Don't worry on offending LEO's, in this case just one of them spoke for a whole department and made them look incompetent, highlight that, and find some PUPD and ask them if they are as ill prepared as their boss said they were. Highlight What he said about them, don't attack them directly. Cox is an idiot, Make your attacks towards him and I am sure that no thinking LEO will take offense.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Hopefully Carry at Purdue in the Future?
- Thread starter scottka
- Start date
-
- Tags
- campus carry
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Don't worry on offending LEO's, in this case just one of them spoke for a whole department and made them look incompetent, highlight that, and find some PUPD and ask them if they are as ill prepared as their boss said they were. Highlight What he said about them, don't attack them directly. Cox is an idiot, Make your attacks towards him and I am sure that no thinking LEO will take offense.
My son and I both have LTCH. I can carry on campus, as I am not a PU Student. He is a PU Student, so he cannot carry. I don't understand, why just being a student at PU denies a citizen the right to carry (on campus). My day off work today, so I have been absorbing all the negative media coverage, from newspapers and TV.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
(emphasis added)
The police have made themselves an issue in a political debate (remember, the typical police whine "we don't make the rules, we just enforce them". It's not true but that's a different thread).
All rhetorical fire needs to be concentrated on the police. He was exposed his neck in this debate by overextending his position.
Just from the quotation from the article.
1. If adding guns do not make a safer campus, demand that the Purdue police be immediately disarmed.
2. What is so magical about the campus that guns being legally carried will create problems? How is the campus different than the rest of Indiana? How is carrying guns at the mall, in bars, downtown Lafayette, in the parks not create problems but campus carry creates problems?
3. Control the resolution? What does the Chief want to control? Is campus a magical zone where the Indiana Code does not apply? Where has chaos and disorder occured? On campuses that permit guns or campuses that prohibit guns? Where have the campus shootings happened?
4. What business do the police have in controlling anything? Are the police our servants or our masters?
5. You don't get many gun violations, Chief Cox? Listen . . . you can hear that speaking for itself.
The police cannot be used as a stalking horse for those that oppose this resolution. Advocates need to be bodyslamming the cops (rhetorically).
I lol'd...how ignorant are some people.
+1 to Applied Ballistics for their assistance!
What a week this has been. Lots of “opinions” in the exponent surrounding that notion of carrying on campus. So I figure why note put my two cents out there too!
I have found out that many of you are grasping at this notion that guns are bad, violence is bad, and that cops can protect you. Let's examine this shall we? First nobody is supporting violence on campus. This bill will not give guns to students on campus, all it would do is permit people that can already carry a side arm to do so on campus. Purdue Student Government (PSG) is not, will not, and can not give guns to students on campus, nor are they deciding if anyone can carry. All this Bill would do is allow those individuals that have already purchased a side arm ( with a federal back round check) and obtained a License to Carry a Handgun (LTCH) to exercise a right that has already been recognized and guaranteed by the State of Indiana, the right to self defense. This bill would allow students, staff and faculty who have a LTCH the right to protect themselves as they leave campus. Purdue Student government would not be providing or authorizing anything, just Standing up for your right to protect yourself.
Many have asked, “protect ourselves from what” My reply is anything. People who have been attacked didn't get a memo warning them, it just happened. It seems to happen more frequently where people are unable to protect themselves. Many have claimed that Crime on campus is so low this isn't needed, I would ask them if this is so why does Purdue have a police department? Call boxes? SAFE walk? Or any of these other measures? I would suggest that crime and assault on campus is more frequent than is formally reported. Just check the crime report, and reference that against the text alerts we all get.
Now let's look at this last bit. The notion that the police are their to protect you. Some light research should make it clear to you that the supreme court has been very clear on you, the police don't have to protect YOU! The police have no duty to put their lives in danger, It is very commendable when they do, precisely because they don't have to. If more people were carrying firearms than just the police, It would be easier for People to stop crime as it was happening to them. how much crime happens in front of a cop? Many shootings, rapes, and thefts occur in firearm free zones, simply because the police can't be everywhere, and the people in those situations can seldom defend themselves, Ask Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp or Amanda collins, both of these women have stories worth looking into, had it not been for gun free zones their lives would be completely different today. Google them.
Also lets consider the notion that police are better trained to deal with crime. Look into their training, the police are not Highly trained by any means with a firearm. They cover 40 hours worth of firearms instruction and range training during basic. ( I understand that many officers pursue supplemental training on their own, but many more don't) This makes sense though. Police have the job of collecting evidence, and frankly I'm glad they spend such little time with firearms as it shows their job is not to shoot people.
Let's look specifically at Purdue University Police department, (PUPD). If I was on this department I would be asking for a different boss. Chief of Police Cox has made statements that just paint them in a a bad light, it makes them look incompetent at their job, and poorly trained. He eludes to the notion that PUPD officers would be stumbling upon long drawn out shoot outs between students, then not “know who to shoot” I think was the phrase he uttered at a Young Americans for Liberty forum on this topic. Statistics suggest that the police would arrive well after a defensive action by a person carrying a firearm, except in the case of spree shootings where they would be orders to stay outside for hours. I have faith that the PUPD officers would only shoot at someone on campus who threatened their life, or a Purdue vistors life. Chief Cox really makes the department look like they disdain students, and don't know how to respond to situations that they may encounter. For isntance Purdue doesn't regulate the carrying of firearms by visitors to the campus, especially when they conceal. I think its safe to say that PUPD could handle threat identification at mackey. Police throught the state seem confident to deal with threats at concerts, or sporting events, yet chief cox implies that his officers might make a mistake. Police don't “shoot first and ask question later” they can't be sure of whats going on without taking time to asses what is in front of them, they don't have the luxury of guessing. Again PUPD, I'm willing to bet that you have more capability than Chief Cox suggests.
Nobody wants an event like Virgina tech, this bill would only act to allow students and staff the ability to Protect their life from someone who might want to take it, this bill and PSG certianly don't advocate illegal activity.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I wrote that, and still need to clean it up, any suggestions?
I have found out that many of you are grasping at this notion that guns are bad, violence is bad, and that cops can protect you. Let's examine this shall we? First nobody is supporting violence on campus. This bill will not give guns to students on campus, all it would do is permit people that can already carry a side arm to do so on campus. Purdue Student Government (PSG) is not, will not, and can not give guns to students on campus, nor are they deciding if anyone can carry. All this Bill would do is allow those individuals that have already purchased a side arm ( with a federal back round check) and obtained a License to Carry a Handgun (LTCH) to exercise a right that has already been recognized and guaranteed by the State of Indiana, the right to self defense. This bill would allow students, staff and faculty who have a LTCH the right to protect themselves as they leave campus. Purdue Student government would not be providing or authorizing anything, just Standing up for your right to protect yourself.
Many have asked, “protect ourselves from what” My reply is anything. People who have been attacked didn't get a memo warning them, it just happened. It seems to happen more frequently where people are unable to protect themselves. Many have claimed that Crime on campus is so low this isn't needed, I would ask them if this is so why does Purdue have a police department? Call boxes? SAFE walk? Or any of these other measures? I would suggest that crime and assault on campus is more frequent than is formally reported. Just check the crime report, and reference that against the text alerts we all get.
Now let's look at this last bit. The notion that the police are their to protect you. Some light research should make it clear to you that the supreme court has been very clear on you, the police don't have to protect YOU! The police have no duty to put their lives in danger, It is very commendable when they do, precisely because they don't have to. If more people were carrying firearms than just the police, It would be easier for People to stop crime as it was happening to them. how much crime happens in front of a cop? Many shootings, rapes, and thefts occur in firearm free zones, simply because the police can't be everywhere, and the people in those situations can seldom defend themselves, Ask Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp or Amanda collins, both of these women have stories worth looking into, had it not been for gun free zones their lives would be completely different today. Google them.
Also lets consider the notion that police are better trained to deal with crime. Look into their training, the police are not Highly trained by any means with a firearm. They cover 40 hours worth of firearms instruction and range training during basic. ( I understand that many officers pursue supplemental training on their own, but many more don't) This makes sense though. Police have the job of collecting evidence, and frankly I'm glad they spend such little time with firearms as it shows their job is not to shoot people.
Let's look specifically at Purdue University Police department, (PUPD). If I was on this department I would be asking for a different boss. Chief of Police Cox has made statements that just paint them in a a bad light, it makes them look incompetent at their job, and poorly trained. He eludes to the notion that PUPD officers would be stumbling upon long drawn out shoot outs between students, then not “know who to shoot” I think was the phrase he uttered at a Young Americans for Liberty forum on this topic. Statistics suggest that the police would arrive well after a defensive action by a person carrying a firearm, except in the case of spree shootings where they would be orders to stay outside for hours. I have faith that the PUPD officers would only shoot at someone on campus who threatened their life, or a Purdue vistors life. Chief Cox really makes the department look like they disdain students, and don't know how to respond to situations that they may encounter. For isntance Purdue doesn't regulate the carrying of firearms by visitors to the campus, especially when they conceal. I think its safe to say that PUPD could handle threat identification at mackey. Police throught the state seem confident to deal with threats at concerts, or sporting events, yet chief cox implies that his officers might make a mistake. Police don't “shoot first and ask question later” they can't be sure of whats going on without taking time to asses what is in front of them, they don't have the luxury of guessing. Again PUPD, I'm willing to bet that you have more capability than Chief Cox suggests.
Nobody wants an event like Virgina tech, this bill would only act to allow students and staff the ability to Protect their life from someone who might want to take it, this bill and PSG certianly don't advocate illegal activity.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I wrote that, and still need to clean it up, any suggestions?
Last edited:
I'm, thinking about a different reply around condoms. Both guns and condoms can be used for protection, many students don't care about rights, they do care about "relations", and waiting on the police would be just like putting on a condom after the deed was done. maybe I'll try to sound high minded and use prophylactics.
Carry on Campus
I have been a big proponent of the right to carry my whole life. When I was in fifth grade I had my first argument with a friends parents about firearms, it took three hours but I had set aside all of their fears, misconceptions, and boiled down their argument to”I just don't like them, OK?”. Neither of Parents are the NRA type, my dad hunted, and only carried a side arm when fur trapping. My mom didn't start carrying until I was into junior high. So when this topic come sup on campus I am to the point, calm and factual. My appearance not withstanding, I have no intention of ever hurting a soul (although I guess some people at the last PSG meeting were worried when I stood up during one lady's remarks).
I have recently figured out that Purdue Students seem selective when it comes to recognizing their rights. I have witnessed Gay Pride events, equal opportunity initiatives, free speech events, Pro choice/(graphic) pro-life events, I have been urged to vote, and any number of events supporting other rights people claim to have. Yet the right to carry a firearm for self defense, is deemed taboo? This is the discussion that students shy away from, attack irrationally, or worry about. I guess this means students don't value their right too highly. So let me break this down another way.
If firearms are such a contributor to crime on campus, and crime is so low, why not remove them entirely and disarm the Purdue University Police Department? They must be the last source of crime as they are the only ones still with sidearms right?
Of course not, yet why do people around campus equate firearms with crime? All I can think of is lack of exposure to reality. To much “news”, movies, and video games perhaps? The fact of the matter is across the country and the world when guns are restricted crime rises, when they are sold, kept, and carried by record numbers crime drops. Correlation isn't causation to be sure, but they are related. Look into the Kates-Muaser study, published in the Harvard journal of Law and Public policy [vol.30, No.2] Would Banning firearms Reduce murder Rates and Suicide?, for more information on my claims.
Since students don't seem to recognize their rights I am going to put this in perspective that students can understand.
Firearms are just like condoms.
They don't do anything on their own and are useless if you don't have them with you when you need them.
firearms like condoms, require careful application to be effective, can be used by anyone, and always get considered for use after a tragedy.
Expecting the police to be able to protect you from theft, rape, and murder is just as silly as expecting them to prevent transmission of disease or stopping a pregnancy. They can't be everywhere all the time.
Police show up after the altercation is over, almost always. You wouldn't put a condom on after the deed was done would you?
All joking aside Purdue, take some time and ask some questions before you speak on this subject. There are many sources available for your reference. There is an insurmountable amount of study on this topic, and to talk about it with doing your homework is silly.
To any of you against this bill, ask yourself why.
If you are worried about students threatening you, your classmates, or your teachers, tell me where this has happened.
It doesn't happen at Colorado State University, or at any of the public universities in Utah where students can carry.
If you are worried that the police won't know who the bad guy is, I assure you they won't be there in time to matter.
They don't have to risk their life for you
They stood outside of Virginia Tech and Columbine for HOURS, afraid to make a mistake.
If students could carry, they could identify the threat to their lives, and stop the threat in minutes or seconds, not hours.
To any other fear you may have find me an example, I bet you can't find an example where somebody carrying a firearm legally did something wrong with it, and even if you can, was that act also not a crime? Murder is murder right? It makes no difference if the tool to commit the crime was a firearm, a knife, a car, or bare hands, the crime should be punished, not the tool used to commit it. We don't sue alcohol producers because some student died of alcohol poisoning do we?
Purdue, please tell me what it is you are so afraid of that you put yourself at greater risk by disarming everyone in order to feel safe?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
thoughts on this?
I have been a big proponent of the right to carry my whole life. When I was in fifth grade I had my first argument with a friends parents about firearms, it took three hours but I had set aside all of their fears, misconceptions, and boiled down their argument to”I just don't like them, OK?”. Neither of Parents are the NRA type, my dad hunted, and only carried a side arm when fur trapping. My mom didn't start carrying until I was into junior high. So when this topic come sup on campus I am to the point, calm and factual. My appearance not withstanding, I have no intention of ever hurting a soul (although I guess some people at the last PSG meeting were worried when I stood up during one lady's remarks).
I have recently figured out that Purdue Students seem selective when it comes to recognizing their rights. I have witnessed Gay Pride events, equal opportunity initiatives, free speech events, Pro choice/(graphic) pro-life events, I have been urged to vote, and any number of events supporting other rights people claim to have. Yet the right to carry a firearm for self defense, is deemed taboo? This is the discussion that students shy away from, attack irrationally, or worry about. I guess this means students don't value their right too highly. So let me break this down another way.
If firearms are such a contributor to crime on campus, and crime is so low, why not remove them entirely and disarm the Purdue University Police Department? They must be the last source of crime as they are the only ones still with sidearms right?
Of course not, yet why do people around campus equate firearms with crime? All I can think of is lack of exposure to reality. To much “news”, movies, and video games perhaps? The fact of the matter is across the country and the world when guns are restricted crime rises, when they are sold, kept, and carried by record numbers crime drops. Correlation isn't causation to be sure, but they are related. Look into the Kates-Muaser study, published in the Harvard journal of Law and Public policy [vol.30, No.2] Would Banning firearms Reduce murder Rates and Suicide?, for more information on my claims.
Since students don't seem to recognize their rights I am going to put this in perspective that students can understand.
Firearms are just like condoms.
They don't do anything on their own and are useless if you don't have them with you when you need them.
firearms like condoms, require careful application to be effective, can be used by anyone, and always get considered for use after a tragedy.
Expecting the police to be able to protect you from theft, rape, and murder is just as silly as expecting them to prevent transmission of disease or stopping a pregnancy. They can't be everywhere all the time.
Police show up after the altercation is over, almost always. You wouldn't put a condom on after the deed was done would you?
All joking aside Purdue, take some time and ask some questions before you speak on this subject. There are many sources available for your reference. There is an insurmountable amount of study on this topic, and to talk about it with doing your homework is silly.
To any of you against this bill, ask yourself why.
If you are worried about students threatening you, your classmates, or your teachers, tell me where this has happened.
It doesn't happen at Colorado State University, or at any of the public universities in Utah where students can carry.
If you are worried that the police won't know who the bad guy is, I assure you they won't be there in time to matter.
They don't have to risk their life for you
They stood outside of Virginia Tech and Columbine for HOURS, afraid to make a mistake.
If students could carry, they could identify the threat to their lives, and stop the threat in minutes or seconds, not hours.
To any other fear you may have find me an example, I bet you can't find an example where somebody carrying a firearm legally did something wrong with it, and even if you can, was that act also not a crime? Murder is murder right? It makes no difference if the tool to commit the crime was a firearm, a knife, a car, or bare hands, the crime should be punished, not the tool used to commit it. We don't sue alcohol producers because some student died of alcohol poisoning do we?
Purdue, please tell me what it is you are so afraid of that you put yourself at greater risk by disarming everyone in order to feel safe?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
thoughts on this?
The picture with the article says so and so is shooting a "glock." Hard to tell from the pic, but I'm pretty sure it's a hammer-fired pistol. They used a dirty word that they didn't have to so that the sheeple would be scared of the "glock."
Although I agree with most of your letter, I'm not so sure challenging them with this is a good idea. There are instances that people legally carrying firearms have done harm. I realize you also say that you say the act is a crime anyway, but I just think I'd leave this part out or change it to not be a challenge for the reader to find anecdotal evidence, but just state that it is extremely unlikely for someone to commit a criminal act while legally carrying a firearm or something to that effect. Are these going to be Exponent submissions?
Planning on submitting them.
thanks for the input. I don't know how I will rephrase that comment so its isn't a challenge, I'll have to think about it.
and yes, he was shooting a sig P228, we kept 9mm in one bay, so it was either my G34 or the sig P228.
thanks for the input. I don't know how I will rephrase that comment so its isn't a challenge, I'll have to think about it.
and yes, he was shooting a sig P228, we kept 9mm in one bay, so it was either my G34 or the sig P228.
Hammerhead
Master
My emphasis is close to Kirk's. It's a b.s. statement and if he doesn't know that it's an argument against everything he's saying, he's an imbecile. The reason there aren't a lot of gun violations on campus is because IT'S NOT ILLEGAL TO CARRY A WEAPON ON CAMPUS.
But that's not the point. The point is that there are crimes happening on campus all the time. Those text messages don't keep people safe, they keep people scared and paranoid. Keeping yourself protected keeps you safe.
The PUPD, as much as I am for them and the job they do, especially considering my personal ties to the members of the dept., needs to keep themselves out of this debate. They do a service, but aren't the leaders here. The people whom they serve are.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
The police SHOULD have stayed in their barracks but they refused and want to make policy.
The Purdue students need to set up a hunter-killer group to politically/rhetorically go after the cops. Get their training manuals, get their general orders, ask Cox all kinds of questions, get the data from the colleges/universities that permit carrying.
Other Purdue groups can make the condom analogies. The cops must be dealt with, quickly and overwhelmingly.
Find me some Pu students that will help attack the police. I have only found one so far, and he only supports me doing it, he isn't willing to help. Kirk I have no issue pointing out the failings of the police, It just seems as if no one at purdue cares about one opinion.
Kirk Freeman
Grandmaster
There are others you have not found them. Remember, people your age are busy and easily distracted.
You have to find them and organize as the other side is already inherently organized.
Somewhere the enemy is out there . . . and training harder.
You have to find them and organize as the other side is already inherently organized.
Somewhere the enemy is out there . . . and training harder.
revolvers&w
Sharpshooter
FWIW
For what it's worth WLKY 32 the CBS affiliate in Louisville ran a story on tv last night.
There is attention being drawn to this .
For what it's worth WLKY 32 the CBS affiliate in Louisville ran a story on tv last night.
There is attention being drawn to this .
Edits made. If you don't like my additions, you don't have to use them. If I missed anything, I welcome correction.
Blessings,
Bill
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv
Members online
- Chalky
- JettaKnight
- TheGrumpyGuy
- goob469
- adws943
- bwframe
- ditcherman
- TheSpookyCat
- rkwhyte2
- Bleachey
- H&SFarms
- dieselrealtor
- tradertator
- Cameramonkey
- 12many
- Bulletb5
- jkaetz
- Whitey
- Bucky623
- Jarvitron
- wtburnette
- ZachJ03
- wtfd661
- derrickgoins
- edwea
- Gravyman
- littletommy
- KJQ6945
- joshf63a
- Mark-DuCo
- Peacekeeper3073
- freekforge
- BigMoose
- 510picker
- mondoreli
- singlesix
- 22LRFan
- Hoosier45
- solarpimp
- scubacuba
- junglerogue
- Brian Ski
- DoggyDaddy
- Squirt239
- MarylandTacomaRider
- speytyer
- Jackson
- three50seven
- SnoopLoggyDog
- ComeJesuscome