendment rights. To me there is a difference there. Making anywhere a non gun zone is a direct infrignment of the 2nd ammendment. Instead carry shoudl be legal and like in any other situation the responsible use of that weapon is on the owner of the weapon. In this way your example and mine would match each other. Consequences for inappropriate actions.
[/quote]
This is a good and nuanced point, but I will counter with this: the First Amendment protects not just from prior restraint but also from punitive measures after the right to speech has been exercised. Other than speech intended to incite imminent lawless action, it is unconstitutional for the state to punish a citizen for the content of their verbal expressions. It is a violation of my First Amendment right, for example, not only for the government to prevent me from publishing this post, but also for the government to imprison me for having published it.
If my First Amendment rights were perfectly intact as a college student matriculated at a major university, then the state–and in Push’s eyes, the university’s management and administration is an extension of the state, so long as the said university has accepted federal money–would not under any circumstances be permitted to administer to me a punishment for having exercised my right to free speech during an exam.
By punishment, we mean expulsion–the same punishment, by the way, that we’re talking about when we talk about the banning of guns.[/quote]
I see your point; however, I think an argument can be made that the student is not being punished because of their use of free speach, but is being punished because he/she is in breach of contract. To me a student and a university have entered into a contract and one of the stipulations is for the student to act with academic integrity. Speaking out during an exam is counter to that.
Young men, 18-22, have secured America for 200+ years. They’ve fought in EVERY major war and minor conflict. Many of this age have families and stable jobs. If this age group can’t handle weapons I think we have a far greater problem than gun control can fix.
[/quote]
I am going to respond to your whole post, but I wanted to single this out: young men in the army and young men at college are two very different animals.
My argument is simply that, after having spent so much time around universities, I don’t believe that student bodies are responsible enough to own weapons. I don’t think the same thing about the military, or about society at large. I think it about college kids.[/quote]
We must be doing something terribly wrong if college age ADULTS can’t handle guns, but it’s your opinion. I’m not going to argue about it. [/quote]
Yes something is terribly wrong. College typically postpones responsibility so I don’t think he is too far off in his assessment.[/quote]
I think we would need more data before we just say student are too immature to have guns on campus. Maybe we shoudl give them more responsibility instead of holding their hand until they are 22.
What about people like me that went back to school after being in the military, why couldn’t I carry?
^not to keep harping on MD, but you have to be 21 to legally buy/own a gun so we are talking about mostly seniors in college. They are to irresponsible to handle guns?
I’m just playing devil’s advocate. So Push, what do you propose students do on campus? Conceal carry regardless of the potentially severe academic and legal consequences? Or take a more pragmatic, subtle approach to self defense while they are on university grounds?[/quote]
It’s a tough call, man.
We could go with, “I’d rather be judged by twelve than buried by six.” I suspect that would be seen as trite by the spineless fool who thinks campus police officers are de facto personal guards. Amanda Collins wouldn’t think it was trite. The two women Ted Bundy raped and murdered and the other two he nearly beat to death on the campus of Florida State University in 1979 just a few short blocks from my childhood home (I remember the incident distinctly) wouldn’t think so.
We need to push hard for CCW on campus. There is both principle and practicality involved.
The Sky Will Fall shrieking we always hear when CCW is being liberalized is so tiresome because it has proven over and over again to be faulty speculation.[/quote]
When I go to class, I carry a tactical folder in my pocket. No one would raise an eyebrow even if they happened to notice it. I doubt the same attitude would hold if someone knew I was carrying a Sig P226. However, this is during the day. I would certainly feel differently if I was a female out at night.
“Because the people who run universities are not obligated to afford all of the rights to their students which are afforded by the American government to the American people pursuant to the Bill of Rights”
Can you explain this further? Why would colleges/universities not have to follow the bill of rights like everyone else? [/quote]
Well, think about my “exam” example. Also, the searches may have been unreasonable, but courts have ruled again and again that staffers may enter rooms and conduct visual checks therein.
Let’s put it differently: is any institution which receives a single dime of federal money obligated to afford to its students/employees/affiliates the same rights that are afforded by the BOR to the American people?
Let’s make something clear here: when Push transmutes the responsibilities of the federal government and heaps them upon any institution that has received federal money, he is also transmuting the definition of a violation of those rights. By that I mean, for example, that he considers expulsion from university for a violation of gun policy to be a violation of the Second Amendment, regardless of the fact that no judges or courts took punitive action.
Expulsion from university, in other words, becomes punishment by the state and of a citizen, in Push’s eyes.
Extend this to other institutions and other Constitutional rights: imagine if every employer that received a single dime of federal money were obligated to afford its employees the same right to speech that is afforded by the Bill of Rights to the people of the United States of America, keeping in mind that in Push’s world, expulsions and firings are tantamount to the kinds of legal punishments that the Bill of Rights protects against. Imagine how many otherwise “private” employers have received federal money recently–imagine if none of their employees could be fired for any kind of speech so long as that speech was not intended to incite imminent lawless action.
I see your point; however, I think an argument can be made that the student is not being punished because of their use of free speach, but is being punished because he/she is in breach of contract. To me a student and a university have entered into a contract and one of the stipulations is for the student to act with academic integrity. Speaking out during an exam is counter to that. [/quote]
But if the university is indeed an extension of the state with regard to the Constitutional restrictions imposed upon it, how can it force me to sign a contract surrendering my Constitutional right to free speech?
And if it indeed can, then why can’t it also force me to sign a similar contract surrendering my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms–if it decides, that is, as it has in the previous example, that the signing of it is an important element in the creation of what its administrators believe to be a suitable learning environment?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think we would need more data before we just say student are too immature to have guns on campus. [/quote]
Like you, I was handed an M4 when I was 18 and was entrusted with all sorts of explosives and whatnot. When off duty, was still required to carry it around.
In fact all the guys in the Yeshiva dorm had M4s and/or Berrettas, and even a couple of crew-manned machine guns.
Never once went on a shooting spree, shot a civilian, or even my annoying as shit roomates.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think we would need more data before we just say student are too immature to have guns on campus. [/quote]
Like you, I was handed an M4 when I was 18 and was entrusted with all sorts of explosives and whatnot. When off duty, was still required to carry it around.
In fact all the guys in the Yeshiva dorm had M4s and/or Berrettas, and even a couple of crew-manned machine guns.
Never once went on a shooting spree, shot a civilian, or even my annoying as shit roomates.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think we would need more data before we just say student are too immature to have guns on campus. [/quote]
Like you, I was handed an M4 when I was 18 and was entrusted with all sorts of explosives and whatnot. When off duty, was still required to carry it around.
In fact all the guys in the Yeshiva dorm had M4s and/or Berrettas, and even a couple of crew-manned machine guns.
Never once went on a shooting spree, shot a civilian, or even my annoying as shit roomates.
[/quote]
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think we would need more data before we just say student are too immature to have guns on campus. [/quote]
Like you, I was handed an M4 when I was 18 and was entrusted with all sorts of explosives and whatnot. When off duty, was still required to carry it around.
In fact all the guys in the Yeshiva dorm had M4s and/or Berrettas, and even a couple of crew-manned machine guns.
Never once went on a shooting spree, shot a civilian, or even my annoying as shit roomates.
[/quote]
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?[/quote]
The differences between a military base and a college campus–and the people who populate each-- are so many and so drastic that it really isn’t worth listing them. If I recall correctly, you went to college? I believe you know the answer to this question very well.
Setting philosophy and principle aside here, anybody who has spent a substantial amount of time at a university within the past decade knows just what the American college student is like.
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?[/quote]
One usually grows up with mandatory military service required when you turn 18, the other does not.
Keep something in mind, we have done away with our draft, other countries have not. This has a profound effect on culture and society. Boys knowing they have military service to perform when they hit 18 automatically “mans them up” in a way. Something lacking here in the US, with the constant pussification of American youth.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^not to keep harping on MD, but you have to be 21 to legally buy/own a gun so we are talking about mostly seniors in college. They are to irresponsible to handle guns?[/quote]
I am less than a year out of being one of said seniors and keep in touch with a lot of current seniors in college. While I think in any other setting, 99% of these individuals would be fine as gun owners, I can confidently say college is the bane of responsibility (for most).
We are talking about a population whose main priority (ESPECIALLY as seniors) is to go out, drink heavily 4+ nights a week, experiment with all levels and forms of drugs, experiment with every possible combination of sexual partners/experiences, and otherwise do everything in their power to be as irresponsible as humanly possible. My school is able to stand up to any school out there in academics-all this did, rather than forcing students to be responsible all the time, was create a small army of Jekylls, ready and yearning to transform into Hyde. The level of sheer stupidity I had both seen and participated in during college has been staggering (and I was, unfortunately, far too responsible for my own good). I hardly believe adding guns to this mixture would be a positive net effect.
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?[/quote]
The differences between a military base and a college campus–and the people who populate each-- are so many and so drastic that it really isn’t worth listing them. If I recall correctly, you went to college? I believe you know the answer to this question very well.
Setting philosophy and principle aside here, anybody who has spent a substantial amount of time at a university within the past decade knows just what the American college student is like.[/quote]
Conscripts would change that. There is a general difference between the type that chooses college and the type that chooses military, I don’t know if you take the choice out though.
And in my experience, entry military types aren’t any less wild or more mature.
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?[/quote]
The differences between a military base and a college campus–and the people who populate each-- are so many and so drastic that it really isn’t worth listing them. If I recall correctly, you went to college? I believe you know the answer to this question very well.
Setting philosophy and principle aside here, anybody who has spent a substantial amount of time at a university within the past decade knows just what the American college student is like.[/quote]
Conscripts would change that. There is a general difference between the type that chooses college and the type that chooses military, I don’t know if you take the choice out though.
And in my experience, entry military types aren’t any less wild or more mature.[/quote]
No, but they generally become so real quickly, especially with regard to firearms.
Now, if universities were going to discipline and train their students in a similar way that the armed forces do, then I’d be perfectly fine with having students carry firearms. But that isn’t going to happen.
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
What is the difference between a conscripted 18 year old, and an un-conscripted one?[/quote]
The differences between a military base and a college campus–and the people who populate each-- are so many and so drastic that it really isn’t worth listing them. If I recall correctly, you went to college? I believe you know the answer to this question very well.
Setting philosophy and principle aside here, anybody who has spent a substantial amount of time at a university within the past decade knows just what the American college student is like.[/quote]
Conscripts would change that. There is a general difference between the type that chooses college and the type that chooses military, I don’t know if you take the choice out though.
And in my experience, entry military types aren’t any less wild or more mature.[/quote]
No, but they generally become so real quickly, especially with regard to firearms.
Now, if universities were going to discipline and train their students in a similar way that the armed forces do, then I’d be perfectly fine with having students carry firearms. But that isn’t going to happen.[/quote]
And military is trained with guns so even at a time when they act irresponsible they have a better instinct to better handle a gun safely.
[quote]Legionary wrote:
Comparing military conscripts to the average American college student is almost as erroneous as the Schindler’s List picture you posted earlier.[/quote]
Not really, since we were college students (or more correctly, Yeshiva students).
Many of us just happened to been in the Reserves and are entrusted with the weapons.
Same drinking and whatnot (less females in my particular school) as any American college.
You go to a co-ed dorm in Tel-Aviv University and all the students have full auto M4s or Tavors stuck in the back of their closets.
