Guns on Arizona State's Campus not if Michael Crow can help it.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**AustonT**

Just got this in my inbox

Statement by ASU President Michael M. Crow on Guns on Campus Bill
January 31, 2012

Arizona State University, like any major research university, is a very special and very complex learning environment. In addition to more than 70,000 of our own college students, we have day care centers, elementary school programs and thousands of elementary school age visitors in a given week as well as thousands of out-of-state teen agers and their parents visiting.

The bill (SB1474) to permit guns on campus is a misguided attempt to increase school safety without a shred of evidence to support the assumption that schools are safer if students are armed. In fact, a study by the World Health Organization found that the very opposite is true.

I don’t oppose gun ownership. Own all the guns you want, I would say to anyone. But please leave them in your car if you bring them to school, which is our present policy.

Our ASU police, the Phoenix SWAT and all the other professional law enforcement chiefs we have talked to are opposed to this bill and say that it will reduce safety.

Can you imagine a crowded college lecture hall in which one student pulls a handgun and fires a shot, then a dozen more students untrained in the use of firearms and how to handle potentially deadly situations all pull out their guns? Innocent people would be caught in a deadly crossfire of panicked students firing in every direction. And what does the SWAT team do when it arrives? How do they know which of a dozen or more armed and possibly firing shooters is the bad guy? Or do they take out everyone with a gun?

There are places where guns are not conducive to public safety. Schools surely must be on that list.

**SilverMK2**

... but... guns make you magically safe! :O

**Frazzled**

Can you imagine a crowded college lecture hall in which one student pulls a handgun and fires a shot, then a dozen more students are killed as he calmly walks the hall shooting people? And what does the SWAT team do when it arrives ten minutes later and 30 people are dead?

Corrected his typo. He also doesn't address when CCL are really needed, the parking lots at night.

He should be fired. He lives in Arizona, not hippy tree hugger California. They have open carry in that state for crying out loud.

**AustonT**

...we have more than just open carry. We have constitutional concealed carry.

**Frazzled**

AustonT wrote:...we have more than just open carry. We have constitutional concealed carry.

Yep. Plus its really hot there.

**AustonT**

...what?

**Frazzled**

Its more hot than Texas. Thats manly hot.

**Seaward**

Untrained civilian shooters are dangerous.

Determined criminal gunmen are dangerous.

**Melissia**

Seaward wrote:Untrained civilian shooters are dangerous.

Determined criminal gunmen are dangerous.

Right, and it's hard to defend against determined criminal gunmen without also being dangerous.

**hotsauceman1**

Um, I agree. Guns have no place in a learning enviroment.
They are dangerous weapons and should be treated as such.
Th only way i would support this is if it would also let me bring my katana or dwarven battleaxe to class.

**Seaward**

Melissia wrote:
Seaward wrote:Untrained civilian shooters are dangerous.

Determined criminal gunmen are dangerous.
Right, and it's hard to defend against determined criminal gunmen without also being dangerous.

You're missing my point.

I'm a firm believer in concealed carry. I'm also a firm believer in getting as much training as you possibly can. Armed criminals are dangerous to the public at large, but so are guys and gals packing heat who don't know how and when to use it.

**SOFDC**

Can you imagine a crowded college lecture hall in which one student pulls a handgun and fires a shot, then a dozen more students untrained in the use of firearms and how to handle potentially deadly situations all pull out their guns?

but so are guys and gals packing heat who don't know how and when to use it.

Both of these, unless I have totally read the text of the bill wrong, are utterly and totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even if I were to concede the points above (Which, I do not -necessarily- agree with.) this bill only allows those with a valid CCW permit (In other words, not untrained.) to carry on the campus.

And what does the SWAT team do when it arrives?

Probably the same thing it does any time it arrives to any given situation. Next?

How do they know which of a dozen or more armed and possibly firing shooters is the bad guy? Or do they take out everyone with a gun?

They don't. People get told to put their weapons down and cease firing, those aiming their guns or firing on police officers will be fired upon. Like any other time gun(s) are in a situation. PROTIP: The people who are not the bad guys will comply with police orders, and also not be shooting at cops.

**Medium of Death**

If the University declares it's grounds 'private', do you still have the right to take weapons onto the campus?

**hotsauceman1**

Medium of Death wrote:If the University declares it's grounds 'private', do you still have the right to take weapons onto the campus?

No, It lke free speech. only the goverment cant intrude. but the private sector can.

**SOFDC**

Again, assuming my reading of the bill is correct, a college, community college or public uni MAY prohibit carriage of weapons...inside the buildings on the campus. But signs must be posted at all entrances to the buildings, AND they must provide for temporary and secure storage of weapons (in each building) if they elect to go that way....but that says nothing of the school grounds OUTSIDE the buildings.

I see nothing worthy of the "BLOOD IN THE STREETS!" approach the ASU admin is taking. Feathers and some tar, I say.

**AustonT**

Medium of Death wrote:If the University declares it's grounds 'private', do you still have the right to take weapons onto the campus?

The University is State owned, it can't declare itself private. So that option is off the table.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

SOFDC wrote:Again, assuming my reading of the bill is correct, a college, community college or public uni MAY prohibit carriage of weapons...inside the buildings on the campus. But signs must be posted at all entrances to the buildings, AND they must provide for temporary and secure storage of weapons (in each building) if they elect to go that way....but that says nothing of the school grounds OUTSIDE the buildings.

I see nothing worthy of the "BLOOD IN THE STREETS!" approach the ASU admin is taking. Feathers and some tar, I say.

It's the same language used for state and federal buildings in the state. However providing storage in every building would probably be cost prohibitive (plus the board of regents is probably pro-gun, The university presidents are not on the board)

**SOFDC**

However providing storage in every building would probably be cost prohibitive

Possibly, they might be able to get away with having guns checked in a central facility. But my reading of it seems to imply that each building they want to prohibit carry in needs to be posted, and if posted, they need to be capable of storage. For my part I can't imagine that a bunch of pistol safes or heavy duty lockers would be overly pricey.

**Frazzled**

hotsauceman1 wrote:Um, I agree. Guns have no place in a learning enviroment.
They are dangerous weapons and should be treated as such.
Th only way i would support this is if it would also let me bring my katana or dwarven battleaxe to class.

Kimber beats battleaxe baby.

Its almost irrelevant. When going to nights classes, about half of my classmates were armed.

**SOFDC**

Kimber beats battleaxe baby.

Ehhhh....Are we talking pre, or post heavy MIM part usage Kimber here?...

**AustonT**

SOFDC wrote:
However providing storage in every building would probably be cost prohibitive

Possibly, they might be able to get away with having guns checked in a central facility. But my reading of it seems to imply that each building they want to prohibit carry in needs to be posted, and if posted, they need to be capable of storage. For my part I can't imagine that a bunch of pistol safes or heavy duty lockers would be overly pricey.

If they follow the model of State buildings it's every building. They may have to be manned check ins as well.

**SOFDC**

If so it would likely be an order of magnitude safer than keeping my firearms in my "Hey, break into the glovebox" mobile.

**DeadlySquirrel**

But guys, you have the right to bear arms...

Who is he to prevent you from carrying the severed arms of a grizzly?

**Frazzled**

SOFDC wrote:
Kimber beats battleaxe baby.

Ehhhh....Are we talking pre, or post heavy MIM part usage Kimber here?...

Old school Kimber baby when they were trying to make their name in 1911s, not the new stuff.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeadlySquirrel wrote:But guys, you have the right to bear arms...

Who is he to prevent you from carrying the severed arms of a grizzly?

Grizzly bears are second only to full auto wiener dog cannons in badassness.

**SOFDC**

Who is he to prevent you from carrying the severed arms of a grizzly?

NOBODY! RABBLERABBLERABBLERABBLE!

...

...

Oh crap he called the local game warden.

Old school Kimber baby when they were trying to make their name in 1911s, not the new stuff.

Excellent.

**Mr Hyena**

So people want guns... in a place overflowing with people... and of which the majority at least are highly stressed?

A recipe for disaster.

**biccat**

AustonT wrote:The University is State owned, it can't declare itself private. So that option is off the table.

Sometimes the State acts as a property owner, rather than as a sovereign. In buildings that are required for government function (e.g. post offices, court houses, jails), certain civil rights (including free speech and assembly) can be restricted or even prohibited.

I think campus buildings are areas where the government is acting as a property owner rather than a sovereign, while the grounds should not be restricted. And I'm pretty sure this is how courts distinguish the issue. Campus grounds probably aren't as unrestricted as sidewalks or public parks.

**AustonT**

@biccat I would imagine that's probably true, however the proposed statute specifically prohibits the head of the university or board of regents to take measures to restrict or prohibit carry except in buildings as you have already pointed out.
As an aside I found an article that stated the cost of gun lockers would be 100-300 per locker. I'd imagine more than one locker per building would be provided.
I was really misreading the quote I responded to as "why doesn't the university just become private" which it is incapable of.

**SOFDC**

So people want guns... in a place overflowing with people... and of which the majority at least are highly stressed?

You mean...like any US city? Or most any office environment i've laid eyes on? Or (Insert any number of things that fit a vague statement here)? I think you could have saved yourself some typing and just ended your statement at "Guns..." and managed to get your opinion across.

As an aside I found an article that stated the cost of gun lockers would be 100-300 per locker. I'd imagine more than one locker per building would be provided.

Compared to the cost of keeping a college professor on staff and compensated well enough that they don't go to greener pastures for a few months, i'm going to bet the cost of lockers (a one time purchase after all) is not really an eyebrow raising amount.

**AustonT**

SOFDC wrote:

As an aside I found an article that stated the cost of gun lockers would be 100-300 per locker. I'd imagine more than one locker per building would be provided.

Compared to the cost of keeping a college professor on staff and compensated well enough that they don't go to greener pastures for a few months, i'm going to bet the cost of lockers (a one time purchase after all) is not really an eyebrow raising amount.

No but I brought it up earlier and found an answer so I thought I'd at least close the loop.