Uh, so much for encouraging people to exercise their rights here.
Good thing you aren't, then, huh. Talk about a power trip.You're all making an issue out of a non-issue. Stop.
If I was a moderator, I'd lock this thread and ban you all.
Thank goodness you are not a moderator then because a lock would be uncalled for, and a ban would be absurd. Not everyone is cut out to be a moderator, and by the reaction in your post, that certainly applies to you.You're all making an issue out of a non-issue. Stop.
If I was a moderator, I'd lock this thread and ban you all. Stop arguing like a bunch of children, posting quotes and pointing fingers. It's over.
I deleted my rant earlier, but I just can't take it any more. I cannot believe what I'm reading here. The original poster clearly stated that it is LEGAL to carry at the test site and that the test is given at "a really sketchy feeling place and a lot of crime goes on there." A whopping 10 responses have told him he should not carry. Why?
It sounds to me like he wants to survive the walk to and from the car!
Carry your weapon concealed just like you would at McDonalds. What else is there to say? Strap in on, then leave it alone. It's not like you're doing something wrong, or trying to make it through a search undetected.
I think he had his priorities perfectly straight. He wanted to avoid being killed in a place he sees as a bad part of town so he could potentially further his education in the future.
In short, I clearly don't see what I am missing. What is it about the GRE that turns a PRO-2A forum into a flock of sheep?
Clearly violating the wishes/rights of the location isn't doing something wrong?
I'm glad you took it and I hope you did well. I'll be doing the same thing soon. When I'm at home, The Auraria Campus isn't too bad. It's the light rail ride in that bugs me and would make me carry. The south line gets a little shady at Evans, and north of campus evry stop bugs me, but the campus itself isn' too bad.Well, I ended up taking it this morning. I could have (and should have) carried. No metal detectors or anything at all. Sure, I was videotaped during the test, but it's not like I was going to be polishing my gun during the break.
I'm really of the mind that I simply carry 100% of the time so long as it's legal. In Colorado a business, park, or whoever can have giant signs saying that all firearms are banned under all circumstances but they carry no legal weight whatsoever.
We can carry everywhere except where Federal law prohibits (schools, USPS) and where there are permanent metal detectors (random wanding does not count).
Anyhow, getting off topic. Hopefully this information proves useful for anyone else wondering about the subject as I found none during my search. And I did take it at the Auraria campus.
What "right" does the location have to deprive the OP of his ability to defend himself? His state already recognizes his right to carry the means for protection. Lots of folks "wish" no-one ate meat. Plenty of folks "wish" violence did not happen in the world. Millions of Americans "wish" to convert me to their religion.
So what?
The important thing is to behave ethically and legally, and the OP would have been doing both. Whether the area was dangerous enough to warrant bringing defensive weaponry is something else altogether, but you're waaaaay off base.
John
Test administrators don't own the school.
As the OP can see, the outcome of such actions is not well understood. Therefore, you're left with two choices: Leave the pistol at home, or carry it and see what happens. Don't be surprised if the second option ends badly.
Clearly violating the wishes/rights of the location isn't doing something wrong?
Just because its legal to violate someone's or a business' rights doesn't make it ethical or the proper thing to do.
Vector - Well done sir! You just made a lucid and reasonable argument. I obviously don't agree with you, but that is completely beside the point. We have used this forum to debate a topic. My basic take is this: If it's legal, go ahead and carry. Your basic take is: In this case, the stakes of getting caught are a little too high. Neither of those arguments is unreasonable. And to think, people thought we couldn't keep this on the high road!
Regarding the property rights stuff, I have a simple way of determining whether I ignore the "no guns" signs. If I am entering a place that wants to sell me a service or a product, then I don't don't accept that I have to check my rights at the door. They have essentially created an open invitation for all-comers by unlocking their door every morning. To me, this would include the GRE testing service.
However, if my neighbor invites me to dinner, and if they were anti-gun, I'd never carry into their home. I can't think of an additional example like this, but basically I would respect the rights of the property owner under these special and personal circumstances. I have no doubt this reasoning is flawed, but it's just how I approach these situations. To be clear, I would never carry anywhere that it is illegal.
Can you guarantee that I won't need it? Why wouldn't you carry if it were legal?
::EDIT:: Sure I don't need a pen everywhere, but I do carry one everywhere, unless I'm in workout clothes.
Where in the rules did it prohibit firearms? And I'm sure many people where someone threatened them, though they were previously in a rather safe environment.
It is a simplistic analogy, and I will need a pen far more often than a gun, but in general, the consequences could be much more severe if I were in want of a pen.