©
By Lerone Graham
BLACKSBURG
The two groups that demonstrated on Virginia Tech's campus Thursday had polar opposite views of rights and safety.
Though their concerns are for the future, the mass shooting that took place four years ago controlled much of the discussion.
Some 35 gun-rights advocates gathered in front of Squires Student Center to demonstrate their support for concealed-carry rights on college campuses.
"Common sense, not PC, is the answer," said Dave Cash of Lynchburg.
Cash said that carrying a gun for protection is a basic human right, on or off a college campus.
Just 30 feet away from the demonstrators, who carried signs and passed out stickers to passers-by, stood a group of 10 to 15 anti-gun demonstrators, rallying in favor of a gun-free campus. Survivors and family members of victims of the April 16, 2007, campus shootings on Virginia Tech's campus were amongthem.
"The fact that these guys are here is morally reprehensible," said Colin Goddard, who was shot four times during the April 16 shooting.
Goddard, who now lives in Washington, D.C., was featured in a documentary about gun control and works with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
The protest and counter-protests stemmed from an opinion issued by state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli that said in order to ban legal concealed carry in campus buildings, a university's governing body must pass a state regulation. A simple policy, such as that now in effect at Tech, is insufficient, Cuccinelli opined.
The two sides remained separate during most of the rally, with a few arguments and some shouting back and forth. They carried signs that said, on one side of the rally: "No guns on campus." On the other: "Rapists agree, keep VT gun free."
Some exchanges were heard among the crowd, such as a protester shouting, "Go home gun Nazis!," toward protesters, many of whom weren't from the area, and "Does that make you feel safe?" toward the counterprotesters.
Kurt Mueller, with the non-partisan grassroots organization Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, called their position a "sacred right" that should be defended just as vehemently as the First Amendment. Students who have concealed carry permits "don't suddenly become irresponsible when they cross onto a college campus," Muellersaid.
"We believe that law-abiding citizens should be able to carry on campus as they'd have the right to everywhere else," he said.
Omar Samaha, who was among the anti-gun demonstrators, lost his sister Reema in the shooting, which left 33 students and faculty dead. He said that preventive measures, rather than having students "play law enforcement" is the answer.
One measure, Samaha said, is to strengthen the requirements to receive a concealed carry permit in Virginia, which currently consists of an hourlong online course and a 20-question quiz.
Ed Levine attended the demonstration from Northern Virginia to support gun rights on campus. He and many of his fellow demonstrators suggested that a student carrying a gun on campus could have saved lives on the day of the April 16 shooting.
"Instead of there being 32 dead, someone would have stepped up and shot him," Levine said.
"Wherever the bad guy is, I want to be allowed to carry my weapon."
Larry Pratt, director of the lobbyist group Gun Owners of America, said the groups are dealing with "two different ways of thinking."
The desire to "feel" safe by not having guns around is emotional, but not logical, Pratt said. The desire to carry a gun for one's own protection, on the other hand, is logical, he said.
Goddard recalled sitting in French class, which Reema Samaha also attended, when shots rang out, and said most of his classmates thought it was construction.
"I didn't even know what the hell was going on until I was shot," he said.
Goddard said mental health and gun regulation should take priority over blindly allowing guns on campus. He questioned the gun-rights protesters' concern for safety, because Goddard said most gun owners he knows say they hope they're never put in a non-recreational situation where they have to fire theirweapon.
"It seems like that's the first thing they [protesters] want to do," Goddard said.
A student using a gun amid the chaos of April 16 is easier said than done, Goddard said, because most gun owners have never had to shoot in a life-or-death situation.
Tech's Board of Visitors is expected to follow Cuccinelli's advice and take up a regulation banning state permit holders from carrying concealed weapons in buildings and at events, although a timeline for doing so has not been announced. Other universities are considering similar actions.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo

I retired...
from being a law enforcement officer.I still have a badge and ID, I carry everywhere VT, ODU and the others can't stop me per a VA code.I believe that a law abiding person that takes proper training should be able to obtain a CCW permit and should be allowed to carry there for their protection also.But I also think that extensive hands on training(not by a computer course)more than a hour or two should be mandated.It takes longer than just that to become proficient with a weapon and more emphasis needs to be put on the laws of when and where you are allowed to use deadly force. For people that don't want a weapon,they don't have to buy one.If it's their right to not want one, then it's our right if we do want one.Concealed means just that.
Well said mini28. I am a
Well said mini28. I am a law enforcement veteran too (17 years with the state including investigations and training before teaching school). It is a fact that U.S. Justice Department studies through their own National Institute of Justice /Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the FBI Uniform Crime Report, every year for the last two decades, show that there are fewer violent crimes and fewer gun accidents where law abiding citizens are allowed to keep and bear arms. According to NIJ/BJS and the FBI, more guns = less crime. There is a definite causal effect to more guns and less crime and the Tech authorities already know that.
To Nanjing03
Thank you for putting in so much of yourself to help protect and educate others. Thank you also for backing up my comment. Have a good one and "Be Safe".
Reporting Inaccurate Statement == inaccurate Reporting
Quote:
One measure, Samaha said, is to strengthen the requirements to receive a concealed carry permit in Virginia, which currently consists of an hourlong online course and a 20-question quiz.
It takes a little more than just a course to get a permit. First time applicants are required to submit fingerprints as well as completing a background check. Renewals are exempt from the fingerprint requirement.
The story leads people not well versed on the laws in virginia to believe it just takes an hour and you get a permit.
For VP: How about adding some factual comments to provide contrast to the emotions?
Local background checks
Local background checks have been shown to be the most effective way of keeping guns out of the hands of the crazies. But the NRA has lobbied against sensible gun regulations because they are also crazy.
Once Again, Chris
Chris33, you keep cutting and pasting the same fallacy from one thread to another. Again, the multi-million member NRA was the grass roots lobbying entity that introduced the current National Instant Background Check System used to access the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) data base at the time of purchase. This successful system is in lieu of the worthless "waiting periods" proposed by Sarah Brady and the Brady Campaign (formally Handgun Control Incorporated). If law enforcement and mental health authorities do their job and intervene through arrests and mental health assessments, people like Cho and Loughner would be denied guns at the time of purchase.
Five million lives have been
Five million lives have been saved by guns since 1960. The democrats and the anti-gunner are against freedom.
And many more
could have been saved from 1934 to 1945 if the Jews and other people were ALLOWED to own and keep firearms during WWII. A law abiding person should never be deprived of owning a firearm. If you don't like them or don't want one, simply don't buy one. Other people and I choose to have one.
Can't legislate sanity
A lot of the legislators who are protected by armed guards will vote against our right to defend ourselves. In the end, who needs a gun to kill a bunch of people? The VT murderer could have rented a truck and drove through the football crowd one weekend.
Its harder to conceal a rented truck in your pocket...
... than a bunch of glocks and sigs. Its not a valid counter argument to say "butter knives or greasy cheeseburgers kill too" (or trucks). Its the ease of concealment coupled with their deadly effectiveness & ease of use that make guns unique.
Also, current laws require a CC permit holder & a gun buyer be 21. The majority of students are under 21. So the idea that the students on campus will be well-armed (and well trained) so that they can stop a Cho-like incident OR prevent one from happening in the first place (just because of the existence of a well-armed student body) is not persuasive.