People keep talking about changing the gun laws for the U of U.  I really think that the recent events in virginia reinforces the need to keep the law for concealed weapons on campus if you have a permit.  The ones who are bringing guns on campus to kill are not going to follow the law against guns on campus anyway.  The law abiding citizens are the ones who will not carry guns if they change the law.  I feel safer knowing that people can carry concealed weapons on campus because if you have a shooter on campus the ones with permits that are carrying guns will be the ones who could help bring down the shooter.  The events at trolley square also show that being able to carry concealed weapons with a permit can save lives.  Even though it was an off duty police officer it could also have been another person there that had a concealed weapons permit and was carrying a gun that could have helped stop the gunman from killing more victims. So I think we really need to look at every aspect of our gun laws on U of U campus before jumping to the conclusion to just ban guns.

                                                                                                                    Kara A. -  Murray, UT.

I agree completely.  I also (As a Concealed Weapon Permit holder) feel that the Concealed weapon class's need to be modified to cover what to do in a situation like that.   Remember the multiple reports that there were two shooters?   Why did they think there were two?  Cause people saw two people with weapons, and that turned into "two shooters".  A few of the reasons why the Off Duty Police officer wasn't shot, is that 1. His Wife called 911, and told Dispatch what her husband was wearing, and that he was a Police Officer.   2. When the Police showed up He called out telling the SLC police who he was, and where the shooter was.   He did this over and over again, the ensure his safety.   

Being through the Concealed weapons permit class I can personally say that I wasn't taught any of these.   I luckly work with a Lady who's husband is a Police Officer in West Valley and we had many discussions about what happened, and she brought these points up which I had never thought about. 

I personally agree with you.   Laws only effect the people who obay the laws.   When making the laws more restrictive your only helping the ones who break the laws.  (Creating more area's of safety for them to take out their violent ways.   Why do shooters always go to schools?  Cause they know that they can find little to no restriction to their violent ways in those places.    You will never hear about a person going "postal" at a Police station, they know that they will have no power there, and will be taking out quickly, so they head to schools.)

     You must change the Punishment for such crimes to such a level that people wouldn't ever consider breaking the law for fear of the result of that violation.       For example, if the Ticket for speeding 5 MPH over the limit was a 1000$ fine I'm willing to bet not very many people would exceed the speed limit.

Kara A.

From what I've read about Cho he purchaced the gun(s) from a store.  What I've been wondering is and assuming is there was an application he had to complete in order to buy the guns.  I've been wondering what the waiting period is in Virginia after someone applies before a gun can be purchased.  Did he then have a permit?  Was he legally caring a gun?

If so, then a very mentally sick person was legally caring a gun.  It seems to me it is too easy to get a gun.  Something needs to change.  What do you think?

Sonny