Gonzaga University Returns Guns It Stole From Students Who Protected Themselves

0 Shares
gonzaga1114_image

Gonzaga University Campus Security has returned two guns it confiscated from university students Erik Fagan and Dan McIntosh after they fended off a man trying to force his way into their off-campus apartment.

But while they have their guns back, the university’s Discipline Review Board said their return carried a condition: The guns can’t be stored at the men’s Gonzaga residence or any other property owned or operated by Gonzaga University.

We reported Wednesday about the men’s experience — which demonstrates yet again why you should never call police — after McIntosh drew his gun on a homeless man who was confronting Fagan at their apartment door. Fagan had tried to placate the man by offering him food and a blanket. When the intruder saw the gun, he fled.

The men called police who later arrested a suspect — who happened to be a six-time felon with an assault conviction as part of his rap sheet — as he was trying to burglarize a nearby home. Police officers commended the men’s action; but campus security, which was called because Gonzaga leases the building and uses it for off-campus student housing, determined their guns violated university policy. The guns were confiscated hours later.

Fagan and McIntosh retrieved their weapons Tuesday night after a reporter from KHQ-TV told them the station had received an email from the university stating the men could retrieve their guns immediately.

Gonzaga President Thayne McCulloh promised “thoughtful evaluation” of the school’s gun policy. Apparently, he has not yet thought about how the two men, who say their neighborhood is unsafe and doesn’t have the same security that on-campus students have, are going to protect themselves from the next potential intruder.

H/T: gunssavelives.net

Personal Liberty

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Join the Discussion

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.

  • vicki

    I bet all thieves wish they could just return stolen property and all is forgiven.

    I do not see a reason to stop the lawsuit. And a second suit should be filed against the university for depriving citizens of their civil rights.

    • Bob Archibald

      I am sorry…what lawsuit? Did I miss something? Is the university suing to evict the tenants that failed to obey the lease that they agreed to follow (i.e. no guns) when they leased the housing?

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        How many more times are you going to repeat that same lie, Bob?

    • Bob Archibald

      actually it was a serious question — I have read nothing about any lawsuits — please clarify.

  • IHateLibs

    Bastards WOULDNT have gotten MY Guns in the First place

    • Chester

      All that says is that you would never have been in that building, or that school, in the first place.

      • Vis Fac

        You know this as fact?

        Wise men speak because they have something to say;
        and foolish liberals like you speak because you have to say something.

        To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

        You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

        • Mark Davis

          My first thought is if you don’t agree with a non-firearm policy in a domicile then you probably shouldn’t move there.

          • Vis Fac

            Certainly but people here assume there was a non firearm clause when they don’t know for sure especially in an off campus domicile. DO you know the intricacies of the lease ? Or are you ASSUMING?

            We know liberal tenet and that all “learning institutions” are in fact liberal so it is to be expected there are no firearms on campus AKA SAFE FELON ZONES

            “Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.” George Orwell

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and foolish liberals speak because they have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Bob Archibald

            there are no assumptions being made except your stupid assumptions. Get a brain cell.

          • Bob Archibald

            there attorney said there was a “no gun” clause … I posted the link several (couple) times already

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, ignoramus, their attorney did not say that.
            You just lack reading comprehension, like the typical public-school educated Liberal Progressive.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No he didn’t. And that won’t change no matter how many times you repeat the lie, Bob.

          • Bob Archibald

            mine also — it is called personal responsibility. You agree to something you should keep your word, not say “even though I agreed to this, I was lying”

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            A Progressive talking about personal responsibility — Priceless.

        • Bob Archibald

          the only foolish person posting here today is you — I am sorry that you are on some mind-altering drug, because you have some serious mental issues.

          • Jana

            Go look in the mirror OLD MAN LIBERAL SOCIALIST!

  • dan

    it’s always GOOD news when folks turn from their error and right a wrong….
    but school IS for learning , lol. i’m relieved that the boys got their gun back…but I doubt that resourceful and intelligent young men are ever unarmed and helpless.
    (just don’t whisper that in a TSA queue)

    • Vis Fac

      Unfortunately the only learning is liberal dogma.

      Those running the liberal one dimensional idiot-ologic non-education indoctrination system that passes for education have simply lost whatever minds they once possessed; and their ridiculous,
      mind-numbed zero-tolerance policies are causing kids and parents all manner of hardship and even resulting in criminal records for victimless non-crimes. And the governments of New York and California have long ago divested themselves of common sense and restraint.

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

  • Martin Tousignant

    Gonzaga and so many other “higher learning” institutions not only fail to recognize the Constitution, but also seek to restrain academic competition between colleges. I would not spend my tuition money at Gonzaga (or most other colleges) until they follow Hillsdale’s example of rejecting federal funding in order to maintain their moral and academic integrity.

    • Vis Fac

      Colleges like public schools are Liberal one dimensional indoctrination camps. The NEA is a tool used by socialists to force their propaganda upon our children. We MUST protect our children for this indoctrination or America is FINISHED!!!!

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      • Bob Archibald

        FR — every time you write you seem more and more like the fool you proclaim yourself to be. Gonzaga is a religious school.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          An ignoramus calling somebody else a fool — Priceless.

    • Mark Davis

      You do realize that Gonzaga is a private college right? Or do you count student loans spent at a college as federal funding?

      And just for reference, the reason Hillsdale rejects federal funding is because they don’t believe in Title IX:

      No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance…

      • Martin Tousignant

        If only Title IX was the only string attached to Federal funding! Hillsdale College has explained at length why they have and continue to reject federal funding. Suffice it to say it is not because they discriminate based on race or gender, because their admission and enrollment has been open to men and women of all colors since they opened their doors in 1844. And no, I do not count subsidized student loans as federal funding.

  • Chester

    A baseball bat just inside the door is a pretty good beggar repellent, too. May not make as much noise as a gun going off, but makes a lot more noise when it hits than a bullet does.

    • dan

      I’ve been told that an air-horn blast is as effective as pepper-spray ..
      or wasp spray…and my wild child just suggested a 24oz.framing hammer

      • Chester

        There again, mustn’t disturb the neighbors. That can of wasp nest spray will work very nicely, as it IS legal for even me to possess, and is very aim-able. From demonstrations I have seen, it is more accurate than most pepper sprays, and far more apt to have a lasting effect.

        • dan

          …and when used in combination with a bic-lighter,,,
          could be a very effective outdoor zombie-crowd disbursant

          • Chester

            Not so likely if you actually use the long range stuff. Believe most of that is now using a CO2 base propellant rather than the propane or butane used in so many hair sprays and the like. As far as that goes, a can of hair spray works very well at short range, but again, doesn’t have the long lasting after effects.

          • dan

            good to know BEFORE you need it !
            I can remember how potent my mother’s hairspray was…akk !
            I personally am fond of moats….beggars dislike bathing,lol

          • Vis Fac

            Then you can explain that to the fire Marshall as they arrest you for arson and your house has burned down and the assailant is still running free.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • dan

            you missed OUTDOOR, and I swithched to Zombie because they don’t run so much as mill about and wave their arms.
            I’ve seen men burn…I don’t intend to set ANYone on fire,
            however deterrence is about capability. You notice that the students never had to discharge the pistol ?

          • Vis Fac

            When you play with fire you are going to get BURNED. I too have seen men burned NAPALM does horrific damage but doesn’t always kill.

            Deterrence is about capability but one must be willing to use it. Since you don’t intend to set anyone on fire you in reality have no deterrence at all

            As for myself I had to use force I will do so again if necessary so as I say I would rather have my gun than not need it than to need my gun and not have it.

            As for the students the need to not use them was the deterrent just having them was enough. I can tell you that if you pointed a wasp spray at me and I were armed you wouldn’t have the chance to spray anyone (think about that) you never know if your opponent is armed so you should assume he is!!!

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and foolish liberals speak because they have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Bob Archibald

            I don’t have anything in my security kit for zombies yet — except bleach.

        • Vis Fac

          Try that on a doped up addict wanting your possessions or anything else for his next fix. He is not thinking about anything other than his next fix. Wasps don’t have arms to put up to protect themselves but people do.

          To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

          You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Chester

            That pressurized stream of wasp spray can get between crossed arms and still have a nasty effect on the face and eyes. If someone is that determined to have what I posses, perhaps they will also be a bit forgetful about other bodily targets for a foot or knee.

      • Vis Fac

        NO Dan it just pisses off your assailant just like it does to wasps.

        You don’t know how resilient an attacker is who wants to do you harm. I’ve had the unfortunate experience of having to utilize my hand to hand combat skills not once but on three separate occasions. Trust me you don’t want to have to remember smelling what was on your attackers breath or what his last meal was while smelling blood and watching the life flow out of him knowing the other guy could’ve been you. Not pretty and memories are etched in your brain forever.

        It is better to have your gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

        To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

        You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

        Libertas inaestimabilis res est
        Semper-Fi

        • dan

          [expletive deleted] aboutthe wasps…works fine ,just takes tim for the
          poison to work same as it takes time to bleed out….they’re not safe untl they are no longer capable of ANY counter attack.
          Many’s the man killed by a dead-man’s gun.

        • Chester

          Regrettably, there ARE those among us who are forbidden, by law, to posses even so much as a single round of ammunition. In those cases, one must do what can be legally done to protect himself from those who would do him harm. Baseball bats and wasp spray are not illegal items, yet, but I have heard people on both sides of the fence say I shouldn’t even be allowed to drive a car, as I might use that to commit a crime against them.

          • Vis Fac

            Regrettably those who are unable to have firearms have done so to themselves. Just like putting themselves in peril. I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, but prior to engaging is anything I fully assess the circumstances; this exercise was instilled while in government service and has served me well in life. In other words I QUESTION EVERYTHING –

            If I see a potential danger I refuse to continue that goes with where I live, shop or conduct business. If i cannot fully assess any situation and must continue I plan for every contingency and prepare as required. I am still alive despite several close calls.

            So if you cannot properly defend yourself I suggest you don’t put yourself in peril.

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and foolish liberals speak because they have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Chester

            Sir, the only thing you have to do to be placed in peril is exist. Many people need no other excuse to attack, or consider attack, than to know someone has something they want. As far as being unable to defend oneself, where does the inability to posses a firearm make one incapable of self defense? While I am very much PRO-gun ownership, statements such as yours are being used against the gun owning community every day.

          • Vis Fac

            Maybe so but you must eliminate or counteract peril whenever possible. If you continually practice risky behavior you are more apt to experience being attacked.

            I lost a son to a career felon who was free on a LIBERAL judges order. My son was a victim of a carjacking at a “safe gun free zone” AKA criminal safe zone” A public library

            We decided from that point on we would take every precaution possible Each member of our family has a CCP I carry in public buildings and no one is the wiser. To further attempt to eliminate man made peril we relocated to some land I bought in the early seventies far away from any urban area.

            The average person IS incapable of self defense because they have wrongfully been led to believe that the police exist to “protect and serve”. I am not saying that the ONLY defense mechanism is a firearm or you cannot protect yourself without one, I am saying a firearm is the most efficient attitude adjustment tool ever invented.

            People who are anti gun are liberal lackeys and use ANYTHING including lies and fabrications to suit THEIR agenda. All the supposed gun control laws work because “we the people” have allowed them it’s called APATHY so according to OUR second amendment any gun control law is ILLEGAL and unenforcible!!!!

            “Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.” George Orwell

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and foolish liberals speak because they have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • Bob Archibald

            and that is what these tenants did — they agreed not to have firearms — I love how the right does not believe in personal responsibility. The tenants did not have to agree to give up their weapons before they acquired the rental, but they chose to.

          • Michael Cole

            Where do you see in the article that they agreed not to have firearms? The article just states, “campus security….. , determined their guns violated university policy.” There is no mention of any clause in the lease.

          • Bob Archibald

            I posted the link previously (several times)….the attorney for the two tenants admitted that there was a “no guns” clause but that it was confusing.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            There you go, repeating another lie.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No they didn’t agree to that, Bob, no matter how many times you repeat that lie.

      • Bob Archibald

        I have the hammer ready — but has anyone used an air horn blast and determined effectiveness. I have a gun (locked up), but I would love something more handy as an immediate deterrent.

    • Vis Fac

      Some people are resistant to bats and police batons especially when they are on drugs. I prefer to keep some distance between me and any assailant so I let my trusty 1911 do the talking.

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

  • http://batman-news.com Jim B

    Hope someone had a warrant to break and enter a civilians home and steel their guns… doubtful! And so, isn’t breaking and entering and theft still a crime in this country, shouldn’t the Nazis who perpetrated this crime be punished? And for Goodness Sack, what law enforcement agency thought this was a good idea, are they completely void of constitutional knowledge and the laws that protect individual rights in this country. If law enforcement officers, or law enforcement organizations are allowed to break the constitutional laws of this country, then where does that leave us?

    • Vis Fac

      Jim I carry a copy of OUR Bill of Rights where ever I go. BECAUSE law enforcement if they believe you are unaware of your rights will trample over them and YOU.

      We have all seen the power the police wield on unsuspecting citizens. A man was arrested for obstruction of justice because he wouldn’t allow a fully armed SWAT team to enter his house for “tactical advantage” of a neighbor. So they broke down his front door and arrested him for obstruction. This was usurpation of his third amendment rights so OUR constitution is just another worthless piece of paper to LEO’s especially when they have an agenda Story of the lawsuit against the officers here
      Police Commandeer Homes, Get Sued http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/07/03/59061.htm

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      • Jana

        Force Recon,
        Question here. I watch cops a lot and when the police come to your door and fly in they don’t even give people a chance to talk let alone show them a copy of the Bill of Rights. How would you handle that?

        • Vis Fac

          Luckily for me I am rather remote from any urban area however since I am a “law abiding citizen” I assume they are there to cause harm in which case they’ll be met with lead. I would rather face death than live as a slave. We all have to go at one time should it come to this scenario it will be on MY terms.

          I’ve faced adversity many times I will do so again if necessary.

          Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools speak because they have to say something.

          To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

          You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

    • Bob Archibald

      I did not see anything about “break and enter a civilians home and steel their guns” — please provide information.

      The information available says it was campus security that went to the tenant’s residence not police. Nothing about doors being broken down.

    • Bob Archibald

      read some more — it does appear that the campus police entered the premises early in the morning. Sounds like a violation of landlord-tenant law.

  • Shorty Stuff

    This incident should go much farther. Come on Congress, push for a bill that states that ALL institutions that receive federal money should receive that money ONLY if they abide by the Constitution, which includes the 2nd
    Amendment.

  • Bob Archibald

    you guys are crazy — this is not second amendment anything — they rented an apartment; the apartment had a lease that said no weapons allowed. Simple as that. They should be evicted and they can take their guns with them.

    No different then getting evicted for taking drugs if that is part of the lease.

    • mickloud

      sigh……. it’s entirely different….. guns are legal, drugs are not……

      • Bob Archibald

        yes — but they agreed not to keep guns on the premises before they entered into the lease….maybe, a “no pet clause” or a “no businesses clause” might have been a better example…but the fact is they made an agreement and chose not to follow it….and somehow the right wing thinks I am a liberal for suggesting personal responsibility.

        • Jana

          Personal Responsibility for NOT being hurt.
          Personal Responsibility for NOT being robbed.

          Wow, such a terrible thing. They did NOT go out with that gun and rob someone else! They did NOT go out side their home with that gun and shoot someone.
          HA they didn’t even shoot anyone inside their home they just brandished it and scared the robber off. Wow how criminal of them!
          You are such a coward!

          • Bob Archibald

            Jana — no wonder the right always loses — cowards and fools are dominating the right….No one said they were criminals, only that they signed a piece of paper and refused to abide by it.

            Personally, I think it is great that a school is forcing our young to take responsibility for their actions. I wish the parents of the right-wing would not tell their young that is is ok to lie and be dishonest whenever they want to.

          • Jana

            As Vladimir Lenin said, Most people on the left aren’t
            communists just the useful idiots being used to promote the socialists agenda which is the first and necessary step towards communism.

            This sounds like it fits you to a T!
            You claim to be a Christian. You need to go back and prayerfully study study study the Word of God!

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The right always loses?
            You certainly aren’t an example of that, Bob. You need to take a reading comprehension class if you aren’t too far gone.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          They did not agree to that, Bob, no matter how many times you say differently.

    • Vis Fac

      Bob Were you the author of the lease or had a hand in printing it? Do you have intimate knowledge of the verbiage specifically that no guns in the domicile? All you offer is conjecture. and while doing so labeled yourself a fool!!

      When I was a landlord the only restrictions I could enforce is local zoning statutes and what my insurance carrier dictated. Other than that I had no business dictating policy.

      FYI Having guns is Constitutionally protected having drugs IS no and illegal.

      Justice means minding one’s own business and not meddling with other men’s concerns.

      To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

      You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

      Libertas inaestimabilis res est
      Semper-Fi

      • Mark Davis

        To be fair, all they needed to do if they wanted to keep a firearm on campus was put in a request with the director of security. It’s pretty much spelled out in the code of conduct that the students signed prior to joining the University:

        Possession, use, sale, or exchange of weapons at any location on campus,
        or within University residences, is prohibited. Firearms, fireworks,
        chemicals of an explosive nature, explosives or explosive devices, or
        weapons shall not be maintained on the university campus except as
        specifically authorized by the Director of Security. The term “weapon”
        includes any object or substance designed to inflict a wound, cause
        injury, propel and object, or incapacitate and includes, but is not
        limited to: all firearms, pellet/BB guns, paintball guns,home
        manufactured cannons, bows and arrows, slingshots, martial arts devices,
        switchblade knives or knives with a blade longer than three inches(with
        the exception of kitchen knives in our University homes or apartments)
        and clubs. Toy guns and other simulated weapons are covered by this
        policy.

        But let’s be honest. Just because someone agrees to something doesn’t mean they should ACTUALLY do it. If you don’t agree with something you should just pretend to agree to it, then ignore it and fight the consequences.

        • Vis Fac

          Mark I have studied at several universities and NONE of them have the same “code of conduct” clause Sure there are similarities but at Annapolis we had a completely different “code of conduct” to adhere to.

          My entire family has Concealed Carry Permits I refuse to not carry mine in a public building no one knows that I do and I don’t advertise. Again it a matter of having and not needing or be gunned down by a drugged up maniac who knows there is no opposition or deterrent.

          “Politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.” George Orwell

          Wise men speak because they have something to say; and foolish liberals speak because they have to say something.

          To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

          You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

          Libertas inaestimabilis res est
          Semper-Fi

          • Bob Archibald

            fool

          • Jana

            Wow Bob, Are you looking in the mirror?

          • Bob Archibald

            only a fool would agree with a stupid post like that — “I have studied at several colleges” — so what — the only question is what the tenants signed, not what you did whenever.

          • Jana

            Well good for you, you good little Socialist!

          • Bob Archibald

            yes — I believe that only fools believe that socialism is bad. Personally, having a border patrol, military, and a police force controlled by the government (not controlled by individuals or corporations) is good.

            I guess there are people that want to let anyone immigrate to the US that wants to (in fact there would be no such thing as immigration per se since that is a socialist concept — just people moving to the United States from other countries); personally, I prefer less (highly selective) immigration to unlimited immigration and think it is better for the country.

            But that is a topic for a different day

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You have been soundly trounced, Bob. The vast majority of your comments were proven wrong. If I was as ignorant as you are, I would be embarrassed to comment.

          • Vis Fac

            Yes you are.

            Wise men speak because they have something to say; and liberal fools like you speak because you have to say something.

            To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the wolf, hoping he will eat you last – but eat you he will.

            You don’t have to be a Marine to make a difference the only requirement is being truly patriotic and the willingness to back it up!!!

            Libertas inaestimabilis res est
            Semper-Fi

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You must be a real hero on the middle-school playground.

    • Jana

      Sure Bob, these guys should have just let themselves be robbed and probably hurt or killed just so good little liberal socialists like you could be happy. Wow, you are really something. Pacifists are a blight to our society!

      • Bob Archibald

        another person believing that people should not take responsibility for their own actions — so far only two people on the right (me and Mark) believe that these two people should take personal responsibility for their own actions (agreeing not to have weapons on the leased property).

        • Jana

          You are sure making yourself sound like a socialist!

          • Bob Archibald

            I am a socialist — I believe our society should have a public police force, a border patrol to protect our borders, a military to defend us from attack. So yes — I am a socialist believing these services are best handled by society rather than capitalism.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            It figures.
            Never mind that Socialism has been a failure wherever it has been fully implemented so that it can’t ride on the coattails of capitalists.
            Those readers, who are as ignorant as Bob, should study this ranking of countries by their Economic Freedom (level of Socialism) and see what Big Government does for countries’ economies:
            http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

    • securityman

      well, I read the articale three times and did not find a word in there thyat said that no weapons were allowed. now, to my way of thinking, “weapons” cover a whole lot of items. knives, bats. pens, pencils, plates, pots, pans and a bunch of other things.i am assuming that they are paying their tution and rent so the school has no , repeat no, authority to tell them what they can have in their apartment, unless it is illegal, which guns are not at this time. I have been a landlord in Calif. and even there they cannot tell you what you can and can,t have in your house. so, bob , you need to get your facts straight or better yet, just stop making dumb comments

      • Bob Archibald

        I do not believe most of what is posted on this website so I did independent research — check the university website. It clearly states that no weapons allowed on the university, or at the men’s Gonzaga residence or any other property owned or operated by Gonzaga University. This included the property that the tenants were leasing.

      • Bob Archibald

        sorry that you are not smart enough to do any independent research — I did it for you — so please stop with the dumb comments.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          If you did the research then post some links to it.

          • Bob Archibald

            I have repeatedly — getting tired of posting the same thing time and time again

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What? You think if you post it enough times, the readers will start to believe your lie?

        • Jana

          Are you sure your name isn’t Jeremy?

      • Bob Archibald

        and by the way, the SCOTUS has indicated that schools can establish “no weapons” zones….it is not a violation of any law or the Bill of Rights.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          You keep citing the Supreme Court, but I have yet to see you post any evidence of any such thing. Evidence please?

          • Bob Archibald

            Heller vs DC

    • Bob Archibald

      Thank you Mark — you clearly pointed out to FR that he is the total fool — I love it — FR gives a definition of what a fool is (offering conjecture) and then goes to offer conjecture that proves he is a fool — I can’t think of a bigger fool then that.

      But yes the students agreed that they would not have guns on their premises before they rented the premises.

      • Jana

        You didn’t bother evidently to read ALL of his reply!

        He also said,” But let’s be honest. Just because someone agrees to something doesn’t mean they should ACTUALLY do it. If you don’t agree with something you should just pretend to agree to it, then ignore it and fight the consequences.

        You must be a great coward!

        • Bob Archibald

          I read it — don’t agree or disagree with his position – it is his position; but then I never taught my son to be a liar or not to follow through with his commitments. Mark may believe that lying is ok; that is his choice; I am Christian and believe that lying is a sin

          • Jana

            But name calling is all right for you and that is a Christian act? Doesn’t sound like a Christian act to me! You calling people a fool.
            Your acting like a liberal doesn’t help your credentials either. Did vote for Obama?

          • Bob Archibald

            fool — “One who acts unwisely on a given occasion.” — it is not name calling; it is stating a fact; like stating you are a homo sapien (if in fact you are).

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, Bob, it is name-calling and is typical for low-information people who have no other way to win an argument.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Bob Archibald says — “you guys are crazy”.
      Okay, I guess Bob wins with that impeccable logic.
      Here is the story from the Gonzaga Bulletin:
      http://www.gonzagabulletin.com/news/article_9c59881a-4772-11e3-b99e-001a4bcf6878.html

  • WillBill Swillberg

    Fire the University president!

    • dan

      nah..he’s backpeddalin’ as fast as he can…might even change the policy.
      Even the security people were in a procedural bind….police might have held them in evidence until the matter was resolved.Pressure him to do the right thing just like he was pressured to return the property/guns.

      • Bob Archibald

        unlike the lease question, landlord-tenant law would preclude entry into the property at 2am to search for weapons.

        • dan

          goes to implied consent…they called/reported (mistake) and they ‘voluntarily’ surrendered (time is not the issue)
          Look, i sure don’t agree with the principle,but at least all has ended well…if their suspension is lifted.

    • Bob Archibald

      ummm — the tenant violates the policy but it is the University President that should be fired.

      Other than me…anyone else believe in personal responsibility? The tenants agreed not to have guns; it was discovered they had guns on the premises; the University slapped their wrist and told them it was wrong to violate the policy they previously had agreed to abide by; and somehow the University is at fault.

      They could have rented elsewhere but chose to sign this lease.

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Indeed they should move. But first the University should give up all public funding since they are in clear violation of the 2nd Amendment by having such a requirement. Once they give up the funding, then they can legitimately claim Private status and issue rules that are contrary to the 2nd Amendment.
        http://www.gonzaga.edu/Campus-Resources/Offices-and-Services-A-Z/Academic-Vice-President/sponsored-research-and-programs-office/Overview_Public_Funding.asp
        And what is this lease of which you speak, Bob? I saw no mention of anybody signing any such lease. In fact in this story from the Gonzaga Bulletin, one of the students says specifically that he would have lived elsewhere had he known of any such rules:
        http://www.gonzagabulletin.com/news/article_9c59881a-4772-11e3-b99e-001a4bcf6878.html

        • Bob Archibald

          1) Gonzaga is a religious school not a public school

          2) the supreme court has opined that limitations on weapons on school grounds is consistent with the constitution, much like yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theatre is not a violation of the first Amendment.

          Just the facts.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Read the first link in my comment, Bob.
            What is this Supreme Court decision you refer to? Do you have any evidence? Did you get the part about Off-Campus?
            What Murray Rothbard has to say about the “yelling fire” nonsense:
            “I would like to take this opportunity, once and for all, to set the record straight on the famous old cliché: “after all, no man has a right falsely to shout fire in a crowded threatre.” This formula of that old cynic, Justice Holmes, has been used time and again as an excuse for all manner of tyranny. Just exactly why does no man have this right? Is this really a case where libertarian principle must give way to a diluting “prudence”? There are two possibilities: either the shouter is the owner of the theatre or he is not. If he is the owner, then he is clearly violating the evident contract which he made with the patrons: to put on a play which the patrons can watch – a contract which they executed in cash. By disturbing this performance, he is violating the contract. If the shouter is not the owner, then he is clearly trespassing on the owner’s property. He was permitted on that property on the ground that he would peacefully watch the play, a contract which he is obviously violating. The false shouter of “fire,” therefore, is punishable not because free speech should be restricted, but because he is violating the property right of others. And property right, in libertarian principle, is one of the basic natural rights of man”.
            http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard65.html

            And a “Fact” is that the Supreme Court was never given the right to be the Final Arbiter of Constitutionality (Judicial Review):
            http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

      • Robert Messmer

        Actually according to the linked article their lease that they signed simply says to refer to Student Handbook. Student Handbook only addresses buildings OWNED be GU; therefor there is no Student Handbook reference for leased buildings OFF-CAMPUS for ownership/possession of guns. Absent a policy, they could not possibly violate it. So yes GU is at fault for not keeping their publications up to date.

  • nonstopca

    If the University won’t change their policy…. they must remove the building from the universities roll….or move…to a place that respects their rights under the 2nd amend.(or ignore the dumb a@#es, and keep your gun close and hidden from them) (it wouldn’t hurt to find a lawyer that would do the work free and fight for change.)

    • Bob Archibald

      correct — follow the policy; move; fight to change the lease that they signed; or keep quiet and hide their guns.

      But seriously?

  • WillBill Swillberg

    Tenants do what they damn well please. However, it is against the law to impose illegal restrictions. That would be violations of civil rights. You know the kind that lets you blab your face off. That would be #1 then the very next thing the writers thought about #2. Then on down the line religion. And hey a new one sex. And very new Gay. Oh forgot #4 illegal search unless you have a hunting and or fishing license.

    • Bob Archibald

      FYI — the SCOTUS says a school can prohibit weapons on their grounds (whether leased or owned)

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        You keep saying that, but have yet to produce any evidence.

        • Bob Archibald

          DC vs Heller

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Where is the link to that quote, Bob? Surely you don’t expect us just to take your word for it?

          • Bob Archibald

            what is the link to your post?

          • Jana

            Wow some nerve.

          • Michael Cole

            District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves.
            You got it backwards Bob.

          • Jana

            Bob is a plant, and he will always have it backwards!

          • Michael Cole

            I am not going to reply anymore to the troll. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

          • Jana

            Not only a troll but an out and out liar!

          • Bob Archibald

            Michael please read the ruling and not prove your ignorance. Dave has the quote above — I gave a summary of the quote.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            It was not a ruling, Bob. It simply said the ruling did not affect certain existing rules.

          • Michael Cole
          • Michael Cole
          • Bob Archibald

            thank you

        • Bob Archibald

          “The Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manner and for any purpose. The Court has upheld gun control legislation including prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            From DC vs Heller:
            “Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms”
            And added in a footnote: “We identify these presumptively lawful regulatory measures only as examples; our list does not purport to be exhaustive.”
            “Presumptively”? In other words they did not make a decision on the validity of such rules or laws.
            So even if the Supreme Court was the Final Arbiter of Constitutionality, the bottom line is that they did not make a decision on those types of gun rules or laws:
            http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

      • Michael Cole

        You keep talking about a lease. Where do you see in the article that they agreed not to have firearms? The article just states, “campus security….. , determined their guns violated university policy.” There is no mention of any clause in the lease.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Bob is just going to ignore the tough questions.

          • Bob Archibald

            what tough question —

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The “Lease Agreement” which you can’t seem to link to.

          • Bob Archibald

            http://www.gonzagabulletin.com/news/article_ca2aa36c-4cdd-11e3-97fc-001a4bcf6878.html

            fool..the attorney for the two boys admits their lease says no weapons

          • Robert Messmer

            Actually no, what the attorney said is that the building is not owned by GU and the lease simply says refer to Student Handbook. Student Handbook only refers to “owned” buildings, not leased buildings. School is saying pish posh owned or leased makes no difference.

            Personally i would go with has GU accepted any State/Federal money. If so would argue that the agent of the State/Federal is bound by the 2nd Amendment same as State/Federal is.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            That’s a lie, Bob, no matter how many times you repeat it.

          • Bob Archibald

            http://www.gonzagabulletin.com/news/article_ca2aa36c-4cdd-11e3-97fc-001a4bcf6878.html

            how many times do you need to have it sent to you — your reading ability limited?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Actually, Ignoramus, my reading comprehension is much better than yours. Robert Messmer’s is also.

          • Jana

            But you cannot answer it. Mr paid liberal.

        • Bob Archibald

          I am sorry that I actually did some research — there are real news stories about this case. The property is leased to the college and the lease requirement include a prohibition of guns on college property. Check the Gonzaga College website for further information lease requirements….spelled out very clearly (Mark published them below).

    • Bob Archibald

      Just an observation — the Bill of Rights deals with the rights of individuals and the government; it is not about and never has been about the rights between two individuals. The rights and responsibilities of two people are set down in contracts such as leases and their is no requirement that guns be part of that contract.

  • Bob Archibald
    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Nor was anything you said, Bob. Which, of course, is why so many of your comments used the decidedly Liberal Progressive technique of Argumentum ad Hominem.

  • jim_wright

    I would strongly recommend that the two young men review their lease. I would also recommend to the two young men that they sue the university for enough to pay for their tuition and living expenses to complete their college education. The university wants to take responsibility for their safety by not allowing them to protect themselves and then was negligent in their responsibility to provide them a secure environment. They can’t have it both ways.

  • 10-Nov-1775

    What do you expect from TOY COPS: frustrated, over-zealous types that are actually thugs in uniform.