Should colleges allow bearing arms?

[ladyphoenix]

Quote by: CoffeeSaint You own it. You don't have the right to attend class there. You want to argue that you have the right to walk onto the grounds carrying your gun? You might have an argument. But if you want to be a student there, attend class there, then you will follow the rules set down for you by those who manage your property for you, in the name of you and all your fellow owners -- including me, and I say you can't carry a gun on my property. If the university doesn't allow students to carry guns on campus, then students do not have the right to carry guns on campus.

Wrong, they have no right to infringe upon my rights any more than I will allow. Not even YOU can infringe upon my rights (in this case, we're not talking about me carrying firearms on to your own private property), no matter whether you are in the majority or not. That's why our laws are set up the way they are. To protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. If I think your school ban on arms on (a public) campus is crap, I sue you. And I take you to court, and we take it all the way to the supreme court if I have to.

As Osborn said, they haven't the right to discriminate against individuals, nor to abridge the rights guaranteed them by the constitution. The constitution is a contract between the people and the government, and if the government owns property, that contract is in effect on that property.

[Praxius]

Quote by: ladyphoenix Wrong, they have no right to infringe upon my rights any more than I will allow. Not even YOU can infringe upon my rights (in this case, we're not talking about me carrying firearms on to your own private property), no matter whether you are in the majority or not. That's why our laws are set up the way they are. To protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. If I think your school ban on arms on (a public) campus is crap, I sue you. And I take you to court, and we take it all the way to the supreme court if I have to.

Even if you don't allow it, it's not a perfect world, and you can't stop it if it does happen.... go ask Arar.... I imagine he can tell you plenty about just how much they can infringe on your rights or anybody else's if they so wish.

You're trying to fight one right with another right.... one has to be overruled..... you say you have a right to protection, and a gun.... we say we have a right to protection from you and your gun..... you can tell us all you want about your good intentions with the firearm you have in possesion.... I couldn't care less.... I don't know you, and I wouldn't trust you enough face to face to look away while you have a gun on you.

As Osborn said, they haven't the right to discriminate against individuals, nor to abridge the rights guaranteed them by the constitution.

Walk into a police station with a gun and see what happens then with your rights. You'll soon find your right to bare arms will change to the right to remain silent.

The constitution is a contract between the people and the government, and if the government owns property, that contract is in effect on that property.

It's a contract.... that doesn't mean it's right. The right is a flaw in your constitution and need correcting. Nothing last forever and if one is not willing to evolve or adapt to the times that continually change, then you'll find yourself extinct soon enough.

[brien]

we say we have a right to protection from you and your gun..... you can tell us all you want about your good intentions with the firearm you have in possesion.... I couldn't care less.... I don't know you, and I wouldn't trust you enough face to face to look away while you have a gun on you.

My carrying a firearm doesn't threaten you one bit. You wouldn't even know it so it can't be a threat to you.

Walk into a police station with a gun and see what happens then with your rights

Once again, Praxius, you don't know what you are talking about here. I can walk into any police station I choose armed because I have a permit to carry. They have the right to ask to see the permit and the pistol, but they have no right to take it away, since I am a legally entitled to carry it.

The right is a flaw in your constitution and need correcting.

So say you and that's your opinion. Thankfully, millions of US citizens disagree with you.

[Praxius]

Quote by: brien My carrying a firearm doesn't threaten you one bit. You wouldn't even know it so it can't be a threat to you.

I would know it was a threat if you decided to pull it and shoot.... which I, nor anybody else should have to take the chance on. You carrying your firearm does threatens me plenty.... I don't know your intentions, and taking your word on what your intentions are, isn't good enough.

Once again, Praxius, you don't know what you are talking about here. I can walk into any police station I choose armed because I have a permit to carry. They have the right to ask to see the permit and the pistol, but they have no right to take it away, since I am a legally entitled to carry it.

They have the right to take it away from you until you leave. If you don't give it up, then they'll just escort you to a nice room with a view.

Firearms Amnesty Program

In the interests of safety: FIREARMS ARE NOT TO BE TAKEN TO ANY POLICE STATION; THEY WILL BE COLLECTED BY MEMBERS OF THE VANCOUVER POLICE DEPARTMENT. DO NOT BRING FIREARMS TO THE DOOR OF YOUR HOME WHEN POLICE ARRIVE TO COLLECT THEM.

This was a quote from the above link in regards to Vancouver's Gun laws and turning them in to the police, which are similar in other provinces to date. In my opinion this is how the laws should be.... if you're allowed to take a weapon into a police station without a problem..... something's seriously screwed up.

So say you and that's your opinion. Thankfully, millions of US citizens disagree with you.

And I imagine millions more agree.... but like me, know that there is no use and it won't work in your country.... hope is lost.

[brien]

I would know it was a threat if you decided to pull it and shoot....

Why on earth would I want to shoot you?

You carrying your firearm does threatens me plenty....

Impossible if you don't know I am carrying.

They have the right to take it away from you until you leave

They can indeed configate it but it wouldn't be a legal confisgation. I hang with cops there Praxius, and I have been in police stations while armed. So, once agian, you are merely speculating here.

And I imagine millions more agree

Yup.

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: brien Go tell that to a minority student.

Show me one and I will. I do not fear political incorrectness. Nor do I fear the truth: people do not have the right to a college education.

Quote by: brien Your opinion is fine but you don't rule the world.

Nor do you.

Quote by: brien Everyone but Federal Marshals on planes are unarmed. It is a guaranteed protected enviornment as in courtrooms. It is guaranteed to be 100% safe. When the Campus can absolutely guarantee that no one will have a firearm on Campus, then nobody carries. Can the Campus guarantee 100% compliance? I very much doubt it.

Airlines can't guarantee it either, as proven by terrorist hijackings for the past 50 years. But you go along with that infringement of your rights. Why is that? Because in your judgement, in your opinion, airlines are safer?
I also find it interesting that you have set this scenario up as a catch-22 for me: if the college bans guns, then you will still carry because nobody can tell you not to protect yourself -- and as long as one person carries, then you have the right to carry because the college can't guarantee 100% compliance.

Doesn't matter; you agree that the airline has the right to force you to surrender your weapon, because of course you have the right to refuse to fly on that airline. Same goes for college.

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: ladyphoenix Wrong, they have no right to infringe upon my rights any more than I will allow. Not even YOU can infringe upon my rights (in this case, we're not talking about me carrying firearms on to your own private property), no matter whether you are in the majority or not. That's why our laws are set up the way they are. To protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. If I think your school ban on arms on (a public) campus is crap, I sue you. And I take you to court, and we take it all the way to the supreme court if I have to.

To sue me, you need to show that I have damaged you. Show that you had a need to be on campus, which I denied you because of your weapon. Tell me how you suffered by not being allowed on this particular college campus, in any way other than losing the privilege of college education -- which is not a right, anyway. The only reason I said I don't want guns was to point out that our ountry also protects the majority from the tyranny of the minority; you don't get to dictate whether I have to be around guns on public property any more than I get to dictate whether you get to carry. The college is yours, but it's mine too -- and that's why we elect/appoint the provosts and the deans to manage our property for us, and we agree to abide by their rulings.

Quote by: ladyphoenix As Osborn said, they haven't the right to discriminate against individuals, nor to abridge the rights guaranteed them by the constitution. The constitution is a contract between the people and the government, and if the government owns property, that contract is in effect on that property.

Which means that you have the right to bear guns everywhere? Including into courtrooms and jails, police stations and hospitals?

I disagree with that. I think your presence on the property is voluntary, which means your rights are not being infringed upon because your right to bear arms does not mean you can exercise that right anywhere you please. If you have a need, and thus a right, to be on campus, then yes, an arrangement would have to be made; but you don't have that need, so you don't have that right -- so you lose nothing by a rule against guns on campus.

[brien]

Doesn't matter; you agree that the airline has the right to force you to surrender your weapon, because of course you have the right to refuse to fly on that airline. Same goes for college

Nope. Airlines have metal detectors and extreme security measures since the hyjackings. Have there been any in the US since these measures were set in place? Nope. Do you want these extreme security measures for colleges? Otherwise, I will carry when it has been proven I am in a potenially dangerous place and my safety isn't guaranteed. I will make this determination, not some pencil neck geek.

[Praxius]

Quote by: brien Why on earth would I want to shoot you?

I don't know... why does anybody want to shoot anybody? Whatever the answer, it still happens.

They can indeed configate it but it wouldn't be a legal confisgation. I hang with cops there Praxius, and I have been in police stations while armed. So, once agian, you are merely speculating here.

I'm not speculating one thing.... I am merely citing the laws in my country, which are fact and are in place today. You hang with cops, I grew up around the local Police, the RCMP (A lot), and from the military background. My father was in the military for a while, and he helped out a lot with the local police force from time to time, as well as played baseball in the summer time with the RCMP.... many I know personally..... and after living a few years around this enviroment, you pick up on a few things..... what I stated above is one of them.....

I can't be speculating if I supply you with links to information directly linked to the Canadian and Proviencial governments and what is practiced here in this country on a daily basis.

I understand clearly that your laws and our laws are different. I am merely trying to express how our laws work, what is legal and what is not.... you then can get a picture of how things work up here.... not so much as to convince you we're right or anything..... just to give you another perspective on this debate and other measures that can be applied or adapted to what your country may need.

Remember, Canada doesn't have a complete and total ban on all firearms.... and that is not what I am trying to get at here.... I'm trying to just say that the current methods you guys have in place right now, are clearly not working, so perhaps a few tid bits of ideas from elsewhere can give you a different approach and give you options that may help improve things, all the while keeping your constitutional rights.....

As I said, our methods won't work in your country, due to cultural differences.... so what you need to do is find what will work for your country..... I just don't see allowing more firearms in more locations as a viable solution.

[brien]

I don't know... why does anybody want to shoot anybody? Whatever the answer, it still happens

Not with me involved. I have no reason to shoot you and you have no reason to know I am concealing a firearm when I have a permit to do so in the US.

so what you need to do is find what will work for your country..... I just don't see allowing more firearms in more locations as a viable solution.

We have laws in place now. I have repeatedly shown how they aren't enforced and allow criminals to use the revolving door of justice. I have proposed more strict laws for those who violate the law by using a gun when committing a crime. The US DOJ needs to focus upon prosecuting and incarcerating criminals who use firearms during the commission of a crime and not law abiding citizens. This where the answer lies because if the DOJ were doing its job properly, we wouldn't have anything to debate here. Punish criminals not lawful citizens.

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: brien Nope. Airlines have metal detectors and extreme security measures since the hyjackings. Have there been any in the US since these measures were set in place? Nope. Do you want these extreme security measures for colleges? Otherwise, I will carry when it has been proven I am in a potenially dangerous place and my safety isn't guaranteed. I will make this determination, not some pencil neck geek.

No problem. I am not against security measures -- only the inclusion of firearms. You want to carry non-lethal methods of self-defense? Outstanding; please do so. And yes, I recognize that even the most non-lethal of armaments can be used in a lethal manner; but then, as my students are so very fond of pointing out (whenever the rules against knives and such in school are discussed) you could kill someone with a pencil, and I don't think we want to remove writing utensils from the classroom.

I freely admit that my argument against guns is based on my prejudice against that specific form of self-defense -- but then, the insistence on the right to carry that same armament is the other side of the same coin.