LSU's steps to being safer?

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Emperor

    Seriously Misunderstood!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 7, 2011
    8,376
    113
    Nether region
    Collateral damage with a baseball bat or hammer is a lot harder to produce than with a firearm.

    Many would simply jump in and try to save the drowning person. No thoughts, just jump right on in to the body of water. An educated (or intelligent) person would evaluate the situation and find a way to save the drowning person and himself in the process. Getting a drowning person out of a body of water is not always the simplest task. There are lots of variables to consider. Jumping in blindly without taking a second to look around could very easily yield to both parties drowning, even if the second one was just trying to help.

    Yes, you could just jump in and hope for the best, but taking a second or two and evaluating would likely make a big difference. I argue the same holds true for CHL holders. Someone with moderate training would be much more able to save themselves and others (if they so choose). Low to no training could very easily yield to unnecessary collateral damage.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6

    You realize that we (as Americans), can bring as many empty 5 gallon gasoline cans to a gas station and just fill them up as long as our credit card works or we have the cash, without adult supervision, training, or a special permit? We can do that at over 10 million gas stations nationwide. As many people can as the country has, and as many times a day as they want. You could literally have 200 gallons of gasoline in the back of your truck and drive almost anywhere in the country (including gun free zones), and in one instant/accident/malicious attack, level nearly a city block. Want to talk about lethal collateral damage? Take a 5 gallon jug of gasoline and light it in your backyard.

    But again, no permit, no special training, no diapers needed. You can do that with lethal pesticides, herbicides, and a host of other combustibles as well.

    I view the likelihood of most gun owners (and stats back it up), to cause about as much collateral damage in their everyday association with a firearm as a hyperactive vampire in charge of a bloodmobile.

    Theoretical incidents of death and destruction from gun owners allowed to carry in colleges are just that; theoretical. The incidents of campus gun violence are minuscule. It is only the added hysteria and phony outrage that makes them so massively disastrous and seemingly prevalent.
     

    Whitebread

    *Banned*
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 3, 2015
    2,421
    36
    near by
    "No guns for you, but I need one"

    Same argument the Anti's use.

    Thought you'd say that. So why you and not other people? I have friends who are 21 currently and are cops... And they just became officers recently and haven't been through extensive training, yet they can now carry on campus legally. Seems kinda not right that they can have the opportunity or chance to defend themselves if something arises, yet those of us who do not want to be police cannot. Thoughts?

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6

    Why would we lose a RIGHT just because we are on college campus?

    The same argument for lack of training would apply anywhere else people are carrying.
    Where are all the reports of armed citizens shooting bystanders at malls, in theaters, on the street, etc?

    ben-franklin-on-liberty-and-security-05182009.jpg

    Really embarrassing to see so many people here claim to support the second amendment but blatantly walk all over it.

    Exactly. It's amazing that some members here demand the right to protect themselves with firearms and at the same time want to deny that same (God given) right to students that are legally just as qualified to carry. What a bunch of hypocrites.

    It's not that though. It's looking at it from a practical approach. I am a current LSU student. I would not want most of my fellow classmates to be armed. People argue all the time and get into little shuffles. It just wouldn't be safe. Most are not mature enough. Having a clause where you need advanced training to carry on campus would be better, but even then, think about how bad that could make a situation if something for hairy.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6

    But you are not looking at it from a practical approch either. You are seeking to prevent tragidies for some well meaning person that you have decided is to stupid or crazy or just nof trained well enough. The reason the second amendment was created as a guaranteed right is because our fore fathers realised that if it were a right you earned it could bd taken away. Maybe someone comes along and decides you are unqualified to own a weapon because well you dont vote the right way or maybe you attend the wrong kind of church. Maybe the fear that one day you may need to protect yourself becomes deamed as parinoid delousions and you are not allowed to own a weapon cause you are by law "mentally deficient". This is a slippery slop the left wants to take your guns and by looking at gun rights as something that only applies if you fit into the right little catagory today will eventually disarm everyone but an oppressive government.
     
    Last edited:

    Whitebread

    *Banned*
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 3, 2015
    2,421
    36
    near by
    Collateral damage with a baseball bat or hammer is a lot harder to produce than with a firearm.

    Many would simply jump in and try to save the drowning person. No thoughts, just jump right on in to the body of water. An educated (or intelligent) person would evaluate the situation and find a way to save the drowning person and himself in the process. Getting a drowning person out of a body of water is not always the simplest task. There are lots of variables to consider. Jumping in blindly without taking a second to look around could very easily yield to both parties drowning, even if the second one was just trying to help.

    Yes, you could just jump in and hope for the best, but taking a second or two and evaluating would likely make a big difference. I argue the same holds true for CHL holders. Someone with moderate training would be much more able to save themselves and others (if they so choose). Low to no training could very easily yield to unnecessary collateral damage.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6
    Colateral damage is irrelevent a weapon is a weapon. You could walk up on a robery and accidently defend the purp instead of the victim and beat to death the victim who is fighting for their life by simply defending the wrong person.

    Focus the drowning example was simply that. You are in the weeds aim for the fairway
     
    Last edited:

    Whitebread

    *Banned*
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 3, 2015
    2,421
    36
    near by
    What about an active shooter situation I dont have a gun and me and two buddies decide we got to stop this guy. Say none of us have any formal training in disarming a hostile. Would we be wrong for trying to take him down bystanders my be shot in the chaos. Is it then our fault if an innocent was shot. I need no ones permission to protect myself and others that is the point of it all.
     

    sliguns

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 25, 2014
    1,149
    38
    louisiana
    I'm not saying take away everyone's rights, I'm just saying require education that is actually useful.

    I'm not saying take away everyone's rights, I'm just saying require them to pass a gov't test first before we give them their rights is all :doh:
     

    AustinBR

    Make your own luck
    Staff member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Oct 22, 2012
    10,835
    113
    I'm not saying take away everyone's rights, I'm just saying require them to pass a gov't test first before we give them their rights is all :doh:
    Might as well get rid of concealed carry permits and drivers licenses then by that logic.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6
     

    sliguns

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 25, 2014
    1,149
    38
    louisiana
    Might as well get rid of concealed carry permits and drivers licenses then by that logic.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6


    I would 100% be okay with permits being done away with...a handful of States have done this already!


    I'd personally be okay with the DL thing as well, but the two are not apples to apples comparable.
     

    AustinBR

    Make your own luck
    Staff member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Oct 22, 2012
    10,835
    113
    I would 100% be okay with permits being done away with...a handful of States have done this already!


    I'd personally be okay with the DL thing as well, but the two are not apples to apples comparable.
    Well then it seems we have reached one of those agree to disagree points. I certainly see the value in your opinion. Just personally disagree. I don't think your points or ideas or flat out wrong, I just don't think they are best for our society. In an ideal society, I'd probably be a little more supportive.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6
     

    sliguns

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 25, 2014
    1,149
    38
    louisiana
    Well then it seems we have reached one of those agree to disagree points. I certainly see the value in your opinion. Just personally disagree. I don't think your points or ideas or flat out wrong, I just don't think they are best for our society. In an ideal society, I'd probably be a little more supportive.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6

    Understood
     

    dirty dan

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 24, 2012
    110
    18
    Denham Springs, LA
    Why are you so angry? You can't have it your way so you resort to tantrums and name calling? A lot of college classes require some debating which you obviously do not have the maturity to do. I would def not feel safer with you walking around my kids with a firearm. It is this attitude that will ensure you will never carry on a college campus.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    I'm not angry and I'm not calling names. I stating what is true. What word would you prefer I use to replace hypocrite?
     

    MOTOR51

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    72   0   0
    Dec 23, 2008
    6,342
    113
    here
    I'm not angry and I'm not calling names. I stating what is true. What word would you prefer I use to replace hypocrite?

    Listen, if you can't handle a discussion that's not my problem. If you are mad because I can carry a gun and you can't then I don't know how I can make you feel better. I didn't make the rules but I do agree with them and I did choose to be a LEO. If you want to carry then go join your local PD but judging by your temperament displayed here I do not think it would be a good profession for you.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    dirty dan

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 24, 2012
    110
    18
    Denham Springs, LA
    Listen, if you can't handle a discussion that's not my problem. If you are mad because I can carry a gun and you can't then I don't know how I can make you feel better. I didn't make the rules but I do agree with them and I did choose to be a LEO. If you want to carry then go join your local PD but judging by your temperament displayed here I do not think it would be a good profession for you.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Why do you insist that I'm angry? Is that what you're hoping for? The statements of some posters on this topic is clearly hypocritical. That's not name calling, that's factual. Too bad if you don't like the word. I'm 54 years old and I really couldn't care less if you're LEO, but exactly what is it that makes you think that I can't carry a gun? From my viewpoint, if you're scared of law abiding citizens carrying firearms, maybe you're the one that needs to consider a career change.
     

    AustinBR

    Make your own luck
    Staff member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Oct 22, 2012
    10,835
    113
    Why do you insist that I'm angry? Is that what you're hoping for? The statements of some posters on this topic is clearly hypocritical. That's not name calling, that's factual. Too bad if you don't like the word. I'm 54 years old and I really couldn't care less if you're LEO, but exactly what is it that makes you think that I can't carry a gun? From my viewpoint, if you're scared of law abiding citizens carrying firearms, maybe you're the one that needs to consider a career change.
    He is referring to how you cannot carry on a school campus legally.

    Anyway, must you two argue here? Let's stick to a good happy argument. Thanks.

    --Sent From My Galaxy S6
     

    Whitebread

    *Banned*
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 3, 2015
    2,421
    36
    near by

    Introduced in the Senate as S. 3266 by Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE) on October 27, 1990
    Passed the Senate on October 27, 1990 (passed voice vote)
    Passed the House on October 27, 1990 (313-1, Roll call vote 534, via Clerk.House.gov)
    Signed into law by President George H.W. Bush on November 29, 1990

    Nice brought to us by Mr. Big F'ing deal himself. And signed into law by no other than a Buildaberg, admited globalist, and a sell out who lied about raising taxes.
     
    Last edited:

    JoeLiberty

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Oct 1, 2014
    420
    16
    United States
    Some people on here do not care about this very valid scenario. I have been trying to make that point on many different occasions but it's all or nothing around here. Hell, tombstone even had rules on carrying based on common sense and the situation in the town and that was the Wild West lol


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Motor,
    I don't want to make assumptions about you, but it seems from some of your comments that you may be against concealed carry in general. Maybe it's not, but I can't tell that you are tailoring your words to be about campus carry only. Is this the case? How do you and most of your fellow officers feel regarding concealed carry in general?

    Also, I think we agree on a few things:
    The 2nd amendment is not an unlimited right to carry anything you want anywhere you want and the supreme court has said so.
    It is your job to carry a gun and you take on extra responsibilities which comes with special privileges. That's not a bad deal.
    I understand the fears that you and Rainsdrop share regarding the possibility of what I guess you would call friendly fire. It is a possibility and even the police have blue-on-blue events. These often turn into tragedies and should not be dismissed. As an officer you may have even experienced such events. It is a scary scenario. The problem is, because the multiple shooter scenario is so scary and visceral and easy to imagine, we all have a tendency to seriously over-estimate the probability of it happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic
    What are the actual odds of that happening?

    However, (and this is not all directed at you but to everyone here)
    I don't understand why, if concealed carry was not illegal on campus, 50 or 60% of people would chose to be armed on campus. Less than 3% of people in LA have permits and less than half of them actually carry. Also, there's the age restriction. Surely less than 1% of people on campus would choose to be armed.

    A number of people have also indicated that they would like more training to be required to carry on campus. I fail to see what is so special about the nature of a campus vs say a mall or a downtown area. The biggest difference I see is the large number of unarmed people grouped together which is exactly the feature a spree killer is attracted too.

    We should go ahead and dispel the myth that our CHP training is insufficient and that permit holders are likely to add to bad situations.
    We can do this by looking at the crime rates of concealed carriers. This study uses data from Texas and Florida, because they keep tabs on the permit holders better than most: http://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/cp...aled-handgun-permit-holders-are-even-more-so/

    Texas and Florida have even less training required than we do and their permit holders are even more law abiding than the police (no dig at the 5-0 here, it is only because police are so law-abiding that it makes a good comparison). If you compare CHP holders to the general population, we blow them away (no pun intended) on not getting arrested.

    Final point: Calling them 'college kids' really marginalizes people. No one wants to see frat boys strapped with glocks doing keg stands. That's not even what we are talking about. A CHP holder is a full grown man or woman, who chooses to take responsibility for their own safety. They already jump enough through hoops to do so. Let them.
     
    Last edited:

    tkben002

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 3, 2010
    23
    1
    Alexandria, la
    Motor,
    I don't want to make assumptions about you, but it seems from some of your comments that you may be against concealed carry in general. Maybe it's not, but I can't tell that you are tailoring your words to be about campus carry only. Is this the case? How do you and most of your fellow officers feel regarding concealed carry in general?

    Also, I think we agree on a few things:
    The 2nd amendment is not an unlimited right to carry anything you want anywhere you want and the supreme court has said so.
    It is your job to carry a gun and you take on extra responsibilities which comes with special privileges. That's not a bad deal.
    I understand the fears that you and Rainsdrop share regarding the possibility of what I guess you would call friendly fire. It is a possibility and even the police have blue-on-blue events. These often turn into tragedies and should not be dismissed. As an officer you may have even experienced such events. It is a scary scenario. The problem is, because the multiple shooter scenario is so scary and visceral and easy to imagine, we all have a tendency to seriously over-estimate the probability of it happening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic
    What are the actual odds of that happening?

    However, (and this is not all directed at you but to everyone here)
    I don't understand why, if concealed carry was not illegal on campus, 50 or 60% of people would chose to be armed on campus. Less than 3% of people in LA have permits and less than half of them actually carry. Also, there's the age restriction. Surely less than 1% of people on campus would choose to be armed.

    A number of people have also indicated that they would like more training to be required to carry on campus. I fail to see what is so special about the nature of a campus vs say a mall or a downtown area. The biggest difference I see is the large number of unarmed people grouped together which is exactly the feature a spree killer is attracted too.

    We should go ahead and dispel the myth that our CHP training is insufficient and that permit holders are likely to add to bad situations.
    We can do this by looking at the crime rates of concealed carriers. This study uses data from Texas and Florida, because they keep tabs on the permit holders better than most: http://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/cp...aled-handgun-permit-holders-are-even-more-so/

    Texas and Florida have even less training required than we do and their permit holders are even more law abiding than the police (no dig at the 5-0 here, it is only because police are so law-abiding that it makes a good comparison). If you compare CHP holders to the general population, we blow them away (no pun intended) on not getting arrested.

    Final point: Calling them 'college kids' really marginalizes people. No one wants to see frat boys strapped with glocks doing keg stands. That's not even what we are talking about. A CHP holder is a full grown man or woman, who chooses to take responsibility for their own safety. They already jump enough through hoops to do so. Let them.

    +1
     

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    195,755
    Messages
    1,549,512
    Members
    29,297
    Latest member
    Wagon461
    Top Bottom