Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Why you need a gun in college: NY pushes to welcome felons to college, no questions asked

NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is conducting the Political Correct Train all the way to Crazytown.  The AG has begun pressuring colleges around the state to stop asking if applicants have ever been arrested or convicted of a felony.

Apparently, asking that question makes you a racist institution.  Because, why would a college possibly want to know if a convicted rapist was applying to their school?  According to Schneiderman that should not have any factor in the school’s decision making process.   Ironic that Schneiderman assumes that black people commit all the crimes and thereby in his rationale asking the question is detrimental to blacks.  That just makes it seem that Herr Schneiderman is a big ole closet racist.

But I digress, our friends at Liberty Unyielding have dissected Schniderman’s stated stance:

Meanwhile, Schneiderman claims that the question of whether one has been arrested or convicted of a crime “can serve only to discourage New Yorkers from seeking a higher education.”

First, applications that ask the question always include a section for remarks, in which the student can explain what happened.  Therefore, an arrest that may not have led to conviction could be covered and discussed. Second, eliminating the question increases the risk of a university’s bringing people with criminal records onto its campuses.

You can read the entire article here: NY State Attorney General pressures colleges to stop asking students about criminal record, says it’s racist

The second point that Liberty Unyielding makes is a telling one.  By not asking the question, by letting political correctness run amok, Universities around New York will be allowing felons to enter their campus without any idea.  Set aside your notion that only 18 year old kids go to college.  People of all ages go to college.  At 20 a person could have raped a woman, gotten caught, served 5 years and then applied to college and be only 25 years old.  Kidnappers, bone breakers, attempted murderers…a whole gambit of felon could be welcomed onto campus with everyone in that college unaware.

Am I saying that cons who serve their time should be cast off?  No.  But people and institutions should know what they are getting into when they are judging an applicant.

All things being equal, grades, intelligence, activities etc.  I would much rather accept the 18 year old who ISN’T a convicted rapist into my school than the 25 year old ex con who is.

But so far,  St. John’s University, Five Towns College, and Dowling College have bowed down to the gods of political correctness and now blindly welcome felons in with bright eyed freshmen.

Of course, it is New York so every opportunity to help criminals succeed in finding victims is in full effect so there are no guns on campus, hardly any gun carrying law abiding citizens at all.  So if Mr. ex con rapist decides that a university full of young 18-22 year olds is as good a place as any to restart his predation, what exactly is going to be his deterrent?

Answer: NOTHING.

I’m a firm believer in being armed while going to college.  Tragedies of the past could have been lessened greatly had they occurred in places that were not gun free zones.

Yet in New York, the Attorney General, with the backing of Governor Cuomo are actually fostering and being complicit in the danger.

Also from Liberty Unyielding: ‘Side note: this year, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced a plan to provide prison inmates with taxpayer-funded college courses, something Schneiderman referred to as “a no brainer.“’

There are some fools that say political correctness is harmless.

Nonsense.  When a civil right is denied because of it and wolves are freely invited into the hen house because you don’t want to appear a bigot, harmless is not be the result.

To parents I suggest you look elsewhere to send your child to college.  Preferably someplace that actually cares about their safety and not the whims of the liberal elite.

 

  • GRAMPA

    So again our government creates special class of citizen. Why then must everyone else need to answer questions. My question is what is the end purpose to this means of action.
    Grampa

  • ps

    I have no problem allowing a second chance for someone who made a stupid mistake. Career criminals (even some teenagers fall into this category) are another matter. In either case, they should be closely monitored if allowed in the wild until they prove they are trustworthy. As the father of two daughters (20 and 16) and a son (18), I have come to the conclusion that it may be best to arm the girls around age 16. I realize it may be discriminatory, but it could put a serious dent in the predator population. My youngest daughter has already ruled out the University of Chicago which has been sending regular solicitations. She understands that she would be at a significant disadvantage regarding self-defense vs. our home state where she can legally carry a firearm at age 18.

    • Bullets First

      I’m right with you ps, with regards to criminals doing their time and given a fair shake when they return to their lives. I even wrote an article about it some time ago: http://bulletsfirst.net/2012/08/20/can-you-ever-pay-off-your-crime/

      But colleges should be aware of who they are letting into their schools. Because a kid making a mistake and stealing a car is a world of difference from a rapist or pedophile. That’s why having the explanation part of the “were you ever a felon” is the right kind of compromise.

Send this to friend