Conservative political commentator S.E. Cupp.(Photo: TheSECupp.com)
Campus carry is in the news once again. With Texas currently considering a bill that would allow law-abiding citizens to carry on public universities folks from both sides of the gun divide are weighing in.
This week two prominent female voices jumped into the fray: conservative author and columnist S.E. Cupp and gun-control activist Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.
On Monday, Cupp published an opinion piece on CNN.com entitled, “Guns for Women on Campus Make Sense” and Watts followed up on Tuesday with, “More Guns on Campus is Not the Answer to Sexual Assault,” published by MSNBC.
Both women do a good job of laying out their arguments. To recap, Cupp believes that individuals, specifically women, should have the capacity to defend themselves from attackers while on campus whereas Watts believes allowing pistol permit holders on school grounds will endanger public safety as campus lifestyle (carousing, partying, etc.) and guns don’t mix.
Below I’ve excerpted the closing statements from both ladies. You make the call on who had the more persuasive argument.
S.E. Cupp:
So why, then, do women still get raped?
Likewise, I listened carefully but heard no outrage from women’s rights groups over the University of Colorado’s tips for female students to avoid being attacked. Some bordered on the absurd, like “vomiting or urinating may convince the attacker to leave you alone.” Others were downright offensive, like “passive resistance may be your best defense.”
So, rather than allow a woman to actually defend herself, the University of Colorado believes a woman can urinate her way out of a rape or she might just have to sit there and take it.
When will this madness end? And when will feminists demand that women on college campuses be allowed to protect and defend themselves against sexual assault?
We’ve tried things your way for a long time, colleges. And disarming students and pretending there’s no problem hasn’t worked. Isn’t it time to bring common sense back to campus?
Shannon Watts, founder Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. (Photo: GunSaveLife.com)
Shannon Watts:
As a mother of five children—three of whom will be away at college this fall—the issue of campus carry is very personal. Like any mom, my primary concern is for my children’s safety—especially when they’re away from home. The thought that my daughters could be surrounded by students making impulsive and sometimes dangerous decisions while carrying a firearm or be expected to defend themselves with a gun, is not something I am willing to accept.
Speak up, parents—this is on us. Don’t allow the NRA to decide what’s best for our children. State legislatures should not force our schools to allow guns. They need to know voters – the people who pay their salaries – are paying attention and we demand they stop exploiting the campus sexual assault crisis to profit the gun lobby and gun manufacturers.
The NRA is right that our daughters need protection; they need their parents to protect them from the NRA.
***
Well, who won the debate? Who made the more persuasive case? Where do you stand on campus carry?
Bonus video:
I find it curious how Watts says she is afraid for her daughters and not that her daughters are afraid. I would think that if her 3 children are in college now that they are adults and capable of making their own decision on whether or not to have concealed carry on their campus. but this is typical of the gun control nut…….the control part that is.
The ability to protect one’s own continued existence is a universal human imperative.
Neither me nor mine will ever comply with any legislation which infringes on this fundamental responsibility. The “good of the many” takes a backseat to the preservation of my genetic code. Why? Because the “good of the many” translates to “flock”, and I am not a sheep. I am the current end product of a genome that stretches back into antiquity, beyond the written word, beyond civilization, beyond the concept of “law”. I am here because my ancestors were all fit to survive, took responsibility for their own survival and that of their offspring, and myself and my children are the latest link in that unbroken chain. No legislation can be allowed to endanger that legacy, and the concerns of those who would submit their own responsibility for safety to a government agency, or the forbearance of strangers, is not my concern.
Pass all the laws you like. Outlaw what you will. Those of us who think, who understand the depths of our responsibility to ourselves, our loved ones, and our country, will do whatever is necessary to ensure our security. After all, it’s in our blood.
‘The thought that my daughters could be surrounded by students making impulsive and sometimes dangerous decisions while carrying a firearm or be expected to defend themselves with a gun, is not something I am willing to accept.’
So….knowing(feeling) that her daughters are surrounded, she chooses(feels) that her daughters should not defend themselves. No problem, let your daughters pee on the inevitable rapist. My children carry guns. They will NOT be raped or assaulted.
Why is a Communist like Van Jones, allowed to spread his ilk? He was Obummers point man and forced out of his job.
Because George Soros hates America and wants to bring it down. His words, not mine.
His plan is to control the media with offering them money which they never refuse, (except FOX) and therefor sway the mindless masses to see things the way he wants them to.
It’s working so far, and Van Jones is just one small part of it.
It’s gotten so insane a school has even taken sanctions against a male student for simply looking like the man that raped another student. No suggestions for her to get therapy, change her hours, or her school: All because this poor guy resembles her alleged rapist (who hasn’t even been caught or convicted of a crime) – he’s been given a restraining order to stay away from this so- called “victim”. This is the kind of solution feminists want on campus. They’re really not worried themselves about getting raped, since most of them are so repulsive a potential rapist would get the worst end of the deal. It’s all about gender competition and divisiveness as part of a coalition to destroy the family.
I think only a fool would send his daughter off to college in a co-ed environment teaming with horny men. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I think they should be educated separately on campuses with at least house rules that don’t promote a drunken and debauched environment or Sorority and Frat houses run like hot-sheet motels.
Securing a firearm in a frat-house or sorority with unknown strangers might be a challenge. I think non-lethal weapons should be allowed for those students and armed security guards. If these are commuter colleges where they come and go, that’s another story. Securing the weapon on your person is more feasible and should be allowed on campus and to and from school.
Watts’ concern for her children’s safety is based on a series of widely publicized mass shootings at campus. She thinks that more guns will mean more shootings. Rather, she DOESN”T THINK and merely assumes this.
First thing to do is quickly look up stats and find out whether shootings are higher where lots of people have guns or higher where guns are banned. Answer, where guns are illegal is where more people get shot, because criminals don’t OBEY gun laws. Neither do mass shooters obey gun laws, like the one that says no guns on campus.
In fact, they are DRAWN to campuses BECAUSE there are no guns there. If Watts wants to keep children from being shot on campus, she should try the formula that demonstrably works elsewhere… more guns in the pockets and purses of people who do NOT break laws. It always means less gun crime. It just does. Statistically, in real life, people who wish to ILLEGALLY shoot others are deterred at the idea that the others will shoot back. It works.
DC, South Side Chicago, all the places with strong local limits on guns find themselves with gunshots echoing through their streets night after night. Not so much in Billings, Montana or Cheyenne, Wyoming, or Abilene, Texas. Where most people are armed, nobody shoots first.
But the real horror is the total moral failure of feminists in the case of campus rape, as Cupp points out. This only proves, as I’ve often said, that the “one issue” leftist groups are always ready to completely step back from their issue, even in a public and embarrassing fashion, when their issue threatens the overall progress of implementation of leftism. They are not REALLY feminists; they are leftists, who use feminism to advance a leftist agenda and DROP feminism when it IMPEDES the agenda.
No better proof than campus rape advise (piss on them), and of course the shrieking silence on the topic of abuse of women in Islam. Islam is the ONLY left wing constituency NOT to drop its own demands when they make a problem for the overall implementation of leftism. The rest of the one-issue crowd visibly scuttles away on the Islam thing. It’s because of the thing Hitler admired about Islam the Nietzchean “will to power”, I suppose. But all one-issue leftist groups will dependably drop their one issue when overall there is a problem for leftism.
Feminism will never fight rape with guns. That isn’t the leftist way. Just lay there and take it, like Ross Perot got in such trouble for proposing.
But boy oh boy will they EVER get upset about binders full of women.
There is a simple solution for the Watts family assuming Texas passes college carry – her daughters need to attend a college in some leftist controlled state like New York, Maryland, Illinois, or California. There they can rely on having to dial 911 or campus police (or urination !?) in the event of rape, murder. robbery, etc., plus they’ll have the added bonus of residing in a state controlled by people who think like their mom about the second amendment, etc., etc., which is certainly (thank God) NOT the case if they go to school in Texas!!