Campus

The University of Colo. Is Segregating Students Based on Gun Permits — Do You Think It Should? (Poll)

By now you might know that the University of Colorado has decided to comply with a state supreme court ruling saying that it cannot ban permit-carrying students from having guns on campus. But in complying, the university has created a separate controversy: It has decided to segregate those students with concealed carry permits. Now, if a student has a permit and is living on campus, that student will have to live in separate dorms off campus.

While students are now permitted to carry legal guns in campus buildings, certain restrictions apply. For example, large ticketed events such as football games will still be off limits for gun-carriers.

And while protection advocates believe the law is a step in the right direction, not everyone is happy — especially because it seems to fly in the face of the logic that legal gun carriers sprinkled throughout a campus at all times actually helps prevent violence.

A scathing editorial in the Colorado Springs Gazette lays out that argument [emphasis added]:

Nearly all modern massacres have occurred in “gun-free” zones. It is likely that gun-free zones attract homicidal maniacs, who want the highest death tolls possible before they are stopped. If guns aren’t allowed, no one is likely to shoot back. It is hard to imagine that mere coincidence explains the common thread of “gun-free” rules at massacre locations, such as Columbine High School, Aurora’s Century 16 Theater and Virginia Tech. It seems like common sense that “no gun” signs ensure predators of soft, defenseless targets.

Given these observations, tt is beyond belief that members of the Colorado Board of Regents have indulged a publicity stunt that establishes new “gun-free” zones on college campuses. Their actions could get students killed.

[...]

Colorado law allows only law-abiding adults age 21 and up to obtain concealed carry permits. Almost no one living in a freshman dorm is over the age of 21. In the unlikely event a full-fledged adult with a concealed carry permit lives in a freshman dorm, his or her presence enhances safety. Concealed carry permittees are trained and screened. The new rule is a policy in search of a problem, and it ensures criminals of new defenseless targets.

Regents and administrators have managed only to promise all predators that freshman dorms are defenseless, gun-free zones. Their new rule will almost certainly result in “no gun” signs on dormitory doors.

[...]

We concur, but take strong objection to the needless and self-indulgent endangerment of freshmen in dorms. That new rule is dangerous, unconscionable and probably illegal.

A Denver Post editorial, however, takes a different approach [emphasis added]:

We doubt that the plan goes far enough for gun-rights owners, however, and won’t be surprised if the issue returns to the courts.

The new policy springs from a Colorado Supreme Court ruling in March that upheld a lower-court ruling striking down a total gun ban on University of Colorado campuses.

The suit was filed by students who held concealed-carry permits and were denied permission to bring weapons on campus.

The students argued that the legislature did not include colleges on the list of institutions in which the Concealed Carry Act could be “specifically limited.”

And they were right.

That should change.

The university’s Board of Regents should be allowed to determine the gun rules on campus — including whether a total ban is in order. It’s the same authority currently given to those bodies that oversee county courthouses and K-12 schools.

As we said in March, such a revision would put this important school safety decision where it belongs — with those who are intimately familiar with the school, its culture and student mix.

Now that you’ve read separate views on the issue, take our poll below and let us know what you think:


University of Colo. Gun Poll

Comments (104)

1 2 3
  • tajloc
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 10:35am

    Latest news on 8/21/12. One hundred million legally registered gun owners in USA did NOT shoot anyone yesterday. Hoorah!

    Report Post »  
    • KevINtampa
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 12:16pm

      …a full-fledged adult…

      WTF is a “a full-fledged adult”?

      Is an adult 18 or 21? Seriously, it’s about time we make this decision. If someone is capable of the maturity to sign his life and liberty over to the government at 18, he should be deemed capable of handling the decision of drinking a beer or carrying a gun. If 18 is considered too young to make a responsible decision with a beer, how can it be old enough to make a responsible decision to give up one’s life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness by joining the military?

      Only in America would there be such twisted logic.

      Report Post »  
    • black9897
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 12:40pm

      So one group, the ones with the guns will be the safe group.

      Report Post » black9897  
    • Shiroi Raion
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 2:56pm

      I’ve had guns for 30 years and have never aimed one at a person.

      Report Post » Shiroi Raion  
    • Larry E
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 4:32pm

      What do you mean by legally registered? I’m legally registered to vote, my vehicles are legally registered, but I am not legally registered to own firearms, and my firearms aren’t legally registered. Registering firearms and their owners is just a way to tax them, and eventually sieze their legally held guns. Ask a British or Australian gun owner or former gun owner.

      Also where I live gun and gun owner registration isn’t on the books and anyone who brought it up in the legislature would be out after the next election.

      Report Post »  
    • BBomber66
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 7:07pm

      @ KevinTampa: This is not a new argument. When I joined the military there was a beer vending machine in the enlisted club and the fed drinking age was 18. Anyway the drinking age was different depending on the state, but military posts/bases were federal property. We could cross the Ohio River and buy it at 18, too; but the KY troopers watched the bridges fairly close. I do agree, though, that if scientifically our logic centers and thought processes are not fully developed until after age 20/21, then that should be the determining factor in critical decision making like voting and one should have to show that you are who you say you are to be able to do that. Your right is not abridged by that and your vote will actually count more. One county just west of Chicago has 520% registered voters to population. Oh, wait, Chicago, some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and over 200 murders already this year.

      Report Post » BBomber66  
    • GunnsAblazinG
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 7:18pm

      I’m definately going with the gun owners…

      Report Post »  
    • Walkabout
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 7:51pm

      black9897

      Is it or is it not true the Saturday night special gun laws were enacted to deny blacks access to firearms to defend themselves? I thought they were but i could be wrong.

      Report Post »  
    • mzk1
      Posted on August 22, 2012 at 4:22am

      There are actually several stages of majority, and furthermore it’s by state. A state could lower the voting age to 16 or 14 if it wanted.

      I would suggest the reverse: return the drinking age to 18 and the voting age to 21. Give them three years to learn to hold their liquor.

      Remember: Don’t drink and vote!

      Report Post »  
  • vorpal
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 10:08am

    then LGBT’s need to be segregated and also people of color and students who have cats and dogs (separate dorms of course!) and then married students in another dorm, and then different religions in separate dorms, hipsters in their own dorm, geeks in their own dorm, age appropriate dorms etc…. ah the list of how and what to discriminate against goes on and on….

    Report Post » vorpal  
    • tajloc
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 10:28am

      What about those crazy religious folks?

      Report Post »  
    • Git-R-Done
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 4:38pm

      Tajloc – It’s you crazy atheists who need to be segregated from civilized society.

      Report Post »  
    • Amarilloan
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 5:53pm

      Vorpal, this is a state university you are talking about. They don’t understand real logic.

      Report Post »  
    • mzk1
      Posted on August 22, 2012 at 4:26am

      Unfortunately, there ARE black-only dorms, or at least a call for them. If we are to segregate crazy religious fanatics, we should start with the atheists, the most fanatical of all groups. (The Muslim Students’ Union should be banned outright, not because of the religion, but because of its associations. Besides, they shouldn’t get student visas.)

      Report Post »  
  • DSTSS2010
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 10:07am

    “the Right to keep and BEAR arms shall not be abridged” The Constitution is your permit. A right is not subject to “permission”!

    Report Post » DSTSS2010  
    • jocko
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 4:50pm

      RIGHT ON! Open or concealed carry… the Constitution does not limit how or what kind. Just like the idiots judges that decided that we can only have semi automatic hand or long guns… and nothing beyond that. Once again, the boots of progressivism (jack boots) march on over our Constitutional rights.

      Report Post » jocko  
    • Oldtimer2
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 11:09pm

      There you go again using that silly out-dated Constitution. It will only be fair when we are all equal targets.

      Report Post »  
  • shogun459
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:55am

    Our County has No break in robberies, no hold ups either per year, 0.
    We support gun rights and our Sheriff has said to Make sure any crook is dead BEFORE you call him. We have had no shootings either.

    The neighboring County (X) has an average of 700+ break-ins per year. County X is Very liberal and they hate Guns and the people that own them.

    Only a moron can’t see the reason for this.

    P.S. Home values are comparable.

    Report Post » shogun459  
    • Locked
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 1:20pm

      “We support gun rights and our Sheriff has said to Make sure any crook is dead BEFORE you call him. We have had no shootings either.”

      If you’ve had no shootings, then apparently you aren‘t following the sheriff’s orders, no? Not even criminals are being shot.

      Give some county names, I’d be glad to run a comparison for you.

      Report Post »  
    • FieldJudge
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 3:41pm

      ‘Locked’ are you really that dumb and/or stupid? Or really trying?

      Report Post » FieldJudge  
  • turkey13
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:26am

    It all went down the tube when a Athiest took prayer out of the schools. Our government actually did a study to find out why all these shootings started in our schools. Remember the kid that planned Columbine – mixed religions in the home – really none since the kid had never been to Church or heard about God. In the old days he would have heard the morning prayer at school. The kid that did Virginia Tech – loner – Godless – all those nice unarmed kids with a target on their backs. The government concluded on the study that this was just crazy people. There should be no such thing as a gun free Zone. All these judges that hate guns should only be allowed to have unarmed guards to protect them and not have any metal detectors.

    Report Post »  
  • termyt
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:25am

    Sure, segregate them. I’d love that – post signs in the neighborhood, too. I’d just make sure I had a permit, whether armed or not, so I could live in the safest neighborhood in Colorado. Crime rates will be near 0 there.

    Report Post »  
    • johnjamison
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:47am

      exactly, signs like unarmed housing and armed housing……or maybe helpless victim housing and don’t tread on me housing.

      Report Post »  
  • soap on a rope
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:23am

    So you get a choice of victim housing or non-victim housing? I think I‘d rather integrate but if that’s the way to get guns on campus, it’s a start.

    Report Post »  
  • AllLost
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:10am

    Once again the NRA was right. Gun permits are being used to remove rights from citizens.

    Report Post »  
  • RRFlyer
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:07am

    Denver is not really a part of Colorado. They ignore the state laws and live in a world of their own.

    Report Post »  
    • shogun459
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:59am

      Too True, much like thier President Obama the First.

      Report Post » shogun459  
  • The_Jerk
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:05am

    Sue the school.

    Report Post »  
  • Locked
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:00am

    Separate is not equal. It’s legal to carry with a permit; the students should not face restrictions.

    Report Post »  
  • jen2012
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:49am

    Just go to a college that lets students carry gun permit. Throw out people in office that are anti gun.
    Boycotte college football games that don’t let you carry a permitted gun. When these schools lose millions of dollars in revenue, watch how fast thing change over night.

    Report Post »  
  • 2A
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:43am

    Criminals now have a clear choice on whom to victimize. If I was a non gun carrier, I’d choose to live in the dorm with a gun symbol sign with no slash thru it.

    Report Post » 2A  
  • Rickfromillinois
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:39am

    I know which Dorm I would want to live in given the choice except that the dorms for those who have gun permits is off campus, which could be a big problem if you are a student with out a car or if there is parking problems. Why not have 1/2 of the on-campus dorms for those with gun permits and the other 1/2 for those who don’t? Anyone want to guess that in the event of riots due to civil unrest, power outages, or some type of disaster, which dorms ALL of the students who can’t get back home will want to stay in?

    Report Post » Rickfromillinois  
  • teddrunk
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:31am

    Guess which dorm won’t be attacked by a crazed gunman on campus.

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:42am

      As I watched the video I was laughing about that exact thought. Reminded me of the guy who put a sign in his yard pointing to his neighbor’s house as being a unarmed citizen. Since the guy had complained about his gun ownership over time. I understand that he eventually stopped complaining.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Al Gator
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:07am

      Oh, you guys forget that we are dealing with moonbat pretzel logic. After some kook rips through the “gun free” zone, the moonbats in the admin will start barking all over again about banning all guns on campus!

      They’ll claim that the presence of gun toting students on campus “forced the shooter to only pick on unarmed students. And that’s not FAIR! Everybody should be at EQUAL risk.”

      I know moonbats!

      Report Post » Al Gator  
  • joeslick
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:30am

    Can students with common sense, if there’s any out there, request to live in a dorm that allows guns????

    Report Post »  
    • OhioRifleman
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 12:00pm

      Actually, there are a lot of students with common sense.

      They don’t go to the major colleges. They do a 2-in at a local university and get out to work ASAP. Like I did.

      Report Post » OhioRifleman  
  • MARCH4HIM
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:24am

    If segregation is the only way we can have even close to what our second amendment
    Guarantees us . I say do this everywhere .That way the liberals can’t complain when they
    find out , that their always the victim. It’s a shame we have to do this with a Right..
    Can you imagine doing this with the first amendment .

    Report Post » MARCH4HIM  
  • Zombee
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:22am

    The US Constitution is all the permit any American needs to own a firearm in this country. All r laws or restrictions that intend to control or infringe on that right, should be, violated, ignored and considered null and void.
    Good Gun Control Is A Steady Aim.

    Report Post » Zombee  
    • garryb
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 1:05pm

      Gun Control is never having to say “I missed”.

      Report Post »  
  • momrules
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:22am

    Cowards rarely attack someone that can fight back. I would much rather my child be in the dorm or classroom where someone is legally armed and trained to use a firearm. My child’s safety should trump the gun control advocates in this country.

    Report Post »  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:58am

      Your child’s safety does indeed trump gun control advocates cries for the elimination of guns in America.
      Your child and every American is protected by natural law,that is rights given to us by God and those rights can’t be taken away by men.Intellectually inferior congresses have perverted our constitution from it’s original intent,small government more liberty etc.

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
  • PATRIOTMAMA
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:16am

    Consider this a study on how just knowing students may possess guns will deter criminal activity. Against those in the non-gun areas. Great controled study if you think about it.

    Report Post »  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:15am

    Every restriction by a city state municipality or college or whoever to carry a firearm is unconstitutional.
    You won’t find a provision for permits or restrictions with regards to firearms purchases or ownership in the second amendment. Those restrictions were added years later by intellectually inferior congresses who supposedly had good intentions,and the road to hell is paved with good intentions and that’s where we find ourselves in modern day America.

    Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 9:26am

      I’ll only add private property owners can restrict you carrying a firearm on their property,outside of that all restrictions and permits are unconstitutional. We have an illusion of private property in this country,if you think you own your property see the IRS or EPA,have a chat with them about your private property rights and see where you stand.

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
  • PATRIOTMAMA
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:15am

    Sometimes you just have to let people learn the hard way. I say tough love on the parts of the students w/o gun permits. Besides I would be happy to be known to live on the side with the guns. Pretty sure those men and women aren’t going to be messed with very much.

    Report Post »  
  • SecularConservative
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:10am

    Ron Paul will endorse Gary Johnson for President if he doesn’t win the candidacy. Vote Gary Johnson and protect our rights and the 2nd Amendment!

    Report Post »  
  • BetterInformed
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:09am

    Switzerland has the lost murder rate of all European nations. Everyone is required to carry an automatic weapon.

    Report Post »  
    • Rickfromillinois
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:31am

      No, every male between a certain age is required to have an automatic weapon in their residence, not carry one.

      Report Post » Rickfromillinois  
    • tajloc
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 10:32am

      I like your thrust but so untrue.

      Report Post »  
    • Xkiller
      Posted on August 21, 2012 at 11:36am

      everyone (male) between 18 and 60 (?) is required to be in the state miltia. They are issued a fully automatic weapon and ammo to be kept and maintained at home. They are under a call up rule if need be.

      Report Post »  
  • travlman77
    Posted on August 21, 2012 at 8:09am

    I think it’s a great idea!
    Let’s do a case by case study of the crimes in each dorm and after one year let’s see who fairs better.
    My money is one the dorms with the guns.

    Report Post » travlman77  
1 2 3

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love