The Active shooter training, which was held on campus, encouraged students to “get out, hide out or take out” in the case of shots being fired on campus.
It is interesting that students were encouraged to “take out” an active shooter on the very same week in which Democrats in the state legislature are pushing through a bill, which could ban concealed carry weapons on campus.
After the active shooter training, those in attendance asked many questions. They wanted to know about security of the buildings, who to call if they heard shots and many other issues. But not a single person mentioned the elephant in the room; the issue of weapons on campus carried by someone other than a mass shooter.
The video shown at the training showed a room full of helpless people throwing books at a gunman before running at the gunman and taking him down as a group. It is a nice thought, but how much easier would it be if one of them had a weapon to fire rather than a book to throw?
On the Colorado State University- Pueblo campus, that question may never be answered, due to the possibility of the state legislature illegalizing the most effective form of self-defense; concealed weapons carried by law-abiding citizens.
Banning weapons at CSU-Pueblo campus is nothing new. In 2010, the Faculty Senate voted unanimously to ban possession of weapons on campus, including students who had concealed and carry licenses.
Later that same year however, the Colorado Supreme Court overturned the ruling, saying that the school (among others) was “operating above the law,” according to an article in the Huffington Post.
Now, the ban on concealed and carry licenses on campus could become law. The bill has passed the house and is expected to be passed by the State Senate within the next couple of weeks, according to an article on campusreform.com.
Democratic State Senator Joe Salazar defended the bill with some comments that have offended many gun-carrying women.
“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be,” Salazar said, according to a Denver Post article.
Apparently, women cannot be trusted with guns, so they should carry whistles. Call boxes might come in handy, for the fast runners.
Many female students from around the state are not satisfied with whistles and call boxes.
“[T]here has not been a single incident of a Colorado student with a concealed carry permit using a handgun to kill or commit an act of violence on campus,” Katherine Whitney, a spokeswoman for the Colorado chapter of Students for Concealed Carry, said.
“On the other hand there have been numerous rapes and murders that have occurred on or near campuses that could have been prevented had the victim had a concealed handgun,” Whitney said.
“I am offended that the senate president wants to increase my vulnerability to rape and assault as I walk home from class late at night,” Whitney said.
An active shooter or any other person, who is committed to hurting other people, will not follow or respect a gun-free zone on campus. Only the law-abiding students with no intent to hurt others will be left weaponless, defenseless and at the mercy of an “active shooter” or other violent person, if this becomes law.
Katie England • Feb 28, 2013 at 12:58 pm
@ C.R.
I appreciate your feedback, and would like to clear up some things.
First, I am in no way discrediting the Pueblo County Sherriff’s office, or the deputies. The Pueblo County Sherriff’s office fully supports concealed carry permits, and consequently I support them. I simply wanted to use the event as a way to introduce the topic of the proposed ban.
My only problem is with the legislature who might be taking away constitutional rights, not with Bill Brown and the other deputies.
If you noticed, in the article I only mentioned those in attendance not bringing up the issue of concealed carry permits, I didn’t criticize the deputies for not bringing up the topic.
As only one person, I cannot cover every event on campus. A different reporter was assigned that event, so if you think it should have been written about, you can talk to them.
C.R. • Feb 28, 2013 at 11:08 am
I don’t think this article was well-written or thoughtful. Your title was certainly attention getting, which was I’m sure was your intention, but it doesn’t really make sense. This was a training session covering the topic of responding to an active shooter. The deputies are part of the executive branch of the government (they carry out the law), not the legislative branch (they make the law). Would you have rather they spend the time debating a political issue or covering the intended topic, which was responding to an active shooter situation? The training covered the topic as advertised. Dr. DiMare, University President, held a forum to discuss the proposed legislation to ban concealed carry by permit-holders on Thursday (and was kind enough to also provide lunch). I don’t see any information on your website about the discussion at that event, though. Obviously it’s a hot topic, but maybe you should get your facts straight before you discredit the work of the deputies. They have to work with the laws as written, not give information and train others according to hypothetical situations.
Jason Cowan • Feb 28, 2013 at 4:29 pm
Thank you for commenting, C.R. But I must note, the event you were talking about, Pizza with the President, held on Feb. 21, began at noon. That was not covered as the writers for the TODAY are students as well. Finding a writer to sit in for a two hour session could be extremely difficult and that does not even take into account that this event was held in the middle of the day. One would either be willing to fall behind in a class or, even more unlikely, not have a class during that two hour block.
dave • Feb 28, 2013 at 6:39 am
I have a CCL and carry EVERY WHERE I go. I do not care if the Colorado Senate passes the bill and Hickenlooper signs it. This is my personal safety and I have a constitutional right to defend myself from harm and that does not stop just because I leave my house or step out of my car. I will still carry and will fight in court if I have too. We potect our President, Elected Officials, money, idiot celebrities, and who ever else can pay with guns.
What is the average response time for the police?
Will they be there in 2 seconds when you are being robbed, raped, or assulted?
The answers are TOO LONG and NO. The police would like to be able to protect you everywhere and at all times but they can not. You must take personal responsibility (some thing that is highly missing these days) and protect yourself, your loved ones, and in the case of an armed shooter those to weak to do it theirselves.
It takes a gun to stop a gun.
Matt • Feb 26, 2013 at 4:53 pm
Well-written and thoughtful article.
Why should students be singled out for disarmament?
Comparing the experiences of the University of Colorado (imposing a comprehensive gun ban) with Colorado State University in Fort Collins (with NO gun ban) over most of the last decade shows that not only were there no instances of concealed-carry permittees committing crimes on campus at CSU, but CSU experienced a DECLINE in crime while CU experienced an INCREASE over the same period.
From a “safety” standpoint, barring guns from college campuses places students, staff, faculty, and visitors at greater risk of criminal predation, as ”gun free zone” equals “target-rich environment” for criminals.
Allowing responsible adults to exercise a fundamental constitutional right – affirming the right of licensed concealed-carry permit holders to responsibly exercise their inherent right of self-defense – is not only good law, it is good policy.
http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/2012/03/06/colorado-supreme-court-upholds-colorado-court-of-appeals-rejection-of-cu-gun-ban/
Monica • Feb 26, 2013 at 4:38 pm
Well said, Katie!!