University of Colorado Puts Politics Ahead of Student Safety

University of Colorado Puts Politics Ahead of Student Safety
In response to CU's decision to continue fighting for the authority to ban guns on campus.

It seems CU would rather risk a repeat of Virginia Tech than let its staff and students defend themselves - AmmoLand.com
It seems CU would rather risk a repeat of Virginia Tech than let its staff and students defend themselves..? - AmmoLand.com
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

Colorado –-(Ammoland.com)- The University of Colorado voted Friday to continue fighting for the right to ban guns on campus.

The CU Board of Regents voted 5-4 in favor of appealing the lawsuit brought by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), which sought legal confirmation that college directors lack authority to suspend Colorado law or Constitutional rights.

Clearly, power and politics, rather than concern for student safety, are ruling the day for CU’s regents. Crime at CU has risen 35 percent in the past four years at the college which prohibits lawful concealed carry, while crime at Colorado State University has dropped 60 percent in the same time frame. No thinking person can look at those numbers and still assert that allowing concealed carry will prove dangerous for the campus.

In fact, other colleges in Colorado have seen the handwriting on the wall with the recent legal victory won by SCCC and changed their policies and allowed concealed carry on campus.

The Associated Press reported that Tillie Bishop, the swing vote, insisted the regents must be allowed to set the rules for a college campus. This argument may hold for private institutions with the authority to set their own rules on firearms as much as attire or conduct, but public taxpayer-funded institutions must not and do not possess the right to govern or suspend the right to bear arms any more than they can suspend free speech, or govern what books to read or what religion to follow. A right is a right.

Regent Michael Carrigan claimed SCCC first chose the oppositional approach by bringing a lawsuit, asking instead that students, faculty and staff be mustered to support ending the gun ban. It appears Regent Carrigan is under the mistaken impression that a majority must express support for a right before it can be granted. (It is doubtful that such a standard would be applied to freedom of speech or of the press.)

Regent Stephen Ludwig reiterated the well-worn and well-discredited argument that students experimenting with sex, alcohol and drugs don’t need guns added to the mix. Regent Ludwig should immediately begin tracking down and reporting students who are both licensed to carry concealed weapons and involved with illicit drug use, or who are armed while intoxicated, since either is grounds for permit revocation as well as criminal prosecution.

SCCC advocates allowing citizens who already possess the credentials to carry a concealed weapon to carry on campus. Arguments against “arming students” are not relevant, since the argument is not about who should carry, but whether or not colleges can enforce discriminatory policies against those who already carry.

By pursuing a costly legal battle with slim odds of success at the expense of the university – students, faculty, staff and ultimately parents and taxpayers – the CU Board of Regents continues to prove its willingness to put personal politics and authority ahead of the greater good of the entire college.

About:
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is a national grassroots organization consisting of over 44,000 college students, faculty members, parents, and concerned citizens who support the right to self-defense on campus. SCCC is non-partisan and not affiliated with any political party or organization. Visit: www.concealedcampus.org

4
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
4 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
Jizz DancerPat NohavecLewstaTyler Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Jizz Dancer
Guest
Jizz Dancer

wrong commite

Pat Nohavec
Guest
Pat Nohavec

You have pushed the wrong button this time. Your radical lies against all the candidates that Dave Gill happens to not like, are going to have law suits flying in every direction. We all are pooling our money to give to the candidates to come after your lies and the damage it has had on these people and their families. You are all sick individuals.

Lewsta
Guest
Lewsta

Tyler, I hoe your sarcasm level is very high….. else it is YOU who are off base. According to your surface argument, the vast majority of students fall into the categories of drunk, high, hormonal categories. If this WERE the case, yes, adding firearms to the mix would be risky at best. What is it about CU that sets them apart from CSU in these categories? Are you saying CU students hold to a radically diferent lifestyle than do the students of CSU? On what inside info is this based? Seems the lawsuit merely sought the same rights ON campus… Read more »

Tyler
Guest
Tyler

yes…having a bunch of drunk, high, hormonal kids with guns is safe and they are all very rational when they are in their drunk/high/hormonal state..which is 24×7