Maybe if we started holding people responsible for their actions instead of penalizing law abiding citizens, you would not need body armor on campus.

Once you start violating the Constitution with regulations, you have gone down the slippery slope to making it meaningless.

I agree with the founders who thought we have a God given right to protect ourselves from criminals and a Government on the rode to Tyranny with Firearms.

FBI or other Government training does not give anyone the “Judgment” that is required to use guns safely BTW.

Ruby Ridge and Waco are glaring examples of that “training” being ignored by “trusted” civil servants.

I think it is a good stepping-off point for broader concealed-carry rights. My two comments are:

1. Regarding the rights of ALL students to carry firearms, have you been to college campuses lately? You would have to wear body armour (with inserts) to protect from stray shots!

2. There are a lot of military members on campus (thanks GI BILL) who have an average of four years of supervised safe weapons handling training. I would agree with the ex-FBI, ex-CIA inclusion but I doubt there are that many on campuses.

On March 14th, 2008 at 4:29 pm, jungatheart said:

According to the Germans, anyone who buys a gun is a moron. I hate to generalize but Germans are the most narcissistic people I’ve ever met.

While I mostly agree with your position on the right to bear arms, that’s a little too much of a generalization for my tastes; Makes me wonder if you have met and spoken to many German people.

Considering their past, I cannot understand how Germans could feel safe with only their government having arms. Much in the same way I do not understand John McCain’s sympathetic views on torture for terrorists. In both cases I think there is permanent damage. I would like to state (to stave off a load of angry posts) that I respect Senator McCain as an American and for his service including his horrific treatment by the Vietnamese, but there is not a moral equivalent.

I, too, agree that anyone with a permit should be “permitted” to carry. Just as a sidebar, I attended a university at which >40% of the undergrads were 28 years old and older. This university had one of the oldest undergrad populations in America. So, the line needs to be drawn at permit or no permit. I will, however, suggest to you that NO age group is immune from the influence of ethanol, hormones, drugs, and just general stupidity. Permit holders, in general, continue to prove themselves to be the most law-abiding of America’s citizens irrespective of age and hormone-levels. There are MANY 21 year olds with permits who are responsibly carrying sidearms and they are willing to defend themselves, their families, and strangers. I hate to see these young folks being defined as those “ruled by hormones, drugs, and booze.” That is not who these people are. They are responsible, trained, and vetted by their states of residence.

Thanks for doing a great job filling in for the management!

And yes, undergrads under 21 can’t even legally buy a handgun on their own. If they’re old enough to get a CCW permit, then I say let them carry along with everyone else. Otherwise, no, I don’t think beer, hormones, drugs, and guns mix well. (Unless you’re the Sooners under Barry Switzer, when that was pretty much every day.)

but as far as Edmondson, that is typical and as far as i know this Edmondson has been attorney general for Oklahoma since the early 90′s when I first moved there and when I left in 2003. He has always been that way and keeps getting elected. Funny this is his record breaking term has been elected consecutively since 1994. He is the most corrupt Atty General even more so than Spitzer could ever dream of being.

Look at H.R.218 that permitted LEO (active and retired) to carry concealed everywhere. Once that passed, there is no longer as strong of a movement for legal carry for the rest of us non-LEO peons–hence no new movement forward for the regaining of our rights.

I fully respect our military veterans and thank those men and women for their service and sacrifice to this country, but I don’t think that it is right to grant “extra” rights to any group of “super citizens.” What about the rest of us “untermensch???”

I’m sure some will say “Go join the military if you want to carry.” However, that is just as invalid as when politicians say “Go join the military if you want to fire a gun.” Clearly, the exercise of constitutionally protected rights should not be contingent on military service.

It is wrong to make laws that require someone be a member of some “protected” special class to exercise your constitutionally-protected rights in America today.

Gun control is using both hands and hitting only the intended target with a tight grouping.