[Glenn E. Meyer]

The bans exist at the state level. Also, the elected federal officials (self-appointed?) haven't mandated no school carry. In fact, in TX - the business community was instrumental in blocking carry and parking lot bills.

That's the reality.

I've summarized school carry issues before - the opposition goes like this (not ranked, just as I remember them).

1. Antigun folk

2. Liability and risk managers - ideology not important - they just have calculated that carry will cost the school more money if something bad happens because of it as compared to a rampage.

3. Private businessmen who fear that mandating carry will also carry over to their businesses and their fears similar to the ones in #2.

4. Gun folks who fear that the student population lacks the maturity to carry guns - given their other behavioral exceses. This is particularly true for campus residents who are just over the 21 year old border. We know that impulse control isn't that hot at that edge. Dorms could a particular risk.

Thus this risk catches the mature night student.

5. The training issue. This engages the reason for carry. The subtext is not to prevent the single mugger crime or rapist (although that is worthy and an argument for carry in general). It is to prevent or limit rampages. However, if you posit going into a intense gunfight - should you have some competency? Thus this adds more standards for campus carry - if you say that you will be interventionist in a VT.

Background for this is that research demonstrates that killing an innocent even to save a greater number of innocents is not looked on positively. Thus, the risk of a bystander getting shot is very prominent in the debate - esp. if you have untrained folks proposing to blaze away.

One could suggest just faculty and staff carry - that has been proposed in some states. Or training standards added.

Anyway, that's my view of the carry debate landscape and unless those issues are understood - bills wont' go far. Just saying RBKA forever, won't work.