Not exactly. Many college freshmen are only 18. I was only 17 whan I started. But since this says "licensed permits" and you have to be 21 for that permit, it would only be legal for those 21 and older. I had my B.A. before I turned 21, so under this law I would have been an unarmed target through my entire under-grad studies.:mad:

Except during my riflery class and marksmanship practice. :D

LMAO!!!!! youre right about that and doomed!!!!!:eek:

It feels like the people pushing the bill do have good intentions, but it's worrying. There's so many things that could go wrong. I don't think guns in schools is going to help make it safer.

Maybe they could improve existing school programmes against bullying, maybe even introduce sort of like a life skills class but in learning to communicate effectively and deal with difficult situations. Not really sure how to put it.

All humans, when threatened are unpredictable and even more so under the influence of alcohol or drugs, which is prevalent in the college environment. Given the high stress levels and relative emotionally immaturity of the average college student as well, adding weapons to the mix is a remarkably stupid addition to the mix. I owned two firearms when I was in college - pistol and a rifle with a fixed bayonette. :rolleyes: I found that people just knowing I had them and could use them effectively meant they never had to come down off the closet shelf except to be cleaned. Just because females have a greater tendency to premeditated crimes instead of crimes of passion, does not mean committing a crime with one is the much more unlikely.

Banning firearms on campus will never remove all of them, but it will deter those who don't have the incentive to work around the rules. And it will continue providing solid grounds for detaining anyone on campus found with one. If its illegal there is no recourse through claims of unreasonable seizure of private property. Still - I would prefer to see it limited to only lifting the ban on being able to transport them across campus - as in locked in my trunk while I am on campus so that I have access to it en route to and from the campus.

Excuse me! Please do not continue on that line of thinking. You are doing the male of the species a great deal of harm. Yes, women are the prevalent victims of violence at the hands of men - especially when we are referring to domestic voplence and crimes between two people who actually know each other. But there are far too many men in the world who are also victims of the same type of crime and it goes unseen because of social stereotyping, lack of resources for aid, and a general perception that such victims are never men. Men are beign abused too, and the longer it takes for the public to realize this the longer it will be before the problem is addressed on the levels it is for women.

Now back to the main thread of this.

Let me ask a question directed at anyone.

Instead of enabling students to have firearms on campus, why dont they have policemen armed with guns stationed on campus grounds? Wouldnt this make more sense?

It is just that it costs money.

but far more effective.

Students carrying firearms may lead to domestic violence which will certainly destroy than protect these communities that contain schools.

Really? Most university campuses are very open places and most already have armed security guards. If someone wanted to bring a gun onto a campus and avoid detection it would be very easy on most American universities. Sure we could put walls around the campus and make going to class as secure a process as getting on an airplane, but the cost and time doesn't make that very feasible.

Pay money for photoshoot of an airplane almost flying into another building....
Or pay money to try and help save human life....?

Hmmm.......

You risk your life every time you get out of bed in the morning. Random shootings are just that: random. We can't expect our government to protect like bodyguards. Either live in fear or live your life.

Same with most campuses around the world.

Having metal detectors at the Universities main gate entrances is a viable alternative than students wearing holsters.

True. But which country has the most public shootings worldwide? America.
Which country provides the least amount "physical" security? America.

When I stayed in Sydney on vacation, there were two security guards always on duty at our Apartment. (they changed times, switched, you know what I mean)

I am not in support of students wearing guns to school, however, my university alone had probably 25 buildings, each with two to seven or eight entrances. That's about 100 entrances to cover. Even if you had just one guard at each entrance during the school day, that is a huge drain on funds, not to mention the purchase of 100 metal detectors. So viable is not a word I would choose in this case.

America provides a considerable amount of physical security. The only policeman I saw in the Bahamas was the one that helped me take my bag off the plane.

Come to NZ or AUS to study. I know for sure we don't have to worry about thing, not sure about my ocker cousins across the ditch though. Think most our Uni students do is get trashed and/or beat each other up really.

My campus had not only their own armed police department, but also hired off duty officers from time to time to patrol the campus. But it all comes down to the fact, most criminals who decide to use a weapon, don't care much if that weapon has been banned.

Just an update...

The House Bill has been out of committee for a while and some technical editing is complete. It should come up for a Texas House voted next week. Only 75 of the 150 representatives have gone on record in favor of this, and the co-sponsors removed themselves when public sentiment turned against them.

Meanwhile an "identical" bill has been introduced in the Texas Senate.

Also, this does not pertain to privately run schools. The bill allows them to opt out and continue whatever prohibitions it likes. however, it not only includes "firearms", but a knives and clubs. urrently you can be arrested for having a baseball bat on campus unless you can prove you are on a baseball team. Does that explain why such a bill was even considered. The present law is extremely flawed, but this isn't any better.

It's not too surprising.. There's an Open-carry initiative going around here lately also, Trying to expand the Concealed handgun permits.

Yep, that is a big part of what we are talking about. The Bill's sponsor is from a Dallas suburb. Welcome aboard .
(I'm less than 30 miles from you ...... sometimes much less).

Pexter, I really don't want guns on campus. However, the way the law is written there are problems for innocent people if someone wants to make trouble for them. Unfortunately the pending bills is even worse.

As it is now, if I have to drive 40 miles through an undeveloped area at 2am when I get off work, I would like to be able to defend myself if I run into trouble. But because I work at a university, I have to leave any and all weapons I own at home where they are of no use. I want it in my vehicle en route not 40 miles away. I do not want to be able to carry it around campus and certainly not into any building or gathering. But the current law says if I even drive across the perimeter of state property I can be arrested if there is so much as my chef's knife or a baseball bat locked in my trunk. Under the existing law my chef's knife is illegal because the blade is more than 4" long and a baseball bat it a club. If I go on a cross country trip and carry my registered and licensed .22, I have to take it home before I could answer a page to come to my office. Its unreasonable.

but instead of amending the law to correct the real problems with it, this Respresentative has gone overboard and tries to allow guns anywhere.

I hate to agree with you, considering I am a Texan, but... Yea. :\ Freaking Texas...