Press "Enter" to skip to content

Professor Called Police After Student Presentation

For CCSU student John Wahlberg, a class presentation on campus violence turned into a confrontation with the campus police due to a complaint by the professor.

On October 3, 2008, Wahlberg and two other classmates prepared to give an oral presentation for a Communication 140 class that was required to discuss a “relevant issue in the media”. Wahlberg and his group chose to discuss school violence due to recent events such as the Virginia Tech shootings that occurred in 2007.

Shortly after his professor, Paula Anderson, filed a complaint with the CCSU Police against her student. During the presentation Wahlberg made the point that if students were permitted to conceal carry guns on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier in many of these cases. He also touched on the controversial idea of free gun zones on college campuses.

That night at work, Wahlberg received a message stating that the campus police “requested his presence”. Upon entering the police station, the officers began to list off firearms that were registered under his name, and questioned him about where he kept them.

They told Wahlberg that they had received a complaint from his professor that his presentation was making students feel “scared and uncomfortable”.

“I was a bit nervous when I walked into the police station,” Wahlberg said, “but I felt a general sense of disbelief once the officer actually began to list the firearms registered in my name. I was never worried however, because as a law-abiding gun owner, I have a thorough understanding of state gun laws as well as unwavering safety practices.”

Professor Anderson refused to comment directly on the situation and deferred further comment.

“It is also my responsibility as a teacher to protect the well being of our students, and the campus community at all times,” she wrote in a statement submitted to The Recorder. “As such, when deemed necessary because of any perceived risks, I seek guidance and consultation from the Chair of my Department, the Dean and any relevant University officials.”

Wahlberg believes that her complaint was filed without good reason.

“I don’t think that Professor Anderson was justified in calling the CCSU police over a clearly nonthreatening matter. Although the topic of discussion may have made a few individuals uncomfortable, there was no need to label me as a threat,” Wahlberg said in response. “The actions of Professor Anderson made me so uncomfortable, that I didn’t attend several classes. The only appropriate action taken by the Professor was to excuse my absences.”

The university police were unavailable for comment.

“If you can’t talk about the Second Amendment, what happened to the First Amendment?” asked Sara Adler, president of the Riflery and Marksmanship club on campus. “After all, a university campus is a place for the free and open exchange of ideas.”


-Shauna Simeone, Asst. Opinion Editor

NOTE: With the exception of commenters who can provide a valid CCSU email address, we are no longer accepting comments on this story. 


  1. 209 March 3, 2009

    peter kuck: They called DPS. As to why they called, it’s called due diligence and is well within the realm of normal everyday investigation procedure.

    For Arthur: CCSU PD did what any other police department in CT would do. They called DPS and got the information. Not bad for “keystone cops”, hey?

    ditto: Calling the officers at CCSU “podunk wannabe campus cops” shows you are just as ignorant as the professor is.

    If nothing else, this article allows us to see that ignorance is as much of an issue for conservatives as it is for liberals.

  2. Ryan March 3, 2009

    What a dumb-ass professor!

    Yup, i said it!

    i went to SCSU in New Haven, CT. this is soo true of all the dumb-asses that infest this great country of ours. small minded individuals who cant see beyond the end of their ass that there is crime and wrong-dooers in this world, in your country, in your state, in your city, and even on the street you live on!

    I met far too many professors that have the same ideals and vision of this professor.

    today isnt the wild west anymore but we have moved on to a different type of society, one that is a bit more cultured. yet, i as many others do feel the need to “LEGALLY” have the right to carry a weapon to defend ourselves against the wrong-dooers of this world.

    i guess the professor here would rather the rapist use a condom than her shoot the prick and prevent it from happening to other people….oh how the dumb will learn with time…

  3. Herbert Heck March 3, 2009

    I am so glad this article was submitted.

    I can’t wait for professor Paula Anderson’s actions to be scrutinized in court by the NAACP or the NRA.

    Paula Anderson, you are a scumbag! Rot in hell!

  4. Bob March 3, 2009

    I discovered that your story was reported on the nationally syndicated radio program GunTalk and posted on their podcast ( last Sunday 3/1/09. If you go to their podcast section and scan in 40 minutes of part 1 or 3, you can hear it. Also, the Up North Journal podcast and blog reported on it last weekend. The NRA is also investigating. I’m looking forward to seeing some people at Central fired for this infringement of the first and second amendments.You need not fear someone who wishes to discuss carry on campus. Fear a system that prohibits free speech and reacts by bringing in the authorities.

  5. A. Rock March 3, 2009

    And so it begins…

  6. Tracy March 3, 2009

    This man deserves to be put into prison for his instigation of a classroom directly after school shootings occured. I applaud the teacher for contacting the police as this man clearly fits the mold of Al Queda sleeper school shooting operative. Gun rights groups are clearly outdated models based on past failures of social policy meant to protect the people. They have no legal standing as law enforcement yet somehow believe they should be able to carry a gun in a school full of children, no less. What if just one child would be shot innocently, taking away his future, because someone wanted to carry on campus. I think the stakes are grave here and the student who made a presentation advocating the constitution should be thrown in prison for corrupting our most sacred document. Let the police do their job. They did a fine job at Virginia Tech-look how many victims there could have been had it not been for the police. As for the first amendment, free speech caused 9/11, it causes people to get abortions, and it’s responsible for more bad than good. Free speech about the second amendment causes countless number of police deaths and innocent children shootings each year. Haven’t we reached a time in our country where we can peacefully disarm and not talk about extreme idiologies? I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to evolve.

    And ‘evolve’ you will, my friend. Darwin may surely catch up with you, because it appears that you have no sense of human nature. While YOU may be so sophisticated and evolved that you see no need for a gun, there’s a large part of the population that sees you as food. You are their prey; a victim waiting to happen.

    You’ve obviously spent too much time in academia and not nearly enough in the real world. History teaches us that societies that have evolved to the point where they believed the need for self-defense was no longer necessary, they quickly fell to those less civilized. Didn’t you learn that, or was that just ‘history’ and bears no relevance to real life?

    “Let the police do their job” is one of the most insanely out of touch, liberal mantras to be uttered. The police DO their job, but their job is NOT to protect you ever second of every day and in every place you happen to wander. Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own personal safety, and statistically, the most effect way to resist an attack with with a firearm. Regardless of what you think you know, simply possessing a gun is not a crime, and protecting yourself is not violence. The anti-gunners have hijacked our language and replaced ‘force’ with ‘violence’ to make and defensive actions sound repugnant.

    Do your pompous, idealistic brain a favor and look up three things for me:

    Jessica Gonzales vs. Castle Rock Colorado
    – You’ll find that you have no constitutional right to police protection.

    Appalachian School of Law shooting
    – If you research this properly, you’ll find that out of over 2,600 news reports of this shooting, only two newspapers mentioned that the shooter was stopped and held for police by two students who were licensed to carry and had guns in their cars.

    National Academy of Sciences and CDC studies on restrictive gun laws vs. crime prevention
    – What you’ll find is they’ve studied thousands of gun restrictions and have yet to find one that has had a measurable impact on crime. Surprisingly (to you, perhaps, but predictably to me), they found that the more restrictive gun laws often resulted in higher crime rates. Wonder why?

    You may need to read this slowly and let the facts sink in. I’d hate for you to have an aneurysm.

  7. TexasFats March 3, 2009

    Not all professors are left-wing goombahs. In my Business Statistics class yesterday, I used the much-discredited Kellerman study that claimed that a gun in the home was six times more likely to kill a resident than a criminal as an example of biased research where the sample was subject to a severe selection bias that led to an invalid conclusion. I called it a prime example of the unethical use of misleading statistics and pointed out that about 43% of the victims and 80-85% of the killers in that study had police records.

    I have said for years that left-wingers strongly believe in free speech defined as the right to say anything that the left approves and nothing that the left disapproves. The professor in this situation was a despicable, dastardly, reprehensible example of a left-wing tyrant.

  8. CCHinstructorMidwest March 3, 2009

    It continues to amaze me at age 65 and a NYC expat just how MANY imbeciles continue to survive in the shelter of academia. And BTW, I retired from a major university here not long ago. Believe me, CT has no monopoly on left-wing fools who, like Susie, seem unable to actually LEARN just what it is the Constitution guarantees re ANY of the Bill of Rights amendments. But maybe she’s blond…

    Out here, a student group mounted a “Carry Concealed Holster” day. Put your cell phone in it, let it print under your shirt, and have a ball. In the 60s, we called this sort of thing rebellion. We still do.

  9. Andrea March 3, 2009

    Thank goodness for people like Mr. Wahlberg. This professor should be fired! If she can’t tell the difference between intelligent discussion and a real threat she better get a job at the zoo.

  10. Eric Kranz March 3, 2009

    Paula Anderson has made your school the absolute laughing stock of the country. You folks must be incredibly proud.

    At the very least Mz Anderson should post a list of approved topics to be discussed in her class. If she despises the freedoms we have in this country she should make it known at the door.


  11. David March 3, 2009

    I find it highly embarassing that an institution of “higher learning” would allow itself to be characterized as not allowing free and open debate, regardless of the subject matter.

    For a seemingly mature and educated Educator to state that she was listening to a student participating in a class discussion and feel “threatened” shows a total lack of objectivity.

    I would hope that the school does a little personal soul-searching and take a look at trying to be less-biased and more open to free discourse.

  12. Takekaze March 3, 2009

    The moment a jihadi will put an AK-47 against her head, our dear Commie Susie will be praying for Wahlberg to come in with an M4.

    That girl is a clear leftist. Indoctrinated, blind, stupid. She may be a professor, but that means nothing on the long run.

    I could bring tons of statistics that show that guns are not the problem. Partly even official statistics from the government here in Austria.

    For example…

    In 2001, the violent crimes resulting in death or injury in Austria were committed with the following weapons:
    1% with legal rifles
    3% with legal handguns
    5% with illegal guns
    44% with knives
    34% any other weapon like axes, bats, etc
    4% asphyxation and strangulation
    9% “other”

    4% of all the violent crimes in Austria in 2001 were done with legal guns.

    Source: page 6 and 7 (it’s German, so beware)

    On page 5 this document tells us that the number of permits for guns in Austria has doubled between 1982 and 1998, yet the number of gun related crimes and violence dropped by 40%. But, according to the religion of the gun control freaks, the number of gun related violence and crimes should have, at least, doubled!

    Anybody else thinks that’s funny? It shows how stupid the gun control freaks are and how little they know about anything.

  13. Smead March 2, 2009

    Quite astonishing!!

    A presentation on school violence including thoughts on the right of self defense leads to the professor making a complaint to police that the student is a danger, quite ironic that he IS most likely a danger…to her belief system.

    Such dissent obviously can not be tolerated in her ivory tower.

    BTW…regarding those whom feel that possession of firearms is outdated…all the dangers that caused the Fouders to include the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution are alive and well…most likely they are a greater threat today than they were in the late 1700’s.

  14. Tim March 2, 2009

    WOW, As an educator myself, I ENCOURAGED my students to discuss the 2nd Amendment and the topic of concealed carry on campus.

  15. Athan March 2, 2009

    Man… I don’t even recognize this country anymore. This country is really turning into Nazi Germany.

  16. Jennifer March 2, 2009

    Wake up, people! The actions of this professor is a perfect example of why this world is going down the toilet. Everyone has this idea that if we ban all the guns that violence will disappear, which certainly is NOT so. Here are some hard core facts for you, of which I have known for some time (and yes, even before all these cry babies decided to attack schools).
    1. Less than 2 minutes after Australia banned certain guns, the crime rate sky rocketed to more than 300%.
    2. In Switzerland, all males are required to serve in the military, and are required to own 3 types of firearms AND know how to use them. Furthermore, their crime rate is less than 1.3%.
    3. Here is a “duh”….if someone is shooting at a large group of people, and no one has a weapon to defend themselves, then they will have to wait on the police to come save them, in which case the innocent person(s) WILL more than likely, be DEAD!
    Point three highlights the fact that, as stated in our constitution, WE as a people have the right to carry guns. It doesn’t say anything about a certain group of people, it says ALL American citizens. Now I know that many anti-gun individuals are sitting there thinking, “that only makes crime worse!” No, THINK about it! If someone wants to break in to a home so they can steal stuff, are they gonna choose house 1 with no guns, or house 2 with guns? Is it right that an individual can’t shoot someone who has broken in to their safe-haven, their home to kill and rob them?

    The main point is this…..criminals will never stop carrying weapons….no matter what laws get passed….PERIOD! It is only right to uphold our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The real problem lies with the mentality that for some strange reason, we must protect the criminals over the victims. I say punish the criminals and the crime will begin to fall, and stop being idiots who are too narrow minded to know the difference between a discussion or a threat. Our government and certain people who agree with this professor are only looking for reasons to target law abiding citizens and throw them in our already overpopulated jails and prison systems, while letting rapists and true murders walk free. Its time to wake up people!

  17. Joe March 2, 2009

    “As a student at CCSU i am deeply concerned. I do not agree with Wahlberg and I believe he should be put in prison for saying such things. When someone speaks of promoting guns they are promoting MURDER and should be punished. I’m all for free speech, just not when it comes to guns.”

    Free speech means that you allow others to speak freely, even if you disagree with them. But you call for a person to be put into prison without any evidence of a crime being committed, or any evidence that any crime was planned. Clearly you have not concept of what free speech means, nor the intent behind the First Amendment.

    Based upon that, I would suspect that you likewise cannot have an informed opinion on the Second Amendment.

  18. Robin Hood March 2, 2009

    well Tom, like all good stereotypes the one about Ct is wrong

    yes we do have the biff and muffys from Yale & Harvard that speak through clenched teeth as portrayed in so many movies, but they are few and far between, concentrated in Fairfield area near U nork and scattered throughout the high scale towns

    but Ct is a serious melting pot that is on low simmer

    we have them all cept for New Haven which is 50% Illegal Alien thanks to it’s idiotic mayor who even instructed the police not to arrest illegals even if they are wanted by the feds………AND HIS NAME IS NOT RIOS OR SANCHEZ, IT’S DESTEFANO, HE’S ITALIAN.. go figure

    he thinks they are like his Italian fore fathers who came through Ellis Island

    hardly the same

  19. Cameron Reddy March 2, 2009

    This is unconscionable. The professor should be fired AND given the Left’s favorite corrective treatment: sensitivity training!

  20. Tom from Ohio March 2, 2009

    Good Lord, what did you expect? You’re in a liberal State, going to a liberal college, and have a liberal professor. Why are your firearms registered in the first place? Registration then confiscation. With your patriotic views, you should move to a State that understands and believes in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Why live and go to college in a State that believes and lives in a dream world? As Horest Greely once said “Go west young man, go west”.

  21. Robin Hood March 2, 2009

    Threatened By a Non Threat.

    I like it.

    Has she apologized yet??

    I love America but there are too many wankers in it, too many that cannot use logic or think things through.

    They just run on what they feel and truly believe that the universe revolves around them…the World according to Ms. Anderson, or should I say Prof. Anderson??

    I amazes me how many people have Masters or PhD’s and are complete idiots, caught in their little world, their version of reality, they have no clue what is really going on.

    Like Rell, now some company paid off our politicians to install cameras that will take your picture and mail you a speeding ticket.

    The system will cost us a million to put in, and the company will run it, it has failed in other states so they need more business, this at a time when the state can afford nothing


    they guarantee hundreds of millions in tickets- just the states cut, yes they take a cut for running it

    now logically, how is some punk that is adjusting this machine, and who stands to make more profit for more tickets going to be fair??, yes the company will calibrate it for the state too

    I will not accept a ticket from anyone other than a sworn officer of the state

    I know off topic but lately it seems we are running on illogic

    illogical behavior ticks me off, what is right is right, what will work is what is right

    it has been proven time and time again that the police cannot save you unless they happen to be at the scene at that moment
    chances are 1,456,987,876 to 1 they won’t be

    what we need is like a new Militia, ordinary citizens trained in self defense and weapons and first aid, take an oathe and are given immunity to act in situations that could save lives until the police arrive

    because with this economy it’s going to get worse

  22. David A. Jared March 2, 2009

    How did professor Anderson achieve her professorship? The woman is singularly lacking in critical thinking skills…which I always believed was the very PURPOSE of a college education. To “report” this young man to the police because he gave a talk about an obvious solution to the problem of on-campus armed violence is the height of stupidity. No wonder the level of excellence in our college graduates is declining so rapidly (as noticed by at least one national career-search company). We have “professors” who think if you discuss a subject, you must advocate for it. That’s as moronic as claiming the rational discussion of race relations by an Anglo is [i]prima facie[/i] proof that the Anglo is a racist. Oh wait! Rahm Emmanual has already said that, hasn’t he?

  23. DEG March 2, 2009

    As far as gunowners being disrespectful of authority it is interesting to note that someone wishing to purchase a handgun in CT – must attend a 10 hour class, go to a local police station, fill in an application, be fingerprinted, have a compete background check done, provide letters of reference, then go to the police to pick up the temporary permit , then drive to the public safety building or other state police facility to be photographed and then pay $35 for a licence to carry. In 5 years they apply again — talk about disrespect for authority

    After all that work no one wants to lose a permit. Crimes are not typically committed by legal gun owners who demonstrate a respect for the law but rather by criminals who do not respect the legal system. Our legal system also helps the situation by failing to prosecute criminals to the full extent of the law.

  24. Common Sense March 2, 2009

    In the late 1960’s the late Col. Jeff Cooper coined the phrase that best describes Prof. Anderson’s condition -hoplophobia, an irrational fear of weapons. These people often espouse the belief that they would rather be “raped and murdered” before killing someone in self defense. I don’t entirely disagree with this Darwinian attitude as it will over time thin the herd of the weaker members.

    Unfortunately this moronic mindset permeates the .edu world. What could be more horrifying then to be in “lock-down” in a classroom with some maniac shooting at you with out a means to defend yourself?

    Everyday countless families send their children to schools in our communities entrusting their lives to these “adults” what have no interest in protecting their lives in an emergency. It is a crime that these un-educated, un-willing and inept have such a strangle hold on our children’s wellbeing.

    Obviously nothing was learned from the shootings at VT and Columbine. The lesson of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs shooting was also lost on these “professors”.

  25. Glenn March 2, 2009

    “As a student at CCSU i am deeply concerned. I do not agree with Wahlberg and I believe he should be put in prison for saying such things. When someone speaks of promoting guns they are promoting MURDER and should be punished. I’m all for free speech, just not when it comes to guns.”

    Susie, I hope you never need anyone to come to your defense against an armed criminal since you obviously wouldn’t want anyone to defend you with a firearm. You’re clueless, you live in a world full of rainbows. I hope reality sets in for you one day.

    This man deserves to be put into prison for his instigation of a classroom directly after school shootings occured. I applaud the teacher for contacting the police as this man clearly fits the mold of Al Queda sleeper school shooting operative. Gun rights groups are clearly outdated models based on past failures of social policy meant to protect the people. They have no legal standing as law enforcement yet somehow believe they should be able to carry a gun in a school full of children, no less. What if just one child would be shot innocently, taking away his future, because someone wanted to carry on campus. I think the stakes are grave here and the student who made a presentation advocating the constitution should be thrown in prison for corrupting our most sacred document. Let the police do their job. They did a fine job at Virginia Tech-look how many victims there could have been had it not been for the police. As for the first amendment, free speech caused 9/11, it causes people to get abortions, and it’s responsible for more bad than good. Free speech about the second amendment causes countless number of police deaths and innocent children shootings each year. Haven’t we reached a time in our country where we can peacefully disarm and not talk about extreme idiologies? I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to evolve.

    You obviously also need a reality check. Think about how many fewer victims there would have been at virginia tech had a law-abiding concealed-carry permit holder was nearby. It took the police ten minutes to even enter the building, do some fact-checking before you spout your foolish anti-gun rhetoric.

  26. Todd March 2, 2009

    If you want a good grade write a paper or give a speach your teacher will agree with, after all he is a liberal democrat who knows what is best for you and everyone else. I am sure you have all heard about the Connecticut home invasion where three people lost their lives, Mr. liberal professor would be protesting the death penalty for the convicts who committed the crime. As a licensed gun owner, and competition shooter I hope I never have to take a life or defend myself with any of my weapons, I would rather use a Chanel-locks pliers so they can suffer for a week before they die.

  27. Michael Z. Williamson March 2, 2009

    There was obviously a threat. It’s a threat to the professor’s belief system that being helpless little cutesy lambs will convince the bag bad wolf that he’s really not hungry.

  28. Mike March 2, 2009

    Just remeber that Utah has allowed their CCW holders to carry for years now on campus. The liberal media, biased leftist professors, and incompetent adminstrators do not like to talk about that and will do anything to avoid its mention. This is because Utah provides hard evidence that *gasp* college students can actually make adult decisions while showing they are not beer-drinking, psychotic people looking to shoot up their school.

    Admins and campus police have also for years tried every trick in the book to show their on campus crime stats are “acceptable” which is a joke. After finding out what crime was REALLY like in and around WCSU I carried for almost my entire 4 years on campus (I have a CT CCW). I carried to all classes, student center, admin building, library, West side, etc etc. Not a single person knew I carried and *shock* I do not recall ever going on a ramapage.

    This professor and others of her ilk needs to be removed from teaching. I will bet- and not lose money- that if this students report had been anti-gun they would have received effusive praise and an A. God forbid someone do a report against left wing sensibilities- oh my what would we do? I know- lets report them to the campus police! Soon we may actually have the Thought Police around for these dingbat “professors” to report anyone not spewing the Party Line in thoughts and speech.

  29. Ron Larimer March 2, 2009

    I don’t know if the actions of Police or the Professor are more ridiculous.

  30. SanAntonioSpectator March 2, 2009

    The report or field interview with the professor should have went something like this… (officer = O, professor = P)

    O: So what I understand is that the student gave an inclass, required, oral presentation on school violence- is that correct:
    P: Yes, but…
    O: And during the presentation he opined that had someone been legally carrying a concealed weapon, that person could have intervened and saved lives?
    P: Yes, but…
    O: And from that your feel he is a threat to you and others?
    P: Yes, because…
    O: And you are telling me that other students, students complaining to you but not to the police, were also threatened by this non-threat Wahlberg utters?
    P: I feel it was a threat!
    O: Did he say, “I’ll kill you? I’ll hurt you, I’ll kill everyone in this room, I’ll hurt her or him?”
    P: No, but he could have meant that!
    O: From, “A person with a lawfully concealed gun could have saved lives, you devine the meaning, ‘I’ll kill my teacher and classmates?” From someone advocatign self-defense you devine criminal threat?
    P: But, see…
    O: Professor, the student complied with your dictate to give an oral presentation in class. He didn’t issue a threat as defined by state law or local ordinance. I will check him out for any warrants for his arrest. Thank you for reporting this.

    Officer hangs up the phone, “Hey, Charley, guess what Professor Anderson just reported…”

  31. Robin Hood March 2, 2009

    I wonder….

    did the Campus Police use water boarding to interrogate Mr Walberg ??

    “ach tung, vhat group made you give zis speech mistah waalllllburg, eh?, vwe shall find outs, und vwhen wez do stheres going to be stroubles, und a lot of spankings, no one vwill be talkings about prrrrrrotectings zemselves on zis campus” ; )

  32. E Sloan March 2, 2009

    I hope a good lawyer takes up his case and sues the hell out of that professor for her idiocy, the cops for harrasment, and the school for hiring that idiot teacher. And possibly the school for infringing on his right to protect himself.

  33. John W March 1, 2009

    Just wanted to say, that YES, the CCSU police have access to gun registration databases. This information is held public safety commissioner as well as within an electronic database.

    The CCSU police are also STATE TROOPERS, with full rights to that information.

  34. G. Meinert March 1, 2009

    I have a CCW permit to carry in 42 states and I’ve never met a police officer who wasn’t appreciative of my efforts. Remember these words of wisdom….

    1) When seconds count, police are only minutes away.

    2) I carry a gun because a police officer is too heavy.

    3) When asked why I shot the attacker ten times, I responded “because I ran out of bullets”

    4) A gun without bullets is a club.

    Be well and be safe …………………. Gary

  35. gh March 1, 2009

    I wonder if a muslim was speaking and spoke of things that made some people uncomfortable, would she have reported them to the police?

  36. Mr. B. March 1, 2009

    Our country is in deep trouble when fascist minded authorities create a chilling effect on straightforward political speech. Keep speaking out, students at CCSU. Make it clear that it is Paula Anderson and her stooge police force that are the true threat to you.

  37. Chris March 1, 2009

    This is horrible, and legal actions should be taken. I am making a similar presentation in my Comm 101 class tomorrow and I will now request no one call the cops.

  38. Mark Hazzard March 1, 2009

    Mr. Jack Burton

    You speak of the constitution having internal protections, yet you then say I have no right to peacably assemble because I own firearms. You go on further to say the army should force me to feed and house federal troops. Have you never heard of the third amendmant? or does the constitution only apply to you and your ilk? I say truly it is not I but rather you who is a domestic enemy of the United States of America.

  39. PBService March 1, 2009

    Does anyone else see the irony, So much for the basics of Communication 140 class

  40. PBService March 1, 2009

    Also I think a review of CCSU Police procedures is in order. Why isn’t a little more light
    being directed toward the way Mr Walberg was interrogated?

  41. Archie March 1, 2009

    I think Mr. Wahlberg needs to sue Professor Anderson for intentional infliction of emotional distress, official oppression, and violation of his civil right to free expression under the First Amendment. I think he also needs to file a criminal complaint for official oppression and violation of his civil rights by Professor Anderson.

  42. RJT1 March 1, 2009

    What happened to free speech! Germany collected all the guns from citizens, shortly before they executed millions of Jews! What criminals fear most is confronting an armed homeowner, so the fact that many people own guns may make you safer in your own home. I know from first hand experience that the police almost never prevent crimes but unfortunately usually show up to deal with the aftermath. Maybe some would prefer being assaulted or raped, but I can assure you that I would rather have the means to defend myself. I have a feeling that gun confiscation in this country would not be possible. I certainly would not want to be a cop going around door to door and trying to collect them. The fact is that we have a strong heritage of firearms ownership written into our constitution. This is for both hunting and the defense of liberty.

  43. PBService March 1, 2009

    This is a bit old but informative.

    A Little Gun History Lesson
    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Guatemala established gun control in 1964.. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million ‘educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

    It has now been more than 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

    Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent

    Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent

    Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

    In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

    It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too!

    While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

    There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

    You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

    Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

    Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!

    The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson.

    With Guns………….We Are ‘Citizens’.
    Without Them……..We Are ‘Subjects’..

    During W.W. II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED !

    Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attache to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.

    It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

  44. Sicko March 1, 2009

    The student should of filed suit against the university, professor, and the cop shop. The student also should not have responded to the cop request to visit their shop, big no no, they just wanted to harass this poor kid.

  45. Jonsy Biggs March 1, 2009

    This “professor” should be required to attend sensitivity training on the issue of First Amendment rights.

    Afterwards… she should be fired.

Comments are closed.