A gun is a tool.
A knife is a tool.
A ice pick is a tool.
A rasore is a tool.
A car, a bat, a hammer, scissors, forks, belts, whips, gavels, books, etc……..
If we proceed to ban all of these, then we would be safe. Or would we?
Many more murders are committed daily by strangulation, pushing, and things that don’t even involve a tool. The weapon is the PERSON committing the crime.
Lets put an END to the weapon. Create a society that executes JUSTICE and the criminal intent will be less favored.
Fences make good neighbors, but locks only keep honest people honest.
House committee OKs bill to allow handguns at colleges
BY DAVE MONTGOMERY
AUSTIN — After an emotional 51/2-hour hearing, the House Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee voted 5-3 Wednesday night to advance legislation to allow concealed handguns on college and university campuses.
House Bill 750, by Rep. Joe Driver, R-Garland, would allow holders of concealed-handgun permits to carry their weapons in campus buildings. It would keep a ban on guns in bars, churches, hospitals and athletic events at colleges.
Public colleges and universities would be required to comply, but private institutions, such as TCU and Texas Wesleyan University, could opt out after consulting with the faculty and students.
The vote was along party lines. The five Republican committee members voted in favor. Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, voted no, along with Reps. Armando Walle, D-Houston, and Barbara Mallory Caraway, D-Dallas.
James Spaniolo, president of the University of Texas at Arlington, and the school’s student congress have opposed the legislation. TCU officials, in a statement this week, also opposed it.
“The ramifications of allowing an individual with a concealed handgun license to carry a weapon on campus would create dangerous situations and in essence, put faculty, staff, students and University guests in the line of fire,” the statement says.
Dozens of students, gun-rights advocates, law enforcement officials and education advocates, testifying into the evening, offered sharply divided views.
“We’re basically fish in a barrel,” said W. Scott Lewis of Austin, representing Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. “This is about changing the odds.”
But others, including Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, warned that introducing weapons into the sometimes emotionally charged social atmosphere at colleges could expand the potential for violence.
Acevedo’s officers were among those who swarmed onto the campus of the University of Texas at Austin in September after a 19-year-old math student in a ski mask strolled through the campus firing an AK-47. The student, Colton Tooley, later killed himself in a campus library.
Bill failed in 2009
Driver’s measure was one of a package of gun-related bills considered by the committee, but the lawmakers deferred votes on the others. Those measures would allow concealed handguns in public junior colleges, public technical institutes and school board meetings.
Driver’s measure appeared to draw the most attention during the hearing and is essentially a resurrected version of an unsuccessful measure he introduced during the 2009 legislative session. Driver told committee members that this latest version has support from 83 of the 150 House members and 14 of the 31 Senate members.
Addressing what he said have been erroneous media reports about the bill, Driver said most undergraduate students would not qualify under the bill since permit holders must be 21 or older.
“Passage of this legislation will not result in a large population of armed undergraduates,” Driver said.
Proponents say campus violence, such as the massacre of 32 students by a gunman at Virginia Tech in 2007, shows the need for additional safeguards at colleges.
A number of students testified that they need to arm themselves against less publicized violence. John DeLeon, 25, a graduate teaching assistant at UT-Arlington, told lawmakers that he sometimes works on campus past midnight and so is vulnerable to campus crime.
“As a responsible citizen, I want the right to protect myself against those who would do me harm,” said DeLeon, who said he has a concealed-handgun permit.
Adrienne O’Reilley of Houston, a student at Texas A&M University, fought back tears as she told lawmakers about being assaulted two years ago.
“I refuse to be a victim again,” she said in urging lawmakers to pass Driver’s bill. “Please give me this option.”
Dave Montgomery, 512-476-4294
I am writing in response to the letter to the editor from David Egler. Mr. Egler is against the idea of Concealed Carry for law abiding citizens. He criticizes Representative Hammond, Sheriff VanBrooker and Macomb Police Chief Barker for presenting only one side of the argument.
He states that they are for making guns available everywhere. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reason they support this bill is that there are several requirements that will give local law enforcement the ability to deny licenses to people they feel uncomfortable with having the right to carry concealed.
Mr. Egler also states that most people can’t defend themselves with a gun, because they are not quick enough. The facts are that people in the United States use guns to defend themselves an estimated 2.5 million times per year. That is more than 6,500 times per day, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995.
Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives.
Of the times that someone uses a gun to defend themselves 92 percent of the time just showing the gun or firing a warning shot will scare off their attacker.
It is interesting that the anti-gun press almost never publishes articles or reports on television any story that shows the successful use of guns for self defense by stopping a crime and protecting law abiding citizens.
According to a study by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, 1979, when a woman defends herself with a knife or gun, 3 percent of rape attacks are completed, but when the woman is unarmed 32 percent of rape attacks are completed. Australia and the United Kingdom have virtually banned handgun ownership while handgun ownership in the U.S. has steadily increased.
During a study period from 1995 to 2003 rate rates increased dramatically in Australia (+26.5 percent) and the United Kingdom (+59.8 percent) but decreased (-13.5 percent) in the U.S.
Women are at the most disadvantage when they are not allowed to be armed to protect themselves.
Mr. Egler also gets the whole issue backwards when he says that we can get a local data base without having concealed carry as if the purpose of allowing concealed carry is to get a local data base.
The purpose of the local data base is to make sure local law enforcement will have the final say in deciding whether to award a license to the concealed carry applicant; after the applicant has passed all other qualifications.
Mr. Egler is also concerned about running into a young person that is drunk and having that young person pull a gun on him. We all know that criminals do not obey the gun laws and carry guns now. Criminals love knowing that law abiding citizens are unarmed.
As Walter Mondale said, “Gun bans don’t disarm criminals, gun bans attract them.”
It is time for Illinois to allow law abiding citizens to protect and defend themselves.
Gary Ludlum, Prairie City