Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: CSU wants a Ban

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Douglas County, CO.
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    http://www.denverpost.com/ci_1390504...uestid=8224665

    The students are more right in this example. Several comments regarding recent events, VA Tech, Northen Ill Univ, Fort Hood are all gun free zones. The students if properly trained should be able to "pack their heat" as they say. One commenter tried to bring in the recent event in Seattle saying implying that the cops were defenseless against someone "bent" on killing them, yet had there been someone in that coffee shop that was armed, could they have helped prevent this senseless killing. There are examples throughout the country, Texas, Florida and other states where armed citizens have participated succesfully in stopping events from either happening or escalating, including killing the bad guys. The professor quoted inthe article believes there would be a wildwest shootout should someone enter the campu with the intent of causing harm, but in reality, there is evidence to suggest that promoting the fact that students may be armed could actually prevent an incident from happening. Sorry, CSU police Chief and Administrators, the fact that you seem to be so smart proves that you are really dumb and you don't trust the student body that takes the time and effort to be properly licensed to carry a firearm. Once again another set of liberal ideals being propogated.

    We need a Universal "All States" Concealed Handgun licesne and we need to promote those states that provide Open Carry, including us here in Colorado and many nearby states. I believe the west has it right, now if everyone else would get on board, I believe we would be much safer. I want the students to win....

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187

    Post imported post

    ColoradoFlyer wrote:
    We need a Universal "All States" Concealed Handgun licesne
    See, here's the dichotomy I'm wrestling with. The US constitution guarantees us a right. It's also supposed to delegate most power to the states. We as OCers are about defending our rights and constitutional freedom. But by insisting the federal government "take action" to demand what "all states" should do when it comes to 2A, are we shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak?

    I'd say the second part, promoting states that do it right, is much more important to our freedom than giving more power to the federal government to stick their business in states rights. What is that saying? Something about giving power to someone to protect your rights only gives them the power to take them away?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164

    Post imported post

    Or, how ‘bout we cut out all the law school crap and just do what the Constitution says.

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;. . .” ~14A

    And, Justice Black, in Duncan v. Louisiana, said:
    "'no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States’ seem [sic]* to me an eminently reasonable way of expressing the idea that henceforth the Bill of Rights shall apply to the States.”

    But, we think that we have to wait for someone to file suit against every unconstitutional law in every state where one exists before the Bill of Rights applies in any instance, even where there is no law so existing (as in the State of Colorado, for example, which has no lawprohibiting open carry).

    The trouble is that in order to apply the RKBA so simply and universally, we must come to trust that most of The People will carry and behave responsibly – that we can depend upon ourselves or the majority of the people we may encounter, wherever we go, to overcome the BGs and nut cases.

    I may sound like I know what I’m talking about. But, check me out. I’m still a novice. Your corrections and comments are welcome.

    _____________________________________
    * I don’t know why we say “[sic].” I think it’s just a typo. I don’t think it indicates the speaker is ill.


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , Colorado, USA
    Posts
    65

    Post imported post

    Vote on the issue on http://www.9news.com

  5. #5
    Regular Member Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    East of Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    672

    Post imported post

    The professor quoted inthe article believes there would be a wildwest shootout should someone enter the campu with the intent of causing harm,
    As opposed to a bad guy entering campus and playing shoot the fish in a barrel.

    How would this be a bad thing? An armed student engaging in an exchange of hot lead with a criminal. If anything it would direct the bad guys fire away from defenseless students toward someone willing to put their life on the line for fellow classmates.

    I would rather there be a shootout than have sit around waiting for the bad guy to run out of ammunition or to kill them self.

    Colorado Gun Owners - COGO
    http://www.ColoradoGunOwners.com

    A discussion forum for Colorado Gun Owners.

    Colorado Firearm law.
    http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/
    Lexis Nexis: Colorado law pertaining to firearms.
    Title 18, Article 12

  6. #6
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313

    Post imported post

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m12d4-Sheriff-vows-not-to-enforce-campus-disarmament-policy

    ...

    CSU, being located in Ft. Collins, CO, is in Larimer County. The Sheriff of Larimer County made a trenchant observation about the proposal to ban defensive handgun carry on campus.
    "I think whenever you create a gun-free zone, you have an opportunity for criminals to act with impunity," Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden said.
    In what may be the most remarkable part of this story is that Sheriff Alberden is publicly backing that position up--saying that his department will not enforce a campus gun ban.

    The Larimer County Sheriff will refuse to help enforce any concealed carry ban at CSU, student government officials said Wednesday, but permit holders packing heat and the Sheriff's office have little to worry about if student government has any say in the matter.

    At its weekly Senate meeting, the Associated Students of CSU passed a resolution supporting the school's existing policy allowing concealed weapons on campus by a vote of 21-3, with one senator abstaining.


    ...
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    Colorado needs to be proud that it is one of only 27 States that allow carry on College and University Campuses.

    Nothing contained under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 922(q) governs Colleges/Univeresities, or any other Vocational/Technical/Adult Literacy Center/Adult GED Center/etc.


    Jim Alderman is probably one of few Public Safety Officials who has it right, or has any common-sense, for that matter.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Statesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    mahkagari wrote:
    ColoradoFlyer wrote:
    We need a Universal "All States" Concealed Handgun licesne
    See, here's the dichotomy I'm wrestling with. The US constitution guarantees us a right. It's also supposed to delegate most power to the states. We as OCers are about defending our rights and constitutional freedom. But by insisting the federal government "take action" to demand what "all states" should do when it comes to 2A, are we shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak?

    I'd say the second part, promoting states that do it right, is much more important to our freedom than giving more power to the federal government to stick their business in states rights. What is that saying? Something about giving power to someone to protect your rights only gives them the power to take them away?
    Please read and replicate in your state: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum25/34843.html

    http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

  9. #9
    Regular Member Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    East of Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    672

    Post imported post

    So they now have a ban on concealed carry. What in the world do they hope to accomplish? How do they plan to enforce it? Metal detectors and x-ray scanners at every entrance. I wonder how many students they will loose over this.

    It would be awesome if they lost some of their contributors over this. Loss of money always gets their attention.
    Colorado Gun Owners - COGO
    http://www.ColoradoGunOwners.com

    A discussion forum for Colorado Gun Owners.

    Colorado Firearm law.
    http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/
    Lexis Nexis: Colorado law pertaining to firearms.
    Title 18, Article 12

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Yup, I saw it on the news. The blood of disarmed innocents is on their hands.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    GoldCoaster wrote:
    Yup, I saw it on the news. The blood of disarmed innocents is on their hands.
    Wonder how many will put up signs in their vehicles in the campus parking lots in protest saying "Victim Disarmament/Criminal Safety Zone"...

  12. #12
    Regular Member MarlboroLts5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    407

    Post imported post

    opencarrybilly wrote:
    Or, how ‘bout we cut out all the law school crap and just do what the Constitution says.

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;. . .” ~14A

    And, Justice Black, in Duncan v. Louisiana, said:
    "'no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States’ seem [sic]* to me an eminently reasonable way of expressing the idea that henceforth the Bill of Rights shall apply to the States.”

    But, we think that we have to wait for someone to file suit against every unconstitutional law in every state where one exists before the Bill of Rights applies in any instance, even where there is no law so existing (as in the State of Colorado, for example, which has no lawprohibiting open carry).

    The trouble is that in order to apply the RKBA so simply and universally, we must come to trust that most of The People will carry and behave responsibly – that we can depend upon ourselves or the majority of the people we may encounter, wherever we go, to overcome the BGs and nut cases.

    I may sound like I know what I’m talking about. But, check me out. I’m still a novice. Your corrections and comments are welcome.

    _____________________________________
    * I don’t know why we say “[sic].” I think it’s just a typo. I don’t think it indicates the speaker is ill.

    I disagree on what I highlighted in red. It's not, nor should it ever be a matter of trust. Its a right, plain and simple.
    "My dedication to my country's flag rests on my ardent belief in this noblest of causes, equality for all. If my future rests under this earth rather than upon it, I fear not."

    -Leopold Karpeles, US Civil War Medal of Honor Recipient

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164

    Post imported post

    MarlboroLts5150 wrote:
    opencarrybilly wrote:
    Or, how ‘bout we cut out all the law school crap and just do what the Constitution says.

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;. . .” ~14A

    And, Justice Black, in Duncan v. Louisiana, said:
    "'no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States’ seem [sic]* to me an eminently reasonable way of expressing the idea that henceforth the Bill of Rights shall apply to the States.”

    But, we think that we have to wait for someone to file suit against every unconstitutional law in every state where one exists before the Bill of Rights applies in any instance, even where there is no law so existing (as in the State of Colorado, for example, which has no lawprohibiting open carry).

    The trouble is that in order to apply the RKBA so simply and universally, we must come to trust that most of The People will carry and behave responsibly – that we can depend upon ourselves or the majority of the people we may encounter, wherever we go, to overcome the BGs and nut cases.

    I may sound like I know what I’m talking about. But, check me out. I’m still a novice. Your corrections and comments are welcome.

    _____________________________________
    * I don’t know why we say “[sic].” I think it’s just a typo. I don’t think it indicates the speaker is ill.

    I disagree on what I highlighted in red. It's not, nor should it ever be a matter of trust. Its a right, plain and simple.
    You are right. By wording it (your red) as I did, I meant to say that we ought to uphold the right in the face of normal anxiety that some people will be BGs, nut cases, or just plain stupid. As I read my wording now, I realize that it operates a bit like sarcasm/humor. Not always clear to the reader that it should not be taken entirely literally. Sorry for the confusion. I know better than to write like that. Thanks for your interest and thoughtful response.

    But, don't you think my footnote is funny? - Anybody?

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    aadvark wrote:
    Colorado needs to be proud that it is one of only 27 States that allow carry on College and University Campuses.
    This isn't quite true. According to the El Paso County Sheriff's Office Concealed Handgun Program, "Regent Policy for Universities in Colorado prohibits guns anywhere on campus to include parking lots. State colleges can have their own policies so you will need to check with each individual college."

    Carrying a handgun on college or university grounds is a Class 6 Felony under CRS 18-12-105.5, with the following exception:

    (d) The person, at the time of carrying a concealed weapon, held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1, as said section existed prior to its repeal; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214 (3); or (d.5) The weapon involved was a handgun and the person held a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214 (3);

    CRS 18-12-214 specifies the conditions under which concealed carry is authorized and specifies the restrictions of concealed carry. It contains no restriction against concealed carry on college or university grounds.

    In Summary:

    If it's any college or university with a board of regents, then one may not carry, either open or concealed.

    If it's a private college or university without a board of regents, one may carry concealed if they are carrying a current, valid CWP AND that institution does not prohibit firearms.

    If it's a public/state college without a board of regents, one may carry concealed.

    That's my conclusion after reviewing the applicable CRSes. Anyone else?
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •