Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

UAA students rally for right to carry guns

  1. Apr 24, 2009 #1


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    http://www.adn.com/tales/story/770932.html [Broken]

    Personally I'd get nervous sitting in class, if I knew George Hines was carrying his semi auto .45.

    And here we are 10 years removed from Columbine. Maybe the news really doesn't get to Alaska?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 24, 2009 #2
    Not trying to start an argument, but what does this have to do with Columbine? Did they allow firearms in Columbine? No. He's probably nervous because of events like the Virginia Tech shootings and Columbine and such.

    Also, this isn't anything new. I think most campuses have at some point rallied to try to allow people to carry concealed on campus. I know that its been tried at my school (UA).
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  4. Apr 24, 2009 #3

    I find it bit funny how he sees his classroom.

    Did gun possession ever prevented gun shootings? (I haven't heard of any incident where use of gun prevented a massacre)

    I would also be bit uneasy as a student or as a professor knowing that half of students are carrying concealed weapons during the lecture.
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2009
  5. Apr 24, 2009 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I've spent a lot of time in Alaska (my dad lived there when I was growing up, and I went to the University of Alaska Fairbanks for a year), and I really really love Alaska.

    But let me tell you - the place is really full of odd balls. Not clever, good-looking, sane, funny ones like in Northern Exposure...but a lot of truly odd people. Including paranoid ones...exhibition #1, Mr. George Hines.
  6. Apr 24, 2009 #5
    Yes, if only Columbine had a rule against carrying concealed weapons, that mess would never have happened. :rolleyes:

    As the cliche goes: "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns". Or something like that.

    If a US Army veteran were holstering a handgun in that class, I'd be much less nervous, thank you. (Assuming I were nervous to begin with.)
  7. Apr 24, 2009 #6
    By the way, this thread is clearly political in nature and I think it should be moved there.
  8. Apr 24, 2009 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Some news show did an episode on this concept...I can't remember which one, but the results weren't any surprise to anyone who takes a few minutes to think about this. They used a room arranged like a typical small lecture room and allowed people who thought they'd be better off if armed on campus to participate. They had people with a range of skill levels try it, including those who won awards as marksmen. The rest of the participants in the room were police playing the role of students panicking as a "shooter" entered the room.

    Even in a controlled situation, where everyone knew there was no real harm from the "shooter," they all developed tunnel vision in their shooting. They took aim at the shooter, but were oblivious to other people running in front of them as people might if panicked, and didn't notice anyone on the other side of the "shooter." The simulation used paintballs as the ammunition, and there were more than just the shooter hit with the paintballs from the volunteers.

    The other thing was that in some simulutions, they brought in a second shooter. Sometimes the second shooter was posing as another student "helping," only aiming at the first "shooter," and sometimes they were another criminal taking aim at other students. The volunteers couldn't tell the difference. Some weren't even aware a second shooter arrived, and those that were ignored them assuming they were helping not hurting.

    The conclusion was simple and obvious...it's very different to be a good shot aiming at a paper target or while out hunting vs. when someone is shooting back at you. The people who want to play hero carrying guns around into classrooms generally lack the sort of training that law enforcement officers have to distinguish between the good guys and bad guys and maintain awareness of surroundings to avoid shooting other bystanders while confronting someone shooting back at them.

    Edit: Here it is, it was on 20/20
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2009
  9. Apr 24, 2009 #8
    What will we see next, protestors arguing for the right to carry concealed bombs on planes in order to blow up undercover terrorists who might be on the plane?

    I'm "pro gun"...I own guns and I was even an officer on the university shooting club, but this is just silly.

    Let students bring guns onto campuses and they'll only be tempted to brandish them, either to show off or joke around, which will at the very least make a lot of people uncomfortable and feel unsafe. It would also be an accident waiting to happen every time someone loses their judgment due to anger or drugs.
  10. Apr 24, 2009 #9
    YouTube please?
  11. Apr 24, 2009 #10
    Yes, that's the logical consequence, indeed. :rolleyes:

    So you think constitutional rights should be infringed on out of respect for the feelings of others?

    How is this argument in any way specific to college campuses? You are equally well arguing that guns should be illegal everywhere, because they might be abused from bad judgement. But quite clearly the constitution affirms gun ownership as a right, not a privilege at the discretion of public officials. So where is your argument for exceptionalism for college campuses?

    (PF readers - this argument is unique to the USA environment, where private gun ownership is both legal and protected by our constitution. Obviously these arguments don't apply to the EU, for example.)
  12. Apr 24, 2009 #11
    In all the school shootings as far as I recall, in none of them were concealed weapons allowed in the first place. I'm confused by prior probabilities, but...
  13. Apr 24, 2009 #12
    I was thinking about public shootings particularly where guns are allowed. I am sure that guns can definitely help if someone breaks into your home or similar events. But, I seriously doubt that people can use guns for preventing public shootings. See Moonbear's post for why I think so.
  14. Apr 24, 2009 #13
    It's the temperature and isolation.
  15. Apr 24, 2009 #14
    Maybe he has to walk home past a corner with hungry polar bears?
  16. Apr 24, 2009 #15
    Along with this experiment lets consider how much more or less likely a shooting would be if it was general knowledge that students may well be carrying their own guns. I believe in most of these school shootings the deranged individuals were searching for a feeling of power; having guns among those that do not; making decisions about whether they will live or die. These things are not as possible when the victims may well have guns of their own.

    Also should be considered how many people tend to die and become injured in these shootings and how many less may become victims if the shooter is taken down more quickly even if you count victims incident to crossfire.

    I don't know the answers to these questions and do not necessarily believe guns in colleges are a good idea. I am only pointing out issues that could be taken with the interpretation of the findings of the experiment.
  17. Apr 24, 2009 #16
    I hear moose are pretty dangerous. ;-)
  18. Apr 25, 2009 #17

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2017 Award

    Appalachian School of Law shooting, 2002.
  19. Apr 25, 2009 #18
    A friend moved to Anchorage for a few years, from Buffalo. One day his associates invited him to go hunting. He said "sure" and met them at the specified time/place. He borrowed a 12 gauge shotgun and purchased slugs.

    The plan was to fly to a remote location on a specially equipped plane. When he arrived at the airport, with his shotgun, his friends all laughed and called him Elmer Fudd (or something comparable?). They explained a 12 gauge was fine for rabbits in Buffalo, but not Polar Bears in the wild.

    They flew a long time, across vast expanses of open permafrost/tundra (whatever the correct term)...and he didn't see ANYTHING for miles...then they landed.

    Upon arrival, he inquired about the area and they assured him it was perfect...as the plane left and they set up camp.

    He further commented that he'd been looking out the windows and hadn't seen anything...and inquired as to how would they find their prey?

    His friends laughed again and explained that the Polar Bears could smell him from 7 miles away...all they needed to do was sit and wait...and the bears would find them.

    He said he didn't sleep until he got home.
  20. Apr 25, 2009 #19
    It affirms gun ownership as a right, but not necessarily carrying of those guns into any place that you want. A property owner has the right to disallow people to enter onto his property. The govt owns public school property so it seems they can disallow people from entering onto the property without violating our right to bear arms. We also have a right to own traps for hunting...but you can't just start setting bear traps in your neighbor's lawn or the school cafeteria. How's that different?

    I think it makes sense to make an exception of schools because they contain a dense population of younger, less mature people, and not very much privacy. A lot of would-be gun owners would be keeping their guns in their dorms without adequate protection, and with tons of people running in and out playing beer bong and what not, it wouldn't be long before people were showing off guns to their friends, having guns get lost or stolen...and by having them readily accessible it makes crimes of passion, which occur very frequently on campuses, more likely to be deadly. In areas where gang violence is an issue, those gang members would be bringing guns into school and brandishing them against people who don't have an interest in guns to intimidate them on a regular basis.

    Once a person leaves school it is easier for them to avoid these sorts of dangerous areas, and they have more privacy allowing them to store their guns more safely and use them for protection of their home area.
  21. Apr 25, 2009 #20


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I think Moonbear and Vanadium have touched on the key point in all of this. At least in California, to get a CCW (carrying a concealed weapon) permit and keep it current, you need to keep your Gun Card current, which involves classroom time and range time for the particular caliber(s) you want to be qualified for. A big part of Gun Card qualification is gun safety, which includes combat shooting safety (for bystanders, not for the target).

    I don't know the rules in other states, but if everyone in my classroom had a current CCW and Gun Card, I have absolutely no problem being a fellow student or the professor. And I grade on a curve, folks... :approve:
  22. Apr 25, 2009 #21
    In areas where gang violence is a serious issue they have to have metal detectors at the entrances because gang members bring guns and knives to school anyway.
  23. Apr 25, 2009 #22
    I doubt the training is sufficient, or sufficiently frequent, to prevent the types of problems in the video that Moonbear posted (and part 2). You have a link with more detail on the training required?
  24. Apr 25, 2009 #23

    No training is required for a conceal carry permit per se. The likelihood that you would be able to obtain a conceal and carry just for the heck of it is very slim. You must give a good reason and "I want to have one with me in class at school" is unlikely to float. The only persons likely to have a conceal carry permit here in California that allow them to carry a weapon concealed on their person at all times are law enforcement types. Private investigators, body guards, ex police officers, ect. and the ability to carry a firearm as part of any of these professions is strictly regulated by the state. I do not know spefically about each and do not care to look them up but I know that a standard armed security guard permit requires qualification at a shooting range twice per year. And an armed guard is only allowed to carry while on the clock.
  25. Apr 25, 2009 #24
    It's determined by the particular state you reside in. Some states require training in order to conceal and others do not.
  26. Apr 25, 2009 #25
    The US gov't is owned by the citizens of the US. It is not a "private person" with individual rights. That argument is invalid.

    I've proposed this idea before. I think it is reasonable that people carrying in public should be trained and/or certified in the use of a handgun. But, I also think it is the responsibility of the gov't to make such training available without restriction to those who, of course, pass all the prequalifications. After that, they should be able to carry anywhere. Schools, hospitals, anywhere labelled "GUN FREE ZONE". Because that tends to be where all the lunatics like to go on their shooting sprees. WHERE NOONE ELSE IS ARMED.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook