Liberty University encouraging armed student body and Islamaphobia?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JFree

Anesthesiology PGY3/CA2 University of New Mexico
10+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
5
Reaction score
17
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0

Liberty University President Tells Students To Bring Guns To Campus
He said, "I've always thought if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in."


I guess this could be one way to be distinctive as osteopathic physicians...
Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
To be fair, Liberty University and LUCOM aren't the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Is the college of medicine not part of the university?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Bea5T said:
To be fair, Liberty University and LUCOM aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

Precisely.

BTW I'm no fan of the Falwell bunch and I know little about LUCOM, but doctors have a right to self-defense and to protect their family just like anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I don't think this would be nearly as scary without the comment specifically targeting Muslims. I live in state where a permitted individual can carry a gun almost anywhere, including hospitals and schools. I am not thrilled with that, but it is what is. The Islamaphobia part is very worrisome, especially when tied to a call for students to arm themselves. I would seriously question applying here if I were a Muslim. And LUCOM is a college of a university. Pretty hard to say they are different. I know the president of my university is involved with our COM. As was the president of the university where I got my PharmD before this. Is LUCOM that different from other universities?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
To preserve credibility never cite the huffington post
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
costales said:
http://www.newsadvance.com/news/loc...cle_beb5db52-8efb-55fe-8320-7a69710c6dff.html
One student took Falwell to task on Twitter for the remarks, but the university president said he was referring to Islamic terrorists. “I was referring to ‘those Muslims’ that just carried out attacks in Paris and California,” he said in the tweet clarifying his comments.

Maybe someone ought to ask this student:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1271226
Click to expand...

This guy is showing his ignorance with every sentence. He shouldn't be saying "those Muslims" or "Islamic terrorists" it should be just "terrorists." Its statements like this that lead the general populous to believe muslims = terrorists.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Preface; I am very pro gun/concealed carry/2nd amendment...

That being said, it baffles me that in most medical schools, students with concealed carry permits are forbidden from carrying while attending lectures.
The demographic of med students ubiquitously consists of some of the most high-achieving, intelligent, and utmost law abiding members of society.... the background check that I took during my med school orientation was vastly more involved and thorough than any sort of NICS check I had to do to buy a firearm. Even the most die-hard liberal would likely conceded that the student body of virtually all medical schools in the US are the kind of people who could be prudently labeled as "responsible gun owners".

Edit: I disagree with any form of xenophobia. The anti-muslim aspect of the speech made at liberty university's forum is not one that I agree with. My classmates are of various religious and cultural backgrounds (christians, muslims, sikhs, atheists, white, black, asian, etc.) and I would feel more comfortable if I knew that we could all preserve our rights to have the chance to defend ourselves from a violent threat while attending class.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
qwe1230 said:
Preface; I am very pro gun/concealed carry/2nd amendment...

That being said, it baffles me that in most medical schools, students with concealed carry permits are forbidden from carrying while attending lectures.
The demographic of med students ubiquitously consists of some of the most high-achieving, intelligent, and utmost law abiding members of society.... the background check that I took during my med school orientation was vastly more involved and thorough than any sort of NICS check I had to do to buy a firearm. Even the most die-hard liberal would likely conceded that the student body of virtually all medical schools in the US are the kind of people who could be prudently labeled as "responsible gun owners".

Edit: I disagree with any form of xenophobia. The anti-muslim aspect of the speech made at liberty university's forum is not one that I agree with. My classmates are of various religious and cultural backgrounds (christians, muslims, sikhs, atheists, white, black, asian, etc.) and I would feel more comfortable if I knew that we could all preserve our rights to have the chance to defend ourselves from a violent threat while attending class.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine that the people who are high achievers are likely to avoid environments where they would ever need a gun and or likewise understand their limitations in situations when they might need one. Or on top of that understanding that gun ownership mainly is linked with gun related suicide or familial homicide....

Personally I telegraph my movements and I'm not going to be able to pull a gun out on an assailant before they shoot me. So I don't understand the point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
I'd imagine that the people who are high achievers are likely to avoid environments where they would ever need a gun and or likewise understand their limitations in situations when they might need one. Or on top of that understanding that gun ownership mainly is linked with gun related suicide or familial homicide....

Personally I telegraph my movements and I'm not going to be able to pull a gun out on an assailant before they shoot me. So I don't understand the point.
Click to expand...

Or, high achievers might also look at the data and realize that these events can happen not just anywhere, but especially and increasingly in environments that are "safe." Understanding one's own limitations in these situations is certainly paramount, and I appreciate your honesty with your own, but don't project your limitations onto those of others who might have undergone training that could make the difference. For instance, I had a Navy Seal and multiple other military members in my classroom every single day in years 1 and 2. In the current climate, why should we ever prevent these individuals from carrying weapons?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
NeuroSpeed said:
Or, high achievers might also look at the data and realize that these events can happen not just anywhere, but especially and increasingly in environments that are "safe." Understanding one's own limitations in these situations is certainly paramount, and I appreciate your honesty with your own, but don't project your limitations onto those of others who might have undergone training that could make the difference. For instance, I had a Navy Seal and multiple other military members in my classroom every single day in years 1 and 2. In the current climate, why should we ever prevent these individuals from carrying weapons?
Click to expand...

I think i'd rather lose my wallet or cell phone over escalating a fight and risking death. And if we're talking about random terrorists bursting into the lecture hall, I'm pretty sure even the marines would be pretty unsure of what to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Someone please close this thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I like the Bill Maher stance on Islam.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
I'd imagine that the people who are high achievers are likely to avoid environments where they would ever need a gun and or likewise understand their limitations in situations when they might need one. Or on top of that understanding that gun ownership mainly is linked with gun related suicide or familial homicide....

Personally I telegraph my movements and I'm not going to be able to pull a gun out on an assailant before they shoot me. So I don't understand the point.
Click to expand...

I reapect your opinion. But how come you think your circumstances/opinion should apply to those who disagree with you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Tired said:
I reapect your opinion. But how come you think your circumstances/opinion should apply to those who disagree with you?
Click to expand...

And what do you believe is the practical application of having an armed populous? or hell just having a few people in every classroom or building that are armed that is not accomplished by having guards and or police persons?

I'm all for appropriate and good gun use. I'm pro having sane people have guns. However how does that make me safer as a person? Chances are if I'm in a hostage situation and someone tries to shoot their gun at a terrorist they'll miss and either hit me or someone or insight said terrorists to probably kill everyone in the room instead of just waiting for a large swat team to clear out the room and leave me with a higher chance of survival....

But again, if you think owning a hand gun makes you safer thats fine. Just don't bring it near me.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
And what do you believe is the practical application of having an armed populous? or hell just having a few people in every classroom or building that are armed that is not accomplished by having guards and or police persons?
Click to expand...

? We have an armed populace (highest per capita in the developed world I think other thsn Switzerland where it's compulsory).

And I didn't have any security on-site at my med school. Do you really have armed police in your lecture halls?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
And what do you believe is the practical application of having an armed populous? or hell just having a few people in every classroom or building that are armed that is not accomplished by having guards and or police persons?

I'm all for appropriate and good gun use. I'm pro having sane people have guns. However how does that make me safer as a person? Chances are if I'm in a hostage situation and someone tries to shoot their gun at a terrorist they'll miss and either hit me or someone or insight said terrorists to probably kill everyone in the room instead of just waiting for a large swat team to clear out the room and leave me with a higher chance of survival....

But again, if you think owning a hand gun makes you safer thats fine. Just don't bring it near me.
Click to expand...

A guard stationed at the front of the building is probably going to be killed before he can react. The attacker would have the element of surprise, and the luxury of pre-planning. If you have armed people in the building, maybe they'd get tipped off by gunfire and could react appropriately. You also don't have to pay those people, and can potentially have a lot more of them. Their attackers aren't going to be able to immediately recognize them and target them either.

What do you consider "appropriate and good gun use?" Sane people having guns that are locked away in a safe in their bedroom isn't going to help in one of these terrorist attacks. If they're carrying, it conceivably could. You're also statistically more likely to be killed if you're taken hostage than you are to live. If you're in such a situation, you should first try to run, then try to hide, and if those aren't options, you should really think about fighting. A 9mm does a lot to improve those odds even if it doesn't completely level the playing field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
in a lecture hall of say 100 students and even if just say 3 students are packing heat...the bad guy would have no idea who's carrying and who's not. He wouldnt be able to target them. If a guy comes in and just starts shooting, I highly doubt he'd be able to pick out the 3 people that have guns. And as soon as they started firing back, im sure the bad guy would flee (or get shot...3 vs 1). In any case, the # of victims would be less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Tired said:
? We have an armed populace (highest per capita in the developed world I think other thsn Switzerland where it's compulsory).

And I didn't have any security on-site at my med school. Do you really have armed police in your lecture halls?
Click to expand...


Switzerland does not allow you to keep magazines at your house. Hence why no one is being killed from guns there.
 
asdf123g said:
in a lecture hall of say 100 students and even if just say 3 students are packing heat...the bad guy would have no idea who's carrying and who's not. He wouldnt be able to target them. If a guy comes in and just starts shooting, I highly doubt he'd be able to pick out the 3 people that have guns. And as soon as they started firing back, im sure the bad guy would flee (or get shot...3 vs 1). In any case, the # of victims would be less.
Click to expand...


chances are the bad guy would just open fire and leave a room full of corpses if they feel like the situation was going sour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Druggernaut said:
A guard stationed at the front of the building is probably going to be killed before he can react. The attacker would have the element of surprise, and the luxury of pre-planning. If you have armed people in the building, maybe they'd get tipped off by gunfire and could react appropriately. You also don't have to pay those people, and can potentially have a lot more of them. Their attackers aren't going to be able to immediately recognize them and target them either.

I'm inclined to believe that if you've killed a guard you're probably going to not have any issue putting down everyone in the room. Ppl aren't going to be able to across a room shoot accurately. A guy with a ak-47 won't need to be accurate.


What do you consider "appropriate and good gun use?" Sane people having guns that are locked away in a safe in their bedroom isn't going to help in one of these terrorist attacks. If they're carrying, it conceivably could. You're also statistically more likely to be killed if you're taken hostage than you are to live. If you're in such a situation, you should first try to run, then try to hide, and if those aren't options, you should really think about fighting. A 9mm does a lot to improve those odds even if it doesn't completely level the playing field.
Click to expand...

Actually the appropriate limitation of guns is a better idea tbh. Sorry, but you've got more chances of dying from a drive by random bullet than a terrorist. Lets be entirely frank, you're not going to be making anyone safer and having a bunch of guns in the arms of random ppl just leads to more deaths anyways. Hell, play any fps without talking to your team. You all end up dead real quick.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
Switzerland does not allow you to keep magazines at your house. Hence why no one is being killed from guns there.
Click to expand...

So it's not about being worried about medical students carrying guns in lecture halls, you basically just don't think anyone should be able to own a gun?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
asdf123g said:
whats that?
Click to expand...

I'll paraphrase, 8% of Turkish citizens are extemists or sympathizers of ISIS. Apply 8% to the global Muslim populous of 1.6 billion and you have the potential to have 96 million extemists or sympathizers. That is enough people to change and occupy nations. Bill reminds people of his right to be intolerant and insensitive of their religion during a time of political correctness and sugar coating feelings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
Switzerland does not allow you to keep magazines at your house. Hence why no one is being killed from guns there.
Click to expand...

This is simply false.
Up until recently, all Swiss males of fighting age were required by law to store a fully automatic SIG SG550 in their homes with a cache of government supplied ammunition. These rifles could be fired at shooting ranges or for hunting, but the owner's had to use their own store bought ammunition.
This system of their government issuing rifles still exists, but it is now voluntary. Also, if a citizen chooses to opt in, he may also choose to keep the rifle at a local swiss military armory, instead of keeping it at home.

To put this into perspective, let's compare 2 countries. Honduras & Switzerland.
Both have nearly identical populations (8 million).
Legal gun ownership in Switzerland is encouraged & common (ranked #2 in the world per capita).
Legal gun ownership in Honduras does not exist. Civilian firearm ownership is entirely banned.
Which of these 2 countries do you think has THE highest homicide rate in the world?
 
Tired said:
So it's not about being worried about medical students carrying guns in lecture halls, you basically just don't think anyone should be able to own a gun?
Click to expand...

Quite a leap there. I believe we'd be safer for it. But no. I think American eroticism with guns is too strong for a Swiss model. I think we need to just regulate guns better and if we must install failsafes on weaponry to limit its use ( Though there were protests against this i.e because when it comes down to it most ppl are owning guns for protecting, it's to fight an infantile game of fight against the tyranny).
 
qwe1230 said:
This is simply false.
Up until recently, all Swiss males of fighting age were required by law to store a fully automatic SIG SG550 in their homes with a cache of government supplied ammunition. These rifles could be fired at shooting ranges or for hunting, but the owner's had to use their own store bought ammunition.
This system of their government issuing rifles still exists, but it is now voluntary. Also, if a citizen chooses to opt in, he may also choose to keep the rifle at a local swiss military armory, instead of keeping it at home.

To put this into perspective, let's compare 2 countries. Honduras & Switzerland.
Both have nearly identical populations (8 million).
Legal gun ownership in Switzerland is encouraged & common (ranked #2 in the world per capita).
Legal gun ownership in Honduras does not exist. Civilian firearm ownership is entirely banned.
Which of these 2 countries do you think has THE highest homicide rate in the world?
Click to expand...


Government supplies caches are stored outside of homes. Many Swiss 'army' men have stated this, and btw being in Swizterland their idea of military training is more akin to boy scouts than anything.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
Government supplies caches are stored outside of homes. Many Swiss 'army' men have stated this, and btw being in Swizterland their idea of military training is more akin to boy scouts than anything.
Click to expand...
For the most part, government supplied ammunition is in fact stored at Swiss military armories since the late 2000's. However, several thousand government-issued rifle owners are designated to keep ammunition at home when they live near high value establishments (power plants, dams, airports, courthouses, research centers & universities).

Swiss military training is akin to the boy scouts? Get out of here with that nonsense. I've never seen a boy scout troupe undergo 18 weeks of mandatory boot camp + yearly 3-week drills for the next decade.
 
qwe1230 said:
This is simply false.
Up until recently, all Swiss males of fighting age were required by law to store a fully automatic SIG SG550 in their homes with a cache of government supplied ammunition. These rifles could be fired at shooting ranges or for hunting, but the owner's had to use their own store bought ammunition.
This system of their government issuing rifles still exists, but it is now voluntary. Also, if a citizen chooses to opt in, he may also choose to keep the rifle at a local swiss military armory, instead of keeping it at home.

To put this into perspective, let's compare 2 countries. Honduras & Switzerland.
Both have nearly identical populations (8 million).
Legal gun ownership in Switzerland is encouraged & common (ranked #2 in the world per capita).
Legal gun ownership in Honduras does not exist. Civilian firearm ownership is entirely banned.
Which of these 2 countries do you think has THE highest homicide rate in the world?
Click to expand...

Socioeconomically those countries are very different. Apples to oranges comparasion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Fang Fang said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0

Liberty University President Tells Students To Bring Guns To Campus
He said, "I've always thought if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in."


I guess this could be one way to be distinctive as osteopathic physicians...
Click to expand...


I read an article about a Muslim girl at lucom. If a president of my school said they wanted to end people of my religion and to bring guns I would be very frightened.

Welcome to nazi germany, I mean lucom.

Come for the young earth creationism stay for the loose association to killing Muslims.


I actually have a friend that goes to lucom (christrain). Nice girl I feel bad for her though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
DoctorSynthesis said:
Socioeconomically those countries are very different. Apples to oranges comparasion.
Click to expand...

It's also as I mentioned very different. Switzerland despite what is said above does not let ppl keep ammo in their homes. This is something Swiss people have made clear repeatedly and dislike when we Americans discuss them as an example.
 
qwe1230 said:
So we agree that the differences are social and economical. Not guns?
Click to expand...

So basically what you're saying is that you're going to invest in changing the society so that gun usage in the country is without major issue?

I mean to put this into a medical example, we're taking a guy off a statin so that we can then put him on a diet.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
So basically what you're saying is that you're going to invest in changing the society so that gun usage in the country is without major issue?

I mean to put this into a medical example, we're taking a guy off a statin so that we can then put him on a diet.
Click to expand...

To answer your first question; yes. American society has been and will continue to be adjusted in order to conform with our inalienable constitutional rights.

In regards to your second question; No, I totally disagree. We as a medical community should never ban statin drugs as a threat or leverage to get unfit patients to exercise. In much the same way that we will never restrict a citizen's right to self defense even if some lunatics will recklessly use firearms for evil.

You never ban a useful tool just because ideally the imaginary absence of that tool would drive people to some sort of moral betterment. The pros of the tool far outweigh the cons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
aust10n said:
I'll paraphrase, 8% of Turkish citizens are extemists or sympathizers of ISIS. Apply 8% to the global Muslim populous of 1.6 billion and you have the potential to have 96 million extemists or sympathizers. That is enough people to change and occupy nations. Bill reminds people of his right to be intolerant and insensitive of their religion during a time of political correctness and sugar coating feelings.
Click to expand...
And according to the same pew study, 7% of Nigerian Christians support ISIS. Apply 7% to the global Christian populous and you have the potential to have 147 million Christian ISIS sympathizers? See, you can do funny things with these polls, huh.

There are several explanations as to why someone would check "favorable" on a poll about ISIS. Perhaps they are uninformed about just how insane that group is, perhaps they are themselves violent lunatics, perhaps they have really weird geopolitical views. Who knows? But why insist that the reason for their support is Islam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
aust10n said:
I like the Bill Maher stance on Islam.
Click to expand...

But theres also the fact that Bill Maher is purposely misleading/lying about Islam to paint a picture of them being violent. In lik 90% of his videos, about Islam, he talks about a significant number of Muslims believing that apostates should be killed. This suggests that if you are living in the US as a Muslim and your friend becomes an apostate then you should kill him. EVERY reputable Islamic scholar would tell you that that action would be explicitly impermisble. Killing an apostate is something that might happen if a Muslim living in a Muslim country aids an enemy which leads to the death of Muslims (i.e treason). And even then there would be a large trial. Theres a reason why Bill Maher never says the # of apostates killed every yr.
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
chances are the bad guy would just open fire and leave a room full of corpses if they feel like the situation was going sour.
Click to expand...
OK so we have 2 situations:
1) crazy bad guy walks in with a pistol and several magazines. Opens fire, reloads, opens fire, reloads. No one has a gun and he kills as many people as he pleases.
2) crazy bad guy begins to open fire. Empties one magazine and begins to reload. 3 people carrying open fire on bad guy.

In which situation were more lives lost? The answer is pretty obvious.
 
...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
asdf123g said:
OK so we have 2 situations:
1) crazy bad guy walks in with a pistol and several magazines. Opens fire, reloads, opens fire, reloads. No one has a gun and he kills as many people as he pleases.
2) crazy bad guy begins to open fire. Empties one magazine and begins to reload. 3 people carrying open fire on bad guy.

In which situation were more lives lost? The answer is pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

Except this is infrequently the case. Terrorists rarely just kill, their major work is in milking it through hostages.

Anyways can we be honest about the reality that will rarely find ourselves in a scenario where owning a gun is going to particularly save our lives...
 
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
Except this is infrequently the case. Terrorists rarely just kill, their major work is in milking it through hostages.

Anyways can we be honest about the reality that will rarely find ourselves in a scenario where owning a gun is going to particularly save our lives...
Click to expand...
Are you even paying attention? Which of the recent terror attacks took hostages? The perps killed indiscriminately until they met armed resistance, then they either killed themselves or were killed by police.

And of course most of us will rarely find ourselves in a situation where carrying a weapon will make a difference. However it is my choice to determine at what threshold it becomes prudent to carry a weapon, not yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Drrrrrr. Celty said:
Except this is infrequently the case. Terrorists rarely just kill, their major work is in milking it through hostages.

Anyways can we be honest about the reality that will rarely find ourselves in a scenario where owning a gun is going to particularly save our lives...
Click to expand...
Self-defense shootings are actually quite common. And it's no longer true that terrorists rarely just kill instead of taking hostages. Which ISIS attack in a western country in the past two years had hostage-taking as the goal?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

NontradCA
  • Locked
Liberty University
Replies
11
Views
1K
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
S
Baptist Health Sciences University COM
Replies
5
Views
1K
Goro
Goro
C
Attention Liberty COM Students
Replies
5
Views
1K
Hematochezia666
Hematochezia666
D
Ways to help/encourage a med student friend
Replies
0
Views
413
deleted1166528
D
hungrydoc710
LUCOM brings students back amid COVID !!!
Replies
3
Views
2K
Goro
Goro
Top