Concealed Carry

You Make the Call: Gun-Phobic Professor Quits Over Campus Carry

Who would have thought that simply passing campus carry at a state university could have such an effect? Although my daughter won’t be going to college for at least a decade, Kansas University is looking pretty good. I carry, and want my children to have the same option whether at home or college. However, at least one Kansas professor disagrees. His open letter makes some rather outrageous claims to supporters of the Second Amendment.

Students for Concealed Carry logo

The Backstory

In 2013, the Kansas Legislature passed legislation allowing lawful gun owners to carry concealed handguns on all Kansas university campuses and in campus buildings, beginning July 1, 2017. In order to be in compliance with state law, the Kansas Board of Regents approved its new weapons policy on January 20, 2016. This policy applies to all Regents institutions, but allows each university to determine some specific ways to implement the policy on their campuses. The Regents asked KU and the other institutions to submit their policies by October 2016.

After eight months of work—headed by its university-wide Weapons Policy Advisory Committee and two campus implementation committees—KU submitted its draft weapons policy to the Regents on October 10. The Regents governance committee approved its policy at the November board meeting. The policy was approved by the full board December 14, 2016.

And the Professor Who Can’t Handle It

Jacob Dorman: Why I’m resigning from KU, an Open Letter

In light of the state of Kansas’ apparent determination to allow the concealed carry of firearms in the classrooms of the University of Kansas, I am writing to tender my resignation effective two weeks from today as an associate professor of history and American studies at the university. I have accepted a job in a state that bans concealed carry in classrooms.

I proudly served as a KU professor for a decade, from 2007 until 2017, and have a great deal of affection and gratitude to the university, Lawrence and the state of Kansas. Kansas is a great and beautiful state that is refreshingly different than the coasts. I have enjoyed getting to know Kansans from all parts of the state as my students, neighbors and friends, and I’ve especially benefited from getting to know Kansans from rural communities where gun ownership and hard work are equally a way of life. But Kansas will never secure the future that it deserves if it weakens its institutions of higher learning by driving off faculty members or applicants who feel as I do that there is no place for firearms in classrooms. Kansas can have great universities, or it can have concealed carry in classrooms, but it cannot have both.

Associate Professor Jason Dorman
Associate Professor Jason Dorman

In practical terms, concealed carry has proven to be a failure. Campus shootings have become all too frequent, and arming students has done nothing to quell active shooter situations because students do not have the training to effectively combat shooters and rightly fear becoming identified as suspects themselves. But beyond the fact that concealed carry does not deter gun violence, the citizens and elected representatives of Kansas must recognize that this is a small state, and in order to run a premier university, which is necessary for the health and wealth of the state, it must recruit professors from out of state. Recruiting the best trained professors necessarily means recruiting from coastal areas and progressive college towns where most people do not believe that randomly arming untrained students is a proper exercise of the Second Amendment’s protection of a well-regulated militia.

Moreover, we discuss sensitive and highly charged topics in my classroom, concerning anti-religious bias, racism, sexism, classism and many other indexes of oppression and discrimination. Students need to be able to express themselves respectfully and freely, and they cannot do so about heated topics if they know that fellow students are armed and that an argument could easily be lethal. Guns in the classroom will have a chilling effect on free speech and hinder the university’s mission to facilitate dialogue across lines of division. That stifling of dialogue will hurt all students, including the ones with guns in their pockets.

Let us not let the NRA destroy the future of the state of Kansas with a specious argument about the Second Amendment. Guns do not belong in classrooms any more than they belong in courtrooms, but a university simply cannot afford metal detectors at every entrance. Kansas faces a very clear choice: does it want excellent universities with world class faculty, or does it want to create an exodus of faculty like myself who have options to teach in states that ban weapons in classrooms? Does Kansas want to reinvent itself as a center of innovation and prosperity, and attract the minds that will create the jobs that the state needs to be prosperous for the 21st century, or does it want third-rate universities that will not find the cures, patent the drugs, train the engineers, start the companies, or innovate the laws and social programs that will bring the state lasting prosperity and health?

This is the truly concealed question that faces Kansas’ citizens and legislators in the concealed carry debate. I hope for the sake of the future of the great state of Kansas that its Legislature will make the right decision and take a stand against weapons in classrooms, and in favor of excellence in education.

Kansas University blue and white logo


It is quite obvious the professor thinks quite highly of himself. Of course, how could Kansas, or any midwest state for that matter, ever hope to produce an intellectual of his caliber? “Recruiting the best trained professors necessarily means recruiting from coastal areas and progressive college towns…” And how about the absurd accusation that people cannot have an intelligent or honest conversation if there is the possibility of a student being armed? How many students are returning military with multiple combat tours? I mean, “randomly arming untrained students…” really? I suppose this means the people educated in coastal, ivy league universities are the product of schools that mold young minds instead of teaching them to actually think and reason for themselves.

You Make the Call

I’ll admit it; I’ve earned several degrees from a coastal schools, including some from liberal schools, including UCLA which Dorman also attended. However, before that, I did a couple of hitches in the military including time in the sandbox in the first Gulf War. So, what do you think? Should students be allowed to carry on campus? Is Prof. Dorman rightfully afraid to teach at KU, or just another gun hater? Was Thomas Jefferson correct when he said, “An armed society is a polite society” or would the potential presence of a firearm stifle open dialogue? Did the Jayhawks ranking just go up in your estimation?

Share your answers, as well as your opinion, on this this story and the author’s points in the comment section.


The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (146)

  1. Good riddance to this so called Professor
    Kansas will have to recruit from progressive coastal areas?
    Kansas can have great universities OR campus carry not both?
    No heated discussion in a class where someone may be concealed carrier?
    I won’t even dignify any of these patently false arguments with a reply
    Keep these coastal idiots where they belong in their crime ridden utopias
    Kansas is on the right path

  2. The greatest generation was armed to the teeth. They hunted, and during the depression it was hunt or starve. They fought on both sides of the world at the same time. They built planes, the nuclear weapons that ended one war. They went to the moon.
    This generation has made people like this professor who is afraid of children of the great generation. His generation has little to stack up to the great generation.

  3. Sounds to me, that future KU students will be relieved to learn of his resignation. The last thing they need are the teachings of a rambling, egotistical, fool!

    1. I do not see where any of your comments wee moderated for any reason. Please submit it again. ~Dave Dolbee

  4. I support campus concealed carry. It is a right and one that if taken away, will lead to all others being taken away. The colleges need to get back to being a institution of higher learning not a left leaning, snow flake, mommy’s boy not being able to contribute to society.

  5. “My opinion is that only mature, trained and vetted students should be allowed to carry on campus. It should be an earned privilege though. That said, it is so easy for officialdom to politically bias evaluations”

    You might want to take a good look at the wording of the 2nd Amendment.
    There are NO “qualifiers” or “exceptions” in it, as to who CAN or CANNOT “keep and bear Arms”. AND, it is the “supreme Law of the Land”, (Article VI, Paragraph 2)

  6. Interesting suggestions. Would you say a rape victim shouldn’t try to defend themselves because they haven’t been trained to do so?
    I agree training is good but the right to carry is just that. Under current law if they can carry off campus I see no reason not to carry on campus.
    When I was on a campus at night; it was a very dangerous place. Just off campus was much safer. Perhaps criminals know campus was full of defenceless people?
    I doubt anybody will miss this guy, except the next unlucky students who get stuck with a history professor who hasn’t learned from history.

  7. To the police officer(s) involved in this conversation. Whether you like campus carry or concealed/open carry or not, it’s here. Time and experience will tell us whether some civilians should not practice that right just like there are police who shouldn’t be officers carrying a firearm. Those that shouldn’t will be weeded out by their unlawful actions which will be prosecuted in our justice system. The large majority of LTC holders will carry lawfully and respond to threats responsibly. And officer, if you are attacked by a perp, LTC holders will be the most likely to respond and help you. Note recent situations in the news from Florida and I believe Oklahoma. In a dangerous society which is getting worse by the minute, the LTC holder is a definite deterrent and we are everywhere.

    1. @ Robert Irwin,

      I don’t think you are really speaking to anyone. From what I caught out of the anti-comments, only one post claimed to be law enforcement; and another post stated they were a member of school faculty (not even law enforcement). The latter claim was supposedly that most officers on his campus took issue with students carrying; a very questionable statement at best.

      With 35 years in law enforcement myself, my particular position affords me the opportunity to interact with literally thousands of officers and task forces at all levels across the nation. I can assure you the overwhelming majority of officers across our nation support the Second Amendment in all places.

      I will admit from time-to-time I have encountered the odd-ball small town department with a culture of anti-gun sentiment, but that is quickly explained away by their local politics and extreme nepotism in their hiring practices.

      So rest assured these two posts are insignificant, if true at all.

  8. As that reporter did some months back, said professor will probably claim PTSD from the trauma……

  9. Totally disagree with the professor’s article, like the fact that he moved on. The faculty need to concentrate on their instruction of the school’s students, leave the business of concealed carry to the constitution. Don’t understand why schools refuse to embrace the constitution, have a firearms class, club, competition, etc. This country grew up with firearms as a normal part of life, need to get back to the basics.

    1. Back to the basics is right, when there were fewer liberals and even fewer gun laws, crime rates were also lower, so for a conclusion that makes more sense the that of the professor, more liberals and more gun laws equal more crime. We can’t outlaw liberals, but if we got rid of the gun laws, maybe they’d be so scared they’d leave the country like he did Kansas and we’d all be better off for it.

  10. One of the responsibilities of a free people is self defense. My daughter is currently attending university and the girl is armed. She is aware that she is her first line if defense. My father was a policeman for thirty years in a large city and he taught me that if you are not armed at all times in all places you are stupid. He would know. Teaching your children to survive is the natural thing caring parents do. We live with wolves among us so raise your children to be like the sheepdog. Look like a sheep but fight like a wolf. Above all survive!

    1. “Straw” Polls on the topic of guns on campus only inflame and already open wound on both the right and the left. A n d as G-man points out are Laws, that enable or disable the lawful carry of guns, are over turned by higher courts that is.GOOD.

      Unfortunately, it is “Without prejudice” OR ” with prejudice” and that makes for more and more litigation on guns and not focusing on wackows that get guns by league or illegal means.

  11. The scariest comment by this guy is what he said is being discussed in his classes: oppression this, victim that. What he is teaching these kids in place of history is the greatest danger to our kids and their understanding of the real world.

  12. More guns, less crime. Do it. Let everyone carry. Make concealed carry part of the curriculum.

  13. As a long-time Kansas resident, I would like to point out that the state law will apply at all of our universities. Therefore the author should consider all of them before picking one for his daughter. Also I never understood why everyone gets so upset about this as, if I understand correctly, one must still be at least 21 years old to carry concealed legally. This means most of the students still won’t be able to carry.

  14. From what I’ve seen published, the laws regarding Concealed Carry are sufficiently stringent enough that the average college student would not qualify anyway simply as being too young. How many students are we then talking about about at KU plan to carry? 5% of the student population? Less?

    And of those, how many are in fact experienced military or otherwise not strictly ‘novice’ carriers? The Professor is within his right to complain and quit, but I believe it’s much ado about nothing. Colleges should be safe yes, but sanctuaries? Sanctuaries are like ‘zero-tolerance’ policies – great in theory but in real life not so much.

    Freedom carries with it responsibilities. Punish those who fail in their responsibilities, leave the others be.

    1. This campus is a zero-tolerance area. Once in a while someone is caught with a gun on campus and in nearly all cases the students are the ones who report this. Those individuals are arrested, property seized, and they are charged with a crime. The surrounding community in this very ‘red’ state has no complaints about this either.

  15. You sure you remember Columbine?!?!?! Funny you just described Waco! Take a history lesson from the good professor before you show your ignorance………again!

    1. Mr. McCurry, I’m a little confused. Do you support ex-professor Dorman in his letter or the right for students to carry? If it’s Dorman, I don’t think either Columbine or Waco are good examples of opposition against the concealed carry right. Columbine was two deranged kids that came into the school heavily armed. Any laws prohibiting concealed carry would not have stopped that. Besides, that was a high school. Had the teachers been able to carry, that death toll would have been probably much lower, if at all. I am also not sure which Waco event you are referring to, although neither of the two events I am thinking about had anything to do with College campuses. As far as the recruiting of prospective college professors from the coast, the west coast is not the only coast. Colleges on the east coast have approved similar measures and have even gone so far as to provide proper training for those that desire to carry….. well at least Liberty College has. I guess Dorman wouldn’t want to work there either.

    2. I’d guess that Dorman would be afraid of Liberty College due to the name alone.

  16. While the good professor has his right to his opinion his statistics/assessment is lacking in substance. It has been shown both statistically and philosophically that concealed carry permits do, in fact, lower personal crime rates. When the perp is unsure if you are carrying, and if you are, do you look like you could use it, the tendency, according to every state statistic shows that crime is averted due to the abject risk that the victim might just do you in when threatened. Now I am all for proper certification, training and encouraging using your weapon at least once a week for familiarity, accuracy and also proper functioning of the mechanisms of the weapon. I would like to see State Police or local Sheriffs’ Departments also offer training on situational usage of your weapon: i.e. when do I draw it, how should I proceed, defining a target in a crowded situation, etc. Also take note that there are many Veterans on campuses these days who may have this advanced training and are weapons proficient. There have been at least two instances on campus shootings that I know of where there were experienced Vets who would have been capable of shortening the killing had they been armed. So the Professor is wrong-headed in his overall assessment but I do agree that if people are allowed to carry concealed on campus they should show proficiency, training in rudimentary police procedures for an active shooter situation, and command of their temperament. Otherwise, the continued banning of guns on campuses will continue to foster and encourage shooters who mean to do harm and will seek the opportunity to do so.

  17. Loved this article. He does think highly of himself. He basically said Kansas is too stupid to participate with the coastal towns. Wow this guy is an idiot. What in the world does he mean “can’t afford metal detectors “? So if they allow Guns then they would need detectors???? What? So if they BAN guns then nobody would have them, get real.

  18. I think the students themselves should be able to vote on this for their college’s policy, it’s their safety and they should be able to decide as a group, I know that unlikely in reality though. I would be fine and would probably carry if I were in college now, but if I look back on myself about 8 years when I was actually in college, I would not have been been comfortable with students carrying any firearms, but that was before I owned a gun and really knew how to handle one. I think fear of the unknown may cause more issues than the firearms themselves. For that reason, I think allowing students to carry and conceal may not be the best idea. A lot of male brains are still developing their pre-frontal cortex when they get to college too and I frankly wouldn’t be ok with them carrying, maybe an age requirement, 25 years for ccw on campus would work. Defitintly a complex issue, students should have a voice in the decision for sure.

    1. 18 year olds are equipped with full auto guns and sent into combat. Training and Responsibility are the key

    2. Students here, in a non-binding poll, basically agree with you. The great majority of them want to keep guns off campus unless carried by campus police.

    3. @ J W,

      It will never matter what the students being brainwashed at liberal universities think in regard to concealed carry. Such a suggestion is an incredibly silly notion as it would be quite illegal to enforce should it win in a binding-vote.

      A student’s ability to vote on school issues is allowed by universities for educational purposes only. It is presumably to educate students as to how government should function in the real world, and implemented through a process designed to affect the students with minimal consequences.

      With that said, a reasonable person understands why it would be outrageously irresponsible to even consider allowing a fleeting group of students to make such life or death decisions for the entire campus; which incidentally is filled with far more employees, contactors, and visitors than the students alone.

      The only reason these schools think they have the authority to ban guns to begin with is due to the misguided governmental authorities over those regions which have created laws to allow it. But even those laws are being knocked off one by one as they lose in the Supreme Court.

      More on the specific illegality of such a student vote: The right to carry has already been put to a vote and won ratification as the Second Amendment back in 1791. The Supremacy Clause prevents any subordinate government from overriding this Amendment.

      Even though some governments ignore this, the aforementioned enforcement of that ratification has become painfully evident to the various liberal governments once challenged in the Supreme Court. I imagine many more of these illegal laws will continue to fall now that the Supreme Court is being restored with justices that actually believe in defending the Constitution as it was intended.

      So it should go without saying just how insignificant and illegal such a non-government vote by mere university students would be viewed in the eyes of any court. Thus explains why even the most liberal of universities would never dare consider it; and silly that you even mentioned it.

    4. There’s no reason or justification to suspend the Constitution within the campus boundaries.

  19. I would venture that any student who has passed the background for a CCW is infinitely more stable, reliable, mature, and less of a threat than many of those that have not gone through the process.

    1. I disagree. Most of these students haven’t been alive long enough to have much of any kind of background to check so they’re mostly going to pass, no matter what their maturity of mental state is.

  20. Why not offer a course in handgun training at the university. Teach students the proper way to handle weapons. Then maybe this would be a non issue. And remember, when seconds count law enforcement is only minutes away.

    1. Here in East Tennessee, the University of Tennessee is developing a carry on campus policy. Most folks, if you ask if it’s a good idea to have firearms at a “college” campus would picture in their minds young, just graduated from high school and immature “kids”. But in reality, those who are PERMITTED are 21+, and value their rights, duty, and RESPONSIBILTY that comes with carrying a firearm LEGALLY.
      I am for legal carry, especially if concealed. Too many snowflakes melt at the sight of a firearm being open carried. It doesn’t benefit, in my opinion to ” make waves” by upsetting the Liberal Left Mental Midgets with our pieces of Justice!

    2. We do this already but only for long guns, not anything that is concealable.

  21. For those opposed witness Israel. Some students are armed by the government. Do we hear of any problems with that? Their situation is extreme, I admit.

    My opinion is that only mature, trained and vetted students should be allowed to carry on campus. It should be an earned privilege though. That said, it is so easy for officialdom to politically bias evaluations.

  22. Concealed carry on campus has not been around long enough to know one way or the other if it is effective or not – no “facts.” Yet this guy teaches history which is nothing but facts or does he teach opinion instead of facts? To carry a concealed weapon you have to be 21 in most places, don’t you, which should make you at least a junior if not a senior and usually more mature. The Supreme Court has held the “well regulated militia” is not substantive, “peoples right to bear arms” has substance. And his bad grammar when he says “like myself” instead of the correct “like me” is enough to wonder whether he disregards offenses against the English Language as well as the truth. Last I am saddened to hear officers suggest that they will shoot anyone with a weapon before they know the situation (I have been a combat infantryman, a prosecutor, and have a son-in-law who is an officer).

  23. YEA, Higher education. We see that higher education in the streets burning, rioting, defecating and what ever else they can do. We see it in the false rape charges, the attacks on elderly, handicapped PPL. This is the higher education of today. Teaching of Hate, racism against whites. Individuals who have no common sense and do not even understand realities of life. GET OVER YOUR SELF professor, your a failure as most of them today.

  24. I would say good riddance and AMF . He needs to return to his coastal universities that breed the intense liberalism that ruining our country. Hopefully someday colleges and universities will make a turn-a-round and start teaching with a more conservative outlook. The liberal arts professors for the most part, are the group responsible for the liberal way of teaching. No pun intended.

  25. Hasn’t been an issue at Colorado Mesa University (or any other public university that has implemented campus carry).

  26. I am a prof at a medium-sized university in a very ‘red’ state. The students here are also mostly conservative. I hold a CWP but I do not carry on campus.
    This issue has been discussed by this campus. The faculty are nearly monolithic in their opposition to campus carry by them or by students. The administration is adamantly opposed to campus carry. The students, when polled, are also in the great majority opposed to campus carry.

    But to me the most interesting response is the one by campus and local LEOs. They are terribly concerned about a scenario in which an active shoot event happens and by the time LE responds, there are multiple students and faculty with guns visible. They are very concerned about the risk of killing someone who is innocent by mistake or, for that matter, one of these supremely unqualified ‘carriers’ killing another one by mistake. That’s their concern.

    But as I survey the population of this campus, students AND faculty, my concern is that if campus carry came here, I suspect that firearms would be handled with the same care and respect that students already apply with respect to sex, drugs, and alcohol…that is to say, very little. Therefore I am opposed to campus carry.

    1. @ Patrick I am a former Commanding Officer of a Marine Force Recon unit. I also hold advanced degrees in several engineering disciplines. The problems that we have with society today is a direct result of Political Correctness where the people have been INCULCATED by Lieberal indoctrination camps that masquerade as the public school system. Civics Government and most all the skills necessary to survive in the “real world” are no longer taught The only things that are “taught are how to accept the LGBT community, that freedom of speech, firearms, and personal responsibility are BAD.

      These little “snowflakes” both students and faculty are afraid of personal responsibility, reality and need their puppies and bubble pipes to cope. I have lost any respect for These LIBERALLY controlled “institutions of higher learning” All I see is politically correct inculcation and not anything close to education!!!

      I carry everywhere I go and no one is the wiser. You might want to consider why schools, shopping malls, Libraries and theaters etc. are always targeted by those who are sick and or depraved or terrorists. I can tell you in five words “Lieberally mandated Gun Free Zones” where the perpetrators KNOW they will face no opposition Robert E Heinlein said it best “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”

      We don’t have a gun problem we have hearts without God, homes without discipline, schools without prayer, and courts without justice

    2. I was hoping someone could address the concerns raised by our LEOs. How can their concerns be addressed? I’m not a LEO so I have no idea how to address them.

    3. I disagree, but I’ll give you credit for being civil in your comments. When I qualified for my CCW I took the class from the head of the local SWAT Team and went through several shoot-don’t shoot drills. When I attended Cal State LA in the early ’70s Several of us carried so that we could escort the female students to their cars at night, we made sure they were rolling before we left. There were at least three rapes in, one of which was almost a murder, in a few months.

  27. I’ve read lots of good comments here, but everyone seems to have missed Mr Dorman’s real problem has with concealed carry. Let me share a quote from his resignation letter:

    “the Second Amendment’s protection of a well-regulated militia.”

    He believes the Second Amendment’s purpose was to protect the militia. He doesn’t believe it exists to protect your right to self defense. Indeed, it doesn’t seem that he even believes you have a right to self defense at all. Most anti-gunners I know don’t believe you do. I’d venture a guess that the professor even believes that, in the face of evil, whether minor or unspeakable or anywhere in between, you have a duty to capitulate. That is the mindset of his ilk.

    Until we understand that this is the mindset we are up against we will mostly be just spinning our wheels.

  28. Where does this professor gets his “facts”? I’d like him to show me how concealed carry has proven to be a failure or how it has not proven to deter gun violence. He has no “facts” to back up those statement because neither is true. Further, where has campus violence taken place? On campuses that don’t allow concealed carry, that’s where. Responsible gun ownership and firearms training should be part of the college curriculum and not be discouraged or banned from responsible citizens who happen to make the decision to protect themselves and others when necessary. And, yes, this professor does come across as thinking very highly of himself. In my opinion, Kansas is better off without him. Rather than move to another state, I’d rather he simply move out of the country.

    1. Bob What else would you expect from a lieberal professor who is a Allinskite?

  29. I think it will keep the high number of casualties in a mass shooting down.because “We the People” are the first responders. But you will allways have mistakes and short minded individual that will make bad decisions, just like in every aspect of our lives. Thus better to have than not to. Its proven.

    1. The average time it takes LEO’s To respond is 7 minutes. An average shooter can more than likely put out conservatively speaking say between 30 and 45 rounds times 7 we are looking at 210 rounds. Granted the majority of those 210 rounds will miss their intended target but by the law of averages say 10% do not miss we have 21 dead or wounded.

      What would you say to having an armed student or faculty member who could neutralize that threat in a few seconds as opposed to the seven minutes???

  30. Arming the students is NOT the answer. I have been in Law Enforcement for 39 years and giving hot head students the authority to carry on educational property will not work no more than arming teachers will work. How quickly we forget Columbine! These students we are talking about arming are not far removed from the ages of the Columbine shooters so think about it people! Enforce the laws already on the books and PROSECUTE those who bring guns on educational property. Now that;s a good law!

    1. I have to respectfully disagree with you sir. The majority of people who conceal carry aquire Firearms training that’s is just as good, or even more thorough than police firearms training. Most cops only qualify when the department requires. Most CCw holders train regularly out of thier own pocket. Statistically CCW holders commit LESS crime than police officers. FACT!

    2. Most States require that you are ‘familiar or proficient with the OPERATION of a hand gun’ NO state requires that you possess the ability to qualify with a handgun. I don’t know where you got your ‘so called’ facts but they are extremely flawed and I take exception with your opinion of law enforcement. You are one of those people who think they can do their own enforcement until the crap comes down when they are calling for the boys in blue to bail them out. To set the record straight, I have my CCW as well but the training you receive to get it don’t qualify you to adequately defend anyone but yourself and most cases not even that because when lead starts flying towards you most of those who don’t possess the real training for the REAL situation will turn tail and run. It’s all well and good to be able to break paper on the range but don’t get in a real fire fight thinking you are Wyatt Earp. It won’t work out well for you!

    3. Every CCW holder I know has taken professional handgun fighting courses, not just poking holes in targets. I don’t know what makes you think that CCW holders don’t train. I’m no talking NRA instructors. I’m talking Gunsite, Haley strategic, Costa ludas, tactical response… Don’t assume we just do the bare minimum to qualify.

    4. None of the CCW holders I know or trained with have taken “professional handgun fighting courses” other than the meager 6 hour classroom and paper target training that was required by the state.

      Our LEO instructor was careful to caution everyone against thinking we could act as if we are LEO.

    5. i whole heartedly disagree sir, my wife and i have had to qualify on three of our permits, multiple times over the years, and was told that we were more profeciant than most of the officers he, the range master, had to qualify. but back to the comment . yes some states do require you to qualify.

    6. @ Charles McCurry What part of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” is unclear to you??? NO ONE and I repeat NO ONE has the right or authority to prohibit me from exercising my God Given and Constitutional right to protect myself or family not even a state or a misguided LEO former or otherwise!!! You fools seem to think that just because you carry a gun and wear a badge you can make up the law as you see fit. I am here to tell you that5 you are entitled to your OWN OPINION but you are NOT entitled to your OWN FACTS!!!

      Facts are that Law enforcement is NOT obligated to protect ANYONE or ANY THING Their mandate reads to “enforce the existing law” NOT make it up as you go
      2005 SCOTUS Ruling: Police Not Constitutionally Bound to Protect Citizens

    7. Columbine was not a college campus. You have the 1st A right to your opinion, just get the facts straight is all we 2nd A supporters ask.

    8. After 39 years in “Law enforcement” I recommend you get out of it. You show no respect for the citizen you are supposed to protect. By calling college students “hot heads” you must have spent little time in higher education. As for Columbine, I remember it all too well. It’s where the government killed and burned alive men, women and children because they wanted to separate themselves from the “evil” of today. Guess “we” showed them!

    9. I too “respectfully disagree with you Again The average time it takes LEO’s To respond is 7 minutes. An average shooter can more than likely put out conservatively speaking say between 30 and 45 rounds times 7 we are looking at 210 rounds. Granted the majority of those 210 rounds will miss their intended target but by the law of averages say 10% do not miss we have 21 dead or wounded.
      The problems that we have with society today is a direct result of Political Correctness where the people have been INCULCATED by Lieberal indoctrination camps that masquerade as the public school system. Civics Government and most all the skills necessary to survive in the “real world” are no longer taught The only things that are “taught are how to accept the LGBT community, that freedom of speech, firearms, and personal responsibility are BAD.

      These little “snowflakes” both students and faculty are afraid of personal responsibility, reality and need their puppies and bubble pipes to cope. I have lost any respect for These LIBERALLY controlled “institutions of higher learning” All I see is politically correct inculcation and not anything close to education!!!

      I carry everywhere I go and no one is the wiser. You might want to consider why schools, shopping malls, Libraries and theaters etc. are always targeted by those who are sick and or depraved or terrorists. I can tell you in five words “Lieberally mandated Gun Free Zones” where the perpetrators KNOW they will face no opposition Robert E Heinlein said it best “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”

      We don’t have a gun problem we have hearts without God, homes without discipline, schools without prayer, and courts without justice

      What would you say to having an armed student or faculty member who could neutralize that threat in a few seconds as opposed to the seven minutes???

    10. I disagree quite strongly. You show a definite bias and prejudice concerning young people. Students are not all “hot heads,’ yet you lump all students within that context. The FBI released a report a couple of years ago that showed civilians fire fewer rounds, hit their target more often, and hit bystanders less often than police officers. And police officers are trained, supposedly. In light of recent events showing some “hot head” police officers shoot unarmed people multiple times, whete is the advantage of police training? Maybe 39 years is enough. Your bias and prejudice could land you on the front page one of these days.

  31. I would say this is a case where the professor doesn’t know his subject. At least the part on how and why the Second Amendment was put into the Bill of Rights. Maybe he should consult an English professor so he might learn the definition of infringe, and pick up a copy of the Federalist Papers.

  32. “Recruiting the best trained professors necessarily means recruiting from coastal areas and progressive college towns where most people do not believe that randomly arming untrained students is a proper exercise of the Second Amendment’s protection of a well-regulated militia.” ,
    So , 1 , This guy contends to speak for “Most” people from the entire coastal regions of the US and that all coastal towns are “progressive” & by default means all NON-coastal towns are Regressive ? Wow, nice broad paintbrush he has there …..
    & > Randomly arming ? ,, is the Univ handing out guns willy-nilly to students walking around campus ? Or is it an option to get get a concealed carry license ( which involves training, at least in Texas) & then purchase a self defense firearm ?
    Next , 2 > “Students need to be able to express themselves respectfully and freely, and they cannot do so about heated topics if they know that fellow students are armed and that an argument could easily be lethal.” >> Ummm ,,, does he truly think Responsible students (like ones that go through the rigamarole of obtaining CC) are going to pull their pistol and yell “Shut UP!!” at someone with a differing view during classroom dialogue ?? Great respect he has for his students . I have one word for this guy : JACKASS . Plz go to your next job where perhaps all students are only allowed crayons and pillows at school . THAT University would be a safe place for you .

  33. First, let me say that I am a veteran and have a concealed carry license. I can see both sides of the argument, although I think the professor is a little off the mark regarding some of the students carrying concealed weapons on campus. He was not disrespectful toward Kansans in general (like many liberals would have been) and stated his objections with comments we all can understand. He did not say he was against the second amendment (maybe he is) just that he does not think concealed carry belongs in the classrooms. Personally I wish him well in his new teaching position at another “coastal” university where he can be assured there will be no legal concealed weapons on campus.

  34. I support the Kansas decision, and will keep it in mind as my daughter looks at schools to attend. I am increasing alarmed by the liberal lefts comments and actions as it relates to constitutional freedoms. Not just related to guns, but the increasing attempts to stifle any view, or comment that does not align with their own. My father was a historian at a college and he was a gun supporter that frequently pointed to past examples of oppression.

  35. I feel bad for the Professor in a certain way. Too bad he wasn’t educated by people who cared enough about him to teach him right from wrong. There really is no excuse for his not knowing that Socrates had defined the principles of balanced citizenship, personal character and strength almost 3000 years ago.
    The only caveat I have is training. Those who are armed should be trained and practice frequently.
    I hope and expect that those who choose to carry will benefit from their experience as I know I have.
    The fool’s comment on the NRA is telling. It is not the NRA that is doing the rioting, looting and burning we see so often. Please note that I did not call him a fool. He told us he is.

  36. I have to agree with Mr. Dolbee The professor is a bit self-absorbed plus there is no basis for his claim that concealed carry has failed as far as I am concerned.
    There are limitless possible outcomes in any given situation how and why does the Professor feel CC has failed? He clearly does not have any use for firearms, especially in his classroom in the hands of his students even if it saves his life. ok, I get that. Good luck Prof but let me ask you this how do you know who has a gun right now at any given moment.?

  37. Rather than attacking this professor’s character, I will challenge one of his assertions: concealed carry has proven to be a failure. Campus shootings have become all too frequent, and arming students has done nothing to quell active shooter situations.

    Is he saying that a CWP holder has shot up a campus? No evidence. Or is he saying that a CWP holder wouldn’t be helpful when a shooting errupts? Isn’t it odd that these gun free zone shootings seem to last about until a)a cop shows up, b) a CWP holder confronts them. They typically end in suicide. A shooting in a mall was stopped by a CWP holder and ended in suicide for example.

    But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good crybaby.

  38. More professors like him should get out of teaching then we might get more intellectual instead of emotional PC education. Unfortunately he will probably come to california to get on his soapbox :p

  39. Amazing that a “History” & “American Studies” teacher takes issue with the 2nd amendment. Thinks a concealed weapon hinders the ability to learn. And states that concealed weapons have not reduce school violence (in gun free schools) as some sort of statistic of merit! Guessing another product of “liberal style higher learning”,….. taught to not think freely, only to “Think this”.

  40. I think that the professor is one of those liberal/progressives that feel the citizenry should be un-armed. Thomas Jefferson is right in an armed society is a polite society.. Kansas has constitutional carry, but I think that those students that want to carry should take a class on it. I conceal carry in my state ( nebr ) and found that there’s much in the class that CCW holder should know.

  41. Ah yes, the power of syllogistic ‘reasoning’. On campus-guns equal inferior education. KU will have on-campus guns. THEREFORE KU will have inferior education. What nonsense. This ‘man’ is a prime example of the confused and (dare we say) wimp-minded ‘scholar’. The same stock that many administrators seem to be made of.

  42. “Students need to be able to express themselves respectfully and freely, and they cannot do so about heated topics if they know that fellow students are armed and that an argument could easily be lethal.”

    Yup, when I was at school, only thing that stopped me from shooting up a classroom was the lack of a gun. And (like most of his students) I was under 21 and prohibited from owning one.

    “Easily” be lethal? By the same standard, the professor could easily molest a student, even greater probability. Good thing he’s going. They’ll love him at Berkley.

  43. Obviously, this professor shouldn’t be teaching classes, since he is not intelligent enough to recognize that there have been no active/mass shooter incidents where carried fire arms are allowed. That only happens at “Gun Free Zones”.

    Imagine that! Even nut jobs know that if they want to score allot of “kills”, the best place to do it is at a “Gun Free Zone” where no one is likely to be able to fight back against them. BUT but, they’re not suppose to bring a gun into a GFZ, the LAWS say so! So much for prohibitive laws, right?

    Let all the liberal/progressive professors quit. The overall IQ of the teaching staff will greatly improve.

  44. I retired from the FBI in 2012. My last office of assignment was the Roanoke Resident Agency. On April 16, 2007 we responded to Virginia Tech as soon as we heard about the first two shootings in the dormitory. When we arrived we were immediately directed to the back of Norris Hall, still not knowing the scope of what had just happened. After a quick briefing 3 of us jumped in with a local tac team that was about to start clearing the building. Many were still hiding in closets, under desks, etc.

    I can’t tell you how many times I’ve thought about what I saw that day, and about how everything could’ve been different there if just ONE responsible, law-abiding student, professor or staff member had been legally armed. They wouldn’t have been able to save every one of Cho’s victims, but they would’ve saved a bunch. Of course, they were not allowed to be armed at VT, and unfortunately they still aren’t.

    Kansas is joining the growing list of schools taking responsibility for their own safety, and it sounds to me like they’ll be a good bit safer without the likes of Professor Dorman.

  45. How about “separate but equal classes” in all subjects — one with concealed carry and one without. Just a touch of sarcasm / humor.

  46. Maybe by not being able to get “qualified professors” the students will get an education instead of brainwashing in liberal snowflake ideas. I say good riddance to Jason Dorman. Have a nice time teaching snowflakes. Hopefully you won’t need someone with a gun to save your worthless a**. Most people that carry a weapon have had a lot of training in its use.

  47. The nature of concealed carry is no one knows if you have a firearm or not which is exactly as it was when campus concealed carry was illegal. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Sounds like a deterrent to me.

  48. Hoplophobes assume the a man without a gun is unarmed, peaceful and harmless. There are no dangerous weapons only dangerous men. This professor has obviously never had a poke in the nose for saying some nonsense like for example that guns don’t really protect you and you obviously lose control if you have a gun.
    Robert Heinlein said An armed society is a polite society although Thomas Jefferson may have agreed.
    When a right is denied it becomes a privilege.

  49. OK, so here’s the plan: Forget working on the media, dimocrats, etc. and stick to supporting legislators, administrators and governors who have reasonable views on firearms and the guts stand behind their beliefs by trusting those who lawfully carry a firearm! If those goals were to be met, many of the chicken little professors, administrators, students and others who are part of the current problem with “higher” education would leave for Berkeley, Harvard, Columbia and other loon institutions. Send your kids to schools that treat gun owners with respect and want to enhance, not diminish, their rights! Problem solved.

    Hey, it’s working in Kansas!

  50. G’driddance. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way to Massachusetts professor.

  51. In a way i can understand Professor Cowardlys response to guns.
    Thanks to public education with “higher education” at for forefront, the pussification of American youth with emphasis on young men has been destroying America since the 1960s.
    Why should students be trusted with guns when they cant get the most basic laws of biology right?
    Its too complicated for teachers and students to understand there are only TWO genders, male and female, so it’s no wonder guns are the ultimate in “mysterious” and “evil”. Well beyond the ability of college age people to understand let alone operate with any type of responsibility.
    No I say. NO! Students have a responsibility to be victims.
    Could you imagine if students at UC Berkeley had concealed carry permits when they were violently assaulted by cowardly thugs over a speaker they didnt like? My God they could have stopped the violence, saved property from being destroyed and worse yet would have allowed an opinion that they disagreed with to be heard.
    We cant have that!

  52. I would like to see the evidence of the professors claims about not being able to have a great university if concealed carry is allowed (he quit, so now that university is destined to fail?), or how campus carry is a failure, or how the students that might carry have no training, or how concealed carry has done nothing to quell active shooter situations (how would he know if a potential active shooter decided not to go to that university because he knew students might be armed?). This guy is making up all kind of assumptions based solely on his feelings. Good riddance!

  53. He is well within his rights to run away to perceived safer places. Kansas is lucky to get rid of such a closed minded individual. Professors should allow all points of view to be expressed.

    I find it interesting that he states Conceal and carry is a failure yet all the facts show the oppisit. He also states school shootings are on the rise yet there are to few to have enough to be statistically significant and 99% of schools are dangerous gun free zones. Has there been a shooting on a campus the permits guns. People like this professor need to start questioning the retoric they get from our propoganda new media and dig for the real truith.

  54. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Maybe it would be best for all if all colleges allows Concealed carry and we could drive all the ” best trained professors necessarily means recruiting from coastal areas and progressive college towns” out of all schools.

  55. i find it ironic that the writer attacks the professor’s character in defense of ‘honest’ debate.

    1. Calling him “gun phobic” is not an attack as much as a true description.

    2. The professor showed his narcissistic attitude in his statements. The writer is perfectly justified in “attacking the professors character”, as you put it.

    3. What is ironic about it? Honest debate is merely obstructing another point of view. It has nothing to do with what the view is.

    4. How about this assistant Professor attacking the intelligence of all of Kansas stating they certainly can not provide teachers of his caliber without getting them from out of state. One does not have to attack this mans character, his own arrogance does the job. His own letter reveals a man who I would not want to teach any of my children.

    5. I fail to see anywhere in the writer’s comments an “attack on the professor’s character”. If anything, the professor is attacking the character of every law abiding student who decides to carry for self defense. Instead of running away from the school he taught at, the professor should have created an educational program at KU to ensure the “untrained” students could get properly trained to handle active shooter situations.

    6. I see no evidence of an “attack on the professors’ character”. I did however see the author calling attention to the good doctor’s elitist explanation of why we concealed carry permit holders are just not bright enough to figure it out for ourselves.

    7. @ davud,

      Our actions define our character. When one’s actions become the very center of “honest” debate, only a fool claims such character to be off limits to scrutiny.

    8. @davud, I find it ironic that you did not recognize the irony in the article. As far as honest debate, the professor offers only dishonest platitudes and cliches tossed about by the noble learned elite (NOTE: IRONY here) which bear no resemblance to the truth. And don’t give me that different people can find different truths. Truth is black and white; it is either true or false, much as woman cannot be a little bit pregnant. Mixing truth with a lie will still ultimately be a lie.
      Now, to go back more than 45 years, to the days when I was in the Army doing SAR and recon, we had a little book called the Ranger Handbook. And, if memory serves me correctly, it had a chapter (or more, I have slept since then) on setting up an ambush to ruin the bad guys’ day. You looked for a site that offered the maximum potential for casualties and minimum cover for protection or resistance. Those areas exist today in our society and are sanctioned by our government as GUN FREE ZONE. And every mass shooting in the US (of which I am aware) happened in a GUN FREE ZONE! Coincidence? I think not!
      Einstein is rumored to have said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The more the people seek refuge in GFZ’s, the more people die. The more people ban guns, the more people die. In fact, look at the crime statistics in all of the major cities in the US with Gun Control laws. Is there any of them that have low crime rates? Uh, that would be a resounding not no, but no to the Hell NO!
      I could go on but you get my drift. To all of you who served or are active duty now, thank you for your service. It is different now than when I came home those many years ago. We owe you all a debt that too many do not understand (Many of those are in the VA but that is an entirely new topic that I will not belabor.)

  56. to dprato,

    here here,

    Not to engage on these issues means that you might as well be right wing or left wing congressman obstructionist or an independent congressional obstructionist. AND see what that has got us in the last 20 years.

    1. Its just comments like that make me choose to ignore folks like yourself so do me a favor and realize this is the very last time I will respond to you on here.

  57. G-Man,
    So that brings us to the portion of my comment in which I wrote, “Maybe it’s time to turn our attention back on the brain behind the trigger”.
    Your conclusions were magically insightful on employee incidents to date.

    Perhaps the G in G-man stands for Postal Inspector, Postal Manager or Postal Mail Carrier.

    The City Counsel in the city I live in wants to add words below our city name to state “In God We Trust”

    With your thinking there should be an additional line saying:
    ” Everybody keep your hands where I can see them”

    1. @ Wood,

      I’ve been posting to the Shooter’s Log for many years, so the regular readers here know I am an active federal law enforcement agent with 35 years of service and counting; hence my nickname of “G-Man”.

      While the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) is quite capable of running their own internal investigations, from time-to-time they do solicit our help or assign inspectors to our joint task forces which focus on specific crimes that may involve the mail system.

      I am sorry that I cannot speak to the rest of your comment as frankly it did not make any sense to me.

      However, given the undeniable Christian foundations which started this Country, I do highly commend your City of Fresno for unanimously voting to add “In God We Trust” to the wall of their council chamber.

      A tip for you: Rather than starting a new thread each time you want to reply to a person’s comment, instead click the red colored “Reply” link directly beneath their last comment. Otherwise, starting whole new thread breaks the continuity and flow of the total exchange when it is just between 2 people.

    2. AS the moderator, I can more than vouch for G-Man’s credentials. ~Dave Dolbee

    3. @ Dave Dolbee,

      Thank you for the validation. As well, thank you for your exceptional work and dedication towards keeping America informed on the issues that matter most.

      I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Of all the forums that offer reader responses, your Shooter’s Log is the only forum that I have consistently engaged over the years.

      It is fine writers like you that make this forum such a success. So please keep up the fantastic work. I salute you.

    4. @ G-Man,

      Thank you sir. From you that means more than I can say. I am truly humbled.

      If you are ever interested in writing for The Shooter’s Log (when you retire), please feel free to reach out at that time. We would love to expand your role and analysis of the issues as only someone with your intellect and experience can. ~Dave Dolbee

  58. I retired from the US Army Infantry branch at Ft. Riley, KS. in 2003. I lived in Kansas from 1998 until 2010. During that period of time, I watched the people of Kansas win the debate on concealed carry in their state. They have since taken it further to open carry within the state. I have been through the concealed carry class in Kansas, and had their license. Their training is designed to familiarize the individual with the laws of Kansas and to confirm that the individual knows his or her handgun well enough to use it effectively. Colorado’s class is much the same. They both assume one is familiar with firearms. I follow the news in Kansas. I have several friends who are still in Kansas. I have some questions for the professor about some of his statements.
    First, what campus shootings? This law has only been in effect since October of 2016, and approved and instituted at KU only since December, 2016. I have heard of no shootings or violence involving firearms on any Kansas institutions of higher learning of any kind since its passing or since it has been applied. Did I miss something in the news? To the best of my knowledge, there have been NO active shooter incidents at any of the colleges in Kansas since this went into effect.
    Second, as to training with weapons, either firearms or other types, many of the students of these universities are former or active military. I was a student at Kansas State after retirement, and I used to instruct both pistol and rifle marksmanship, basic and advanced over my 20 year career in the Infantry. I was even an armorer for a while. Most of the former military students are highly trained in the use and safety of various types of firearms. The concealed carry class simply adds to their knowledge of the laws of Kansas. Also, as a group, these men and women are highly stable emotionally. The have been taught to be so in an unforgiving school, that of a combat environment. They are taught to think before acting, and their lives at times have been at risk when instability would have killed them. Also, quite a few of these people, especially those in combat arms, are trained in combatives. If they wanted to maim or kill one, they could do it without a firearm.
    Third, this man is a liberal arts professor. He doesn’t teach in any area of hard science. I cannot say if or how much he is liberal in his personal politics, but as a professor, he adds nothing direct to the training of engineers, chemists, physics or any other area of scientific development. At most, they have to pass his class as a required course to make sure they are ‘educationally rounded’ as part of their degree requirements. I seriously doubt that campus carry will worry any of the professors who teach in the hard sciences. If the past is a teacher, campus carry will make the campus environment safer.
    Fifth, as to being a deterrent, concealed carry has been proven to be very effective in passive deterrence, and active deterrence both. I see no evidence that it will not prove to be so in this instance, too. If I were going to speak in a public forum on any of the liberal campuses today, I’d want some emotionally stable people in the crowd to be armed, if only to stop the ‘activists’ from trying to attack me for my views, which has happened several times lately, even to speakers who are in my view somewhat radical in their liberal views.
    Finally, this could be simply fear. This professor may simply be afraid and using all of this to cover for his personal fear. I have no doubt that he had already secured a new position elsewhere and this is his parting shot at rationalizing his personal fear. I don’t think that concealed carry would do other than insure that debate in his or any other class would be somewhat more polite. Or perhaps this professor is somewhat belligerent with his students and fears that this would threaten his ‘teaching style”. I’ve had professors who were so. I do know that what he says in his letter is neither true nor accurate, thus his conclusions are erroneous.

  59. Recently on the University of Texas at Austin campus, there was a deranged person who attacked several people with a knife, killing one of them, a freshman student. What the media refused to mention was a student with a license to carry was the one who stopped the attacks. When the student pulled his gun, the deranged person took off running and when he went around the corner, the police caught him. If that brave student with a license to carry had not been carrying his pistol and intervened, there would’ve been a lot more students injured or killed. I guess Professor Dorman doesn’t live in the world of facts, only his fictional notion that people who go through all the training and documentation to have a license to carry a handgun somehow make it unsafe.

  60. @ Dragon Yes Dragon, I was wondering what the Millennials had as an affliction. Thank you for explaining that. They still can’t accept that Hillary lost the election and now they need therapy for that. LOL

  61. professor Dorman can move to MEXIFORNIA & preach his anti gun message & get elected to political office. he will fit right in with the JERRY MOONBEAM BROWN RULING CLASS. it appears that MANDATORY GUN CONFISCATION is in the works out on the LEFT COAST. just a matter of time.

  62. Mr. Dorman is just another (((tribe))) member who is working for the Gun Confiscation Lobby (GCL). I’m quite sure he’ll find employment directly with GCL in the near future, if he hasn’t already.

    Insincere, virulent, vicious, scheming, without ethincs or morals.

    Typical (((tribe))) behavior. See Senator Charles Schumer for the template.

  63. Dave, 21 Handgun 18 long gun.

    That is Federal Law to own a gun. To date I know of no CCW law that allows one to barrow a gun to carry.

  64. This to G-man

    The no carry zone at my County Court House seems to work, (thanks to the Sheriffs Deputies and the metal detector upon entry).

    Haven’t heard of any postal shootings for some time, (perhaps 20 years in a post office facility). I don’t think there are (security personal with metal detectors), all throe some times I wish they did when a FFL sends my a hand gun to my store for an FFL transfer. The box won’t fit in the mail box.

    I am an FFL and CCW holder. I would not be in the business of selling guns if I could not carry a loaded gun at work or home, as a FFL.

    Maybe it’s time to turn our attention back on the brain behind the trigger
    save putting metal detectors at every corner store seven eleven and ice-cream store in the US.

    what do you think…

    1. @Wood,

      I am not certain if you were attempting to refute certain aspects of my post by bringing up the perceived effectiveness of weapons bans at your county court or postal facilities, but regardless, your comment actually supports my position.

      My post actually cited, and I quote, “…especially when your bans don’t even attempt to offer me additional security to replace that which you’ve stripped me of providing myself.”

      In direct correlation to my comment, the specific facilities you’ve mention actually do rise to the level of additional and exceptional security measures and responsibility I’ve mentioned – in exchange for forcibly waiving our Second Amendment Rights when visiting or working within those facilities.

      However, the same could never be said for all these liberal school campuses and other random places that demand we be stripped of our constitutional right to protect ourselves. Instead they just demand all the guns banned, but don’t ever think in exchange that it is their responsibility to implement additional protections to mitigate the security deficit they create with their bans.

      But even within those more secure facilities you’ve mentioned, they are still not infallible. Not a year goes by that we don’t hear plenty of news stories about shootings in court rooms where bailiffs or deputies had their guns overtaken by a defendant in chains and still managed to kill a few before being subdued or even escaping.

      As for the Postal Facilities – the issue was disgruntled employees, not the patrons; which explains why you don’t always see “security personal with metal detectors” up front. But such security measures have been implemented quite extensively behind the scenes since their last shooting; and thus would explain the reduction in deadly work-place violence occurrences.

      So that brings us to the portion of your comment in which you wrote, “Maybe it’s time to turn our attention back on the brain behind the trigger”. Interestingly the Postal Service is a prime example of an organization that has done precisely that in the aftermath of their work-place tragedies.

      Millions of dollars have since been invested towards the Postal Service’s implementation of advanced programs that involve extensive pre-employment screenings, ongoing stress management practices and classes for employees, work-place conflict resolution counseling, dedicated Mail Center Security Coordinators and staff, along with advance facility detection systems and additional armed Postal Inspectors who are trained to investigate and act on even the slightest hint of a disgruntled employee.

      While such measures have virtually prevented any more postal worker deaths, look at the immense cost, manpower, and effort associated with such prevention. And even then the Postal Service still has their less lethal instances resulting in bodily harm caused by internal disgruntled employees; but you never get to read about those occurrences because they are investigated internally and officially sealed as undisclosed employee matters.

      So in conclusion – despite all the best efforts, the only dependable measure to self-preservation will always be reliance on none other than one’s self. The framers of the Second Amendment understood this and it is as viable today as it ever was.

  65. After reading other comments I’d like to address the couple of dissenters and fence riders to challenge you folks to think this all the way through to its logical conclusion.

    First let me just get two things out of the way to set the platform: 1.) There is no way we will ever be free of the evil men do; and 2.) There is no question that the Constitution protects every single eligible and law abiding U.S. citizen’s right to carry a firearm.

    Those certain dissenters that disagree completely that there should be a Second Amendment don’t even qualify to engage in this conversation.

    So those that remain must be the half-measured dissenters which partially agree with the Second Amendment and for unknown reasons somehow think they make the world safer by placing limitations on the protections it was intended to offer. So let us examine the lack of rational behind such infringements…

    Imagine for a moment that there was a constitutional amendment which guaranteed your right to wear protective equipment and goggles every time you used a woodchipper or band saw. But then I came along and infringed on your right by instituting my own subordinate laws which placed limitations on exactly how, when and where you could exercise your constitutional right to use your goggles for such protection.

    Or how about I said you can only have one protective lens over one eye but not the other (synonymous with magazine limitations). Well just as we non-dissenters feel about infringements upon the Second Amendment, I would think you all would pitch a fit and simply not stand for such ludicrousness where your eyesight, safety and a woodchipper are all concerned.

    So now that I’ve got you dissenting folks oriented properly against the adverse effects and undefended half-measures caused by your infringements, let us now move on to the causation behind your unwarranted fears to begin with:

    The safety offered by the Second Amendment applies anywhere in our country, for example: malls, parks, buildings, transit hubs and roadways just to name a few. There is no place that is any more or less subject to the evil people can bring into these places. Therefore there is absolutely no logic behind singling schools out as exclusively exempt from the protections guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

    So let’s ponder for a moment just how illogical it is to reduce one’s right to defend their self in one place, over that of another. A reasonable person would have to agree the entire concept looks absolutely preposterous; especially when your bans don’t even attempt to offer me additional security to replace that which you’ve stripped me of providing myself.

    So that just leaves one final point for examination, which is – the types of people that are actually in possession of the instrument you fear. Well, there are only 2 types of concealed carriers: those that want to kill you, and those that don’t want to be killed.

    So out of the sum of all those you fear carrying on campus, it turns out you only ever have to worry about the type that wants you dead. The problem is – your bans only remove guns from the law abiding half that never wanted to kill you in the first place. But that second half will ignore your laws and find their target anyway. There is no ban you could ever implement that would diminish that fact.

    The resounding flaw in your logic to ban concealed carry is the assumption that everyone will honor the mere words you’ve scribed on paper. Time and again you dissenters have been tragically proven wrong. No one actually believes a disturbed student hell-bent on blowing his class away has ever changed his mind simply because there is a ban on carrying the gun to do it with.

    And let me remind all you dissenters, there is a ban on murder too… yet we all see how that’s been working out.

    1. I agree with your position on the 2nd Amendment. I would only add that when any of us who in fact use common sense, logic and obey the law as written start to question the common sense, logic or failure to agree with the laws of the land of those who don’t a couple of things need to be kept in mind. Those folks don’t really care about common sense, logic or what the law says, period. They don’t care what you or I think whether we can substantiate our positions with facts or not. In my opinion, it is a total waste of time to even bother engaging them in any kind of intellectual discussion and we would be better off simply addressing one another than trying to engage them in an honest debate. I no longer waste my time trying to convince them of anything.

    2. @ dprato,

      I completely share your sentiment and have been tempted many times to toss in the towel as there are much better things we should all be spending our valuable time on.

      However, I encourage you to not do that. Because even though they may lack the intellect to comprehend our logic and wisdom to ever change their minds, our persistence to display it still serves to show them our strong will and resolve to never give in.

      I feel it is our intellectual attempts to consistently engage them no matter what – is what makes us their strongest opposition. And it is that opposition which keeps them at bay one argument at a time… one day at a time.

      But to sustain such an effective force against them requires every freedom-loving American to join that fight and engage them every chance we get.

    3. I do understand your point of view and i actually do engage them although somewhat less. I save it for the people who are being totally ridiculous and basically go with my gut feelings on who I should and should not respond to.
      After listening to the back and forth on the Trump post, it further convinced me that the “ongoing” conversation with people like Wood and the other guy whose name I have already forgotten was a total waste of time on the part of all of us because it was clear they both fit my previous description and no matter what anyone said they were going to disagree.

      I will continue to engage them but not endlessly as I did with the guy whose name I forgot. After the first two exchanges I told him to take a hike and when he tried to contact me again I just clicked him off and didn’t hear from him again.

    4. @ dprato,

      I’ll give you that one… cutting conversations with those “being totally ridiculous” is something I should do more often.

  66. Every time I read or hear about some left-wing liberal going bananas over people exercising their Second Amendment rights, I am reminded that I once determined a pathological condition that explains why they are as they are. The condition is called CESDS…..Cerebral Electrochemical Synaptic Dysfunction Syndrome. It is essentially a pathology in which the thinking part of the brain…..the cerebrum…..cannot properly transmit the electrochemical nerve impulses across the gaps…..the synapses…..between the neurons or individual nerve cells. This condition is manifested with symptoms that include, but are not limited to, a complete failure to rationally and pragmatically form valid thoughts leading to valid conclusions.

  67. Seems like two wins to me. Students can be armed if they wish, and liberal elitist professors will leave.

  68. ok, ccw for the 21 year old students. that makes the TEACHER look even more ANTI GUN and less bright than i realized. thank you sir.

  69. maybe i do not have the WHOLE PICTURE. what is the minimum age to own and carry in that state. i assumed 21 years old, like drinking. if it is only 18, i see a problem there. many 18 year old kids are VERY SCARY, if they are carrying. i still OBJECT to college teachers brain washing OUR kids, instead of teaching them to think and become adults. maybe i am out of touch, with the current civil discourse in our class rooms.

    1. The age is 21 for CCW. The only exceptions would be those under 21 can carry at home, on their own land, or at their fixed place of business. ~Dave Dolbee

  70. well, the good news is, HE will not be around to spread his ANTI GUN VIEWS, in front of people, who have the legal right to carry. the PROBLEM is HE thinks as an ELITIST. only HE sees the light shinning down the path of learning. perhaps being unemployed, for a while, might add to his knowledge, but that would be giving HIM credit for some CRITICAL THINKING. i wonder if he skipped that class, when he was a student.

  71. I will admit first, that I have not attended any state university, nor have I earned a degree. However, his arguments are ludicrous!
    Without progressive bastions on the coast, there would be​ no one intelligent enough to teach? I am so glad he deigned to lower himself enough to Grace the Midwest with his illustrious presence. And his facts on campus shootings is pitifully incorrect. I do not have the facts at my fingertips, but it seems to me that the overwhelming majority of mass shootings take place in gun free zones. As a non-tenured professor in a state school, he should be, at least capable, of doing a bit of research before climbing the pulpit. At least he got another job. Shouldn’t be difficult for a liberal college professor.

  72. No question. Students should be allowed to carry concealed or openly. It is basically our Constitutional right, although I believe those who are mentally impaired should not carry. This professor needs to go back and study history, or perhaps go off to one of these “touchy-feely” schools and find his “safe space” and hide. Incidentally, the school shootings of recent news, would not have been so severe if a teacher/principal/security officer, had their weapon on their person.

  73. the safest place for men and women is appendix carry. concealed actions that come as a surprise is the safest way to carry you have more control over the gun. i have seen videos of guns being taken at the 4 to5 setting . they come up from behind and yank the pistol out and are gone.. i believe it is the easiest place to hide your gun also. of course you have to wear un-tucked baggy shirt, i mean blouse. your chest if you have good posture will keep the gun from printing. the holster should be hard sided and completely cover the trigger. if the gun does not come out of the holster it will not fire. when pulling the gun out keep your trigger finger straight and off the trigger, if you do not touch the trigger it won’t fire. when it comes time to holster it, do it very carefully and if possible take the holster off and put the gun in pointed in a safe let everyone know you are carrying is also a good idea.

  74. Ok, I am going to come out of the closet on this one. I usually don’t discuss much of my private life in public but this has impact on me because of some of my past life. I am an ex adjunct college professor in 3 fields, business, criminal justice and information technology in Nevada. I am a CCW holder and believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment. In Nevada no school staff (except school police) or students are allowed to carry firearms on campus per state law. Strange thing is that Nevada is an “Open Carry” and “CCW” state. I know that public school teachers in the elementary thru high school divisions a few years back were asking the state to allow them to carry concealed weapons if they were licensed to carry. I guess the state shot that down (no pun intended). After seeing some of these kids that have been through the public system, I don’t blame the instructors for wanting to carry weapons. I think this Instructor (from Kansas University) is a little over the top on what his criteria is for wanting to resign. I will tell you….. that one day I was at one of the colleges I taught at (both colleges I taught at had criminal justice programs) and 2 students were running through the halls during a break with replica 9mm Berettas (they looked just like the real thing). I pinned myself up against a wall as they passed by. I then noticed blue paint marks on them. As soon as I saw they were fake, I stopped the students and asked what they were doing. They said they were working on a project for one of their classes and that their instructor knew what they were doing. I told a couple of instructors later what happened and their response basically was “You’ll get used to it”! I was standing there saying “GET USED TO IT, ARE YOU KIDDING ME”!

    In conclusion:

    I see both sides of the issue. As I stated before, I believe heavily in the 2nd Amendment but sometimes there needs to be some restrictions in certain instances. I don’t have the answer. I do believe that just about anything can occur anytime, it’s the world we live in now. I feel as though we are not safe anywhere, anymore.

    1. Suddenimpact: Running through the halls with guns in your hand, real or not is absolutely the opposite of concealed carry. Restricting running through the halls with guns is fine but didn’t you for a least a moment wish that you had a gun when that happened?

  75. The Professor looks like he needs a bullet proof bubble filled with Play Doh and crayons and therapy puppies…

    Wow… I see he is a Ph.D. from UCLA… I was thinking he got his credentials from a Cracker Jack box, because he registers at ZERO in the common sense department…

    He is fleeing FROM a campus that will be very secure TO a campus that is wide open in advertising that it is a gun free zone (I assume, but it’s Liberals, so the sign is probably entrenched in concrete)

    He might be going to the U. of Arizona, where a Snowflake professor there has proposed for students to say “Ouch” when offended, while the offender will say “Oops”… I’m sure the maniac shooter will obey those rules.

    I guess this snowflake believes he will be protected by the Police, who are understaffed in every single city on the planet… If his bubble isn’t bullet proof, and the Gun free zone is surrounded on 4 sides by 4 different Police precincts, not including campus police, the Police won’t get there fast enough if a maniac chooses that place, Period

    You have to remember, these geniuses are even against armed Police on campus, because even under tight control, they will have scary boom boom sticks…

    If a massive invasion of this country takes place, I hope the Liberals know how to run a washing machine and do dishes…

    The maximum effective range of what a Anti Gun Liberal says is ZERO meters, and it’s real difficult to prove otherwise

  76. yes let them carry,

    concealed means no one will know.

    Bad guys do it right up to the murder they commit

    I would rather be a sheep dog than a sheep

  77. Dave, as you know I generally agree with you on gun ownership and concealed carry.
    However this time I side with Dorman.
    There’s no guarantee that every carrier has the proper training and license to carry.
    Students get agitated and can get reckless.
    T do think Dorman wimped out.

    1. Henry,

      You wrote that “there is no guarantee that every carrier has the proper training and license to carry.”
      There is no guarantee of that now, without the law.

      “Students can get agitated and can get reckless” – Students can do that now. In fact, Penn State is going through an investigation where 18 were charged in the reckless death of a student over a hazing and alcohol incident. No guns were used, but the student is just as dead.

      In truth, Prof. Dorman’s assertions could happen anywhere in society, not just on a college campus. That is primarily because Prof. Dorman’s arguments are pure speculation and fear. They are not substantiated with any facts; never have I seen a fact-based report showing simply because someone was carrying on campus, that person or place was more dangerous than anywhere else in public.

      I am pushing 50 years old and just finished my Ph.D. Would I have been suddenly been less trained or responsible just because I was on campus? Would that same KU student suddenly be more trained or responsible simply because he or she stepped off campus? ~Dave Dolbee

  78. I think that the professor would be much happier in California or San Francisco. I’m sure that Kansas is better off without him.

  79. His letter of resignation was well written, cogent (to the weak minded) and demonstrated a grasp of good grammar. Fortunately for me and many others his arguments against lawful carrying of a self defense product on a college campus don’t make a lick of sense. Just the possibility of someone in his class *might* have a weapon on them means that all reasonable opinions cannot be expressed? That is absurd. Not only is it absurd but it is demeaning and insulting to those students who are aware enough to educate themselves about owning and carrying a firearm. Just because I have a concealed firearm means I turn my brain off and fly off the handle at any moment? I don’t think so.

    Good riddance to bad trash. That’s a saying my Granny used to say when an undesirable left or was expelled from a group.

    I’m extremely glad Mr. Liberal Professor is going to his own nirvana: some hell hole of a coastal state university.

  80. I have 4 words in honor of Kansas successfully forcing this scumbag elitist liberal progressive the hell out their State: IT’S A GOOD START.

  81. As long as it is concealed carry, I believe it is DUTY to carry one, whether in a classroom at a college or the local Walmart, movie theater, diner, state park, ANYWHERE a person can go.
    By listening to this “professor”, we all realize he is a Liberal as one has come to expect of college educators. And as such, realize that guns frighten them. The facts he states are not truthful. Best t hing is its one less Liberal teaching( brainwashing) our youngstersl

  82. The first thing that comes to mind has nothing to do with firearms but the total disregard for the Constitution particularly the right to free speech. More and more Universities are trampling on the right of free speech by not permitting opposing views to theirs on College Campus’s. The hypocrisy of the left is very simple, anything we want is ok and anything you want is not OK. Has nothing to do with logic or common sense or the law but the attitude of we want what we want, when we want it and how we want it. It is a waste of time to engage these folks as you have noted in the Trump article. Best thing to do is to ignore them and stop spending your time in debate. It does no good whatsoever.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.