In Florida, chilling testimony against guns on campus
From The St. Petersburg Times:
Sen. Greg Evers this morning postponed discussion of a controversial gun bill (SB 234) that, among other things, would allow people to carry weapons onto college campuses after the father of a killed Florida State University student showed up to oppose the bill at a Senate committee hearing.
Ashley Cowie, a 20-year-old sophomore studying interior design, was killed January 9, 2011 at a fraternity party when another student accidentally discharged a rifle, according to police. Dr. Robert Cowie described the incident during emotional testimony, telling the Senate Criminal Justice Committee that a bullet from an AK-74 went through his daughter’s chest and struck a second student. He held back tears as he said how Ashley’s identical twin sister Amy tried to perform CPR at the party to keep her alive. Amy was “looking at the whole in her sister’s chest with blood gushing from her mouth and she knew she was already dead,” Cowie said. “But she felt compelled to do something.”
Alcohol was found in the system of the shooter, 20-year-old Evan Wilhelm, police said.
“Allowing guns in an atmosphere of college parties puts everyone involved at increased and undue risk,” Cowie told senators. “Would you feel more or less at risk today if I were carrying a gun?”
Guns on college campuses — where combinations of young people, drugs and alcohol are common — are a bad idea. As Dr. Cowie notes:
“Allowing guns in an atmosphere of college parties puts everyone involved at increased and undue risk. Each young man in that fraternity that knew that weapons were present and had been brandished in the past will have to live with the guilt that they could have prevented this tragedy.”
Cowie’s testimony succeeded in delaying, but probably not preventing, passage of the bill. However, if you want evidence of the overwhelming power of the National Rifle Association, it’s hard to beat this one, also out of Florida:
“A controversial gun bill, strongly backed by the National Rifle Association and strongly opposed by doctors, passed through the Senate Criminal Justice Committee Tuesday morning.
SB 432 would not allow doctors to ask patients whether they own a gun. An offending doctor would be charged $10,000 for the first offense, at least $25,000 for the second offense, and a minimum of $100,000 for the third offense. Psychologists and psychiatrists dealing with emergency psychotic episodes would be exempt.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Greg Evers, R-Baker, passed 4-1. Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland was absent, but Sen. Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando voted as an ex-officio member. Sen. Gwen Margolis, D-Sunny Isles cast the lone dissenting vote.
Doctors turned out in force to oppose the measure, saying it hampers their ability to evaluate patient safety…
But Marian Hammer, a National Rifle Association lobbyist and former national president, said doctors are pushing an anti-gun agenda on their patients and intruding on their Second Amendment rights.
“A growing political agenda is being carried out in examination rooms,” Hammer said. “It has become about the politics of some medical doctors, and it has to stop.”
Doctors can’t even ask about gun ownership? A $10,000 fine for simply daring to raise the question?
Really now.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
774 comments Add your comment
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:18 pm
md: I still think the best thing people can teach their kids has nothing to do with guns, one way or the other.
Perhaps you are right, but if you’re one of those people who believes that everyone should have a gun, put the gun in your kid’s hand and show them how to use it. Also tell them how to be responsible with it and the moral implications of having such power in your hand. And if you can’t or won’t do that, then shut up and stop talking about how everyone should be able to have a gun.
Essentially, people who own guns should be proficient with them or not use them at all.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:19 pm
I misquoted. md should have been Hillbilly
md
February 24th, 2011
11:19 pm
No Adam….all choices….such as dropping out of school and then asking for assistance and not paying taxes, and……….you know, the ones the folks on the left label as the “poor things”……..
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:20 pm
md: You know with all this talk of dropping out of school you’d think the kids you’re talking about would have been educated enough to realize the cold and calculating decision that you’re suggesting. What cunning kids! I guess they didn’t need to go to school after all!
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:21 pm
Adam:
You wouldn’t want all the “rayguns” gone.
Then the world would be ruled by the biggest and badest ……… you know, the bullies of the world.
md
February 24th, 2011
11:22 pm
“Also tell them how to be responsible with it and the moral implications of having such power in your hand. And if you can’t or won’t do that, then shut up and stop talking about how everyone should be able to have a gun.”
Kind of funny if you think about it………..”such power in your hand”……….yet we can care less how dumb folks are when they exercise their right to vote……..THE most powerful tool we possess.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:23 pm
0311: Yep those are the ones who would know exactly how to construct and use an EMP device.
Assuming you have a geek capable of that who ALSO can kick anyone’s ass, I say he deserves to win.
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:23 pm
Agreed Hillbilly but did any of us do that when we were in that age group regardless of what our parents taught us? Do any of us know what or what not our own kids are doing once out of the house? I’ve swung from a few hotel balconies in my day. I’ve thrown a bullet or two in the campfire just to see what happened. I guess my point is why encourage something that is so potentially deadly when it might just best be left alone. I for one don’t think my political agenda or yours is worth the life of even one kid.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:24 pm
Just imagine what Atlanta would be like tonight if every gun “except police” was gone (house, car, place of business, body, etc.) and EVERY criminal knew it ………………..
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:24 pm
Personal responsibility…..say it to yourself, go ahead. If I am at a party and someone offers me heroin, and I overdose, I am complicit in my own death. If I die of alcohol poisoning, I am complicit in my own death. If I die driving a car while I am drunk, I am complicit in my own death. If I am at a party with drunk people with guns, and I don’t leave…….
md
February 24th, 2011
11:25 pm
“You know with all this talk of dropping out of school you’d think the kids you’re talking about would have been educated enough to realize the cold and calculating decision that you’re suggesting. What cunning kids! I guess they didn’t need to go to school after all!”
And what was that you said about consequences??
You do know that eventually these dropouts grow old enough to choose to get back into school, and many choose not to……but that would nullify your argument.
Hillbilly Deluxe
February 24th, 2011
11:25 pm
Adam
I never said everybody should have a gun, it’s up to them whether they want one or not. Everyone has the right to have one. And as I said, I was taught to shoot before I learned to read, and I learned to read at age 5. There were always guns in our house and I always knew where they were and that I would get my ass beat if I went around them without adult supervision. I’ve taught kids how to use guns and supervised them. I agree that people who have guns should know how to use them but then, I’ve never said otherwise.
And I’ve never told anybody to “shut up” on a blog. I consider that rude.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:25 pm
md: I care a lot about how dumb people are when they vote. That’s why I hate Fox News and so on. But what do you suggest to fix it? An English test? A test to see if people know what the candidates are campaigning on (perhaps given only in English, and only in text)?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:25 pm
Adam
funny but ………………
md
February 24th, 2011
11:28 pm
“If I am at a party and someone offers me heroin, and I overdose, I am complicit in my own death.”
No. no no……someone else brought it in, so no way it was my fault. If he didn’t bring it, I wouldn’t use it and wouldn’t be dead.
A bit like folks buying more house than they could afford…..those evil bankers made them sign that contract…….used force they did.
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:29 pm
BADA BING if the gun is concealed how do you know it’s even present? After some fool pulls his concealed weapon and starts shooting it’s too late to leave now isn’t it?
md
February 24th, 2011
11:31 pm
Taps…..
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:31 pm
md: Out of curiosity, how would you feel if you slipped into a coma at age 13, woke up as an 18 year old, and had to go back to school at the same grade level you were at? Let us assume for the sake of argument that you have no choice or chance at home schooling or anything like it: you HAVE to go back to a public school. How well do you think you would learn? Would you really be motivated? If we take out the coma part and say it’s a decision on your part to have left in the first place, sure you’d regret it, but would you necessarily then overcome all the new obstacles associated with doing this. You still now have 5 years of schooling to catch up on, which would put you at age 23 instead of age 18 by the time you’re done. Feeling good about yourself now?
That’s about the same as someone going back to school after they have surpassed their grade level by age.
Once the decision is made, there is very little encouraging that person to go back to school.
Also, let’s say for a moment that dropping out of school is something no kid should ever do. What then do you suggest? Also, do you have some actual statistics showing some sort of calculated effort to live off of the government from such an early age by a majority of those who quit school?
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:32 pm
md if someone offers you heroin and you use it is totally different than if you get shot from across the room by the hand of another. That was a pretty dumb analogy. Now if someone hands you his gun and you blow yourself away with it……….
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:33 pm
Hillbilly: You are a good example of the people I am NOT telling to shut up.
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:34 pm
If someone pulls a concealed weapon quickly and shoots you, that is murder. If you know there are guns at a party, and you stay, that is different. Does the story say if everyone knew that there was a gun at the party? Can’t give you my opinion without the facts.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:35 pm
Does ANYONE object to a former police officer or former combat veteran or faculty member or university employee (all 21 or over) having the right to carry on campus ?
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:36 pm
Staying at a party that you know is dangerous, is a personal decision that you have made. You live with that decision or die by it.
Hillbilly Deluxe
February 24th, 2011
11:37 pm
I should have been in bed ages ago. Nite all.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:39 pm
0311: Depends WHY the police officer is a FORMER police officer, and how proficient staff members are at KEEPING and using their weapons.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:41 pm
ok BADA BING, let’s say there’s a kid at the party, 21, and has been drinking. THEN the guy comes in and announces to everyone he has a gun. The guy doesn’t leave because, well who knows. Maybe he didn’t understand what was said, maybe he was only paying attention to the boobs he’s looking at, maybe he thinks a gun is cool and doesn’t realize it’s loaded and doesn’t realize the owner is also loaded. We won’t ever really know, because that’s the guy who got killed.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:42 pm
Adam ;
Points taken.
The assumption is everything is in order.
Would you object ?
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:42 pm
BADA BING: My point being, is that guy who died complicit in his own death?
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:43 pm
0311: If everything is in order, I have no reason to object. Typically the people who meet the requirements I have laid out are not irresponsible users.
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:45 pm
BING….if the guns are concealed how do you know they are present? If you don’t know the danger exists because it is concealed you have no decision to make regarding a dangerous situation. Explain to me how you remove yourself from a danger that is totally concealed. Are we clairvoyant?
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:46 pm
Adam, you and I have both done foolish things, everyone reading this has done it too. How did we suvive? I honestly could be dead 10 times over. This girl was hit, it could have been anyone. Luck of the draw? Fate? I chose to stay sometimes, I left sometimes. It was a tragedy, how are you going to protect yourself from bad things? Sometimes you can’t.
Sam
February 24th, 2011
11:47 pm
BADA BING you are making no sense whatsoever.
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:48 pm
BADA BING…..once again…how does one protect himself from something he doesn’t know exist? Something that is CONCEALED from him?
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:50 pm
no, you cannot be complicit in something you don’t know about. The story does not give enough info. But , if you do know, then yes, you have a choice to opt for your safety.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:50 pm
BADA BING: I’m not really sure what the point is behind that. You’re right, some of it is apparently random. My survival is certainly seemingly lucky in certain instances. That doesn’t mean I should tempt fate or anything.
For example, I choose not to carry a gun because I don’t know how to use one, and they are expensive to buy. I also know that even if I knew how to use one there are very few situations in which it would do me any good to actually have one. There are many more situations that not having a gun is not a disadvantage.
MC
February 24th, 2011
11:52 pm
Is this not about CONCEALED weapons Bing? Concealed danger? Of course if you know you have a choice to make. But the issue here is the CONCEALED weapon. The one you can’t see or don’t know about.
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:53 pm
Easy boys. I am not a gun nut, or an anti gun nut. I just use common sense. I would not shoot anyone except in self defense. I am no superman, nor am I a victim.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:53 pm
BADA BING: Exactly my viewpoint.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 24th, 2011
11:54 pm
Adam:
Excellent. We are in agreement.
The campus police could even do a background and the gun toter could have to pass a firearm’s proficiency test.
No problem !!
TAPS !!
BADA BING
February 24th, 2011
11:55 pm
You may be talking about concealed, I am talking about an AK47 mentioned in the article, the one at the party. We both may be right.
Sam
February 24th, 2011
11:56 pm
MC, BADA BING has painted himself into a corner and can’t get out. What he needs to do is just come clean and say he wants everybody to carry a gun anywhere they want to carry it period. The lives of innocent bystanders be damned. Why don’t you just man up and say it BADA BING.
Adam
February 24th, 2011
11:56 pm
0311: Not a perfect solution but I’ll take it. Although I’d add something in there about a class on responsible firearm use. It wouldn’t be a bad idea to have some small amount of police-like training.
getalife
February 24th, 2011
11:56 pm
“Rep. Broun (R-GA) gets town hall question ‘Who’s going to shoot Obama?’ and plays it off saying, yeah everyone’s frustrated.
–Josh Marshal”
Come on cons.
BADA BING
February 25th, 2011
12:00 am
What should they ban? Guns at the party, the booze at the party, Fraternity parties, boys at parties? She would probably be alive if you banned any of these.
BADA BING
February 25th, 2011
12:03 am
Painted myself into a corner? Well, I guess there is only one way out. Come out shooting!
Adam
February 25th, 2011
12:07 am
booze at the party should have probably been banned, or WAS banned technically if anyone there was under 21.
TnGelding
February 25th, 2011
12:09 am
Ready, aim, fire! How many more have to die from “accidents?”
Gandalf, the Wise!
February 25th, 2011
3:12 am
Cars kill more people on Campus than Guns, let’s ban those! Dumbassi!
TnGelding
February 25th, 2011
3:56 am
Lock and load! Let’s arm them all and then invite Obama down for a coming of age party. It’s easier to kill and destroy than to nurture and create. Some of us dumbasses are a generation or two more removed from Neanderthals than others.
We’ve finally taken giant strides in making operating a motor vehicle safer for our children, but yes, banning them until the age of 21 is a great idea. I told our son to forget about driving until he was 21. His mother took him to get his license when he was 16. They were suspended six months later.
@@
February 25th, 2011
6:13 am
My daughter lived with three other girls at college. None of the girls owned guns. One of the girls, unbeknownst to her roommates was paranoid schizophrenic. At some point, she went off her meds and was threatening to kill my daughter and her roommates. Not sure with what since she didn’t own a gun.
When I asked why my daughter and her roommates were not made aware of their roommates condition, I was told it was confidential.
Shortly after the incident, my daughter moved in with two guys…one a Marine veteran with two tours (Iraq and Afghanistan) to his credit. He owned several guns. Lived with the fella and his friend for two years. No incidents.
@@
February 25th, 2011
6:30 am
SAN PEDRO (KTLA) — A mother of two children is speaking out about LAUSD officials placing her 6-year old son in a 72-hour psychiatric hold because he drew what school officials considered to be a “disturbing picture.”
‘Ya think the aforementioned 6-year old will ever express how he’s feeling again?
Not likely. He’ll just keep it to himself.
Charlie and Dave, the Koch Heads
February 25th, 2011
6:39 am
And if @@’s daughter had gotten shot by an ex-marine that went off his meds, I suppose she would have just said, “Oh well, them’s the breaks.”
Jarhead1982
February 25th, 2011
6:47 am
ATF Max 8 million CPL’s US, approximately 186 million age 21 or older or 4.3% of the people licensed for CPL.
US Census 2008 18.4 mil students, 42% of whom are 21 or older, 4,300 schools.
So what is your risk of exposure to these “licensee’s?
18.4 mil x 42% = 7.728 mil x 4.3% = 332, 304 / 4,300 schools = 77.28 people per school.
On average there are 18.4 mil / 4,300 = 4,279 people per school or 77 / 4,279 = .0179 = 1.8% chance of you being near a person with a concealed carry license. Wow that is so freaking scary.
But hey since all you chicken little wannabe’s are such experts at detecting people who carry concealed, we should know all of you for being such hero’s with assisting in all those arrests of criminals carrying concealed right? LOL, no, you wet behind the ear college kids only concern is finding your next beer, where to get laid, or where to flap your lips and prove just how ignorant you really are!
Yeah we see all that hoopla from the VPC 2009 report. Funny how when you dig through all the context and details, or should we say the absolute LACK of details, like actual licensee’s, government issuing a license when they shouldn’t, justifiable homicide, detailing the difference between a permit to purchase and an actual carry permit. You know, all those details the anti gun zealots NEVER, EVER bring forth instead using fear mongering hysteria.
What you have is 137 possible deaths from the 8 MILLION licensed CPL holders as identified by the BATF in a 3 year time span from Violence Policy Center report last year, 137 or 45 per year equals .00000562 per concealed license holder. You can also review Florida’s data on CCW at http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html it says the same thing.
Now lets compare this so called TERROR by the VPC LIAR report JAMA Journal of American Medical Association Malpractice report 2001 http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/286/4/415 700,000 doctors in US kill 44,000 to 98,000 by medical malpractice every year or .14 per physician.
Physician is .065 or .14 /.00000562 = 12,000 to 25,00 times more likely to harm you than a CPL holder.
So where is the risk from concealed carry holders and why aren’t you antis crying to ban doctors?
cont
Charlie and Dave, the Koch Heads
February 25th, 2011
6:51 am
Jarhead’s lid must have worked loose again. He’ll be ok once he gets it screwed back down good and tight.
Jarhead1982
February 25th, 2011
6:56 am
Oh I am sorry, if you disagree with all this government data and facts, if you want a discussion like an adult instead of a petulant little child getting verbally destroyed by all these facts, you should direct your trembling panty wetting angst and unsubstantiated fears to the appropriate government agency and complain to them. All we did was point out the data exists, prove it doesn’t exist little child.
Lets review the following 9 mass shootings, and note what the body counts were where resistance occurred versus no resistance.
October 16, 1991, Luby’s Cafeteria, Killeen, TX, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 23 murdered, 20 injured.
December 17, 1991 Shoney’s Family Restaurant, Anniston, AL: 3 gunmen, 20 hostages, one ARMED customer (Thomas Glenn Terry). Police finally arrived to find one dead robber, one wounded robber and the third had fled when the shooting started. NO INJURED INNOCENTS.
October 1, 1997, Pearl High School: 1 gunman, 2 murdered, 7 injured: Stopped by ARMED vice principal.
April 20, 1999, Columbine, “Gun-Free”: 2 gunmen, 13 murdered, 24 injured. Many were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”.
January 16, 2002, Virginia Appalachian School of Law: 1 gunman, 3 murdered, 3 injured. Killer was stopped when confronted by two ARMED students.
April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 32 murdered, 25 injured. Most were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”.
Dec 9 2007, Colorado Springs, New Life Church, 1 gunman 2 murdered, 3 injured, gunman stopped when armed woman shoots gunman, who then turns gun on self and commits suicide, while 100 other church members are in church.
Feb 14,2008 Northern Illinois UNiversity, 1 gunman, 5 dead, 18 injured, gunman kills self long before police arrive to engage.
Nov 5 ,2009 Ft Hood Texas, 1 gunman, 13 dead, 30 wounded. Military personnel on base are BANNED from having a weapon, but the shooter did, and it was almost 9 minutes before police responded
Gun Free Zone 5 incidents
Defenseless victims murdered: 86
Defenseless victims injured: 117
Where murderers encountered ARMED resistance 4 incidents
murdered: 7
Where murderers encountered ARMED resistance; injured: 13
Wow, where no resistance occurred 8 times higher body count.
Yep, a higher body count is morally superior to a lower body count based on JAY & Koch’s beliefs.
@@
February 25th, 2011
6:59 am
Charlie and Dave:
First off….why don’t you just use one name (your original)?
Just pointing out that there are no guarantees in life.
If my daughter were stricken with a terminal illness…died in an auto accident…stabbed…bludgeoned to death or the victim of a shooting, I would be devastated, just as Dr. Cowie was.
No guarantees!
Can’t create an impenetrable bubble in which to live.
Charlie and Dave, the Koch Heads
February 25th, 2011
7:01 am
According to Jarhead, killing is ok so long as you limit it to some statistically acceptable level such as less than the people that die due to medical malpractice. Then, you move up a notch, I suppose, and compare medical malpractice (perhaps Phil Gingrey has already worked up the number here for us) to the next higher killer and claim that it is ok because it kills fewer people and before you know it, war is good because it doesn’t kill as many people as an asteroid hit. Do you need a job, jarhead. We may have some openings on Paul Broun’s staff or in the Tea Party.
Jarhead1982
February 25th, 2011
7:01 am
We see from US Census, and an average of NSSF & PEW surveys, that in 2009 40% of households have a firearm. That is an increase since 1997 of 9 million households to 80 million law abiding gun owners as recognized by the BATF.
We see that since 1997 per FBI UCR, that violent crime has gone from 611 VCR (Violent Crime Reported) per 100k people to 429 VCR per 100k people in 2009.
That is a 30% reduction in violent crime. Did we forget to mention that the same data shows a 20% reduction in murders?
All while at the same time we see 12-15 more states implementing concealed carry to 48 states total, and 30 plus states implementing concealed carry in eateries that serve alcohol. All without the predicted and much cried about blood baths predicted by such pundits as this opine writer Jay suggests for oh what, something like the millionth time, yep. Those anti gun soothsayers really suck at predicting violence and mayhem from the law-abiding citizen, every single time. Hope they aren’t trying to make a living as a soothsayer they are starving if they do.
So much for more guns equals more crimes BS people like Jay & Koch like to have you believe.
Jarhead1982
February 25th, 2011
7:02 am
Of course there are other countries that have recently tried gun bans, what effect did that have on their violence?
1997 Australia, Canada, England
Australia 1997 629 VCR per 100k 2007 1,024 VCR per 100k, a 32 person reduction in murders by firearms, exactly replaced by murders with knives. Funny how that trend was mirrored in England (ref AIC.GOV)
Canada 1997 980 VCR per 100k people 2009 1,324 VCR per 100k people, murder rose from 560 to 610 (Ref Statcan)
Canada $2 billion dollar plus registry, that hasn’t solved one crime, such a common trend.
England 1997 820 VCR per 100k people 2009 1,667 VCR per 100k people, murders have reduced to 1997 levels after a 25% increase.
So much for less gun equals less violence, a trend found in every single gun ban country, prove otherwise. Oh, use government data to try if you want, the above references ARE their government databases.
@@
February 25th, 2011
7:02 am
And Charlie?
YOU are a bubble head!!!
Jarhead1982
February 25th, 2011
7:13 am
Poor Koch, like all progressive extremists, slant everything to the far left and blame everyone else, lamely attempting to interject words and beliefs to distract and confuse, it will not work.
Actually medical malpractice is a fantastic comparison, all you progressives believe health care is a right, yet the government is going to force it onto everyone right? Here is someone people as a rule trust to be safe with their best interest and safety at heart, so why not do a comparison?
Oh here is a better one, how about you go google police committing crimes. I quit counting at 25 pages with 9 to 11 actual crimes on each page committed by the police. Care to do a comparison of how many crimes the 800k police are charged and prosecuted with versus the 8 mil civilians licensed to carry concealed? Lets see that actual comparison child rather than your empathic emotional gibberish.
No, don’t want to take that challenge eh? Anti gun extremists never can stand the heat of reality and facts!
Should we review how many accidental shootings committed by those 800k police versus those 8 mil cpl licensee’s? Come on Kock’y, lets see those comparisons!
So using Koch’s logic, we will expect her to suggest, implement and enforce the following new laws and controls because you are afraid.
We will expect all priests to be jailed and chemically neutered as since one priest committed pedophilia, all are automatically pedophiles right?
We see multiple stories and incidents of police killing, robbing, raping, dealing drugs etc, etc so all police are automatically felons and must be disarmed right?
Here is an even better one.
AID’s is a frightening virus, which first became noticed in the gay community. So knowing that, and everyone is afraid of that virus, all gays must come out of the closet and wear some sort of identification, just like the jews in Nazi Germany so we can avoid them in public. Yet to be even safer, we should move those people into their own camps. Maybe we can ask the Jews how their experience turned out eh?
Shall we continue on this stupid right to feel safe BS Koch espouses eh?
Grow up little child, prove there is a real risk, prove the data represented does not exist, or take your medicine like an adult.
Since all you will do is rant, rave, curse, insult and demonize in response with no facts to support your unsubstantiated position, how about a simple GFY until you prove the data wrong eh?
Charlie and Dave, the Koch Heads
February 25th, 2011
7:20 am
Ewww. Jarhead sure is c-o-c-k-y this morning. Can’t handle the truth, I see, so you start dumping all the vile bile.
Since all you will do is rant, rave, curse, insult and demonize in response with no facts to support your unsubstantiated position, how about a simple GFY until you prove the data wrong eh?
Jim in Houston
February 25th, 2011
10:02 am
“Since all you will do is rant, rave, curse, insult and demonize in response with no facts to support your unsubstantiated position, how about a simple GFY until you prove the data wrong eh?”
So, you can’t meet this challenge?
jack burton
February 25th, 2011
11:09 am
Instead of predicting what “might happen” how about acknowledging the REALITY that tens of thousands of college age students legally carry concealed handguns every single day with none of the doom and gloom stories actually happening.
http://concealedcampus.org/common_arguments.php
Richard
February 25th, 2011
12:59 pm
Why not complain about the ILLEGAL DRUGS or the alcohol ABUSE instead of the gun? Would it have been better if his daughter had been killed by a drunk driver instead? Or maybe she could have OD’ed when someone slipped her a drug without her knowledge? STOP blaming the guns and start holding PEOPLE responsible and maybe we will get safer all around?
BambiB
February 25th, 2011
7:59 pm
I’m glad the NRA is working to restore our Second Amendment rights. For too long, they’ve been asleep on the job.
I’m looking forward to being able to open carry wherever I go. (Concealing a .45ACP comfortably while wearing shorts and a T-shirt is pretty hard to do.)
Rich7553
February 25th, 2011
8:22 pm
Jack Burton is spot on. I’ve read over 700 comments, many that merely speculate as to the effect of campus carry. Quit speculating and read:
Since the fall semester of 2006, Utah state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of Utah’s nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses). Concealed carry has been allowed on the two campuses of Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, and Pueblo, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for an average of over five and a half years (as of January 2011), none of these 12 colleges (33 campuses) has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single resulting gun accident, or a single resulting gun theft.
At the start of the 2010 fall semester, 14 Colorado community colleges (38 campuses) began allowing licensed concealed carry on campus, raising the total to 26 U.S. colleges (71 campuses) that allow campus carry.
Oh, for those of you who swear by the VPC, please review their data:
Law enforcement Officers killed by concealed weapons killers — 9
Private citizens killed by concealed weapons killers — 279
Number of Mass Shootings Committed by Concealed Carry Killers — 18
Number of Murder-Suicides committed by concealed carry killers — 25
Sounds horrid, doesn’t it? Now take into account that these numbers reflect over 4 years of data collected nationwide from an estimated 6 – 8.5 million concealed carriers. Math majors, please help the liberal arts students make the connection here. The VPC data prove that concealed carriers are, as a group, among the most law-abiding of any group, including law enforcement officers. Research it yourselves if you doubt the claim, but use official sources. Brady kool-aid ads don’t count.
Jarhead1982
February 26th, 2011
4:15 am
Go get em Jim & Jack and no, they never do accept the challenge as to do so would force them to admit all that government and independent data does exist, thereby further destroying their irrational beliefs. Having seen the physical reaction of a person whose core beliefs have been destroyed, it is indeed a gruesome sight to see a grown progressive, weeping, babbling, defecating themselves in uncontrollable fear. It is why “Depends” is such a popular clothing item for Kochy!
Cocky, yeah, and why not? When in 6 years of whipping up on morally bankrupt alien life forms like you who do nothing but use emotions, lies, distractions, and have ALWAY failed to counter any of the government facts presented earlier, we sure should be. In fact in those six years, there have been to date 4 logical, level headed responses to the facts presented. Of those four, we still correspond today as they indeed chose to educate themselves, then make a choice. Two still choose not to, but they no longer attempt to go telling everyone else what they can or can not do like little napoleonic brain dead zombie wannabe Kochy.
Jack & Jim from Houston consistently have this same problem, but they are just a touch nicer about it than I am as a rule. Well Jack does post some rather eloquent indirect sarcasm I do admire. Then again, I have this intolerance for ideological zealots like who never can or will answer these challenges so rather than coddle you, it is very appropriate to tell you to go sit and rotate on a topless bar stool. Mindless sheeple do so love to do that without even a courtesy reach around by their false idol god the government!
independent thinker
February 26th, 2011
8:42 am
It is clear from this article that the NRA will stop at nothing to protect its members and gun sellers. How does trhe NRA get the right to decide what safety issues a doctor can discuss with his patient who may be in emminent danger of harm from a deranged spouse, parent or lover? Next phatmaceutical companies will ban questions by a doctor about drug overdose and possible suicide attempts.
Jim in Houston
February 26th, 2011
10:34 am
“How does trhe NRA get the right to decide what safety issues a doctor can discuss with his patient who may be in emminent danger of harm from a deranged spouse, parent or lover? ”
The “NRA” doesn’t decide this at all. Our LAWS decide this. It is a Boundary Violation for a physician to offer untrained advice, particularly if unsolicited, concerning any issue. It is particularly true in cases where physicians, who are often indoctrinated into poorly supported anti-gun positions, opine on self-defense issues. A “patient who may be in emminent (sic) danger of harm from a deranged spouse, parent or lover” should be consulting a self-defense expert, of which there are many, with the goal of accessing the most effective measures.
Jim in Houston
February 26th, 2011
10:35 am
Correction:
“any issue” should read “any issue outside of their certificated expertise”.
B.G
February 27th, 2011
11:26 pm
To “Normal”:
Yeah you’re right, I should give up my carry permit and get rid of all my guns, because the criminal might win if I ever try to defend myself. Yeppers, I should give up practicing how to move and fire efficiently with my handgun, and instead start practicing how to cower on my knees and blubber for my life. Just like you would!
Better yet, maybe I should also practice offering to suck the criminal’s dick so he’ll let me live… or even better, offering him my wife or daughter so long as HE JUST DOESN’T HURT ME. Just like you would, Normal!
Thank you oh so much, for your peerless pearls of wussy wisdom! I now know what to do if I’m ever accosted by a criminal.
Matt the Brave
February 28th, 2011
11:17 am
Sad, yes. Is it really going to stop 19 and 20 year olds from having a gun on campus? No. Just like it’s not going to stop 19 and 20 year olds from drinking on campus even though there’s booze bans. Just more posturing from politicians so that they can pad their resume.
ironhorzmn
March 1st, 2011
12:35 am
The problem is not doctors asking the gun owners, but asking the gun owner’s CHILDREN whether Mommy or Daddy owns one of those nasty guns…and WHERE it’s KEPT. THAT is none of a doctor’s business.
Do I have any business asking the DOCTOR the same question? Of course not.
Drunken underage kids shooting off illegal rifles on campus has absolutely nothing to do with legally licensed and trained adults carrying as responsibly on campus as they have for decades off campus.
And Normal: In an active shooter situation involving you, you’d never know what hit you…unless there IS an afterlife.
You obviously have no idea of proper handling and tactical deployment of firearms in such a situation unlike myself and many others who are very well trained to deal with would-be mass murderers such as you apparently fantasize yourself being.