Concealed carry means just that. If there were a threat, and a citizen with a concealed carry permit intervened, his weapon would be holstered immediately after the threat was addressed, as it is a crime to display a weapon in public. Upon encountering any law enforcement official, he must immediately identify himself as having a valid permit, and carrying a weapon. After this point, he must follow the instructions of the law enforcement official. Everyone should read up on the subject and learn exactly what someone has to do to get a permit. And also, the responsibilities that go along with having a permit. I really believe that if everyone would actually read the requirements, there would be less confusion. But right now, the schools are a gun free zone only to law abiding citizens. Nut jobs simply don't care about the signs, and will continue because there is no resistance.

Of course outside opinion is relevant .. and proper. I live near four universities (within walking distance)and have attended one of those in the past. I have friends who currently attend universities as students and am friends with several professors. I was working in Roanoke, VA when the VPI shootings occurred. I knew several VPI students personally at the time and was very concerned for them when news of the incident became known. I can only imagine how I would feel to be trapped with no way to excape or to protect myself. CCW license requirements are quite high and I feel safer knowing that there may be CCW carriers close by when I am not carrying. Professors and students with CCW licenses should be able to carry on campus as should non-students with CCW licenses. One should remember that when seconds count the police are just minutes away (if you are lucky ... it generally takes more than "just" minutes). I'm not being critical of the police ... it's just a fact of life (ask an honest policeman). Just one CCW in the proper place at VPI and a very different outcome might have been possible.

You are a complete idiot. Everyone is affected by this decision. Colleges get tax money that we all put in so therefore we do have a say in how things are run. If there is ever a lawsuit to come from this, its us the taxpayers that will have to foot the bill. Not only that, it could also impact a parent where they want to send their child in the future.

I couldn't disagree with you more onemoretime. I'm a current college student and feel downright exposed to potential trigger happy psychos. Check out some statistics...many towns across the country who allow concealed carry have LOWER crime rates (this goes for other countries as well). I will post links to the proof I'm spittin' out. We are a herd of sheep sitting in our classrooms just waiting for the next nut job to kill everyone. People who think "gun free zones" actually mean something to criminals are FOOLS. That just lets them know it's open season on the herd. This is a topic in which I feel very stongly about. Please email me if you would like to further this conversation in an intelligent manner. Baked_potato13@yahoo.com (or anyone else for that matter) Does your Mommy still tuck you in at night and tell you stories onemoretime?

"If you are NOT a college student your input on this is pretty much void." "Now how about we just stfu, get our heads out of our asses and let this be decided by those who it actually affects." It's comforting to know that your standing up for our constitutional rights. Free speech, right to bear arms, to be secure in our persons. Your best comment is "stfu"? Everyone has a right to comment on this subject. Some may even become informed on things they did not know. Trying to stifle legitimate discussion sounds a little socialistic to me. Fortunately, the framers of our constitution guaranteed these rights so as to make sure "STFU" could not propagate. I take it your college educated. My sympathies.

I think if you have a child attending college you may have concerns regarding this matter. People wandering around with guns, legal or otherwise, can affect us all no matter where you are..... That said I do agree that a thug will think twice about attacking if we eliminate soft targets. Being armed would provide that deterrent. Everyone has the right to protect themselves and I am all for it but there are pros and cons that must be weighed by us all.

If I'm a parent of a college student then my opinion IS NOT VOID! I think my daughter has every right to carry a weapon and us it to defend herself with as much force as the situation calls for. After the UNC-Chapel Hill incident you can bet your butt she carries and she is scheduled for the concealed carry course in the very near future. Nobody gets life points for being a victim.

I agree with you Brian, in theory. Unfortunately until students stop walking into classrooms killing students with guns, nonlethal weapons just won't work. I'm pretty sure the shooter at VT couldn't have been taken down with mase. It's just a sad reality of today's society. The best thing is just hope for the best and prepare for the worst. In a humorous fashion Harold Wilson once said, "I'm an optimist, but I'm an optimist who takes his raincoat."

The concealed carry permit is a piece of paper. Things that would stop an intruder are: 1. Permit holder actually carrying a sidearm. 2. Permit holder having undergone background checks. 3. Permit holder that has submitted ALL of his fingerprints to the sheriff's office. 4. Permit holder that has attended his classroom training. 5. Permit holder that has passed his proficiency test with his firearm. How,(unless he's psychic)will he know I have a carry permit and I'm armed? He can't see it, smell it. Give these young adults (21 years old) a chance to prove themselves. They probably are carrying legally off campus already with no problems. I don't remember any articles where a concealed carry individual had is sidearm taken and used against him. Following your argument, people shouldn't drive because the car will get stolen and run over you. Remember access to a car is more easily available.

No, the permit won't do a thing except certify that the holder has undergone a criminal background check and training. But the claim is a non-sequiter anyway. When was the last time you heard of a CCW holder having his/her gun taken away and criminally used? You know the media would trumpet such an occurrence nationwide. Forty states issue to anyone who meets the objective qualifications of passing the background check and training. Eight more issue to those who are politically or financially "connected." Only two states have no form of concealed carry. Yet I challenge anyone here to cite any occurrences of a CCW holder having their weapon used against them in any of those 48 states. In contrast, almost every mass shooting that was ended through intervention was ended by an armed citizen halting the criminal through use of a gun.

We are talking about CONCEALED CARRY here. The point of concealed carry is that nobody knows you are carrying. In the unlikely event that someone does discover another person has a concealed weapon, it is even more unlikely that they would decide to attack an armed citizen.

"Permits won't stop someone from stealing your gun and using it to kill you or someone else; access is more easily available." One of the sillier arguments ever made. Far better to just let the bad guys shoot, eh Mr. not brave enough to use your real name? That's what's happened every time so far in these wonderful "gun free" zones. Gun free for the good guys, whatever you can carry in, for the bad guys. "Victim disarmament zones" is more like it. Norm

Try to take or steal my gun, they'll get shot. DUH. This isn't rocket science. It's a gun. They haven't materially changed to a great degree since the advent of the brass cartridge.