Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Idaho H0222 Passed The House Today

I really think the open carry aspect of this is going to provoke a backlash.  Yes, very, very few students are going to be so incredibly stupid as to open carry to class.  Do you suppose that might influence how some professors might grade you essays?  It should not, of course, but for a fair number of faculty, seeing anyone carrying openly on campus will be an underwear changing experience.

I really hope that some sort of reasonable compromise gets worked out--something that lets Idaho academics pretend that, in spite of the law, there are no guns on campus.  "Don't frighten the horses and servants" is the operative idea on this.


  1. I'm not quite sure of the point of this legislation.

  2. It is, as near as I can tell, a response to the understandable fear of a Virginia Tech type of incident happening here. These are very rare events, but very frightening. The hope is that either faculty, staff, or one of the small number of students with a concealed weapon permit will prevent such a tragedy before the body count gets too high.

    That's a bit of a leap--not really the right solution to the problem of deinstitutionalization of the psychotic. But we can't fix that problem, because it would fix too many other problems.

  3. Well, if a backlash might happen I guess we shouldn't exercise our Constitutional rights. Kind of like the doings in Wisconsin - those Wisconsin voters who put the Republicans in power should have anticipated the union backlash and just stayed home.

    So what is a "reasonable" compromise on a Constitutional right? Your mileage may vary, but I'm through worrying about what the left may think or do. Tippy-toeing around them all these years has certainly worked out, hasn't it?

  4. Don't want to carry a gun? Then don't. The current Idaho law allows open carry in public spaces, with an open carry permit.

    This legislation will only underscore that state-funded (taxpayer-funded) institutions like BSU, ISU, College of Idaho, CSI, CWI and U. of Idaho will be treated just like every other public space.

    I have no problem with this law--and I don't carry a personal sidearm.

  5. There is no such thing as an open carry permit in Idaho. If you are not legally prohibited from possessing a firearm, you can open carry. I am hoping that no one is rude enough to do so on campus.

  6. Campuses are big places, especially with respect to U of I. I remember the schools going "gun-free" in the 90s, and the consternation it caused hunters who happened to live on campus.

    Carrying your rifle out to your truck is, after all, also open carry. Should you be required to possess a CWP to transport your weapon legally?

    Sure, some womyn's studies professor might get her knickers in a twist, but who cares?

  7. Generally, the more upset professors you have, the most likely it is that they are going to get motivated enough to start working on making lives difficult. The more that you can find ways to not ruffle anyone's feathers, the more likely it is that they aren't going to be part of a political movement that you are going to be struggling with later.

    Remember that I was not much involved in political matters until the assault weapons ban in California. By most measures, whatever they gained by passing it was probably more than lost by making me active.

  8. Clayton, I've seen your name mentioned around on the internet, but this is the first time I've actually read one of your pieces. "The more you can find ways not to ruffle anyone's feathers" is it? Too bad MLK and those "outside agitator" civil rights folks didn't take your advice - blacks would have had their rights a whole lot sooner.

    Since anyone can have a bad day, I'm going to check out some of your other posts. Hopefully I'll find some evidence of a spine.

  9. MLK was actually an example of someone who avoided confrontation for its own sake. There were much more militant voices in the 1960s, such as the Black Panthers, H. Rap Brown, and others. And if they had been the leading voice for civil rights, what do you think would have happened?

    Never let your style of speaking become more important than the substance. Never unnecessarily provoke fear or anger--it just riles people up who you might prefer to remain slumbering.

  10. OK, I looked around, and find that you're THAT Clayton Cramer. I still can't fathom why you feel it wise to accommodate irrationality, but I regret the smart-ass tone. As a mea culpa I'm going to buy "Armed America" AND "By the Dim and Flaring Lamps". Which as penances go is like having to go to DisneyWorld as punishment for skipping school.

  11. It is not so much accommodating irrationality, as dialing down the level of irrational fear and hatred. Two or three years of knowing that there are concealed weapon permit holders on campus--and amazingly enough, the sky does not fall--will make them realize that guns really aren't the problem.

    We lost our gun rights one slice at a time until, in some places, the gun control crazies had more than half the loaf. (In D.C., all we had left was one moldy crust.) If those same forces had sought to achieve their goals all at once, would they have done so?

    Glad to hear that you are out buying Armed America. I think you will find it interesting. Wait until you see what James Madison had to say about his marksmanship skills. You will never see him as a useless intellectual again. Ditto for Audubon--some of the quotes from him would boil the brains of many Audubon Society members today.