Texas senate approves guns in college classrooms

[someone_else]

The only good thing that this kinds of laws do is providing evidence that it was a bad idea. Like all mistakes anyway.

I hope they gather enough evidence to make fucking crystal clear that such thing is idiotic before the pile of dead bodies starts to be relevant.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Living in hicksville USA (arizona) I have talked to many people who think this is a good idea. They will all tell you that doing this will "protect Law abiding Americans from criminals" that arming all students some how magically makes it impossible for a "criminal" to go on a mad shooting spree.

The very notion that one these "law abiding students" might just get drunk and shoot up some kids at a party never seems to enter their heads at all.

[Elfdart]

Just classrooms? Because if you want to define 'Bad idea' it involves the copious drinking of college students and adding in weaponry.

How many college students want to have a gun? Better question, how many of those can afford to purchase a gun? Further how many of those can then afford and pass a CCW course? As this article implies it's necessary. No one is going to accept you into a CCW course with a $100 Derringer, you're talking at minimum an excess of $300 for a decent handgun*, and the classes themselves can cost hundreds of dollars as well. CCW permit owners and NFA owners are the two most responsible gun owners to be found, largely because there's a lot of expense necessary to get the permit.

*If you don't believe me go have a look at some of the popular handgun models, I suggest the Colt M1911, Glock 17, SiG P226, CZ 75, Beretta 92, H&K P30, or the Browning Hi-Power. I'm not as familiar with revolvers so the only one I'm really certain is very popular is the Model 10, though they're all price about the same.

Maybe this can be used as a backdoor way to get Republitards to stop cutting Pell Grants and student loans:

Tell them the college kids can buy GUNS with it!

[Beowulf]

Now I do believe that the issue of campus violence at parties is more real and should be the main concern not teachers feeling eve. We already know that alcohol makes people more prone to violence and stupid behavior, we know violence is a regular enough occurence in dorm rooms plus at parties and we know that people get ridiculously drunk on campus. Thus we know that giving those people guns is a ridiculously bad idea and that at the least the law should position that anyone caught drinking while carrying is an automatic arrest. That to me should be the main focus not whether teachers piss off their students since like pointed to previously, that can happen in any high stress situation.

Congratulations. You're late to the party:

According to the Texas Penal Code, it is unlawful for an individual who is intoxicated to carry a handgun. It is important to note that the Penal Code defines “intoxicated” as not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance in the body. Additionally, the Penal Code considers having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher to constitute intoxication.

[TheFeniX]

Now we just sit back and collect statistics on campus shootings for the next ten years to see what happens.

Probably will be just like the 2007 census data collected on CCW holders in Texas. Namely, people who go through the process of getting a CHL are not psychotic murderers waiting for a chance to gun down anyone who looks at them funny. And also that people who buy firearms legally also don't go looking for excuses to gun people down. But I wouldn't want to derail "the sky is falling" parade going on here.

Yeah. This alone shows why allowing guns on campuses is a bad idea. Drunk college students can be a threat to themselves and those around them even without guns. Can you imagine if they can now also now legally pull triggers ?

The Texas CHL law does not change the situations in which Texans can use deadly force. Neither does this new law. Try again.

I can see the potential for assholes using their guns to intimidate other students. They don't have to do anything actually overt, just let people know that they have brought a gun.

This is a pretty fucking stupid comment, but I've come to expect it. Please tell me the difference between a CHL licensee and a person without one doing this. What exactly would be the difference in legality? They both get expelled, go to jail, and have the honor of never owning a handgun again.

You really think a Concealed Handgun License gives me the right to walk up to someone and say "I have a gun," consequence free?

According to the Texas Penal Code, it is unlawful for an individual who is intoxicated to carry a handgun. It is important to note that the Penal Code defines “intoxicated” as not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those substances, or any other substance in the body. Additionally, the Penal Code considers having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher to constitute intoxication.

It's worse (better?) than that: it's to the officer's discretion if you're intoxicated or not when you carry a firearm. You can go to jail and get your CHL revoked from blowing any detectable amount of alcohol. But more than that, any form of impairment (tiredness, anti-histamines, etc) are also up to the officer's discretion.

[Simon_Jester]

Look, I would love it if this works out as planned- if we don't see narcissistic twentysomethings legally obtaining firearms, bringing them onto campus, and then engaging in poorly thought out attempts to intimidate peers or professors.

But I'm quite worried about the possibility, and about the odds that such things will occur often enough to offset the (extremely low) probability of a mass shooting on campus which is effectively checked by armed students happening in the state of Texas.

[TheFeniX]

Look, I would love it if this works out as planned- if we don't see narcissistic twentysomethings legally obtaining firearms, bringing them onto campus, and then engaging in poorly thought out attempts to intimidate peers or professors.

They do that shit anyway and it's a one-way ticket to getting your ass expelled and that's if your lucky and campus police doesn't put you in jail and fuck your world up legally. They arrested some poor guy for just saying "I understand where the VA shooter was coming from" during a discussion about the fucking shooting. No firearm even required. But is the kind of person willing to pull that shit (actually being a threatening asshole) really the kind of guy to put in the time to spend 12 hours being told how badly Texas will fuck his life up if he decides to use his handgun for that? Or is he just going to carry one illegally and do it anyway?

Check these stats. I posted about 2007, so I'll use it (even though I have no idea why 2008-2009 came out so fast. I need to read them). In 2007, there were 160 CHL holders convicted of a crime. Let's assume they are all CHL related (they are not). Out of the estimated 200,000 CHL holders in Texas, and that estimate was probably low when I found it years ago, you're looking at an extremely low percentage. And 2009 convictions have gone DOWN to 101 and CHLs issued have increased. Do the math at the conviction rate of CHL holders per capita of CHL holders, then compare that to non-CHL holder convictions per capita (2009 has 24 million Texans).

The college kid without a license should be the one who scares you.

But I'm quite worried about the possibility, and about the odds that such things will occur often enough to offset the (extremely low) probability of a mass shooting on campus which is effectively checked by armed students happening in the state of Texas.

You're assuming that this is only there to combat mass-shootings. The number of e-mails UH spams at me daily about parking lot robberies disagree. Not to say that concealed guns will combat this, but considering UH has been cutting back security patrols due to budget issues and the CHL program has proven people are up to the responsibility, it won't hurt the situation. Personally though, the UH campus is a criminal's fucking playground considering the shitty lighting and numerous blind corners and dense foliage to deal with.

[Winston Blake]

Mass shootings like Columbine and Virginia Tech don't happen very often- when was the last major school shooting in Texas? The only one I know of is Charles Whitman, and that was over forty years ago- one which masses of armed students wouldn't have done all that much good for.

I'm not going to get involved in this thread, but I would like to specifically refute this point.

Around 20 minutes later, once Whitman began facing return fire from the authorities and armed civilians who had brought out their personal firearms to assist police, he used the waterspouts on each side of the tower as gun ports, allowing him to continue shooting largely protected from the gunfire below but also greatly limiting his range of targets. Ramiro Martinez, an officer who participated in stopping Whitman's rampage, later stated that the civilian shooters should be credited as they made it difficult for him to take careful aim.

Now, these were hunting rifles, and Whitman was still able to get enough shots off to kill and injure people. However, the fact is that unprepared civilian firearm owners helped pin down a well-prepared ex-Marine who was in a position of great superiority. That is 'doing some good'.

[Shroom Man 777]

What do you people stand to gain from introducing concealed guns in college? What are your benefits? And what are your risks? You risk accidents, you risk theft of guns, you risk people acting like idiots, etc.

Do they also approve of bringing knives in college classrooms? How about pornography?

[wautd]

What do you people stand to gain from introducing concealed guns in college? What are your benefits? And what are your risks? You risk accidents, you risk theft of guns, you risk people acting like idiots, etc.

Do they also approve of bringing knives in college classrooms? How about pornography?

Ho there, I can see guns and knives, but porn will take it too far. This is the USa we're talking about remember?

Although, maybe the porn industry should bribe... I mean, lobby to, Taxanistan politicians. If the weapon industry has a lot of politicians in their pockets, why can't porn do it as well?

[TheFeniX]

What do you people stand to gain from introducing concealed guns in college? What are your benefits? And what are your risks? You risk accidents, you risk theft of guns, you risk people acting like idiots, etc.

"You people," oh wow.... As for accidents, there was a staggering amount of deadly discharges of firearms in 2009, with concern to CCW: 1

As for theft, care to provide anything related to CHL holders? I assume you have data on how many handguns are stolen from citizens while they are in the process of carrying.

Do they also approve of bringing knives in college classrooms? How about pornography?

Who gives a shit if someone is carrying a knife at a university? This isn't fucking prison or high-school. What right does the UH campus have to tell me that, even though the state of Texas considers it legal to carry a knife under 5," they can deny it because.... well, whatever reason they want? It's a state institution spitting in the face of evidence and saying "I'm special, I don't have to follow state law." And porno? What are you, a prude or something?

However, the fact is that unprepared civilian firearm owners helped pin down a well-prepared ex-Marine who was in a position of great superiority. That is 'doing some good'.

Remember kids, guns turn criminals into omnipotent avatars of death. The same kinds of firearms turn the rest of us into bumbling drunk idiots ready to start a gunfight over any slight we perceive.

[Shroom Man 777]

]"You people," oh wow.... As for accidents, there was a staggering amount of deadly discharges of firearms in 2009, with concern to CCW: 1

As for theft, care to provide anything related to CHL holders? I assume you have data on how many handguns are stolen from citizens while they are in the process of carrying.

They're still carrying lethal weapons, needlessly, somewhere where there's no real need to carry a fucking gun. The presence of the weapon itself increases the risk of shit happening. Do they let government employees conceal carry while working in town hall? Are hospital staff allowed to carry guns? Can a doctor have a Smith holstered by his pager, while he's doing surgery? Why? Can they carry guns in the airplane?

What is it with carrying guns that makes gun owners such blubbering cry babies who want to bring their stupid little shit everywhere? It's like those kids who piss themselves at night, and have to carry safety blankets everywhere.

God, we should go send child psychologists to Europe and see how many poor people got traumatized by the horrible fact that they couldn't... couldn't... *sob*... couldn't bring their GUN... to some place!!!! WAAAH! MOMMAH! DEY DIDNA LEMME BRING MAH GUN!!!! WAAAAAAHHH!!!!!

Who gives a shit if someone is carrying a knife at a university? This isn't fucking prison or high-school. What right does the UH campus have to tell me that, even though the state of Texas considers it legal to carry a knife under 5," they can deny it because.... well, whatever reason they want? It's a state institution spitting in the face of evidence and saying "I'm special, I don't have to follow state law." And porno? What are you, a prude or something?

It was just a question, because if they don't allow porn but allow guns, then that would be really fucking stupid. But then again, I'm sure once upon a time, they'd allow people to carry guns in their pockets everywhere, but would outlaw and punish men who liked to have dicks in their asses.

Remember kids, guns turn criminals into omnipotent avatars of death. The same kinds of firearms turn the rest of us into bumbling drunk idiots ready to start a gunfight over any slight we perceive.

So because a gunfight erupted because a psycho asshole wanted to shoot people with his gun, and got shot at by other people with guns... this means more people should have guns? The solution to gun violence is obviously to arm more people. Brilliant.

[Connor MacLeod]

Frankly there's nothing that would prevent guns from being carried on campus, or knives, or any sort of weapon. At least not without being alot more invasive about it than any of the schools where I live were. But the mindset that approves of that sort of thing, and even encourages it... I just find it disturbing. Because alot of nasty shit happens on campuses as others have pointed out, and adding guns or other weapons into that mix is... bad.

[Shroom Man 777]

You mean to say that a society wherein the carrying of things designed specifically to kill people is promoted and encouraged and treated as some kind of privilege is actually a perturbing thing? WHO KNEW!

But Connor, giving more and more and more people the capacity to take life away is obviously a good solution to the problem of some people misusing the capacity to take life!

AM I RITE?

[Simon_Jester]

...
The college kid without a license should be the one who scares you.

To a large extent, he is. It's not like gun thefts are unheard of.

Mass shootings like Columbine and Virginia Tech don't happen very often- when was the last major school shooting in Texas? The only one I know of is Charles Whitman, and that was over forty years ago- one which masses of armed students wouldn't have done all that much good for.

I'm not going to get involved in this thread, but I would like to specifically refute this point.

The guys shooting at Whitman came in from off campus with long guns- having a dozen students with concealed-carry handguns on the scene, when one guy is shooting from the top of a 300-foot tower with a rifle, is not going to be all that helpful.

What do you people stand to gain from introducing concealed guns in college? What are your benefits? And what are your risks? You risk accidents, you risk theft of guns, you risk people acting like idiots, etc.

"You people," oh wow...

Dude, he lives on the other side of the world from where all this is happening; to him, the entire population of the United States is "you people."

However, the fact is that unprepared civilian firearm owners helped pin down a well-prepared ex-Marine who was in a position of great superiority. That is 'doing some good'.

Remember kids, guns turn criminals into omnipotent avatars of death. The same kinds of firearms turn the rest of us into bumbling drunk idiots ready to start a gunfight over any slight we perceive.

No, they turn existing bumbling drunk idiots into more dangerous bumbling drunk idiots. College campuses have no shortage of bumbling drunk idiots, or narcissistic twenty-year-olds who cannot understand why anyone wouldn't let them get away with horrible shit, as it is.

But of course, anyone who thinks this might be a problem is obviously a total cretin who thinks all gun owners are murderous cackling lunatics- oh, wait. No.

Maybe the point of concern is (as people already said) that there's such a high concentration of immature and dangerous idiots on college campuses that behaviors which are very rare elsewhere become more common in that particular place. That there might be a difference between the odds of a 20-year-old CCW holder being dangerous and a 30 or 40-year-old CCW carrier, that on a college campus there might be more binge-drinking sophomores trying to get their hands on a friend's gun because they're that angry and not thinking straight, that there are in fact students willing to make death threats to professors as it is and whose death threats will become all the more credible under these circumstances.

The typical private gun owner is neither a dangerous loon nor a square-jawed steely-eyed protector of the innocent- he's just a normal person. It's the people at the tail end of the bell curve who commit crimes in any case, and gun crimes are no exception to this rule.

And this is why so much of the expert testimony delivered to the Texas legislature opposed the concealed-carry bill: why professors and campus police chiefs think this is a bad idea. Because they already have to deal with the shit created by the 1% or 2% or 5% of adolescent jackasses and borderline mental patients who live on every college campus, and oh great now the number of firearms on the campus that these people have access to just went up by an order of magnitude or so. Great.

This isn't as bad as having people carry guns into bars to get drunk, or carry guns into public buildings like legislatures and courthouses, but in terms of its potential to go awry, it's pretty high on the damn list.

[Shroom Man 777]

The guys shooting at Whitman came in from off campus with long guns- having a dozen students with concealed-carry handguns on the scene, when one guy is shooting from the top of a 300-foot tower with a rifle, is not going to be all that helpful.

Ooh! Ooh! Oooh!

The Whitman shooter's weapon:

Remington 700



A cursory google search gave me a range of 100 yards, which is 90 meters. But the rifle itself has variants that fire different rounds, so this may not be the same range as the Whitmang's. But still.


Let's get a standard concealed carry firearm, let's say...

M9, the standard sidearm of the US military.



It's range is... 50 meters.


So if you want to be as effective as those Texan kids in pinning down a sniper, you CAN'T trust your life to a small concealable pistol! Doing so would be foolhardy and you would have inferior range and firepower to the enemy! Thus you must wield a full-sized rifle or carbine or something!

[Simon_Jester]

Also, they weren't kids. They were random citizens who came in from off campus, of varying ages, bringing their long guns.

I can actually understand the benefits of having something like that as an institution- the idea dates back to the old hue and cry of Anglo-Saxon common law. The problem is that to make this work, you need to have a certain kind of martial virtue in the population- not just the guns and not just the guts, but the discipline to use them properly. People must intelligently and in a well organized fashion react to a crisis by piling in on it, without making the situation more difficult for the trained professionals who actually have to go in and do the dirtiest work.

I don't have great faith in modern Americans' ability to do this, to be honest; the sort of citizens who were actually good at this kind of thing grew up in a harder school than most.

But the existence of what amounts to a self-organizing posse for supporting law enforcement against particularly dangerous criminals is quite separate from the question of handing out pistols to twenty year old college students.

Come to it, even back in the day, there were... very very serious problems with the posse system. So I'm kind of ambiguous even about that.

[Shroom Man 777]

Then again, on the flip side, people who go through the effort of obtaining concealed carry permits don't tend to be idiots who fuck around with their guns.

When you shoot a gun, shoot it properly and shit, you feel the power of the thing and at first you fear the firearm, but then you learn to respect it. When you know just how powerful it is, you will know not to fuck with it.

But that doesn't change the fact that there's no real need to bring a fucking gun to school.

BTW, I got a Sig P228. Yay!

[Zaune]

Just as a point of clarification, what sort of requirements does Texas impose on concealed-carry permits? If you need a couple of character references and get regularly inspected to make sure you're keeping it stored securely then I would be reluctantly okay with this.

And come to think of it, I'd be astonished if there weren't at least a few students who were carrying concealed on campus already, with or without a permit. I suppose that at least this means that the staff have advance warning of some students being armed, as I doubt there's anything in the letter of the proposed law to stop them requiring students intending to exercise their concealed-carry license on campus to notify the university.

[Dave]

Interesting, because just today I was receiving automated notices that a gunman had gotten into been near one of the buildings at the university I just graduated from. Now, they're done with finals and most everyone should have gone home by now, and nobody was killed or even seriously injured (except the gunman), but I wonder what could have gone wrong if we had concealed carry on campus here in Missouri.

(For more on the incident you might review the updates posted at http://ice.mst.edu today.)

EDIT: corrected for accuracy

[gizmojumpjet]

Just as a point of clarification, what sort of requirements does Texas impose on concealed-carry permits? If you need a couple of character references and get regularly inspected to make sure you're keeping it stored securely then I would be reluctantly okay with this.

This thread is full of so much full-retard that I am literally going blind from rolling my eyes so much, but since you asked, the eligibility requirements for applying for a Texas CHL are as follows:

(1) is a legal resident of this state for the six-month period preceding
the date of application under this subchapter or is otherwise eligible for
a license under Section 411.173(a);
(2) is at least 21 years of age;
(3) has not been convicted of a felony;
(4) is not charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor
or equivalent offense, or of an offense under Section 42.01,
Penal Code, or equivalent offense, or of a felony under an information
or indictment;
(5) is not a fugitive from justice for a felony or a Class A or Class B
misdemeanor or equivalent offense;
(6) is not a chemically dependent person;
(7) is not incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to the
proper use and storage of a handgun;
(8) has not, in the five years preceding the date of application, been
convicted of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or equivalent offense or
of an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or equivalent offense;
(9) is fully qualified under applicable federal and state law to purchase
a handgun;
(10) has not been finally determined to be delinquent in making a
child support payment administered or collected by the attorney general;
(11) has not been finally determined to be delinquent in the payment
of a tax or other money collected by the comptroller, the tax collector of
a political subdivision of the state, or any agency or subdivision of the
state;
(12) is not currently restricted under a court protective order or subject
to a restraining order affecting the spousal relationship, other than
a restraining order solely affecting property interests;
(13) has not, in the 10 years preceding the date of application, been
adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a penal
law of the grade of felony; and
(14) has not made any material misrepresentation, or failed to disclose
any material fact, in an application submitted pursuant to Section
411.174.

If you're eligible, the process is basically 1) get fingerprinted 2) attend a two-day class 3) take a shooting test 4) pay a fee 5) wait for license to come in the mail. It's galling that we have to pay a fee and jump through hoops to exercise a funamental right, but hey, we don't live in a perfect world.

We're not required to provide "character references" or submit to periodic inspections in order to own guns or to carry guns. We are required to keep guns stored in such a way as to prevent them being accessible to children, but cops don't come around to check your gun safe or anything.

And come to think of it, I'd be astonished if there weren't at least a few students who were carrying concealed on campus already, with or without a permit. I suppose that at least this means that the staff have advance warning of some students being armed, as I doubt there's anything in the letter of the proposed law to stop them requiring students intending to exercise their concealed-carry license on campus to notify the university.

It's nice to see someone acknowledge the fact that laws against guns on campus don't do anything to actually keep them off campus. If this legislation gets signed into law, the law abiding will be on an equal footing with the lawless. Toot toot.

[Zaune]

We're not required to provide "character references" or submit to periodic inspections in order to own guns or to carry guns. We are required to keep guns stored in such a way as to prevent them being accessible to children, but cops don't come around to check your gun safe or anything.

Which raises the question of how one enforces Part 7, frankly. By "character references" I was alluding to the requirement under British law for testimony of two persons other than family members (usually one's employer and family doctor, though clergy can also act in this capacity) that you are trustworthy to own and store a firearm correctly, as well as passing a psychiatric evaluation.
And let's face it, without periodic spot-checks even the best of us can become careless or forgetful. Where do you think most of the unlicensed guns in the US are coming from?

And if you really find it "galling" that the government requires you to prove that you're not mentally ill or merely a reckless fool before it entrusts you with the ability to kill someone from ten or twenty yards away, the most charitable thing I can say in response is that you have an unduly rosy view of human nature.

[Night_stalker]

Well, the only things I have to say about this bill is, Why am I not surprised, and Thank god my College is up in Vermont, and their no guns near schools gun laws.

At least up there, the ROTCs and the National Guard (They have a onsite training facility), know how to use their guns, safely.

Plus, to quote the Norwich Statement of Guiding Values

We stress self-discipline, personal responsibility, and respect for law.

And VT's guns laws clearly state

Title 13:

Section 4003. Carrying dangerous weapons

A person who carries a dangerous or deadly weapon, openly or concealed, with the intent or avowed purpose of injuring a fellow man, or who carries a dangerous or deadly weapon within any state institution or upon the grounds or lands owned or leased for the use of such institution, without the approval of the warden or superintendent of the institution shall be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $200.00, or both.

§ 4004. Possession of dangerous or deadly weapon in a school bus or school building or on school property

(a) No person shall knowingly possess a firearm or a dangerous or deadly weapon while within a school building or on a school bus. A person who violates this section shall, for the first offense, be imprisoned not more than one year or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both, and for a second or subsequent offense shall be imprisoned not more than three years or fined not more than $5,000.00, or both.

(b) No person shall knowingly possess a firearm or a dangerous or deadly weapon on any school property with the intent to injure another person. A person who violates this section shall, for the first offense, be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both, and for a second or subsequent offense shall be imprisoned not more than three years or fined not more than $5,000.00, or both.

Hell, this whole bill just shouldn't have been passed. It's putting easily concealed guns in the hands of students who aren't going to be the sharpest tools in the shed most of the time, and who are really focused on passing, which means no bad grades. This just doesn't seem to end well in my book.

[Winston Blake]

The guys shooting at Whitman came in from off campus with long guns- having a dozen students with concealed-carry handguns on the scene, when one guy is shooting from the top of a 300-foot tower with a rifle, is not going to be all that helpful.

Also, they weren't kids. They were random citizens who came in from off campus, of varying ages, bringing their long guns.

Gee, it's almost as if I didn't specifically mention that they were hunting rifles. Your argument was that, even in a 'school shooting' situation, armed students would not do much good, using the Whitman shooting as evidence in an anecdotal fallacy. Now, you can either admit that you didn't know much about the Whitman shooting, or you can admit that your original wording was a carelessly sweeping generalisation.

The Whitman shooter's weapon: Remington 700 A cursory google search gave me a range of 100 yards, which is 90 meters.[...] M9, the standard sidearm of the US military. It's range is... 50 meters. [...]

It's not quite as clear-cut as you make it sound, although I'm sure people who have no idea about firearms would have happily laughed at me with you.

Bullets don't just drop at their effective range, and suppressive fire does not require sufficient accuracy to hit a man-sized target at the specified range. People hunt with pistols zeroed for 100 yards. That's shooting to kill, at 300 feet. Now, that's for a .357-class cartridge, and slant range to the top of a 300-foot tower will be longer, and have gravity losses, and this is a high-stress situation. But we're talking about suppressive fire, from multiple shooters (higher hit probability), and if this is a CCW environment, those firearms would have been returning fire at the first shot, rather than Whitman shooting fish in a barrel until firearms could be retrieved.

Yet you make it sound utterly absurd that pistols would have been any use.

---

To be clear, I am not actually supporting this law. Nor am I opposing it. I haven't examined this issue or the facts and statistics closely enough to draw a reasoned conclusion, and I frankly don't have the time to do so for the foreseeable future. My provisional conclusion is that the best option is to secure funding and training for campus/mall security, and to train/certify a certain portion of the general staff in appropriate weapons & tactics. They can then retrieve firearms & "SECURITY" vests (low probability of friendly fire) from nearby secure rooms when required. This is not possible in general society, simply because it would be prohibitively expensive, thus CCW still has a place. But in certain public places where it's feasible, it seems like a more optimal solution.

[defanatic]

I don't know if it would be constitutional though. Alcohol is one thing, but I don't think you can restrict citizen's constitutional rights on age.

Uh... Yes you can?