Aside from bantering the points raised regarding being armed, unarmed, etc., the rifle the young woman is sporting would really appear to be an AR-10, a variant of the AR-15, which utilizes a much higher level of power. While AR-15s are chambered for the relatively miniscule 5.56 X 45 caliber, a species actually developed in Belgium by the reknowned FN Herstal Company, the AR-10 is chambered for .308 NATO. The 5.56 is in reality a "22" caliber, this being deemed in many jurisdictions as inadequate for hunting game the size of deer. Hence, the critics' claims of AR-15s being "not suited" for legitimate hunding purposes. That's propaganda B.S., pure & simple. Now, the AR-10, chambered for .308 NATO caliber, uses a much larger round of .30 caliber, actually a descendent of the world-famed .30-06 everyone has heard about. .30-06 was the standard rifle round used by U.S. in WW-II. The rifle using it was the famous GARAND, called by General Patton "the finest battle rifle ever developed". The .30-06 cartridge was shortened a bit to make it more amenable to full-auto fire in machineguns, and was used in the M-14 military rifle of Korean War vintage and early Viet Nam skirmish. M-14 was a select-fire design capable of firing single-shot or full-automatic. A single-shot version is publicly available and known as the M1-A, generally sold by Springfield Armory. Here is an image showing, left to right, the 5.56 X 45 (or .223), .308 NATO, and .30-06 rounds. Frank
I was using a principle comparison using (this time) teens and autos versus teens/ college campuses and guns. Just for your assurance, I did not nor ever would give out specific names of those who might be or have been in college whilst garnering civilian legal notoriety. It’s a generalization based on statistical evidence and nothing more. Since there are more teens in college who do drive responsibly it makes sense to allow them to drive on campus. The same application might be observed with the trained and qualified gun carrier.
At UAF, students are permitted any legal firearm on campus, but they are not allowed to have them in any campus facilities or housing, so most students lock them in the trunks of their cars. I am not sure that is safe, either, but I have never heard of an incident there, My sons and one daughter went there, and, although they didn't have any guns with them, one of my sons' friends was a very avid hunter and had several weapons locked in his trunk. In Alaska, handling a firearm when intoxicated is a felony (I believe), so, while done, if caught it means you lose the ability to own any firearms.
@Chrissy Cross But, what's your point, Grandma? I see it as, grant ability to be armed, violate the conditions (no drinking), get caught, get punished. Lots of firearms-related crime is undoubtedly carried out by individuals not under the influence, anyway. Frank
To debate the holding of firearms by anyone, let alone college students whilst interjecting the use of alcohol and or drugs as a synonymous issue is a misnomer of gigantic proportions. If a statistical report were to be issued stating that the vast majority of students who drink and own weapons shoot people compared to those who “party” and own weapons and do not shoot anyone then I would rethink things. If there IS such a report, then I would like it produced en masse for all to see so a proper judgement can be made. If someone wants to kill someone, drunk or sober, they will find something to do the job whether it be a club, knife, barstool or yes, a gun. If we wish to scrutinize the entire world or just one city and analyze what people use ( non military) to injure or kill each other whether on campus or off I believe that legal gun ownership would not be first on the list. The only thing that is in question is NOT open or concealed weapons areas nor alcohol consumption nor drug use but rather the question of having gun free zones. My own particular belief is that people do not deliberately smoke in tobacco free zones in order to give everyone second hand smoke, or have a bottle of booze in alcohol free zones to hurt people. But........people absolutely DO carry weapons into a gun free zone in order to kill (defenseless) people and gun free college campuses are ripe for such a demented individual.
Sorry. Read it wrong. Deleted what I said. But, the guy did live you when he done this. So, the ex wasn't a responsible gun owner. There, got it right this time.
Well, bottom line is.……...something needs to be done and that's what this young lady is referring to.
He was.very responsible, he was ex Ohio HighWay Patrol among other things but that was when sober. When drunk ...not responsible.
I actually do not understand the need to debate alcohol use if one understands what the effects of alcohol really is. There is an astronomical difference in the number of people who say, “I was too drunk to remember” or “ I don’t know what I was doing” versus the number for people who actually do not remember or know. The unvarnished truth is that alcohol use just removes the social whitewash and reveals what a person is capable of doing and in most cases, what they really want to do. Liquid courage isn’t a bad description but that said, people who drink and commit a crime DO know what they are doing. The “blackout” phase that some people experience is the result of a continual use of alcohol by someone addicted to it. Most occasional users who black out are bridging on passing out due to the lack of oxygen to the brain. It takes a lot of tolerance to walk around in a black out state. Those individuals who use the excuse of being too drunk as a defense for errant activities, and in particular the use of firearms, know exactly what they were doing .......and why.