Opinion By Larry Keane
USA – -(AmmoLand.com)-A recent analysis of the lobbying activity of Johns Hopkins University found a conflict in the institution’s priorities.
According to the Baltimore Sun, Hopkins spent $581,000 in the 2019 legislative session in its effort to convince lawmakers to approve an armed police force. This was a 58 percent increase from the prior session spending and made the University the third-biggest spender for Maryland’s 2019 General Assembly session. The proposal was met with controversy in the legislature, and on campus, where students held protests against the armed police force.
Request Granted
Their efforts paid off, with Gov. Larry Hogan signing the approval into effect for July 1. Hopkins can now create a police force of up to 100 armed officers for the campus and adjacent residential streets.
This is odd for the home of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, part of the Bloomberg School of Public Health, a center devoted to the promotion of gun control.
This center’s activities aren’t limited to the publication of research, as one would expect from a University.
Lobby Against Gun Ownership
It also boasts of various state and federal lobbying activities, and of grassroots programs such as the Summer Youth Institute, “a 3.5 day workshop where youth will work directly with Center faculty to learn how to translate gun policy and research into action, inform advocacy efforts, and pursue actionable change within their own communities.” Looking at federal expenditures alone, the University has already spent $130,000 this year on issues including firearms. Last year the institution spent $660,000 and in 2017, it spent $800,000.
So while the institution will now have guards protecting the campus with firearms, will Hopkins also continue to declare that firearms are the problem in society?
About National Shooting Sports Foundation
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 10,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. www.nssf.org
See what happened there. (read below comments). The left is great at controlling the conversation. They have most of the commenters here talking, discussing, arguing about the terms “guard” and “police officer” and adjacent powers. The article is a very simple example of the irony and hypocrisy of those who want to disarm us citizens. They want armed protection, but want to eliminate it for us “deplorable’s”. That’s the gist. And think about this: They have their OWN armed “force” now, and can train and direct it as “needed”…. And don’t say that “police officers will obey and uphold the… Read more »
It’s all starting to make sense now. I now see that I didn’t, of my own freewill, choose to make a point about the article and the writer’s commentary on the article. All this time I was unwittingly carrying out the “left’s” master plan. I don’t know how I could have missed it. In the meantime though, I am going to prepare for every eventuality and say a Hail Mary just in case. Am I right?
Hopkins declares that Firearms are the Problem in society? “NEWS FLASH”, Firearms are NOT the PROBLEM, Hateful, Disrespectful, EVIL Human Beings Are the PROBLEM.
Several excellent comments recently. Commendations.
Armed police on a school campus? Save the money, just put up gun free signs and chain the gates. That what they do at some California high schools.
Call “them” what you will. The HYPOCRISY is that “johns hopkins” IS AGAINST individuals having weapons to DEFEND themselves. “They” have enabled a select group that is NOT RESPONSIBLE for ANY INDIVIDUALS’ SAFETY. The HYPOCRISY is that “they” get to have and carry weapons to GUARD MATERIALS, PROPERTY.
Johns Hopkins policy, guns for us but not for you.
Let’s not do the leftist thing and call things that which they are not. They are, according to the article “Police Officers” and not “guards.” Being actual police officers and not guards they should have arrest powers as well as guns. The only problem is that, as we all know, the police are not responsible for the safety of an individual in society. But it will look nice and may even deter some lower level offenders. Considering I have no plans to be anywhere near that part of the country I find it an amusement.
@RoyD You made a good point there about legal requirements. The article however is not doing the “leftist thing” however. Its asking about consistency, and it did specifically call them police. Acta non Verba. Its the same issue we have had for years with politicians who feel they deserve armed protection while everyday Americans should be disarmed and defenseless, even though the police who get called have no obligation to protect us legally. The position the article takes is that Johns Hopkins is practicing hypocrisy. So lets not call a verb or adjective(Guard) what it is not, a Noun(like Police… Read more »
My comments were aimed at the last sentence of the article which should sum up the substance of the article. That sentence is: “So while the institution will now have guards protecting the campus with firearms, will Hopkins also continue to declare that firearms are the problem in society?”
They will not be “guards” they will be full fledged Police Officers with all that entails.
Whilst we figuratively debate and opine about “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”, the reality is that Johns Hopkins University has successfully lobbied and finagled its very own police force, with all the powers, limitations and attendant lawyerly weasely excuse that allows them to “guard” Johns Hopkins physical assets but not human beings. The JHU “police” will also be handy to enforce Gun Free Zone restrictions which put human beings at more risk.
Guard, police, who cares? In the end, they’ve achieved the worst of both word descriptions.
bingo
@Roy D As the Article had already noted “Hopkins spent $581,000 in the 2019 legislative session in its effort to convince lawmakers to approve an armed police force” The position or job description to be held is as guards. As someone whose family has been heavily involved in the law enforcement sector, they do not lose authority or arresting powers, as your first comment pointed out, while they are off duty. Many do in fact work as security guards during their time off. A church I used to attend had two who would be present in full uniform and armed… Read more »