Saying everyone but criminals will be safer, a veteran legislator wants to let qualified faculty carry guns on university and community college campuses.
Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, said Wednesday there has been a history of situations where someone with a grudge comes onto a campus, goes into a classroom and starts shooting. He said the current prohibition against weapons on campus - one which the criminal has ignored - leaves the teacher and student defenseless.
But Harper isn't stopping with arming the faculty. He is crafting a separate measure to allow students with certain training to also arm themselves.
Not everyone would be eligible. Harper's legislation would limit the right to those who have obtained a state-issued permit to carry a concealed weapon.
That permit, which requires a background check and training, is no longer required for individuals to have weapons beneath a jacket or in a purse. But there are special privileges for those who do go through the permit process, such as being able to carry that weapon into a bar or a restaurant where alcoholic beverages are served.
Harper's bill on faculty, HB 2001, and his yet-to-be-filed measure on students would add to that list.
Similar measures have been attempted in the past, including one by Harper himself this past session. All have stalled among stiff opposition from the police chiefs at state universities.
Harper said he expects a different outcome this coming year for two political reasons.
"A couple of ‘country club Republicans' who were opposed ... will not return," he said. The 2010 election swept some of the more moderate Republicans out of office.
Potentially more helpful, Harper said, is the National Rifle Association is backing the bill.
"The NRA sat it out last year," he said.
Harper has been a perennial supporter of allowing more guns on campus.
He said there have been instances over the years where gunmen have come onto a campus and started shooting. With the faculty and students disarmed and police at least minutes away, Harper said that has created "defense-free zones."
"I understand the positions that they want to take in terms of making a safer environment," said John Pickens, chief of police at Arizona State University. And Pickens said he is aware of problems that have occurred elsewhere.
"We're not disregarding both sides of it," he said. "But we're looking at it from a professional law enforcement operations (perspective)."
Anthony Daykin, Pickens' counterpart at the University of Arizona, said he is prepared to come to the Capitol to testify against the bill this coming session, as he has before.
Daykin said one issue concerns what happens if police, responding to an emergency call, enter a room and find multiple people with guns. That forces the officer to try to ascertain quickly who is the assailant and who are the faculty and students engaged in self defense.
Harper said he understands the concerns. But he said the alternative could be worse.
"Forty, 50 people could be dead by the time that police officer gets there 20, 30 minutes later," he said. "If an assailant comes into a classroom with intent to do harm, it's minimized by a law-abiding citizen that's allowed to carry (a weapon) concealed."
He also said the fears of the police chiefs are overblown.
"None of this happens in Utah or Colorado," he said, states where guns are allowed on campus.
manini posted at 9:56 am on Sun, Dec 26, 2010.
Ummm, real swift thinking confiming my view that IQ's of todays
younger generation has slipped at least 20 points. Now disgruntled, dummy students P.O.-ed at their "Prof's" can more
readily "waste" the SOBs on-campus, huh???? I think it's
a good idea on ASU especially, with the rash of recent killings,
rapes & major felonies since the worthless ASU Campus "Keystone_COPs" seem unable to protect ASU students & faculty from the criminals in Tempe, AZ...My weapon of choice: an 8-shot S&W .357 mag pistola in my shoulder holster, together with an 5-shot .38 Special revolver in an ankle holster. This gives me a feeling of security, especially studying late at nite behind the reference stacks in Hayden Library & having to return to my dorm room late at nite...hehehe.
Slabside posted at 11:00 am on Sat, Dec 25, 2010.
Accuracy, ever notice that Dale spins straw men to support his ludicrous theories on the world news? It's hilarious that he says we don't understand English when he didn't even know "Condescending" was a word. Poor Dale. [smile]
Dale Whiting posted at 8:15 am on Sat, Dec 25, 2010.
Rich,
Have you noticed how little English either Accuracy or Slabside can understand? Accuracy says "As Dale Whiting has posted, he is obviously does not agree in any way with the Second Amendment." implying that something I said opposed the 2nd Amendment.
And Slabside says "Not surprised to see Dale turn sour grapes on yet anther civil right being with held from law abiding Americans. Me thinks the slain students of Columbine and Virginia Tech would agree with Accuracy and myself if they were alive today."
I did not address any 2nd Amendment Right. Rather, not unlike you, I questioned the wisdom of carrying side arms for personal defense. Who gets killed by those concealed weapons? Only guys wearing black hats? No, I speculated that if the statistics on concealed carry are similar to weapons stored at home, its the carriers. Then I suggested we ought to hear from those teachers and students who would be effected, not from those whose minds are made up but who have not experienced as you have, the killing of another human being.
And by the way. While I do not know any of the students who were killed at Columbine or Virginia Tech, I do know a student who sat a one of those tables in the Columbine library next to one of the girls who was shot dead on the spot. He has post tramatic stress disorder. He carried her body out of the school, his hands and chest drenched in blood.
What do either Accuracy or Slabside really know about death? Nada!
davidflucier posted at 7:21 am on Fri, Dec 24, 2010.
Guns on campus is a wholely bad idea from start to finish even with the "restriction" as proposed...mostly because, in reality, those restrictions/requirements are meaningless and ineffective.
Think of yourself going out to play basketball with the Suns after a week at basketball camp and you have a rough idea of what getting a CCW is worth.
Listening to the "professionals" on this score is the wise choice.
Everyone can run through a thousand scenarios and come up with as many reasons pro and con for guns on campus, but the reasonableness test always falls to the side of caution. People are more at risk with guns on campus than without.
Accuracy posted at 5:17 pm on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
As Dale Whiting has posted, he is obviously does not agree in any way with the Second Amendment.
Students for the Second Amendment works on college and university campuses to bring the truth regarding our constitutionally protected rights to students who have been misled by an academic establishment that is often hostile, to true freedom and individual liberties.
Slabside posted at 2:26 pm on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Not surprised to see Dale turn sour grapes on yet anther civil right being with held from law abiding Americans. Me thinks the slain students of Columbine and Virginia Tech would agree with Accuracy and myself if they were alive today. If these rights were being with held form illegals he would be shouting "UNCONSTITUTIONAL!" from his pulpit.
Dale Whiting posted at 1:13 pm on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Not surprised to see Slabside and Accuracy in favor. Where the concealed weapons law applies in public, one exception was on campus.
Yet the statistics show that one is far more likely to be killed or wounded by one's own weapon that by that of someone breaking in. I suspect that this same sort fo "fact" also applies to weapons in classrooms.
Let's hear from students and teachers, not any of the above. It's their lives at stake. Were I a teacher, no weapons other than those pencils mightier than the sword would be allowed in my classroom.
Accuracy posted at 10:01 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Slabside,
You and lawmaker Sen. Jack Harper have got it right.
Arming the faculty on university and community college campuses and allowing guns on campus as in the states of Utah or Colorado.
Not only did the U.S. Supreme Court say Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting . . . in June, 2008 the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handgun possession.
This was justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights (under the Second Amendment) in U.S. history.
rrffcc1 posted at 9:29 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Too complicated, by far. Just arm EVERYONE...Grandma, Uncle Harvey (you know, the odd one), sister, brother, cousin -- EVERYONE. No age limits, required firearms training beginning in -say - 6th Grade, require everyone over the age of 12 to carry.
At worst, once the initial gunsmoke clears, it'll be a much more POLITE society.
Obviousman posted at 9:12 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
"Daykin said one issue concerns what happens if police, responding to an emergency call, enter a room and find multiple people with guns."
Answer: They same thing they would do in EVERY OTHER ROOM IN ARIZONA that ISN'T on a college campus.
They haven't figured out yet what that is? Well, either that's because it's a TRUMPED-UP SITUATION THAT NEVER OCCURS, or they need to do their homework instead of just denying people in ONE situation their constitutional rights.
OC4me posted at 8:47 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Come to think of it, wouldn't the theoretically possible accidental death of a law-abiding student or faculty permit holder (at the hands of LEO first-responders) be better than suffering the horrific consequences of an unchecked massacre?
The remote possibility of being accidentally shot in a friendly-fire incident is a risk that permit-holders choose to accept.
OC4me posted at 8:37 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
"A shootout is better than a massacre!" - David M. Bennett
AZMomma posted at 6:43 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Sorry - part of above was deleted:
First line goes onto to state a victim of Luby's testified at a Congressional hearing. The term I used was "Heart-wrenching".
Sure wish there was a preview or immediate edit allowed here.
AZMomma posted at 6:40 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
I remember the TX Luby incident and also the heart-hearing. She was licensed to carry (CCW) but had left her weapon at home that day while eating lunch with her parents at Luby's. They were killed.
I also remember the Nov 1966 killings of patrons, a baby and students at the Rose-Mar Beauty School in Mesa.
To survive as a person who didn't try to fight back/a passive victim is a future filled with guilt.
wdgnas posted at 5:50 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
two things here: how much for the permit, urrr privilege. this from the party of less regulation...
and don't forget the absence of evidence argument, we haven't had anything happen so we must be doing something right...
Slabside posted at 2:52 am on Thu, Dec 23, 2010.
Rich, I do pray I'm never in a situation that warrants the use of deadly force. If it comes down to it, it's either me or them. I refuse to subscribe to your rants on McCain and Pearce though. On this we do not agree. [wink]
Rich posted at 11:04 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
Slab,
Pray you never have to use it. A little Vietnam might have taught you how unpleasant the memory is, if you are a civilized man. Killing is surprisingly easy. Living with it comfortably is impossible, and a man like McCain, who glories in it are very hard to understand. I'd like to hide the fact I've done it. Imagine my surprise that Russell Pearce thinks he can determine my destiny. He hasn't. He only steals his way through life, trying to make you hate, and kill. Learn, and don't pull it in my presence, because the heaviest thing around me will come crashing against your head,
Slabside posted at 9:15 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
Rich, I understand and appreciate you view on this. I carry concealed 100% of the time I'm away from home. I don't consider myself one bit paranoid. I refuse to be a victim and will defend myself or loved ones if need be. If trouble arises and I can turn tail and run away like a school girl without the consequences being injury or a loss of life then run I will. The cemetary is full of people that could not defend themselves when deadly force wasneeded. Lubys cafeteria in Killeen, Texas in 1991 is a prime example. I carry a handgun because a 185 lb. policeman is too heavy.
Rich posted at 8:47 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
I am hopeless with a gun, I drove a Marine up a wall as a naval officer because I'd have to shake hands with a person to hit them with a .45. I'm actually pretty good with a bow, Within forty yards I have hunted and killed things as big as a bison (still got meat from that in the freezer). I could string my hunting bow, carry it around with a quiver. I also fenced and am rather good with a katana. Have half a dozen, should I carry one around? Paranoia isn't the best feeling in the world, and they aren't really out to get you. In fact they don't consider you relevant at all. Maybe that's why you want a gun.
trigama posted at 7:04 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
I am for this as well! As long as the ones carring have a CCW permit. Its annoying having to park accross the street from a school to pick up my kids, because im am carrying a weapon. I am not a criminal and should not be treated like one.
PS: The UN is trying to disarm the US citizens. Be Alert this is no joke and hillary clinton is not the only one with them
Slabside posted at 5:16 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
I am totally for this. Schools have to stop being target rich environments for the kooks that want to tally up a body count.
geekette posted at 4:59 pm on Wed, Dec 22, 2010.
The state has serious budget problems, the tax code needs to be overhauled, jobs need to be created, there are the issues involved with health care and transplants and this joker is worried about letting facutly and students carry guns on campus? Please. Solve the big issues of the state first, then bring on the fringe stuff.