CU-Boulder doesn't think gun restrictions discriminate against concealed-carry holders

Categories: Education

first-photo-dorms-flatirons-cloudcasey.jpg
Weapons will still be banned at CU-Boulder's dorms.
CU spent a lot of time and resources fighting to maintain its on-campus weapons ban, so why risk more legal action -- something attorney James Manley hints at in a Boulder Daily Camera article on this subject -- with more regulations?

In response, Hilliard says that "with a decision of this magnitude, it's never made lightly. The process involved extensive legal discussion with our attorneys and extensive legal review, including doing some research into what other universities around the country have done, and how military bases accommodate concealed carry. We talked to Fort Carson and Peterson Air Force Base, as well as undergraduate students, graduate students, parents, faculty and staff. And then we had an extensive review that began in late spring, shortly after the Colorado Supreme Court decision, and it continued intensely throughout the summer. It's not an off-the-cuff decision."

Did the Aurora theater shooting -- allegedly committed by James Holmes, who was in the midst of withdrawing from a neuroscience program at CU's Anschutz campus in Aurora when the attack took place -- factor in?

"By the time the tragedy in Aurora happened, we were well into the process," Hilliard replies. "It certainly was a difficult emotional situation for all of us in the CU family, and we knew it would certainly factor into the news coverage of whatever our eventual decision was. But I don't think it would be accurate to say it changed the trajectory of the discussions at all. We were fully aware of all the scenarios that can come out of issues with firearms, both positive and negative."

Nevertheless, Hilliard emphasizes that "we don't screen our students for having a concealed-carry permit when they apply to come here. The only way that comes to our attention is through the process of applying for housing. We're not doing anything to single out concealed-carry-permit carriers, and they can move freely around the campus."

More from our Education archive: "CU must allow real guns on campus two years after banning Nerf guns."



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
20 comments
Monkey
Monkey

Most mass shooting are in "gun free zones".  Colorado is a concealed-carry state, the theater in Aurora was a “gun free zone”, just like Virginia Tech’s campus. But that did not stop James Holmes, or Seung-Hui Cho, from embarking on a killing spree of their defenseless victims. These examples highlight the perspective advanced in several academic studies suggesting that laws prohibiting gun possession, ironically, do not disarm criminals, only the law abiding citizens whom they are meant to protect.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

Firearms + Drunken College Students = what could possibly go wrong?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Monkey"Most mass shooting are in "gun free zones".

 

Gun Loon Bullshit. 

 

Jared Laughner's rampage in Tucson was not only in a pro-gun State/City, but numerous other people at the event were in fact armed ... and not a single one of them had enough time to analyze, decide and react before the entire event was over -- approximately 12 seconds.

 

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

 @DonkeyHotay Funny, Donkey. We're going to make your post an upcoming Comment of the Day. Thanks.

Monkey
Monkey

 @DonkeyHotay One? Don't feel bad, it's hard finding mass shootings outside of "gun free zones", that's why I referred to the fact that most mass shootings happen in "gun free zones". I'm not saying guns prevent crime, I'm saying the lack of guns don't prevent crime.

Monkey
Monkey

 @DonkeyHotayThe facts disprove and disposed of the flawed journal of medicine study you found. Try again.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Monkey So a gun loon was critical of a PEER REVIEWED study that disproved and disposed of the LIES that gun loons so often spout ?

 

Fascinating.

Monkey
Monkey

 @DonkeyHotay Gary Kleck, a professor at Florida State University’s College of Criminology and Criminal Justice was critical of that study, saying that the period it studied was too short and that the suburbs were a poor point of reference. When the Supreme Court overturned that law, the rate soon dropped back close to the national average of 11 per 100,000, instead of the 25-83 per 100,000 during the ban. During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law. Try again Donkey.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@Monkey

A 1991 study in The New England Journal of Medicine compared Washington D.C. to its suburbs before and after the gun ban took effect.

 

It found that the law was linked to a 25 percent drop in homicides involving firearms and a 23 percent drop in such suicides.

 

The study found no drops in other kinds of homicides and suicides in Washington D.C., and no changes in the suburbs.

 

Monkey
Monkey

 @DonkeyHotay You are incorrect! Is that why you don't show these make believe statistics? Here is a list of States with more gun homicides and more gun restrictions than Colorado: Maryland, California, Illinois, Michigan, North Carolina, Florida, New York, New Jersey. Also, municipalities with more gun restrictions have more gun homicides in the U.S., Chicago is the best example of this. It seems the anti-gun loon is in fact the one spewing lies with no statistics. That's ok Donkey, try again. Remember the original topic though, gun-free zones and mass murder, you often like to get off topic when you can't argue a topic.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@MonkeyThe statistics show -- contrary to the lies spewed by gun loons -- that areas with more stringent controls on firearms have FEWER homicides by firearms.

 

And the stats also show the logical converse.

 

gjaxson01
gjaxson01

 @DonkeyHotay While I appreciate your observation on my  attachment from reality, I have not attacked you personally.  I find it odd, that you chose to make comments about me as an individual rather than the facts of the issue. 

 

One of the biggest issues is why people feel the need to carry some sort of weapon.  I suspect it is out of self preservation.  I would argue that no one keeps statics on crimes that are stopped by people with guns. Who do you report a stopped crime to?  I would also argue that since the police are not required to protect you, it falls on to each one of us to protect ourselves. 

gjaxson01
gjaxson01

 @PolitiComm  I certainly understand your point, and my heart goes out to the victims, and their families.  The ultimate point is that you cannot legislate safety nor can you remove all risk from life.  Why should a segment of society be punished for the actions of one person? The failure of the system is not with the lack of gun laws, but a lack of enforcing them. How many innocent people have been killed by The Justice Department in Fast and Furious. 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @gjaxson01 "To say, that people who carry concealed are people looking for glory and looking for a fight, is not correct."

 

You really are detached from reality -- as the standard sound-bite uttered 1000s of times every year by the pro-gun crowd every time there is some mass shooting by an armed gunman consists of them fantacizing of how things would have been different if THEY or someone like them had been there with their precious pistol to "save the day".

 

It is in fact the PRIMARY fantasy/delusion that drives these gun-loons in their desire to carry guns in public places.

PolitiComm
PolitiComm

 @gjaxson01 I can't speak for DonkeyHotay, but I will say that safety and security are freedoms. We each have rights to life and liberty. I think if this summer has proven anything its that those freedoms are threatened when someone can obtain the means to end 12 lives and permanently alter 58 more in less than 2 minutes. 

gjaxson01
gjaxson01

 @DonkeyHotay While, I will not disagree with you on the point you make about the facts, I will disagree with the substance of you stance on the issue.  I will make this observation that it was not a police officer who stopped Laughner.  I will also point out, that those who are armed may have thought the risk to employ a firearm may be to high or risky, the fact that they didn't employ them doesn't mean that the system we have isn't a good one. To say, that people who carry concealed are people looking for glory and looking for a fight, is not correct.   I would, if you will permit me, be inclined to ask you a question in light of these terrible events, What freedoms are you willing to sacrifice for safety and security?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @gjaxson01 NOT before he stopped shooting ... and not a single one of the armed civilians was able to draw, shoot or otherwise stop him with their precious pistols, thus disposing of the often repeated myth/delusion that armed civilians will become vigilante heroes in a firefight.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...