Page 2 of 2

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:38 am
by Douva
I attended the screening tonight, and the segment on campus carry is surprisingly balanced (it includes several strong statements by campus carry proponents such as Suzanna Gratia Hupp and SCCC President David Burnett). I disagree with many of the positions promoted by the film, but the stuff on campus carry actually doesn’t have the stench of propaganda that one might expect. The film stakes a clear position on campus carry, but the information isn’t provided in a heavily-edited, deeply-skewed Michael Moore sort of way (the film wasn’t actually produced by the Brady Campaign).

We've known about this event for a little over two weeks, so I don't think anybody tried to slip it in under the radar.

I’ve read, watched, and listened to everything I can find on Colin Goddard, and I’ve never heard him claim that he stopped the shooting by calling 911. FYI, the shooting actually lasted ten to twelve minutes, not six minutes.

Colin certainly spins the facts to support his position, but I think he actually makes a fair attempt to be truthful in his statements. Tonight he even clarified the difference between the requirements to purchase a machine gun and the requirements to purchase a semiautomatic rifle, in response to an audience member who made a rambling statement about people being able to walk into gun stores and buy machine guns.

I don’t think it’s fair to question Colin’s motives just because he’s being paid for his involvement. Most of us working with SCCC would welcome the opportunity to take home a paycheck for what we do (as it is, we’re virtually—if not literally—bankrupting ourselves for this cause).

Campus organizations are obviously welcome to host any speakers or films they wish. Suzanna Hupp spoke at UT earlier this week, and John Lott spoke at UT last semester. However, colleges are not allowed to use official resources to encourage students, faculty, or staff to lobby one way or the other (they can say, “You’re invited to attend a screening of this film,” but they can’t say, “Go to the Capitol, and lobby against this bill”). We’ve brought it to the attention of another Texas college that they recently violated this statute, and they seem to be making a reasonable attempt to rectify the situation (they’re looking at ways of offering us equal time).

I felt that the question and answer portion of the evening was quite telling. Colin is clearly more interested in talking about the gun show loophole than about campus carry, and I felt that most of the panel (with the possible exception of John Woods, whose organization Students for Gun Free Schools deals almost exclusively with this issue) was ill-equipped for the two or three difficult questions about campus carry that they received. When asked what can be done to protect students, faculty, and staff in that time period between the start of a shooting spree and the arrival of police, they talked around the question. When asked what students, faculty, and staff should do if they find themselves in a campus shooting, all three panelists (Colin Goddard, John Woods, and the head of the Texas State University Police Department), sat silently, trying to think of an answer (the MC interrupted and said something to the effect of, “We’ll give you some time to think and come back to that”). When asked how a campus environment is different from a movie theater, a shopping mall, or a music festival, the head of the campus police responded that campuses are not fundamentally different from those other places and that the training for first responders is pretty much the same for any of those locations.

There were probably 50-60 people at the screening, and I honestly don’t think that either this film or the subsequent conversation is going to sway the campus carry debate in Texas.

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:28 pm
by EconDoc
My understanding is that it is also coming to ACC, sponsored by the administration of that college.

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:12 pm
by Ameer
Douva wrote:When asked how a campus environment is different from a movie theater, a shopping mall, or a music festival, the head of the campus police responded that campuses are not fundamentally different from those other places and that the training for first responders is pretty much the same for any of those locations.
:iagree:

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:22 pm
by rm9792
EconDoc wrote:My understanding is that it is also coming to ACC, sponsored by the administration of that college.
Which ACC?

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:47 pm
by Douva
South Austin (Manchaca Rd. & Stassney Ln). It's going to start around 6:00 or 6:15 and last about two hours.

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:20 pm
by 74novaman
the name "living for 32" is incredibly arrogant to me.

How do they know what those victims would want? Maybe they wouldn't want other students to be defenseless! Campaigning in their name is offensive.

But of course, arrogance goes hand in hand with gun grabbing so.... :totap:

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:17 pm
by jcarp02
74novaman wrote:the name "living for 32" is incredibly arrogant to me.

How do they know what those victims would want? Maybe they wouldn't want other students to be defenseless! Campaigning in their name is offensive.

But of course, arrogance goes hand in hand with gun grabbing so.... :totap:
:iagree:

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:52 pm
by EconDoc
Most of ith their arguments against CHL on campus are driven by half-truths, distortions, and emotionalism. Living for 32's position has no basis in empirical evidence.

:patriot: :txflag:

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:27 am
by stevie_d_64
jmoney wrote:It would be very interesting to see if they would allow a pro-gun discussion to take place on campus
That's what I was just thinking...I bet someone from that group Students for Concealed Campus Carry could rebuke every single point made by this, "hero".../sarcasm

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:39 am
by stevie_d_64
When asked how a campus environment is different from a movie theater, a shopping mall, or a music festival, the head of the campus police responded that campuses are not fundamentally different from those other places and that the training for first responders is pretty much the same for any of those locations.
Yep there is a big difference...

At a shopping mall, movie theater, music festival etc etc etc, there is the distinct chance that "first responders" will arrive minutes later to possibly find fewer victims, and the shooter stopped by a person who is licenced to carry concealed in this state...

At a college campus, you are likely to arrive to many more victims in various conditions ranging from minor wounded, seriously wounded, to deceased...With the number equating directly to the amount of ammunition the shooter managed to carry on their murdering spree...With plenty of heros calling 911 to tell the authorities that there is someone shooting up the place...This makes for fantastic TV news when they replay those frantic calls to their audiences to generate further calls for complete civilian firearm bans and confiscations...

But hey, what do I know, right??? ;-)

Re: Living for 32-Anti-Gun Comes to my TX Campus

Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:21 pm
by Douva
stevie_d_64 wrote:
jmoney wrote:It would be very interesting to see if they would allow a pro-gun discussion to take place on campus
That's what I was just thinking...I bet someone from that group Students for Concealed Campus Carry could rebuke every single point made by this, "hero".../sarcasm
Well, in the case of ACC, they did allow "pro-gun" discussion. I was invited at the very last minute (i.e., a few hours before the the ACC event took place), to sit on the post-screening discussion panel, and I did my best to rebut John and Colin's arguments against campus carry.

I didn't advertise that I was going to be there because the whole thing was so last minute that I honestly didn't know if it was going to work out or not. But overall, it went pretty well. I was allowed to hand out literature packets to everyone in attendance (about 50 people), and although I didn't get to say everything I wanted to say (you never do in this type of situation), I felt that I adequately made the case for campus carry.

The only annoying thing was that the moderator of the panel (the professor who put the event together) cut me off a couple of times and chastised me for not sticking to the agreed upon rules. The only "rule" we'd agreed to was that the event would be a panel discussion, not a debate, so I'm really not sure what that was about (I never interrupted anyone; I was just offering follow-ups to a couple of John and Colin's answers). But for the most part, I was allowed to speak undeterred, and John and Colin were both good sports when I tried to shoehorn as much information as possible into my answers (because the moderator was only allowing me to respond when asked a direct question, I tried to get as much millage as I could out of each answer).

The chief of the University of Texas Police Department was there, and I thought that his presence was actually something of an asset for us because he didn't try to spin the issue at all and gave very direct answers to each question asked. He said that he opposes campus carry but has officers on his force who support it. He said that one concern is that having a bunch of people with guns might impede first responders; then he added that he hasn't heard about that happening anywhere else where concealed carry is allowed. He made it clear that he doesn't think this is a black and white issue and that he does think it's something that needs to be discussed.

I think it's extremely unfair to criticize Colin as some sort of wannabe "hero." He's never claimed that he did anything heroic or had anything to do with bringing the shooting to an end. In the film he says very bluntly, "I just got lucky." I get the impression that Colin was inspired to get involved with this issue by all of the wannabe heroes--people who've never actually stared down the barrel of an assailant's gun--telling him they would have stopped the shooter (it's one thing to say that students and faculty should have been allowed the means to defend themselves; it's another to say, "If I'd been in your shoes, I would have saved the day"). I definitely disagree with John and Colin's position, but I don't think they have sinister ulterior motives, and I do think that, more or less, they try to keep things above board. I wish the people on our side would make more of an effort to disagree with them without attacking them personally.

As a final note, I'll add that the professor who was moderating the panel asked me to speak to a couple of his political science classes this week, so I'm getting another opportunity to reach out to ACC students. And the head of the department that sponsored the event has informed us that, because the email they sent out about the screening/discussion panel also informed students and faculty about the Students for Gun Free Schools lobby day, they'd be happy to send out an email promoting an SCCC lobby day. So, all things considered, ACC is making a very reasonable attempt to give our side of the debate a seat at the table.