Support NeoGAF

[Timeaisis]

She is the one who brought it up.

Ah, well I guess that explains it, then. Looking back at the article the only mention of open carry was a quote from one of her tweets, so you're right.

Anyway, honest mistake on her part, but I just wanted to clarify that this has to do with concealed carry laws in Utah, not open carry laws.

 

[diehard]

You think gun laws are the reason for that?

No, i believe mostly the economy is.

But the attitude of "lol their gun laws!" isn't very applicable here either.

 

[Kettch]

Perfectly reasonable to you, maybe. The law isn't something that we can bend and change on a whim of opinions, it's something that is drafted, debated, and eventually voted on by the representatives. It may seem reasonable to you at present, and may seem reasonable for the people of Utah to change the law if this event sparks some social discussion, but one cannot assume what is reasonable to you is reasonable to the rest of us and just make a claim that the law should bend for your reason. Because it's your reasoning, not necessary everyone else's.

Let's not forget that everyone interprets the law differently, and that something reasonable to you is not necessarily reasonable to me. That's the entire reason why laws exist: we don't all agree on what's ethical or logical or reasonable, but we must obey a set of statues (this goes for police officers, too, in this case). It may seem illogical to not disarm attendees to you, but it is the law.. And subject to change through legal means, but not on a whim of some present opinions.

You just said a lot of nothing there. I'm perfectly aware of what laws are. That's why I said lawmakers could be blamed as well for the passing of laws that don't allow for someone's protection at an event. Your response doesn't apply to my comment at all. Changing the law through legal means is exactly what I think should happen.

 

[WayneMorse]

#killallmen

No but really fuck gamergate, this shit is so fucking dumb and needs to stop. I hate the gaming community most of the time because of shit like this.

WASPs with inferiority complexes upset that they no longer control the hegemony.

 

[Pickman]

The Wasatch front has over a million people.

You do know how "rates" work, right?

Eh I just googled a number. I'll see myself out of this thread now.

 

[Russell_T_Shackelford]

How many hostile offensive public shootings have been committed by CCW permit holders?

Btw, the "open carry policy" referenced in the OP is restricted to CCW holders. Owners without CCW permits are not allowed to open carry on campus.

 

[timetokill]

The entire state of Utah has less people than only Los Angeles and San Diego combined. Salt Lake City, their largest city, has only 186,000ish people in it. There's just not enough people close enough to shoot.

Sounds like we should ban urban areas

 

[massoluk]

How many hostile offensive public shootings have been committed by CCW permit holders?

Btw, the "open carry policy" referenced in the OP is restricted to CCW holders. Owners without CCW permits are not allowed to open carry on campus.

Nevermind the innocence of CCW permit holders for a second, the cops flat out refuses to check for gun at all. Fine, the good guys with the gun want to carry their toys, but the cops refuse to at least check the people at the events where a threat was made against because of the law.

 

[Russell_T_Shackelford]

That's not how it works, the school is private property. Even in open carry state, the school can simply state that no weapons are allowed and that is that. Just because it's open carry, does NOT mean you can take your weapon anywhere and any place can tell someone that they don't want the weapon on property.

State university is private property? Just a cursory search of Utah gun law reveals that the university cannot "simply state that no weapons are allowed and that is that."

 

[KuwabaraTheMan]

Terrible. It's awful that she has to constantly deal with these threats, and it's really horrendous that the authorities won't do anything to stop this even with a clear danger being presented. This makes it clear that gun advocates have gone way, way too far.

It's not "gamer culture" it's asshole misogynists on twitter who also happen to enjoy games.

At this point, it is "gamer culture". That's not to say that even close to a majority of gamers feel this way, but the culture around games and gamers has fostered this. It would be easy for all of us to wring our hands and say "it's just a few asshole misogynists", "they would have done this anyway", "women haters who just picked this issue", but the reality is different, I think. This has all been facilitated by the culture around gaming. Xbox Live and game websites and booth babes and exploitation in games, and hundred million dollar games about a bunch of tough manly men doing manly things. To deny how we got here is to head further down this hole.

 

[Russell_T_Shackelford]

Nevermind the innocence of CCW permit holders for a second, the cops flat out refuses to check for gun at all. Fine, the good guys with the gun want to carry their toys, but the cops refuse to at least check the people at the events where a threat was made against because of the law.

That law is called the 4th Amendment.

Methinks Ms. Sarkezian overestimates her importance. Idiot gamers talk big on the interwebs all the time. Should my mother take out a restraining order for every rape threat uttered by XxMadKillah69xX? The saddest part is that some idiot troll is laughing his ass off because she gave him exactly what he wanted with no effort beyond his "strongly worded" email.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

It's almost humorous that they specifically designed it to prevent schools from establishing more than one secure area and to keep that one area for only one possible purpose. I mistakenly assumed the legislature would have taken a rational approach and given latitude to establish those zones as may be necessary.

However, my reading of that statutory definition is that the school determined secured zone is a permanent one which may explain the ridiculous limit. But it doesn't seem to indicate that law enforcement would be likewise restricted, so they should be able to establish a temporary secured zone as they saw fit, which I imagine they do for other types of public events like high level political speeches and the like. My guess is they didn't see the threat as dangerous enough to justify such an action or they were worried about political blowback.

 

[Kurdel]

That law is called the 4th Amendment.

Let's take that argument straight to the airport!

Or does the constitution stop working at some point?

 

[massoluk]

That law is called the 4th Amendment.

You mean the one that protected against unreasonable searches?

 

[Version 3.0]

edit: never mind, already addressed

 

[JDSN]

In retrospective Leigh Alexander's article was too nice on this little insecure assholes, that goes double to the ones that pretend to be moderate while trying to turn a discussion about abuse into a rant of how not all GG assholes are the same.

 

[Nairume]

I really don't understand how Totalbiscuit is relevant to this discussion, you had to go out of your way to insult the guy.

So it's funny you should ask this when TotalBiscuit pulled this this morning.

 

[bryehn]

Utah: Can't get a decent fucking beer, but hey, open firearms policy...why not?

 

[timetokill]

Let's take that argument straight to the airport!

Or does the constitution stop working at some point?

The government argument is that it pretty much does, yeah. Which is pretty fucking frightening in a lot of ways, if you ask me. But I guess society is a series of compromises.

 

[Zoe]

Utah: Can't get a decent fucking beer, but hey, open firearms policy...why not?

This has nothing to do with open carry even if people try to make it so.

 

[diehard]

Utah: Can't get a decent fucking beer, but hey, open firearms policy...why not?

Spread irrelevant bullshit ..why not?

 

[fuzzyset]

Methinks Ms. Sarkezian overestimates her importance. Idiot gamers talk big on the interwebs all the time. Should my mother take out a restraining order for every rape threat uttered by XxMadKillah69xX? The saddest part is that some idiot troll is laughing his ass off because she gave him exactly what he wanted with no effort beyond his "strongly worded" email.

Trash talking over XBL is completely different from what happened here. You probably would get a restraining order for your mom if someone told you they were going to show up to her specific work site and murder her and her co-workers.

That guy was not a troll. He is a deranged, unstable person with a warped view of the world.

 

[jon bones]

That law is called the 4th Amendment.

Methinks Ms. Sarkezian overestimates her importance. Idiot gamers talk big on the interwebs all the time. Should my mother take out a restraining order for every rape threat uttered by XxMadKillah69xX? The saddest part is that some idiot troll is laughing his ass off because she gave him exactly what he wanted with no effort beyond his "strongly worded" email.

Then why are there countless articles on here every day bringing up topics a ton of us discuss? Why the huge "GAMERGATE" goober patrol rallying all the undersexed white MRA guys against her?

Are you too young to remember all the school shooting's this country has been through?

 

[MonkeyKing]

That law is called the 4th Amendment.

Methinks Ms. Sarkezian overestimates her importance. Idiot gamers talk big on the interwebs all the time. Should my mother take out a restraining order for every rape threat uttered by XxMadKillah69xX? The saddest part is that some idiot troll is laughing his ass off because she gave him exactly what he wanted with no effort beyond his "strongly worded" email.

Right before giving a speech you are informed of a violent, nasty death threat. You are warned that if you go forward with your speech, there will be a violent massacre. There is a reasonable possibility that several members of your audience will be armed. You do not know who will be armed. Would you go forward with the speech?

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

Well, better be safe than sorry, but it's unfortunate that this is what gaming culture is at, right now. Death threats.

I wont comment on America's love affair with firearms cuz at this point, it's just becoming quite a bizarro thing for the rest of the world.

 

[The Librarian]

This has nothing to do with open carry even if people try to make it so.

Apparently the police couldn't pat people down because of a state gun law?

 

[Zoe]

Apparently the police couldn't pat people down because of a state gun law?

Public universities can only have one area designated as a hearing room where methods can be used to identify concealed carry.

 

[The Librarian]

Public universities can only have one area designated as a hearing room where methods can be used to identify concealed carry.

Because of the law? Yeah, that's dumb, so yeah, this does have to deal with open carry.

 

[Zoe]

Because of the law? Yeah, that's dumb, so yeah, this does have to deal with open carry.

No, open carry and concealed carry are two entirely different things.

They can deny entry to people open carrying all they want.

 

[prwxv3]

Because of the law? Yeah, that's dumb, so yeah, this does have to deal with open carry.

Open carry and concealed and carry are two different things.

 

[bryehn]

Spread irrelevant bullshit ..why not?

This has nothing to do with open carry even if people try to make it so.

But if police aren't allowed to search people for weapons, how can they ensure a safe environment for the students or Anita?

As a Canadian, I think some of Utah's laws are absurd. Even if there is an open carry law, they could at least allow private events to impart their own security measures if it's stated on promotional material, etc.

 

[Admiral Bone to Pick]

So I'm confused. Is Gamergate composed of WASPs, COD players? Who are we stereotyping to be the cause of these problems?

 

[prwxv3]

But if police aren't allowed to search people for weapons, how can they ensure a safe environment for the students or Anita?

As a Canadian, I think some of Utah's laws are absurd. Even if there is an open carry law, they could at least allow private events to impart their own security measures if it's stated on promotional material, etc.

open carry has nothing to do with this

 

[The Librarian]

No, open carry and concealed carry are two entirely different things.

They can deny entry to people open carrying all they want.

Right, thanks for pointing out the difference, but here's the thing: "Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah's open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches."

They couldn't do pat downs because of a stupid state gun law. Shame on Utah for passing that. The US really has some backwards views when it comes to guns.

 

[Zoe]

Right, thanks for pointing out the difference, but here's the thing: "Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah's open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches."

They couldn't do pat downs because of a stupid state gun law. Shame on Utah for passing that. The US really has some backwards views when it comes to guns.

And she is wrong about that. It's because of their concealed carry law.

 

[Timeaisis]

Right, thanks for pointing out the difference, but here's the thing: "Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah's open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches."

They couldn't do pat downs because of a stupid state gun law. Shame on Utah for passing that. The US really has some backwards views when it comes to guns.

Anita tweeted that. She was mistaken.

They wouldn't do pat downs because it goes against the concealed carry laws in regards to universities in Utah.

 

[The Librarian]

And she is wrong about that. It's because of their concealed carry law.

And you're missing the point of what I'm saying. It's because of a stupid gun law that police weren't able to pat people down. Shame on Utah for passing something like that.

 

[bryehn]

And she is wrong about that. It's because of their concealed carry law.

Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. The wording makes much more sense. I think that law is even more absurd, but at least I understand the situation better.

 

[diehard]

And you're missing the point of what I'm saying. It's because of a stupid gun law that police weren't able to pat people down. Shame on Utah for passing something like that.

So you must be a fan of stop and frisk?

 

[Russell_T_Shackelford]

Let's take that argument straight to the airport!

Or does the constitution stop working at some point?

Instead of presenting false equivalencies, perhaps you should check into US v Davis (1973).
"airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.”

Putting a search policy in place for the speech would be a special case, not part of a "general" regulatory scheme, and being that weapons are not in fact banned on campus, would also not be supporting anything "regulatory."

That aside, there are plenty that do in fact argue that a great deal of what the TSA does is unconstitutional.

The government argument is that it pretty much does, yeah. Which is pretty fucking frightening in a lot of ways, if you ask me. But I guess society is a series of compromises.

Yeah, unfortunately the Constitution "stops working" a lot more than it should.

You mean the one that protected against unreasonable searches?

"Reasonable" means that there is probable cause to suspect that the individual being searched is committing or has committed a crime.

... have you forgotten the horror of Aurora, Sandy Hook, or more recently, an attack by yet another misogynist idiot at Isla Vista, CA?

But no, surely just words, right?

Sorry, what did any of those have to do with video games? I'm not aware of the first two issuing any kind of "death threats" before the shootings, and the third was a generalized "fuck women/good looking guys" diatribe, not directed at any individual, and involved what had been perceived to be a personal affront against the shooter.

I don't think they search the entire audience for weapons even when Salman Rushdie gives a speech, and I think one could argue that some of his detractors are a touch more "fanatic" than Sarkeesian's.

 

[The Librarian]

So you must be a fan of stop and frisk?

Where did I say people should be stopped and patted down randomly wherever?

 

[jon bones]

So I'm confused. Is Gamergate composed of WASPs, COD players? Who are we stereotyping to be the cause of these problems?

Men's Right Activists

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Where did I say people should be stopped and patted down randomly wherever?

Then how do you figure that police will know who has a concealed carry license? By divining the fortunes? Or by frisking people who enter to see the event?

 

[Punchy4486]

So you must be a fan of stop and frisk?

I hate stop and frisk. That's why I think anyone that meets the president or gets on an airplane shouldn't have to be subjected to a search!

Then how do you figure that police will know who has a concealed carry license? By divining the fortunes? Or by frisking people who enter to see the event where there was a threat of gun violence against the speaker and audience members?

He said he doesn't support random searches. It's not random to search people choosing to enter an event where there was a gun threat.

 

[The Librarian]

Then how do you figure that police will know who has a concealed carry license? By divining the fortunes? Or by frisking people who enter to see the event?

You pat down anyone and everyone who enters the event.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

I don't think they search the entire audience for weapons even when Salman Rushdie gives a speech, and I think one could argue that some of his detractors are a touch more "fanatic" than Sarkeesian's.

Is this true or just something you think to be true?

If it is true, then I can see your points about holding one same rule for all speeches. But if they at least did partial searches on the Salman Rushdi audience, they also should try to accommodate Anita's request. Just to be consistent with the policy, if not to err on the side of safety.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Then how do you figure that police will know who has a concealed carry license? By divining the fortunes? Or by frisking people who enter to see the event?

If you search everyone entering an event targeted with threats it's not random

come on

 

[BreezyLimbo]

He said he doesn't support random searches. It's not random to search people choosing to enter an event where there was a gun threat.

You pat down anyone and everyone who enters the event.

True enough, but some people will find it offensive.

Metal Detectors/Wands I feel would be the better solution then physically handling people.

 

[stufte]

You pat down anyone and everyone who enters the event.

Considering the weapons the threat boasts about, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to just hide them in your pocket.

 

[The Librarian]

True enough, but some people will find it offensive.

Metal Detectors/Wands I feel would be the better solution then physically handling people.

I'd rather people be offended than somebody killed. Metal detectors and wands are okay, sure, but this is getting away from my point that Utah's law doesn't allow for that, which is really, really dumb.