LSU's steps to being safer?

[JoeLiberty]

It's true that it is not very difficult to get a license to carry, BUT... going through the CHL class is not what makes the permit holders responsible citizens, but rather it is because they are responsible citizens that they go through the effort of obtaining a license. That process, IMHO, is more than enough to separate the wheat from the chaff (i.e. the idiots you refer to). There is no reason to prevent licensed carriers from carrying on campus. They are statistically more responsible with their weapons than the police are:
http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/pol...er-than-concealed-carry-permit/#axzz3nRMa33L1

No one goes through the trouble to get a CHL just so they can use it to go and commit crimes, they just go commit the crimes anyway.

 

[AustinBR]

It's true that it is not very difficult to get a license to carry, BUT... going through the CHL class is not what makes the permit holders responsible citizens, but rather it is because they are responsible citizens that they go through the effort of obtaining a license. That process, IMHO, is more than enough to separate the wheat from the chaff (i.e. the idiots you refer to). There is no reason to prevent licensed carriers from carrying on campus. They are statistically more responsible with their weapons than the police are:
http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/pol...er-than-concealed-carry-permit/#axzz3nRMa33L1

No one goes through the trouble to get a CHL just so they can use it to go and commit crimes, they just go commit the crimes anyway.

It's not that they aren't responsible enough, it's that they haven't been through enough training. A CHL class really isn't enough.

--Sent From My Galaxy S6

 

[Detatnola2012]

I did enjoy the idea of extra training. I'm not sure if you meant classwork but a weekend with a group to prepare you for scenarios that might arise with live fire or those paint bullets. This would be a great compromise so you don't have just basic idiots running around trying to stop someone with no training. BUT at the end of the day, you as a coach holder has to be responsible and maintain that training. When sh*t hits the fan you have to be ready for it. There are no re-spawns or do overs in the real world. Practice to get basics down and when the adrenaline is pumping you will revert back to the solid basics of the training not to freak out and put effective lead on a target.

 

[Emperor]

It's true that it is not very difficult to get a license to carry, BUT... going through the CHL class is not what makes the permit holders responsible citizens, but rather it is because they are responsible citizens that they go through the effort of obtaining a license. That process, IMHO, is more than enough to separate the wheat from the chaff (i.e. the idiots you refer to). There is no reason to prevent licensed carriers from carrying on campus. They are statistically more responsible with their weapons than the police are:
http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/pol...er-than-concealed-carry-permit/#axzz3nRMa33L1

No one goes through the trouble to get a CHL just so they can use it to go and commit crimes, they just go commit the crimes anyway.

Correct! There is only one minor (very minor), flaw with this argument. Hypothetically, if it were allowed (don't worry, it won't any time soon), then it might be construed by some as just the "in" thing to do. Remembering that most college age kids are morons; those would be your jack asses! There is a distinct difference between a person that has never handled a firearm and one that has, going to get a CHP for the 1st time. Usually, the natural progression to a CHP is after you have realized that you can handle firearms reasonably and familiarly well.

Thankfully, the 2nd Amendment makes them equal, but they are different in that one respect.

 

[whitsend]

I saw this today and thought about this thread.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/01/legal-lesson-law-prof-sues-bosses-over-campus-gun-ban/

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[JoeLiberty]

It's not that they aren't responsible enough, it's that they haven't been through enough training. A CHL class really isn't enough.

--Sent From My Galaxy S6

I have to agree with you there. Many people just get their permit and think that's enough to get the job done. It's not. It is never enough training. 40 hours is not enough. But then again, what the police get is not enough either... Would you believe some of THEM only have 8 hours?! In Louisiana: http://www.shreveporttimes.com/stor...-officers-tote-guns-little-training/15540981/

So I'd have a hard time asking people to have more than that before they have the right to armed self-defense. The class I took was actually pretty light on gun handling safety and more geared toward the legal implications of what you can and can't do with your gun. 8-hours was probably enough to get that info across. Once you have that down, it really is about the level of responsibility you take with respect to that weapon. That's what determines the level of safety around you and your weapon. Examples available on request.

To be clear, is your fear of bad actors with a permit committing crimes, or of well-intentioned people making mistakes with a gun? And what exactly would you want that extra training to accomplish?

@Detatnola2012 Extra training is great and tbh it is fun. Take all you can. Check the training boards here on BS for stuff in your area.

@Emperor I hope it does become the 'in' thing to do. I hope they start to judge each other on their gun-handling skills. Kids would go above and beyond in range time and pro-level training and competitions if they thought it would get them laid. "LOL don't invite the kid with the SEPRA holster. Jack-ass gonna get someone shot wearing that thing"

 

[LACamper]

Most college kids aren't old enough to CCW. Minimum age is 21...

 

[Detatnola2012]

Honestly I have been looking to do some training. Does anyone have any suggestions? NOLA or Baton Rouge area.

 

[US Infidel]

Honestly I have been looking to do some training. Does anyone have any suggestions? NOLA or Baton Rouge area.

http://www.advantagegrouptraining.com

Best money I've spent.

 

[enutees]

I know I'd feel safer as most around me would if I were allowed to carry on campus. I'd be happy with anyone who wanted to go through the trouble to legally carry having the choice to protect themselves. The whole people aren't responsible enough garbage that people spew is stupid. They will be arrested if they do something stupid.

 

[SMR412]

How about armed staff?
Volunteer basis. Extensive training. Etc...
I am not against students being armed at all but the staff would typically be older and more mature.
It works in other places...

 

[Rainsdrops]

Many of bayoushooters members are responsible firearm owners. There are many irresponsible and reckless firearms owners as well. When you allow weapons on a campus, it also applies to the less desirable as well. Concealed weapon class is not firearms training!!!! You will have piles of untrained gun toting people in one location. Imo that an accident waiting to happen. There are many people that can drink one beer, and drive home, and then there that other guy.
There will always be a wacko human, that desires mass murder. Some people are just messed up. Even if you arm everybody you never change that.

 

[ajridgedell]

Well it seems to me that we have some that think "if you can possess a conceal carry permit then you should be allowed to carry on campus." and those that think, "I like the idea of certain people having permission to carry on campus." I can certainly see a point to both opinions. I think the majority of people want to see people be able to defend themselves everywhere including on a college campus (obviously on this forum, but also outside of this forum). I strongly believe if we don't all get behind one idea and push hard and with help from the NRA, it will be the same thread over and over again with just a different campus in the title. Don't act like
"there is nothing we can do, there is always gunna be crazy people." I don't want my kids growing up not being able to defend themselves in certain areas that they should want to go to, like college!!

 

[WildBillKelso]

One could consider the 21 year minimum age a reasonably effective filter for those that are concerned about young adults being impulsive and irresponsible. That is well into adulthood. If an individual is acting a fool past their 21st birthday, they have a good chance of running into the other laws in place and end up a prohibited person.

There are plenty of "nontraditional" students on campuses along with the 18 year olds. I think of the honorably discharged veterans, finished with their 2-8 year hitch and going through undergrad on the GI bill. For the most part, it is these people that would definitely make a campus safer by CCWing on campus.

I also think of the older graduate students attending school. Many of these people can take as long as a decade to finish a PHD. I've seen them as old as in their forties. Many grad students are basically in poverty while in school and can resort to renting less expensive apartments in rougher parts of town. Sometimes they rely on public transportation as they cannot afford a car. They have no car to store a firearm in while at campus. Sometimes they work student jobs such as the evening shift at the library or writing center and go home very late at night. If it were my children in that situation getting an advanced degree, I would want them to have the option to CCW on campus.

I went to undergrad at a very large university just outside of Washington DC. Every week there were armed robberies and other violent crime perpetrated on students both on campus or off-campus commuting to/from school. All of what I have written is based on real world observations.

 

[JoeLiberty]

Back to the OP.
Things LSU can do to make the campus safer:
AFAIK it is not legal to conceal carry on campus in LA but we can (and should) lobby to change that.
If that does not happen and you want to keep guns out of any area, you need armed guards and metal detectors at the doors. If they don't allow people to be responsible for their own safety, then THEY should have to actually be responsible for it. Think about your major sporting events. No guns allowed (in those settings it makes more sense) but they check every person going into that building. Armed security actively patrols. Bag checks. Thats the level of security that every 'gun free' zone should be required to maintain.

 

[madwabbit]

I was in a meeting with division heads at <two different Louisiana based universities> wednesday, and talked to a few administrative someones. The subject of firearms came up, I pointed out that the more this happens and licensed people are told they cannot carry to protect themselves, the more appealing online attendance ala Phoenix etc becomes. They both told me, paraphrased: They'd like to see some type of qualified armed personnel on staff at every university. -But it's taboo for them to even talk about it to their superiors.

I was feeling ambitious and particularly political, so I reminded them that I've been on their various campuses over the last 7 years roughly 100 or 200 times. I've attended as a student, a guest adviser, a conference speaker, a sports fan, a trainer... among other roles... and they've never seen me without a firearm. I know that because I've never showered with any of them. It got interesting quick.

Stage: In an office with a few division heads and decision makers (90% of which know me personally, fyi). Ill be O, let their administrator (a good friend, btw) be X

X: "our policy is no firearms on campus"
O: "my policy is my firearm goes where I go"
X: "we have gun free zone signs all over the campus."
O: "Yep, the sign had the same effect in your office as it did in oregon, sandy hook, columbine, Va Tech..."
X: "what are we supposed to do? if people just ignore it, we're helpless. are you no different than "those guys"?"
O: "you're supposed to guarantee your students a safe learning environment. Instead of lobbying for new bleachers and federal grants, apply a mandated budget for armed security or at very minimum some certified staff training as a response to an active shooter. you guys, speaking collectively as a profession, are excellent teachers and **** poor learners. This won't stop until you find the solution. You're all post-graduate alumni with impressive educational resumes - and your incapability to learn from repeated tragedies over a series of decades is embarrassing. How many teachers do you have licensed by the state to carry? I'd bet your local lea would exchange firearm training for CJ hours straight up... you just have to get creative. you aren't even looking for a solution, which means you accept bodybags as an answer.

I ended my soap box with: A veteran in Oregon charged at the shooter after taking multiple rounds. I'd like his chances a lot more if he had a firearm. The state says he can carry. The school says if he does he's expelled at best and a felon at worst. Perfect example of a school having exceptionally qualified personnel in their classrooms ALREADY and yet choosing to disarm them out of some misdirected sense of higher enlightenment. Your hero was there, and he took action disregarding his own safety and the possibility of dying on his son's birthday. The reality is that the faculty took away his teeth. You castrated your hero, and liberal legislative decisions cost lives that day.

X "Who, exactly, do you blame for this tragedy? How can it not be guns?"
O: "the scumbag that did this, entirely. beyond that? ANY CITIZEN that voted for ANY representative whom campaigned on the grounds of disarming those that would selflessly protect others.


I'll forego the remainder of the story, but it ended with handshakes and an invitation to discuss the matter in depth with some other decision makers at state level.

 

[Hattrick 22]

I think people sometimes get caught up in what's allowed and what is worth following when regarding laws.

It's a personal choice being responsible for our own security regardless or where you are and what signs may be posted.

 

[Hattrick 22]

It's true that it is not very difficult to get a license to carry, BUT... going through the CHL class is not what makes the permit holders responsible citizens, but rather it is because they are responsible citizens that they go through the effort of obtaining a license. That process, IMHO, is more than enough to separate the wheat from the chaff (i.e. the idiots you refer to). There is no reason to prevent licensed carriers from carrying on campus. They are statistically more responsible with their weapons than the police are:
http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/pol...er-than-concealed-carry-permit/#axzz3nRMa33L1

No one goes through the trouble to get a CHL just so they can use it to go and commit crimes, they just go commit the crimes anyway.

+1

 

[Hattrick 22]

It's not that they aren't responsible enough, it's that they haven't been through enough training. A CHL class really isn't enough.

--Sent From My Galaxy S6

Now amount of training will ever be enough for these types of situations the best classes aren't even close enough to replicating it..

 

[pyreaux]

Actually there are groups that now offer force on force classes as well as active shooter response to civillians, while by no means perfect they do offer the opportunity to evaluate people's capabilities under stress.