Arboretum

Pretty much. If anything, the event that has UP and the the campus administration telling everyone to stay out of the arboretum is a reason why concealed carry should be allowed (in my opinion).

ConcealedCampus.org

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=13634&post=79811&uid=2383535699#...

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=13634&post=79811&uid=2383535699#...

probably because armed robbers are sneakier than people smoking weed. you can't really smell armed robbers and if they conceal their weapons well enough, they look just like everyone else.

Say the person who was confronted in the arboretum did have a concealed weapon... how would he have been better off? Two guys, one with a gun and one with a knife approached him. If he pulled out his concealed weapon to defend himself somebody would have gotten either wounded or killed, most likely the one who was outnumbered. In this situation, I think it is better to part with your valuables than to put you life at risk.

As for university police, I can't say I have any complaints. If stoners want to be open about illegal substances, then they can face being caught. These robbers were much more elusive and therefore the UP is investigating a much more complicated matter.

Not only that, the perps would likely rob him of his concealed firearm, adding +1 to the number of unregistered firearms in the possession of violent criminals... not a good thing.

I think you need to readjust your definition of "criminal".  Someone who smokes weed is an actual criminal.  Sounds to me like someone is a little butthurt about being REALLY obtrusive about their drug abuse.  If you don't want to get caught smoking weed, then you have a few options:

1. Don't smoke weed
2. Don't smoke weed in the most obvious "hiding place" on campus, which is going to be regularly patrolled.
3. Own up to the fact that you are smoking weed in the most obvious, regularly patrolled "hiding place" on campus, and accept the consequences of an action you knew to be illegal.

As far as the concealed carry thing, I have a concealed pistol permit and advocate that right, and yet, I am pretty opposed to the aforementioned substance-abusing troglodytes on campus wielding .38s in a drunken, high stupor.  You people cannot be trusted.

And the UP work hard, they are not the hand of oppression stifling your libertarian conception of freedom that you make them out to be.  No police force can be everywhere at once, especially given the fact that the arboretum gate closes at sundown.  Lay off, they are a group of professionals behaving as a disinterested third party.  I reiterate that people need to grow up and accept the consequences of their poor decisions.

Your wording isn't entirely clear, but it sounds like you're saying marijuana users are the people that "cannot be trusted."  Why can't we trust them, exactly?

And why should we trust people who carry around hidden firearms?

How does either activity, ipso facto, clue me in to your trustworthiness?

i'd trust a pot head over some one caring a gun any day

Absolutely.

What do you mean 'you people' ?

I'm pretty sure he means that he doesn't trust stoners WITH concealed firearms (which is exactly what he says...)

I, personally, don't trust anyone with a concealed firearm (much less someone who's high/drunk as well).  There may be some nice people with with them, like the people in this post, but that doesn't mean there aren't any legitimate creeps who have them too.  Maybe the robber who had the gun actually had it registered or maybe it was registered to a friend/family member and he took it.  You can't pretend that concealed firearms are okay because they're "accounted for."  Crap gets stolen and "borrowed" everyday. 

I would not feel comfortable on this campus with the knowledge that people had concealed weapons, aside from cops.  Thus, I say "a-hell to the no" to concealed carry.

No, actually.  What he EXACTLY says is that he doesn't trust a) reclusive, b) drunken, c) people on campus who d) use marijuana, and e) wield a 0.38.

The likelihood of somebody being all of those things at once is kinda low, which means Cole isn't running into somebody exactly like that on a regular basis, which means he probably has a particular quality in there that he is picking on.  Based on his previous wording, I assumed his disdain was mainly for people who use marijuana, and the other descriptions were helpful bales in constructing his straw man. 

Even if he was providing a complete and accurate description, you didn't interpret him precisely either, since "wielding" doesn't jive with "concealing."

Whatever he meant, though, I agree with your sentiment.  I'd rather people NOT be toting around campus.

Step 1: Make handguns illegal (kills 12,000 a year, mostly suicides followed by homicides, and only protects about 150 people per year from threats)

Step 2: legalize weed (it's never killed anybody)

Step 3: ????

Step 4: profit?

/opinion

/ doesn't smoke

If the government just legalized it, sold licenses, and taxed marijuana to high heaven, think of how much money it would generate? Then, law and drug enforcement could track down the substance abusers/sellers that are actually hurting this country. I agree with spottsk wholeheartedly on his brilliant 4-step process. Handguns do more harm than good, weed is over-policed, and there is money to be made!

Sorry, that wording was indeed confusing.  By "you people", I meant every student I have ever encountered at WWU.  I have never met a balanced enough person that I believe could or would train adequately with their concealed weapon to be safe with it.

Please do not turn this into a marijuana legalization thread, or necessarily a concealed weapons thread.  There are already a few marijuana legalization threads that you can participate in, this one is getting off topic.  The focus was initially on University Police and the mugging in the arboretum.

Damn, I was going to link to the legalization thread, but it was locked.  Still, threads exist separately for a reason.

First off, this topic has gone to far. Most of the replies are not even worth reading. Second off Deejay, research a little more about handguns doing harm and weed being overpoliced because your information is wrong buddy!

Is that so? With what qualification can you claim that every other student at WWU (with the stated exception of yourself) cannot be trusted? Do you have a psychology degree? What about professional experience as a firearms instructor?

Somehow, I think not. Blowing hot air much?

By your same logic, you, as a non-expert-movie-maker, would be unqualified to pass judgment on any movie in theaters. Best argument ever.

I'd try to clarify what I think Cole_Edwards meant, but I'd say it's pretty clear: "I have never met a balanced enough person that I believe could or would train adequately with their concealed weapon to be safe with it."

By your same logic, you're not a professor of logic with a PhD, so you are unqualified to comment on my logic.

Movies are popular entertainment. They are supposed to be evaluated by everyone. Psychiatric and professional assessments, however, are to be made by professionals. Cole_Edwards made a statement that he is unlikely to have the credentials to be able to support. The two are not comparable situations

With all due respect, I still don't think Cole is being clear. 

In honor of "let's get picky about your English" day (which I just now instituted), I'd like to point out that the original comment about "you people" came at the tail end of a paragraph accusing said people of being gun-waving, weed-smoking, beer-guzzling troglodytes.  So, if "you people" now refers to "every student I have ever encountered at WWU," then the preceding sentences would also have to refer to every student.  And I maintain that Cole cannot possibly have run into many, if any, people on campus who meet that description.  Certainly not every student he's ever encountered.

If that's what Cole_Edwards meant, he's wrong. There are plenty of people that are perfectly mentally balanced enough to carry concealed without shooting peoples' heads off.

My aunt, uncle, brother and his wife are good examples. They all shoot at designated ranges, and carry only for self-defense.

I'd also like to point out that with the knowlege that other people on campus carry concealed, the average criminal (that's not nuts like the guy at VA Tech) would be deterred from brandishing weapons because there would be a higher chance of someone seeing and reacting by shooting them dead.

Just because a college says "You can't carry guns" means that the safe, sane, law abiding people won't, and potentially dangerous people will.

Getting back on topic, I'd say that it's only way easier to catch a few people smoking a quick joint before class in popular smoking areas than it is to find people who (possibly) staged a planned attack in a deserted area and then got the hell out of dodge.

Just my 2 cents.

I was hoping to get some light on what was happening concerning the armed robbery issue... but apparently there is not much to be said about it. i hope thought that the University Police will keep us updated when any light gets shed upon it.

This whole gun and weed argument is getting insane. This is a school so there should be no guns on campus period, people are poor and having that option can make desperate people do crazy things. I honestly think the robbers were stupid and desperate. Your not going to get much from a college student, I mean I know I don't have a dime to my name, and my iPod is outdated. Nevertheless I still refuse to carry it around with me everywhere I go.

Here is a note: Marijuana is known to be an agent in car accidents, so the statement that marijuana has not claimed ANY lives is foolish.

I agree for the most part  and I see your point with the whole gun issue, however i still don't like the idea of guns being on a college campus. There were very good points about it not being allowed. Not everyone is responsible enough and we dont live in the south where gun saftey is part of growing up for the most part (the south meaning at least texas). So it is better not to meddle, no one got hurt or killed thankfully.

Actually, that was your logic.  I was highlighting the absurdity, which you were so gracious to do as well.

He doesn't need credentials (see above: absurdity), he just has to provide something to back up his claim.

This is what I thought of when I read "I have never met a balanced enough person that I believe could or would train adequately with their concealed weapon to be safe with it."  Note that "safe" is interpreted in regards to the user as well, and that Cole_Edwards did not exclude himself.  I can't find a better source but this will do:

More reading.  Basically it's just something else to throw at "a concealed weapon wouldn't have mattered" as this thread was already over after the third post.  But hey, why not play "in before the lock?"

A Pot smoker is NOT a criminal. There are laws set in place that make people who choose to indulge in the herb, who are normally upstanding citizens that in no other way do anything else illegal, into a criminal that is putting their future at risk for getting high. And we waste untold amount of money throwing these people in jail to protect them from who? themselves? they certainly aren't harming themselves? THC has been proven to actually be a neuroprotectant against the loss of long-term memory at old age.

"Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself."

- President Jimmy Carter, Oct 2, 1977

People aren't criminals, it's just laws that make them criminals.

Nevermind that a criminal is someone who breaks the law...

Haha, nice try but no ball. Yours was the fallacious claim that my logic was absurd because you illogically extended my logic to encompass all situations that you can think of, even when I made no claims of the universality of my logic, but only its applicability in a specified set of circumstances. In other words, you tried to use a failed slippery slope argument on me.

k

I did not say that I can be trusted to carry a concealed pistol, I just said I had the permit.  However, I am in fact more qualified with firearms than the vast majority of students I have interacted with on campus, at least by virtue of the fact that I have shot a gun, which at the absolute minimum is more than most people I have talked to. We live in a very firearm-illiterate setting.

I believe the minimum standard of firearm proficiency that qualifies you to safely carry a firearm with you is actually very high.  You should not be carrying a pistol if you do not know how it functions, at an advanced level.  This means you should be able to disassemble, clean, and reassemble the components again.  It means you should practice not only shooting, but also drawing it, tracking a target, considering what lies beyond and behind your intended target.  You should shoot at least once a week, have professional instruction, and formal training.  I have been to the firing range here in Bellingham (Plantation Rifle and Pistol Range), and having never seen any other students there, (and having experienced their less than adequate "training" session) I can honestly say that nobody here on campus meets these qualifications.

For these reasons, I do not carry a firearm.  Plus, you know, it's a felony to do so on campus, but even so. If I hold myself to these standards, it is not unreasonable to hold others to them as well.

Jump to conclusions much?

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

And the gun, I suppose.

It looks like they caught  at least one of the robbers (it probably won't be too long to find the other one)... I guess the original question is now answered. It makes me happy that justice was served, and that such crime is investigated by the current system set in place. The students who had the courage to relay information to university police show that this behavior does not pay, and should be proud of themselves.

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/102/story/1126074.html

They got both of them. Pretty cool story actually...

Think these two douchebags are going to be expelled for this? I'm pretty sure you get expelled for armed robbery... But who knows! For epic lulz check out one of their facebook's.

http://www.facebook.com/search/?q=Derick+opheim&init=quick#/profile.php?...

Nice!  That wasn't a very smart move on his part.  Abusing opiates will do that to you, though.

He should change his status to "is in prison"

So the UP were all detective-like, and caught the baddies! Cool story bro...

Suuuure, not bad parenting... blame drugs.

 The fact is weed is currently illegal, I agree it shouldn't be, but it is, therefore people are criminals even if the law is incorrect (in your and my view). And to the person who said weed caused car accidents, so does alcohol, but thankfully thats illegal too... oh... wait.