Want amazing, share-able, conservative quotes? Check out QuotableRight on Twitter, Facebook, or the web.

CSU vs Legal Self Defense

Colorado State University’s current gun regulations are exactly in line with the state laws, but according to the Denver Post, president’s cabinet and the schools “public-safety experts” are attempting to implement a gun ban against the will of the student body.  Apparently CSU’s Faculty Council prompted the measure in response to the VA Tech shootings.  While I don’t doubt this is their reasoning, it is illogical.  Part of the reason the VA Tech shooting was so devastating was the lack of armed defense between the initial attack, and the arrival of police and SWAT teams.  VA Tech had a gun ban.  It failed there just as it failed at Luby’s Cafeteria; at Columbine; and most recently, at Fort Hood.  What is so different about CSU that a failed policy will suddenly begin to work?

Furthermore, the CSU administration is propagating the same sort of fallacy we see in the Congressional Health Care debate.  If the gun ban is such a good idea, then why are “security details for high-level visitors” exempt?  Why is the police chief advocating the denial of legal self defense for students while ensuring that he will be able to retain his own sidearm?  If the gun ban is good enough to protect students, then it should be good enough to protect everyone.  The students see this for what it truly is: a relentless power-grab by university administrators on behalf of an insecure, paranoid CSU Faculty Council.

President of the Faculty Council, Professor Richard Eykholt, apparently doesn’t agree that “a ban on students legally carrying concealed weapons” leaves them defenseless in the event of an armed attack.  He is convinced that since mass murderers are intent on killing other people, and often themselves, they will not be deterred by the prospect of armed resistance.  As such, Eykholt believes the logical conclusion is to ensure there can be no resistance.  I would like Professor Eykholt to please give a lecture detailing how removing the possibility of armed resistance, and allowing a murderer to proceed–as Cho did–methodically, systematically killing his classmates is preferable to CSU’s current system which has yet to cause any harm to any member of the campus community.

There is a glimmer of hope in this ordeal.  The ASCSU–CSU’s Student Government–has passed a resolution in favor of retaining the current rules.  The school’s president has assured the campus community that he will consider their recommendation before making a final decision.  We can only hope that CSU’s president will make the right choice, and defend his students’ right to legal self defense unrestricted by arbitrary borders.

/************** Update: The full text of the ASCSU Resolution is available from files.soderstrome.com/../12-02-09-ASCSU-3917.pdf **************/