Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Students For Concealed Carry On Campus Set To Protest This Week

April 7, 2010 by  

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus set to protest this weekAs the fight continues to preserve students’ and faculty’s rights to carry hidden weapons on United States campuses, an organization supporting gun rights is planning a protest rally against laws and policies banning licensed concealed guns on school premises.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) is sponsoring the event, which begins today and will last until April 9. It comes in response to some colleges’ refusal to allow students to discuss the issue and others imposing such bans, the organization has said.

"Colleges aren’t content to ban the right to self-defense anymore," said David Burnett, a spokesman for SCCC. "Now they’re trying to suspend the right to freedom of speech."

Burnett also stated that schools that are banning weapons have yet to implement proper security measures, such as metal detectors, to ensure their students’ safety.

"Until they can take responsibility for our safety and guarantee our protection, colleges can’t be allowed to deny us the right to self-defense," he stressed.

According to SCCC, during the five-day-long event college students across America will strap on empty holsters in an act of silent protest.

ADNFCR-1961-ID-19703987-ADNFCR

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Students For Concealed Carry On Campus Set To Protest This Week”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • JC

    Lives are saved and criminals are thwarted every day by law abiding gun owners. But of course that isn’t news worthy is it?
    More power to the students.

  • MITCH M.

    I THINK EVERY RESPONSIBLE STUDENT WHO IS LICENSED TO CARRY SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXERCISE HIS/HER SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. SO CALLED “GUN FREE ZONES” ARE MERELY KILLING FIELDS FOR THOSE BENT ON DESTRUCTION. THAT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED. THOSE SCHOOL OFFICIALS WHO ARE AGAINST IT USUALLY LIVE IN A PERCEIVED UTOPIAN WORLD. THERE WOULD BE A LOT OF PEOPLE STILL WITH US HAD SOME IN CLASSES HAD BEEN ABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND OTHERS. THESE SAME OFFICIALS WOULD GENERALLY LIKE TO SEE THE WHOLE COUNTRY DISARMED. I CARRIED A HANDGUN TO ALL CLASSES (LICENSED) WHEN I ATTENDED COLLEGE BACK IN THE 1970′S. NO ONE EXCEPT MY GIRLFRIEND KNEW THAT I DID. IT WAS NOT FOR SHOW OR TO IMPRESS ANYONE. A TOUR IN SOUTHEAST ASIA A FEW YEARS BEFORE TAUGHT ME THE VALUE OF HAVING THE ABILITY TO PROTECT MYSELF IN EXTREME SITUATIONS. SAIGON WAS NOT A SAFE PLACE THEN. NOW WITH THE DETERIORATION OF OF OUR SOCIAL STRUCTURE THE STREETS AND PUBLIC ACCESSED ESTABLISHMENTS HAVE BECOME SHOOTING GALLERIES FOR GANG BANGERS SOCIAL MISFITS AND MENTALLY SICK PEOPLE NOT TO MENTION THE RISE OF HOME GROWN JIHADIST. PERHAPS THE SAME OFFICIALS WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DISILLUSIONMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.

  • obiwan

    Sign at campus entrances. ” Dear Criminal, the patrons ‘students and faculty’ of this establishment ‘campus’ have been disarmed for your safety. Enjoy!” The Administration.

    • Americal Liberal

      Mitch… It’s a problem when you have the mentality that every place is a war zone…school isn’t Siagon…you can’t go through life looking for an enemy…i support the 2nd amendment but I don’t want my country to be ” thought of as war zone..”… I understand it can be a violent world but I try and not live in that mindset…. I don’t know why , but it seems almost every subject coming from this site revolves around fear… I think the conservatives at the top of the conservative ladder want the everyday conservative afraid.. They have you thinking that somebodys always out to get you.. You need to change that.. It’s not always doom and gloom..even your religion is based on keeping you in fear…that’s control .. Take they’re control away .. Stop fearing everybody not like you… You might find more common ground without the wall if fear…

      • James

        American Liberal, Let’s no forget 9-11, nineteen legal aliens hijacked four planes with the intent of destroying three WTC buildings and the pentagon. That was in retaliation for our endless meddling in the middle east. To assume that no other such attacks will ever again happen is being naive to its silly extreme.

        • American Liberal

          James, I agree that we will probley get hit again… But as far as the Saudis that hijacked the planes… I don’t believe they were all illegals… Some had student visas , some were on a terrorist watch list… A few were actually taking flying lessons on flight schools in Oaklahoma and Florida… But I think I understand your point and don’t disagree

          • James

            American Liberal, I said they were “legal aliens,” they were all here legally, originally, but at the time of the attack, a couple of their student visas had lapsed. My point was, that many more like them are undoubtedly still here, and pose a potential threat.

      • MITCH M.

        LETS PUT IT THIS WAY, I DO NOT FEAR PEOPLE. I AM A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER NOW. I WAS ON THE FRONTLINES OF THE WAR ON CRIME FOR OVER 20 YEARS. I KNOW WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THE REAL WORLD OF OUR CITIES. I SEEN THE THE DEVESTATION BROUGHT ON TO VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES. THESE INCIDENTS ONLY GET HALF INCH SINGLE COLLUM RESPONSE IN LOCAL RAGS. I WAS A PO AT THE AGE OF 25 WHILE ATTENDING SCHOOL AND A COMBAT VET. I DO NOT AND HAVE NOT SUFFERED FROM PTSS AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO INFER NOR FROM PARANOIA.DO NOT JUDGE A SITUATION UNLESS YOU LIVE IN THAT ENVIRONMENT ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. YOU NEED TO FACE THE REALITY THAT THERE ARE DANGEROUS AREAS IN MANY CITIES AND NOT EVERYONE CAN RUNAWAY LIKE YOU WOULD OR WOULD LIKE THEM TO.

        • American Liberal

          Mitch… That’s true… And I wasn’t suggesting that you personally cameback damaged from war… But you do make the point that some people do comeback damaged and those places you mentioned that are like war zones, their full of Guns and some of those people shouldn’t own guns…. And thank you for your service.. Glad you made it home fine ..my point is just because the 2 nd amendment says we can own and bear arms doesn’t mean everybody is responsible enough to be gun owners… That kid that shot up that school a few years back.. that’s the guy I’m talking about… He was delusional and it was common knowledge he was mentally ill.. Like I said.. I’m a gun owner, but I leave them at home and if I don’t feel safe at some locations I don’t go there…armed or not.. Avoiding trouble is my goal..

        • American Liberal

          Mitch… One more thing… I didn’t say anything about ” running away”… I said I don’t go to places that I would need to carry a weapon… To me that’s being smart and avoiding trouble..

          • obiwan

            My incedent occured in a Walmart parking lot at 5PM. My CC saved my life, the assailent ran. Anything can happen anywhere. Just like the
            Boy Scouts teach, “always be prepared”. It’s not unhealthy, its smart.
            Being victimised is unhealthy. Being a crime statistic is unhealthy.
            The point was made clear to me, don’t leave home without it.

          • MITCH M.

            LET ME REPHRASE IT,NOT RUNNING AWAY AS SUCH BUT LIVING OR WORKING IN A HIGH THREAT AREA, DO YOU CHANGE JOBS OR SCHOOL OR MOVE OUT OF THE AREA, THAT WOULD BE RUNNING AWAY WOULD IT NOT? MANY CAN’T MAKE THE MOVE. I AVOID HIGH THREAT AREAS NOW BY CHOICE. I HAVE A LOT OF PERPS WHO WOULD LIKE TO GET EVEN WITH ME FOR THE JAIL TIME I MADE THEM DO.I DON’T PONDER OR DWELL ON IT, I JUST TAKE SAFEGUARDS AND STAY AWARE OF MY SURROUNDINGS. I AGREE MANY ARE LEGALY AND MENTALY DISQUALIFIED FROM CARRYING AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO CHOOSE NOT TO.THE POINT IS THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE. NOT EVERYONE WILL CARRY AND MANY WHO DO WILL MAKE MISTAKES AND BE PROSECUTED FOR IT. THAT IS THE PRICE FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE. I PREFER A DECISION OF SHOOT/ DON’T SHOOT OVER BEING A VICTIM. I SAID IN MY ORIGINAL PIECE “RESPONSIBLE STUDENT” MEANING MATURE AND FOCUSED NOT SOME HORMONE DRIVEN ADOLECENT. AS I ALSO SAID I WAS 25 AND A POLICE OFFICER WITH CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDIES. LAW HERE REQUIRES YOU TO BE 21 YEARS OF AGE AND ATTEND AND QUALIFY FROM A LAW AND SAFETY COURSE TO GET A LTC.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Mitch,
            to add to your post, the fact that a perp is disqualified to own a weapon has never stopped a crook from aquiring an illegal weapon! They can be bought on almost every big city street corner, if you know who to ask!! the crooks usually do!

      • Meteorlady

        Lib – A war zone? What the heck, I carry a gun and I’m older and a woman. I carry it to protect myself. I am not some nut case, I am a responsible citizen. If someone whats to assault me, they will do so at their own peril. I am also not a “cowboy” as I have taken gun classes and carry responsibly. You need to research the lives that have been saved by citizens carrying. The news doesn’t want you to know these stories, but they are there.

        Lets see – the 72 year old black man in Fort Worth whose house was broken into three times and he was beaten once. He got a gun and the next time he used it. It was the same criminals each time.

        The 10 year old in Montana that saved herself when two home invaders kicked in her front door while she was alone. She blew them away with a shotgun. Turned out they were illegals and had killed two people – they were also armed and dangerous.

        How about the lady in Luby’s watching her parent murdered while her gun was in the car? She could have saved them and many others.

        I could go on, but you posts tell me that your logic is flawed. A war zone is inner cities where home invasions are rampant, where drug wars are killing citizens, and where criminals have automatic weapons that they purchased illegally.

        We should really get rid of pencils and pens because they misspell words.

  • Jeep

    Here is the problem with all of this…NOONE can guarantee safety. Period. It cannot be done. However, you can give or take the right and/or the tools to defend oneself. As an avid gun owner, it really hackles me that the debate always centers around the “right to carry”. Really? It seems that it should start with the “right to defend oneself” and only then move into a debate on with what tools can one defend oneself. Otherwise, it just becomes a losing diatribe about what was intended by the second amendment. To sum up, the sign should not read “‘campus’ have been disarmed for your safety” (don’t take this wrong obiwan, I really liked your post), but it should read “You do not have the right to defend yourself on this campus”.

    • James

      Jeep, Americans have always had to bear arms, the Second Amendment is just a restriction on the federal government, not to infringe on it.

      • Jeep

        James, I guess I did not make my point very well. I am in total agreement that the amendments to the Constitution are not to limit the people, but were set in place to limit the govt. I think that every time there is a shooting anywhere the conversation always seems to degenerate into a discussion about the “limits” of the second amendment. By contrast, whenever there is a free speech question raised, the conversation centers around the “expansion” of the free speech clause. I suppose you could sum up my thought as I would like to see the tone change from “should we limit gun rights to…?” And, instead frame the question as “should we expand gun rights to…?”

        • American Liberal

          I think the 2nd amendments fine right now…. I’d just want to make sure criminals with a record don’t get access… Or people who are being treated for mental illness.. How do we do that?.. I’m not sure

          • Jeep

            There is a fine line somewhere that will allow max freedom, without allowing individuals that we can all agree (violent criminals, mentally unstable, etc.) should probably be limited. I would think that the more local the controls are, the more inclined those controls are to be fair and balanced. Just a thought…

          • Dylan

            Amer.Liberal,
            There are already laws against the MENTALLY UNSTABLE, and CRIMINALS having guns!! Where have you been? Locked in your mommys basement again?
            If our inept government would do their jobs and enforce the laws we already have, I guess you’d have no worries would you?
            Why do you liberal socialists always think that writing MORE laws, is always the answer to governments inability, or desire to enforce the laws we already have?
            Criminals generally disregard the laws because there isn’t much enforcement or punishment when they do break them, thanks to the liberals “revolving door policies”.
            Have you ever heard the term “career criminals”? These are criminals that you, and your liberal brothers and sisters have spawned with your sympathetic mindset of giving these losers 3rd, 4th, and 5th chances to continue breaking the laws. When is enough going to be enough for you people? WHEN are you going to wise up?

        • James

          Jeep, the reason for the confusion is that individuals and gun organizations and clubs us “the right to bear arms” and the “second amendment” expressions, interchangeably. That gives the impression that the ‘right’ and the ‘amendment’ are essentially the same thing. But that isn’t true. The right to bear arms existed before the federal government was created in 1789, and certainly before the Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution in 1791. The Bill of Rights are restrictive clauses designed to prevent the federal government from legislating or infringing on our rights.

          • Jeep

            WEll, put James…I just had a hard time putting my thought into words!

  • Bob Wire

    I wasn’t mature enough to be heeled up at 19. Maybe some were, but it was not I.

  • Americal Liberal

    School is for learning…. I’m a gun owner… My guns stay secured in my home…I’ve never felt the need to pack outside my home and if I had a fear that I might need a gun to go to a location, I don’t go there…. What a mess it would be if we had 350 million Billy ” the Kids” walking around America… No guns in schools…. The gun protest scheduled at the Washington Mall is an accident waiting to happen… Bad idea..

  • JC

    If people were allowed to carry concealed firearms at will the crime rate would drop to nearly zero in a very short time. The sticking point should be a system of Justice that is able to define the difference between self defense and murder. If the the penalty for murder was severe enough, people would think twice about drawing a gun in anger, wouldn’t they?
    Here again, we would weed out the idiots in fairly short order.

    • James

      JC, That has been defined by State law. If a person breaks into your house with the intent to harm you, it is perfectly lawful to kill him in self defense. If someone just knocks on your door and yells at you, it is not lawful to kill him. The same is true even outside the home, if we are threatened, we have the right to defend ourselves, even to the point of killing the attacker.

      • obiwan

        James,
        To set the record straight, the gun laws are more complicated then that and require real self control and responsability. If an assailant
        is facing you with a clear threat, you can shoot and not with the intent to kill (no intentional head shot, just the largest part of the body, the torso). If the assailant runs from armed confrontation,
        you have to let him go. It is illegal to shoot him in the back if he is escaping or to snipe from a hidden position. You yourself will be
        charged. I don’t know of any state thats atually passed a “Castle” law
        yet. I’ve been there, assailed in a Walmart parking lot. The assailent
        ran and I let him go. Lucky for both of us. He was just a bumb kid
        and I didn’t want to spend the hours filling out the paper work and
        answering the police’s questions.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        James,
        Not necessarilly so. In some states and even cities, the law states that if you have an avenue of escape then you are required to take it. In other words, if your back is to a back door and you shoot an assailant then you are at odds with the law!! Pure bullshat!!!

  • American Liberal

    James… If your point was pilots should be armed and air marshalls should be allowed to carry.. Then we do agree .. I don’t believe your saying 350 millions Americans should all be armed .. I’m not saying Americans don’t have the right to own weapons .. I’m saying their are logical places they shouldn’t be and their are places they should be allowed … Schools aren’t a place I want weapons…. Nor do I want guns in bars…

    • James

      American Liberal, the right to keep and bear arms, means we have the right to possess and carry arms. Back then, all able-bodied men were required by state law to possess a firearm. They were all considered to be potential members of a state’s militia, and if called up for duty they were required to appear with their firearms.
      The Second Amendment’s prefatory militia clause was later used by Congress to mean that the “shall not be infringed” applied only to militia-type weapons, and they began to regulate some firearms through their power to regulate interstate commerce. That issue came up again in D.C. v. Heller, but the High Court rejected it. The Court held that the Second Amendment’s restriction on infringement, applies to individual-type weapons as well.

  • American Liberal

    Jc… I don’t at all agree that if everybody was armed then crime would fall… I believe the opposite… I also don’t believe just because somebody was in a war zone that that’s a reason to carry a weapons at home… That’s an unhealthy mindset…. And I know the argument that Switzerland mandates you own a gun and crime is almost never there…. Europe has a very diffrent way of thinking than us ” cowboys ” over here

    • Jeep

      I’ll just throw this out there…I wish I had time to look this up…and, I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure that in some communities nationwide that have mandated gun ownership crime rates dropped off significantly. If I get some time I’ll try to get the actual numbers and where. While I do not advocate wild west gun slinging, I lived in Alaska for nine years and have a differing perspective. When outside the Anchorage bowl I usually carried. So, did everyone else. Honestly, everyone was most resepctful and very polite. I stopped on several occassions to render assistance, and never once felt threatened. On the contrary, it gave me confidence to stop.

    • Meteorlady

      Am Lib – so England has strict gun control laws and still has a murder rate. How do you explain that? Switzerland also has a murder rate that is higher than one would think, but most are by people that know each other, not criminals.

      In this country right now, we have drive by shootings, drug warfare in our streets, home invasions, car jacking, robberies in mall parking lots, etc. and you think that I should show restraint and leave my gun at home? I am personally scared to even to to the mall in a big city now. I carry to protect myself, not to shoot people and go crazy like a “cowboy”. You generalize most of us gun owners because you really don’t know us, and you push your own agenda. I am older, a woman and weight 130 lbs. I cannot defend myself against force.

      When was the last time you actually saw the police on the scene when a crime was being committed? They come AFTER the fact and I could be dead by then. So I carry and am comfortable and confident in my decision.

      • JC

        Generalize is what liberals do…it’s all emotional crap too.

      • Claire

        Meteorlady–Good post. I no longer have my trusty old crowbar but I still have my mace. And my Glock.

        • http://?? Joe H.

          Claire,
          Way to go lady!!!! Glad you saw the error of your ways with that crowbar!!!! Welcome to the well heeled crowd!!!! I just bought a hi-point 9mm and have already had it to the range a few times. Being a little heavy, I’m using a brace on my wrist( arthritis)but I find it to be cheaper than the Glock and pretty accurate on the range!! cost me 299.00 with two clips!!

          • Claire

            Joe H — The Glock is not a “big” one. My husband got it for me. He knows all about guns, I don’t. He thinks it is just right for me. The law here is that we can carry in the glove compartment but not loaded. That is why I still have the mace. The mace may give me time to get the gun and load it. I hope I never have to but the crime is on the rise. I would probably have a heart attack. But sometimes in the moment of need adrenaline takes over. With 450-460 state troopers being laid off in Illinois, it is not good. The illegals will have a field day going up I55. Home burglaries and robberies are on the rise. And the purse snatchers at the mall and shopping centers is unbelievable. In broad daylight, used to be only in the dark of night. The creeps have become bolder.

    • JC

      I don’t give a flying Rats…what Europe thinks of anything. They’re mostly trained sheep anyway. And whether or not you agree or disagree with my point that an armed society will have a lower crime rate is irrelevant also. The stats tell the tale. Florida was the first state to implement concealed carry law and saw a 38% drop in crime. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

  • Claire

    I do not have a problem with students carrying concealed weapons. What does bother me is when they have their beer parties and go crazy. Then what is going to happen? I realize not all students will be irresponsible but there will be some that are.

    • JC

      Claire? Is that you?
      I suppose it’s something to worry about…
      But, in that vane, shouldn’t we be just as worried about them driving? Or having access to steak knives? Or ball bats?
      (you get the picture)
      Gun ownership is just not something we can justifiably single out as something we should control over and above all other things.

      • Claire

        JC — Yes, it is me. LOL I was merely trying to point out that when they have their booze parties all hell breaks loose and they go wild and crazy. They could take their gun and possibly do some damage. Who knows? I remember when my son was in college. The parties were frequent and quite rowdy. But in reality, they have drugs and look what happens when they do drugs. No difference.
        I do understand what you are saying, and believe me I have no problem with concealed and carry. And with all the school shootings, yes, they need to be able to protect themselves.

  • Clifford Wentzel

    These Liberals who want to control “Guns” just get my ire up. It’s like
    the lady says we should do away with pens & pencils because they misspell words. It is the criminals who need to be controlled not the weapons. The weapons are only objects. Luckily our forefathers had good foresight into what our future leaders would be trying to do-take away our constitutional rights-and made provisions, which they are also trying to misinterpret. Do they not realize, or care, that the people who obtain licenses to protect themselves, have been thru strict training and background checks, etc. before issued a license and are NOT going to be out there waving their guns around &/or causing trouble and will only be using the weapons in case of a situation coming up that requires it-like the lady being attacked in the parking lot. I am a retired police officer and you better believe my gun goes where I go. Noone knows it’s there, but if a threat comes
    you better believe I can aim right at “his” head. Plus, this is all about the government controlling “us”. If they take all the citizens guns then what are said citizens going to do but whatever the tyranist
    socialist communist government says, Right??

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.