Had to repost a very, very funny comment from the Chronicle website, in response to Brady's musing that colleges would be sued if they allowed CCW (comment not mine, just reposting):

"Henhouses may face legal problems if guarded, report local foxes."

"what about the student that merely flashes a gun threateningly?"

Merely? What an absurd statement.

Why aren't college administrators who forbid concealed carry permit holders the right to defend themselves, and then neglect to provide effective security held criminally and civilly liable?

VT seems like a clear cut case of gross and willful negligence as well as reckless disregard for human life to me.

At least it is clear that the Brady bunch is really just against anyone defending themselves. I guess the only thing students and teachers should do in a situation like VT is to put their head between their legs and ...

The henhouse quote is really funny.

Agree with all said above. On a seperate note, the Bradys have been at this for DECADES, yet they can't even get simple terms correct?

"High Capacity Ammunition Clips"

This term should command the same respect as opening a Car & Driver magazine and reading "Fule Injected Carburator" or hearing a writer refer to an inline 4-cylender as a "V-4"

cite all the studies you want, but saying ignorant terms like this should get you laughed out of the room.

You forgot my favorite argument from Brady:

"Plus, college gun owners are more likely than the average student to:
* Engage in binge drinking,
* Need an alcoholic drink first thing in the morning,
* Use cocaine or crack,
* Be arrested for a DUI,
* Vandalize property, and
* Get in trouble with police."

Where do they get their data for this crap?

I work with 50 plus college students teaching marksmanship at Winchester Canyon Gun Club in Santa Barbara. They are uniformly polite, competent and smart and SAFE. And their lives are worth the same as yours and mine, Mrs. Brady.

Another note on uninformed analysis:

The Bradys seem unaware that most CCW permits cannot be issued to people under the age of 21, while most campuses have at least 60% of their attendees under that age.

Or, they suspect that CCW licenses will have the same effect as the achieving the legal age to purchase alcohol.

(This observation leads to some funny questions. Do new-ly-minted-21-year-olds go through a day-long course on law, alcohol abuse, and the medical side-effects of binge-drinking before they get permission to drink? Do alcohol dealers have to check ID and criminal status of purchasers against the FBI database?)

Their "data" came from "Private Guns, Public Health" by Hemenway. So basically, they're citing themselves.

As a prospective graduate student, I'd like to see universities justify their ban on concealed weapons. They need to explain to me just how careless, irresponsible and hot-headed their students and professors are before I drop tens of thousands of dollars into their coffers.

" had there been a number of people who had been in that classroom with guns, [there could have been] additional persons killed just as a result of poor judgment calls."




I'd much rather be shot by one of my classmates who's intent is to save lives than by an evil, murderous thug! What's wrong with these nutjobs?!?

Since everyone in the classroom was shot multiple times(except Mr. Cho, of course)and nevertheless, some survived, the logic of their speculation on the result of an armed response to the attack fails to convince me that it could possibly be worse than the actual events.CCW permittees are not incompetent, binge drinking, cocaine/crack users.