Saturday, May 17, 2008

2theadvocate > News

NEWS

Campus-gun debate hot

Panel backs bill to allow carrying weapons at schools

By JORDAN BLUM
Advocate Capitol News Bureau
Published: May 2, 2008 - Page: 1A - UPDATED: 12:05 a.m.

Comments (12)

Page 1 of 3
SINGLE PAGE VIEW

Legalizing permitted handguns on college campuses took its first major step toward approval Thursday after three hours of debate in a legislative committee.

Gun advocates, faculty, students and college police chiefs lined up on all sides of the controversial issue that has arisen in the wake of campus shootings nationwide, including at LSU and Baton Rouge’s Louisiana Technical College.

House Bill 199 by Rep. Ernest Wooten, R-Belle Chasse, was approved in an 11-3 vote in the House Criminal Justice Committee. HB199 next moves to debate in the full House.

Wooten said allowing more responsible people to legally carry guns would serve as a deterrent to killers and not create the “wild, wild west.”

Rep. Barbara Norton, D-Shreveport countered, “It’s supposed to be higher education and higher learning, but it seems to me we’re preparing for war.”

Although most of the students who testified opposed the legislation, Southeastern Louisiana University College Republican Geoffrey Green said he only wants to be able to defend his friends if necessary.

“I feel defenseless,” said Green, who legally must keep a gun in his vehicle on campus. “It’s not fair that we’re not able to defend ourselves.”

“Where I spend most of my time, I am mandated to be unprotected,” LSU law student Elizabeth Cooke added.

Southern University student body president Carey Ash said the focus should be on increasing police staffing, not adding more guns. Ash warned that changing the law would harm the recruitment of out-of-state students.

“It is worrisome to not only worry about class grades, but who next to you might have a gun,” said Ash, who chairs the Louisiana Council of Student Body Presidents.

Grambling State University student body vice president Steven Jackson said he sees a more “hostile environment” with more guns on campuses.

“We should be talking about textbooks. We should be talking about scholarships,” Jackson said. “We shouldn’t be talking about guns on college campuses.”

To apply for a permit, a Louisiana resident must be at least 21 years old, take some training and not have a felony record.


	Most Popular	Most Emailed	Hot Topics	Most Commented

Go to complete list

Comments (12)

Write a Comment

Mikey
Friday, May 02, 2008
7:41 AM

Jindal needs to begin redevelopment plan to buy out the NBR Harlem slums and demolish, relocating to sectionA high-rises in preferred area. Need to move really Quick! Mikey

Joe Wiggles
Friday, May 02, 2008
9:16 AM

Unless all these students and faculty are sharp-shooters, I'd prefer no guns be allowed on campus. One person shooting is bad enough. If another or more start shooting back that will be a mess. Keep in mind close-quarter ricochet, please. One of the arguments I've heard for this bill to be passed is that it would deter people like the VA Tech shooter, the BR Tech shooter, Columbine, etc. Almost all of the recent school shooters in the last decade went in with the intent to die - either by suicide or shot by police. And in ALL cases the police handled it very well by themselves. It seems to me that funding for mental health counseling and training is more important than allowing guns on campus. It's not the only remedy but much better than inviting a panicked free-for-all shootout in a crises.

Uptowner
Friday, May 02, 2008
10:09 AM

First, a factual error in the article - Virginia also allows guns on college campuses; however, colleges are allowed to forbid students/faculty from carrying, in effect allowing a non-affiliate to carry, while forbidding a student from carrying. 2nd - @Joe Wiggles - Do you include police in your ban on guns on campus? Because the average permit holder is by far more experienced on the range than the average police officer. The minimal qualifications/renewals required of police are trivial compared to the time that most CCW holders spend on the range. Moreover, here's a test - go to a range. See how many rounds you can fire off in 2 minutes (an exceptional police response time under any circumstance). However great a quick police response is, it will NEVER be faster than a citizen on the scene who is able to protect themself. The fact is, for all the fear-mongering about shoot-outs, etc, they DON'T happen. However, I can find you numerous instances of law abiding residents with guns protecting their fellow citizens. The school shooting a few years back in Pearl River, MS. Appalachian State University in North Carolina. The recent mall shooting in Nebraska. In all those instances, and others, law abiding citizens responded with guns. And lives were saved.

Friday, May 02, 2008
10:19 AM

How long before a student turn a gun on one of his or her professor?

Nick
Friday, May 02, 2008
11:02 AM

Gun grimes are very rarely committed by concealed carry licensees, so I don't see what the problem is. If a student has gone through the training required to earn his CCW, then he should be able to carry anywhere he wants. Gun control only serves to restrict law-abiding citizens, not criminals.

O'Brien
Friday, May 02, 2008
11:38 AM

In response to the no name post below it would seem the question is why hasn't a student turned a weapon on a professor already? At the moment it would seem there is nothing except a cop on the phone to protect a professor or a student. Obviously this is not the most comforting thing in the world when you're looking down a barrel and the cop's best response time, as pointed out by another post, is roughly 2 minutes. Even with a bolt action anything It possible to precision shoot more chaos than the average American citizen would believe. Historically laws, locks, and passwords keep honest people honest. None of the above will deter someone who is set in his/her self made (or otherwise given) mission. The hostile individual may go in with intent to kill and be killed in the process but I would rather take that response time from 2 minutes to possibly less than 4 seconds (the time it takes me, a CCW and college student, to decide, draw, and put 2 in the chest and one in the head accurately at 25 yards). Sheep or Sheepdog, which will you make me?

Jeff
Friday, May 02, 2008
12:15 PM

Fact: Criminals do not follow laws. Hence the reason they are called criminals. This being the case, then if one is of criminal intent then he will arm himself regardless of laws and commit the act that he wishes to commit. Fact: Since Criminals do not follow the law then the only thing that can stop them is immediate use of force. Active shootings usually end when the shooter is dead. In most cases these incidents end by the shooter committing suicide before the police arrive, but sometimes by suicide when the police arrive. In Virginia Tech the police were prevented from intervening by chains and padlocks. In Columbine they were slowed by boobie traps and explosives. Now please ask yourself these questions. First how many rounds can be fired from a gun in two to five minutes? This is the average police response time on a good day. Secondly, where does the first responsibility for personal protection lay? Is it with the individual or with law enforcement? There are a hundreds of dead students, faculty, and staff that waited for the police to protect them. I say let an adult who has a clean background and training have the chance at surviving one of these situations.

mark edward marchiafava
Friday, May 02, 2008
5:20 PM

What this article did NOT even bother to mention was the "rest of the story." Louisiana state constitution, article 1 sec. 11, clearly states that ALL citizens have the right to bear arms, NO PERMIT REQUIRED. However, the state does have the right to regulate/control/prohibit the CONCEALED carry of weapons. Solution: simply wear it in the open, end of conversation. and yes, you ARE welcome !!!

micah braase
Saturday, May 03, 2008
1:26 AM

There are many instances above where students say that they would be frightened of people who use this law to carry a gun on campus. I'm sorry, but the people who would bring a gun on campus to shoot people and create a Virginia Tech shooting aren't going to be those CCW carriers. If someone wants to shoot people and they have a gun. They aren't going to be stopped by a law that says you can't bring a gun on campus. VT was a gun-free zone. Most of the school shootings were gun-free zones. The people doing these crimes aren't law abiding citizens that get a CCW permit for self protection. Also, if you allow CCW permit holders to carry their weapons on campus, they aren't going to all of the sudden decide to go on a shooting spree. If they were, then a gun-free zone law wouldn't stop them, so this idea that allowing CCW permit holders to bring their weapons is bad is just a joke. CCW permit holders have to go through a lot of training, and I guarantee 2 things that if a maniac comes onto campus shooting at people: 1- He is not a CCW permit holder and 2- one of the safest places to be at that time is in a classroom with a CCW permit holder who had their firearm with them. These CCW permit holders can protect themselves and those around them. Stop demonizing them by saying that they will go around killing people and making our campuses less safe. A classroom with a CCW permit holder who has their weapon on their person will be one of the safest classrooms on campus if a maniac shows up shooting.

Neil Evangelista
Saturday, May 03, 2008
8:14 AM

Paperwork, fees, and background checks to allow people to carry a side-arm? What kind of nonsense is this? The right of self-defense is a corollary to the right to life; to deny one is to deny the other. The purpose of government is to insure our rights, not to infringe on them. The fact is that governments should not be involved in permitting the carriage of weapons, either openly or concealed, by anyone, anywhere. Our constitution states that the right of the people to keep (possess) and bear (carry) arms shall not be infringed. Marbury v. Madison (1803) decided that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that any law that contradicts the Constitution is null and void. "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ... An unconstitutional law is void." (16 American Jurisprudence 2d, Sec. 178) In Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943) the Supreme Court stated that a constitutionally-protected right may not be licensed, nor a fee charged. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of those protected natural rights. In Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, Alabama (1962) the Supreme Court decided that “If the state does convert a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” (That means they can't punish you, folks!) To paraphrase an oft-quoted movie line, "Permits? We don' need no steenking permits!" Neil Evangelista NRA Pistol & Personal Protection Instructor Boca Raton, FL

Southern Man
Saturday, May 03, 2008
1:55 PM

How can a nation who holds the Constitution and Billof RIghts in such high esteem, as the supreme law of the land, NOT allow students to protect themselves. The first thing that opposing views say is, "You add firearms to the mix, it’s going to be deadly," how lame. If you DON'T add firearm "PROTECTION" to the mix there are going to be more deaths. It's like, "call 911 and die". Whereas if you had a gun, you could return fire and I promise anyone that fired upon me would get return fire. You don't have to talk about guns. In fact it is best if you do not discuss whatever protection you have. Just go on about your studies. A gun is for killing. I hope that no student needs to protect themself with a gun but in the event a "CRIMINAL" wants to do bodily harm, you don't have to wait on Campus Police or city Police to respond. You can defend yourself quite adequately. Makes sense to me. We should NOT rely on government all the time to protect ourselves. This IS a positive step to curbing crime. It has already been proven that commmunities that allow gun ownership have much fewer crime rates. Do the research and keep the guns. Otherwise only the crimenal will have a gun and you will be sitting there waiting on the Police, who may or may not get there in time.

a professor
Friday, May 09, 2008
7:01 PM

From the misinformed, reactionary comments written here it sounds like the rule of law has ended and anarchy is upon us. Informed public policy decision-making based on evidence from the social sciences and criminal justice has never been a top priority in Louisiana, but now we're being told to act rashly on our worst fears. Handguns, concealed and brandished, are routinely restricted from campuses and schools as a reasonable safety measure. Guns in the classroom will have a detrimental effect on education. This act would take away the ability of administrators to establish appropriate safety regulations, require educational institutions to allow concealed guns on campus, and undermine attempts to reduce violence. It will polarize the learning environment and destabilize student – faculty interactions. It will further damage the national reputation of Louisiana, undercut efforts to attract students and faculty, threaten recent improvements in education, and result in increased numbers of gun-related deaths. In this culture of violence, only those ready to kill are respected. Supporters of nonviolence and conflict resolution can only hope that reason and education prevail over the politics of violence and fear.