The Joys of Higher Education

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bclark1

member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
351
Also known as, allowing people's ignorance to become false expertise.

Guns have been vilified since day one of law school, and I have basically just kept my mouth shut as there's been a lot of things beyond guns where my classmates' opinions simply fly in the face of all that is good and right.

Anyway, today, I couldn't help but speak up, and I thought I'd have some support. My criminal law professor was in the IDF and I thought he may have been a recreational shooter. I took the "no accidental discharge" stance, saying they were all negligent, and no, guns don't fire themselves. My point was that, even in older guns that leave something to be desired mechanically, obeying basic safety rules in terms of the trigger, loading and unloading, and muzzle discretion will prevent ill. Before I could make this point though, it was shot down and turned around for the peanut gallery to comment on, who now have their false opinions on the subject emboldened. "Not only did I see it on TV, but my professor inferred it." It really seems pretty pointless to try and educate people these days. I was debating passing the hat around for ammo to start a "Take an idiot shooting" thing on the weekends and try and correct people's views, but I'm increasingly unconvinced that it would be to any good effect.
 
The case had to do with a man who threatened another, going to his car for a rifle, thinking he had unloaded it when there was still one in the pipe, and then claiming it was accidental when he shot the other man, saying that "the gun went off by itself." The professor said "Well what would happen if I dropped a gun pointing it at you right now?" to which I suggested most likely nothing. He then related his story of the Uzi having problems with firing unexpectedly. It would have been nice, although something of a tangent, to make it clear that if you're pointing a gun at me, that is in an unsafe condition to allow accidental firing, that you've loaded, and are then irresponsible enough to drop it, yes, you have definitely been reckless. Instead, the floor was opened to people who "know" guns can go off by themselves, because they saw "one time on TV" where if you "squeezed the barrel" (this was an actual thing put out there) it would shoot without pulling the trigger.

My whole point would have been that the guy was wrong for getting a gun while he was drunk, he was wrong for thinking cycling the bolt a few times had emptied it, and he was wrong for pointing it at someone. At that point, even if God were to release the firing pin, you've done enough that it's no "accident." I was not allowed to make this point, instead just getting a stock "You're wrong."
 
I've done my fair share of higher education and I'm even working on a Masters degree right now. I have NEVER had a professor cut me off before I could make my full point. Sometimes points of view are debated and are not always agreed upon, but that's life. However, in a university classroom setting, there is no reason why full discourse shouldn't take place.

However, you're professor shouldn't have stopped you before you finished making your point. I'd say switch schools, but you're not an undergrad and law school is a pretty committed endeavor. Trash him on the course evaluation, and, if it persists and/or if he was VERY out of line, speak to the department chair or dean. If you do, don't make it into a gun issue, make it into an issue about opinions being shut down.

I expect lousy tactics like that in the media, but you would think a university - a LAW SCHOOL - would show better decorum.
 
1. As you will discover after graduation, all defendants do things accidently.:D "Aw, man, I ass-i-ent-lee shot Ice Dawg 8 times with my 5 shot revolvers." "Aw, man, I assientlee had 14 keys of horse in my trunk while I was assientlee driving from Chicago to Indy."

2. Firearms, when dropped, do discharge. However, they do this only a fraction of a percentage point of what is claimed.:D "Aw, man, I didn't mean to shoot Ray-ray. I assientlee dropped my Glock and it went off 17 times in the same direction."

3. "You're wrong" is not an acceptable answer in law school and your professor should not have cut you off. You could argue recklessness, negligence or accident. Just ensure your argument is supported.

4. Always be ready to argue either side in an argument (always raise both sides in your exams in December).

5. Learn from this class today.:) Be prepared, never quit.
 
the only way to combat ignorance is with superior erudition.

You gotta know more than them.

So, go look up the gun in question.

Memorize how it works.

Draw them a picture and show them why it cannot just "go off" by itself.

a point, however.

Guns CAN -seem to- "go off" by themselves when the mechanism holding the hammer back gets worn. In which case, a jarring impact can knock it loose.

A friend of mine got shot in 11 2005 in Iraq this way. A Marine on guard was showing off rifle spinning tricks, and dropped a chambered M16. Either the disconnect was worn, or the firing pin had been crudded forward, but in any case an m855 went flying out at ground level and zipped a hole in my buddy's left calf. Fortunately, he is a medic and was literally right in front of the hospitol so now he just has a cool scar to show off.
 
Possible explanation

The IDF had a habit of modding the uzi with a swivel stud on the cocking handle. Supposedly made readying the weapon faster. They stopped this when several people were shot by "empty" uzi's that had been inadvertently chambered by pushing down on the weapon. This operated the bolt via the sling. In the end, still a ND, not AD.
 
That is a shame that your professor is ignorant. Your wasting time and money in his class. It’s like blaming the perfectly functioning car for vehicular Homicide, or blaming the bat or a knife for a beating or a stabbing. Your professor really said, "What if I dropped a gun in your direction and it went off"? What if I threw a butcher knife and said, "CATCH". The difference between 1st Degree murder and involuntary manslaughter is all about intent...A LAW PROFESSOR SHOULD DEFINATELY KNOW THIS. The guy pointing what he thinks is an unloaded rifle at a guy he his mad at and pulling the trigger probably used the "I did not know it was loaded" argument to get a lesser manslaughter charge instead of a murder charge. The prosecution probably argued that as a gun owner should never ASSUME that a weapon is unloaded, and that if he truly intended to scare the victim he should have verified that his rifle did not have a round chambered in it, and he should have never pulled the trigger. The discharge was either intended or not, and that is what the jury or judge needs to decide. The firearm function has no bearing on the case, its the action and intent of the individual.

When I went to college I learned something about professors, they fall into certain categories. 1) Some teacher became teachers because they are book smart, never had real world experience in their field and went right into teaching 2) Others excelled in their field, but for some reason they decided to walk away from that and become teachers 3) Others where outright failures in their field, and became teacher to make a buck. The best professors are from the second category, and I would make a 5-dollar bet that this guy is either #1 or #3.
 
You're lucky they didnt rush you and toss the lecturn .
Butt stroking an animal with some old shotgun might get you shot , but the predominant number of guns that still work , dont go off by themselves . They are there to take your money and they will , so keep it on the down low . The dude sounds like a weenie , watch out . I would still troll for a range buddy .
 
Yes, it's open bolt.

However, they're carried with the bolt in battery on an empty chamber. Jostling them around got the bolt retracted and when some Nimrod forgot several of the Four Rules...
 
When my wife was going through law school, the anti-gun crowd was absolutley rabid. Conversations were seldom finished, and the professors were entrenched in their positions.

Good luck in there.
 
I also have my masters degree. It is in psychology and fine arts but I still have experienced higher learning.

I have always found the more educated people are the more willing they are to listen to opposing points of view and examine different sides of an issue.

I hate it when gun people try to make it seem like higher education is an enemy of RKBA. That is like saying "gun lovers like to be ignorant and uninformed and anyone that is informed is against RKBA".

Is that the image we want to put forth????

Arguing with the educated is a challenge because you have to think and stay on your toes...arguing with a "bubba" is impossible because they do not follow logic or rely on facts. "If Rush said it then it has to be true."
 
I too am in college..not law school however but have not been shutdown for my opinion but I have not had to have the gun debate...yet. I am surprised that in a discussion like that you were shut out. Any loaded weapon can "GO OFF" but its usually cause the idiot on the other end pulls the trigger and does not realize it. I would invite a couple of the anti-gunners to the range and ask them to squeeze your barrel in a fashion that will make the weapon discharge.
 
Thanks for the replies - I just needed to get it off of my chest. Engineering was my undergrad, and it's a major where, by and large, you manage to stay away from the loonies.

I'm going to try and chat with him by myself, because I don't want to have to deal with this bothering me the rest of the semester. Yes, mechanical failures happen, but when they do no one needs to get hurt if you're handling your implement properly. I wouldn't bring it up in my other classes because I wouldn't expect most of the professors to understand that, but one with military experience certainly knows the rules of safe gun handling, and I had just hoped would have allowed me to point out that a bullet is not travelling down a barrel toward a person because the evil gun wanted it to. I'll probably just be for the most part biting the bullet, so to speak, here though.

I like a lot of what's been said here, though. It's always nice to be reminded there are pockets of common sense left out there, especially after you get publicly embarassed for being the one foolish enough to say something rational out loud. I'd be tempted to bring up how the IDF goofed with the slings, but I'm going to give that whole "drawing flies with honey" thing I used to hear about first.
 
I have always found the more educated people are the more willing they are to listen to opposing points of view and examine different sides of an issue.
Click to expand...
I've had exactly the opposite experience. I've found that the more formal education one has the less likely they are to listen to an opposing point of view (especially if the person espousing this opposing point of view has less formal education than themselves).

Most Academicians I know (and there's a few in my family that reinforce this) live in Ivory Towers and are disinterested in coming down regardless of the quality of the opposing position's data).
 
I am sorry. I will have to disagree. To say to be educated is to be close minded is an untruth. it shines a bad light on anyone that makes this statement. It is a statement that comes across as based on fear and resentment and it shines a bad light on anyone that makes it. it seems to say that it is "better" to be ignorant.
 
too bad

Maybe it was the particular class? My law school experience was more balanced overall regarding opinions on gun control and class discussions, though most people were apathetic on the issue . . .
 
I am sorry. I will have to disagree. To say to be educated is to be close minded is an untruth.
Click to expand...
You can believe whatever you want but I stand by my statement as it is based on my actual life experience as opposed to a theoretical or idealists view of higher education and the higher educated (BTW, I did go to college, so I do actually have experience with the close mindedness of academia).

it shines a bad light on anyone that makes this statement. It is a statement that comes across as based on fear and resentment and it shines a bad light on anyone that makes it.
Click to expand...
Thank you for reinforcing my belief there. Surely anyone who disagrees with "the learned" is an idiot. I guess I'm just too uneducated to realize this.

it seems to say that it is "better" to be ignorant.
Click to expand...
No, its just acknowledging that many highly educated people are extremely (and often willfully) ignorant, but because they have letters after their name they are unwilling to believe they can be ignorant.

Your assumption seems to be that only those with a formal education lack ignorance.



Clearly the two extremes (1 that all college educated people are close minded or 2 that all college educated people are open minded) are wrong here. But for many people, higher education ends up closing their minds more than opening it because they are programmed with the hubris that they are right simply because they have a sheep skin from an accredited university.

Otherwise how do you explain the massive wrongness of most of academia on the issue if guns?

At one time in history higher education taught critical thinking ... now most colleges and universities indoctrinate, not educate and students are taught not to question what they are told (so I don't know, maybe you're real old and went to school before the big shift :neener: ).
 
I have known good people of all educational stripes, but the most vehement in their arguments against me in gun realms tend to be the "over-educated" in my circle of family and friends. I think the problem is the sort of people that want to learn forever end up living in a fantasy world because they see the world so differently, and want everything to fit nicely into their theory of the universe. If there is such a stereotype, the pseudo-libertarian who has forgotten what a necessary evil is comes to mind. That is not to imply guns are one, as punching paper and smashing clay are probably the two of the most relaxing-but-focused things I partake in, but they only see guns as a destructive implement because they never had that sort of a good experience, because even if the opportunity presented it does not fit the PC-mold which you need to fit in the circles they run with. There are 2 or 3 people I'm picturing right now, who I love very much, but that will just never "get" the reality ever again. Not to politicize the debate either, but young people tend to be more liberal, which usually means anti-gun. Good professors will get along with their students, who are young people. And so a lot of "good" professors, that will stick around teaching for a while, will be liberal, because they'll relate to their audience better and probably reach the majority more effectively.
 
This is why I gave up the idea of becoming a lawyer (I was all set with applications in hand and an appointment to take the LSAT's) and am going to a gunsmithing school instead...
 
Zundfolge,

I am not saying that all educated people are open minded, nor am I saying all uneducated people are close minded, but you cannot make a gereralization that more educated people are not as open minded. In fact I have always noticed the opposite. People that possess the mental facilities to be successful in higher education usually have an open and analytical mind. Give them good information and they will listen. Give them faulty information and they will tear you apart. They tend to have a prove it or shut up attitude and sometimes do not believe anything they cannot discern to be true on their own. That is why they do not like people like Rush who twists facts or just makes stuff up. I have a book completely devoted to things Rush said and then the truth about the same topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top