In their quest to find a college student to write a polemic against the bill allowing campus carry in Texas, the Huffington Post tapped the tragically unhip wesbite collegecandy.com. “Hey kids, I’m Sarabeth. I’m a Junior at the University of Texas. I probably have too many tattoos to get me a real job, but oh well, I don’t want a ‘real job’ anyway. I want to be a writer for TV. I’m unusually peppy and I LOVE cupcakes :D.” Of course, excessive pep and seemingly related blood sugar issues don’t disqualify Sarabeth from entering the CCW debate. This does . . .
I can see why some would support [campus carry]. Back in 1966 when Charles Whitman went to the UT Tower with a rifle and opened fire, he received return fire from not only the Austin police, but armed civilians as well. Some believe that with guns on campus, students would be protected if a shooter were to show up. But personally, I think this is way too preemptive [a] viewpoint . . .
Not that it matters, but one civilian—Allen Crum—helped dispatch Charles Whitman. Wait, it does matter. Because if there’s one thing about gun control advocates that really pisses me off it’s their abject inability to build a case for their position based on facts.
Now you could say that’s because the facts don’t support their position. But I reckon anti-gunners avoid reality because they are emotion-driven. When it comes to argument, they depend on the rhetorical equivalent of “fuzzy logic.” Everything—including the truth—is relative. Generalizations R Us.
For example, how can campus carry be “way too preemptive”? How do you measure relative levels of preemption, as they relate to concealed carry firearms and campus gun crimes? Maybe it’s just my over-thinking mind, but one could start by defining terms (What does preemption actually mean? What are you preempting?) and then quickly move on to quantifying the key variables (How much preemption is acceptable?).
That’s too much like hard work. Better to just CYA with words like “personally” and “common sense” and call it good.
Besides, measuring things is a dangerous business. It tends to lead to established facts. Facts are notorious for not doing what you want them to—especially if you have a specific agenda in mind.
So instead of arguing logically, gun control advocates begin and end with the fact that people get shot (and that’s a bad thing), throw logic out the window and stop making sense.
This is probably my over-thinking mind at work, but can you imagine a frat party where the guys are allowed to have their guns? Nothing about that says “good idea” to me. I’m an optimist; I like to believe that not everyone is out to kill me and my fellow students. Guns on campuses are completely unnecessary. I know I can’t speak for every other Texas school out there, but I feel perfectly safe with UTPD doing their jobs. If trouble goes down, I know they’ll take care of it and they’ll keep me safe.
The first statement in this puddle of consciousness conclusion contains the qualifier “where the guys are allowed to have their guns.” This sort of infantilization is gun control SOP. In this case, Sarabeth implies that “the guys” are children who need Mommy and Daddy’s permission to play with their toys. Rather than adults with a constitutional right to armed self-defense.
Sarabeth’s second statement is completely disingenious. No one is suggesting that “everyone” is out to kill Sarabeth and her fellow students. Someone may be out to kill some students. By generalizing the threat, Sarabeth is attempting to ridicule it. But just because you’re not paranoid doesn’t mean someone’s not out to kill you. Or your fellow students. The Virginia Tech massacre proved that point.
“Guns on campus are completely uncessary.” Not only is Sarabeth contradicting her earlier admission re: the utility of campus carry for dispatching the original clock tower boy, but she completely forgot to build a foundation upon which to place this outrageously self-righteous (to us) outburst. It’s only true because Sarabeth feels it’s true. True?
Sarabeth’s last statement returns to her “college as womb” world view. I’m glad the aspiring TV writer “feels” perfectly safe and trusts big brother to shoot the crazies on her behalf. In fact, she isn’t and the campus police might not get to the scene of an active shooter in time to save lives.
According to 2000 Department of Justice report, one in five women will experience rape or attempted rape in their four-year college term. Even if it’s one in ten, that’s still a pretty clear indication that some bad shit’s going down on campus. As far as spree killers are concerned, again, Virginia Tech.
Oops! I used facts instead of feelings. My bad. I feel an obligation to do so, just as some college students feel an obligation to protect themselves from rape, kidnapping and murder with firearms. And that’s a fact.
I think this is way too preemptive [a] viewpoint . . .
I don’t know what that means in English.
Yeah, I couldn’t figure that either. And although I know what the word “preemtive” means, I looked up an official dictionary definition, figuring that perhaps the writer was using some obscure meaning in an effort to sound more important (because big words make you gooder…) this actually helped immensely.
Taken as a measure against something possible, anticipated, or feared; preventive; deterrent.
So, I with that in mind:
Some believe that with guns on campus, students would be protected if a shooter were to show up. But personally, I think this is way too preemptive [a] viewpoint . . .
I interpret this as: People who want be able to carry on campus have a far too deterrent viewpoint because they take preventative measures.
Wait? These people want to deter crime?! Those JERKS!
I read it as people who carry a gun are going too far in their preventive measure. Who knows…
I clicked that college candy link and she is definitely a credible source; how can you disagree with something that shares such vital knowledge as “How to Avoid a Beastly Hangover” and “5 Signs Your Friend is Really a Frenemy.”
This is what makes college students look like the unstable, drunken individuals that the opposers of campus carry keep harping about. They couldn’t have found a better example.
Hey! It’s official, overalls are back!
So this is what young adults aspire to be while accruing six figure student loan debt.
Will Sarabeth still be writing for collegecandy.com when she’s working at Starbucks next year?
I’ve been having the same talks pretty much word for word on local news sites and face book pages. Those objecting to this bill are basing their view solely on their baseless, knee-jerk aversion to guns. With that, every one of them with clockwork precision, decide to ignore the actual language of the bill and assume that ANYONE enrolled in college can now carry a gun. How can you argue a point to someone with virtually no understanding of the debate on the table?!
I have read the phrase “gunfight at the OK Corral” no less than seven times now.
People are seemingly oblivious to the State of Texas’ own published statistics on concealed carriers. A user here on this very forum linked to the txdps’ own statistics that support the fact that lisenced handgun carriers simply are not the ones people should worry about.
I can’t tell you how many times people are shocked when they find out how many people in Texas are LEGALLY carrying a concealed handgun. Then are shocked to find out that every single time they’ve been in my presence for almost two years now, that I’ve been armed.
Two things EVERYBODY’S overlooking here.
1. In Texas, it is illegal to conceal carry while you are consuming alcoholic beverages.
2. They don’t issue CHLs to anyone under the age of 21.
So what we’re really talking about are grad students and teachers being allowed to carry. Both groups, presumably, have more sense than God gave a goat, ergo, DON’T FRIGGIN’ CARRY A GUN WHILE YOU’RE DRINKING.
Last I heard, they frown on underage drinking at UT. (They don’t stop it, mind you, but it’s a reason a frat or sorority can get their charter pulled, if underage students get caught at a Greek kegger.)
So let’s recap: Susie Creamcheese there wouldn’t qualify if she’s an under-grad. She’s too young, regardless of a rule change for carry on campus. And if she’s drinking on- or off-campus, carrying a gun (illegally) would only be one of her many legal problems.
The facts are, CHL holders are statistically more law-abiding than the general public. This is true in every state. I have no way to prove my hypothesis, but since even a relatively benign infraction can cause you to lose your CHL permanently, I suspect this is a big reason that CHL holders are, on the whole, positively anal about not breaking the law. And for the record, if they catch you concealing whilst drinking, you ain’t getting that CHL back. EV-ah.
But let’s not let logic, reason, and the facts get in the way of Lydia the Tattooed Lady and her simple, desultory philippic.
As a Texas College Student and a handgun owner with a desire to obtain a CHL when I have the money and the time to spare, I am a supporter of campus carry. Traditionally Colleges are a magnet for crime with young people with money, the general lower quality of the neighborhood surrounding a university and the predicablity of when a victim might be walking alone at night carrying several hundred if not thousands worth of electronics(cellphone, mp3 player, laptop, etc.). Having made that walk countless times to my car with nothing but a pocket knife for self-defence, I welcome the ability to carry my H&K .40 caliber with me. Plus those individuals most inclined to commit a gun related crime on campus are also the least likely to care about the law.
There’s something about the chick in the illustration that gives me the almost irresistible urge to crack that bitch in the face with the back of my hand. And I’ve never hit a woman in my life. Just sayin’.
You give her too much credit. I don’t think she has any sort of calculating intent. Nor is she writing based solely on her emotions -what passes for reasoning in her mind is so piss poor that she doesn’t understand any of the issues or the means of understanding issues. She has almost surely spent almost all of her life being overly spoiled and protected while being exposed to the deliberate dumbing down mind control programs of the media and education systems. Her personal and mental worlds are superficial and artificial. Rather than being challenged and encouraged to think and to work and to grow into a responsible adult she’s been led by the pied piper into becoming a child of the state. Really quite pitiful.
She could have shortened that piece by quite a bit by simply writing “Guns are all icky and stuff! Ohmigod! What-EVER!!!!”
John Fritz wrote:
John, I think you need to put some quotation marks around the word “adults” in that sentence.
Martin what is scary is you are right. Kids in college are far from being adults. B/c of this, I am on the fence about this issue. The one thing that worries me about guns on campus is there are far too many socially and mentally developed individuals on campus who will try to obtain a chl. And there is always someone willing to help that person if the money is right. Or even more scary as a Texan watching the popularity of the Utah chl.
Last thing I want is some 21 yr old gamer boy trying to go “kimbo” with pistols. College is becoming filled up with people who have lost a connection to this world. I worry about guns in their hands.
Damn. I just clicked over to collegecandy.com and now I feel like my IQ dropped 20 points…
“I probably have too many tattoos to get me a real job.”
Kinda says it all right there. Meet the next Katie Couric. Another bubblehead, but this one has a tramp stamp.
Facts can be slippery things. I think it’s more likely you cited politically correct, feminazi BS.
Point taken. Any legit source for college rape data? I’ll surf for a replacement.