And of course, they’re not about some flawless event with clouds and angels and harps and kittens. Oh no.

Last night’s began with me sleeping in until 4:00 pm on the big day, which happened to be the time the wedding was supposed to start. I of course awoke in a panic, and told everyone to tell the guests it would have to start at 5:00. I threw on my dress, which I somehow had not tried on before that very moment, and it was not at all what I wanted. In addition to being quite plain and… un-poofy, it had long sleeves. I thought “oh well” and went on to attempt to pull things together. At some point in here, I realized we had completely forgotten to arrange tuxedos for the groomsmen, so they were going to have to wear whatever they had on that day. For Daniel, this happened to be a Christmas sweater. John was decked out in some sort of nice striped button-up shirt but extremely metrosexual jeans… probably his glitter jeans. Brian at least had his USMC blues, but of course none of them matched. I don’t even know where Mike was.

About this time, it starts pouring down rain (outdoor wedding, mind you) and we get a call that the musical talent has gotten stuck/lost along the way and is sending us a distress signal via morse code.

I then meet the officiant - who has appeared out of nowhere, and been arranged for by somebody other than myself - and he’s like the lone island of calm in this whole mess. I realize I don’t have a veil, and he tells me not to worry, he has one I can use and he’ll drive all the way home to get it. I told him he didn’t have to do that, but he was very kind and insisted. He was wearing some kind of a priest’s collar (you know, with the white in the middle?) but I asked my dad and somebody else if he was Catholic, and he wasn’t. I then thought he was Lutheran, but somebody else said maybe Episcopalian… Keep in mind that I belong to none of these churches. The closest I come is Lutheran.

Anyway, about this time I set off to rescue the singer, who is still sending us distress signals from somewhere down a hill. I arrive at the source of the signal, and he’s set up some sort of elaborate comm system with wires from his music equipment, and it’s in a tree. There are wires radiating out from the tree in six different directions, and for some reason I know that one of them points to his direction, but I have no idea which one it is.

I think this is about the time I woke up. I’d woken up once before and was awake for a few minutes, but lapsed directly back into the dream when I went back to sleep. Needless to say, this was one of those mornings where I woke up feeling like I just got my ass kicked.

See why we’re getting married this summer? I can handle this for four months… A year and four months, not so much.

I’ve determined this song is only good when it involves some combination of the following:

• Summer

• Pickup trucks, esp. Chevy
• Cold drinks
• Bodies of water, i.e. lake/river
• Shorts/tank tops
• Bonus points for a boat

So, in sum: it’s just not as good when it’s on the radio at work, where I am… on a Saturday. All day. Bah.

…since I clearly haven’t been blogging at an acceptable rate.

Fighting for concealed carry at the University of Idaho

In short, a fairly large group of students got together, worked out a game plan, and the ball is officially rolling. As chronicled before, University President Timothy P. White is not going to be a friend to us in this, so while we may still attempt to work with the administration and board of regents, we will most likely wind up with an opinion from the attorney general. We may have to fight it in court, as was done in Utah, and I’m confident that we will win one way or another. It may also lead to legislative action to make it very clear that the public universities of Idaho may NOT deny rights to law-abiding students.

Getting interviewed by Glamour Magazine

I know, I WTF?!-ed at it too. I got a random call from a Glamour editor the other day, looking for politically-active women from across the spectrum who were willing to chime in on the current political climate in the country and the ‘08 elections. I’ve now gotten three or four follow-up calls, and apparently will be quoted as an “independent” voter who is disgruntled with both sides. We’ll see how it turns out, if I even make it into the final copy. On a positive note, the ladies I spoke with were quite nice and didn’t seem to be fishing for spin - it’s hard to talk about being a displaced Republican without making it sound like I’m giving kudos to the Democrats. In reality, both “sides” suck almost equally, and I’ve been driven firmly to no-party land. Anyway, I guess I’m officially an “independent” now. :)

Wedding stuff

Bridesmaids’ dresses have been picked, venue is booked, musical talent is about 80% confirmed, theoretically I have a dress to wear, save the date magnets are on the way to me from the printer, my photographer (cousin) is for sure, I’ve picked up some materials to play around with to determine if I want to do my own invitations or send out for them, wedding favors have been chosen, and I have several good ideas for a wedding gift for Mike. We still have to coordinate travel and lodging for guests (we’re not paying for either, but we want to make it easy on everybody!), the rehearsal dinner, an officiant, cake (I hate cake), groomsmen/groom tuxes… Okay, nevermind. I like looking at the list of accomplishments more than I like looking at the to-do list. The good news is it’s coming along quite nicely and I think I will have it planned with plenty of time to spare. Told y’all I could do it!

School, work, etc…

School is almost over for the semester, and I’ll start taking summer classes in a couple weeks. It is going to be a crappy schedule, but now that I have direction with the advertising major, I’m pretty excited about undertaking it. I’ll be taking classes during the first and second summer sessions, and will be done in early July. That gives me almost a full month of only having to worry about work before the wedding - and I have great jobs, so I am not worried about getting the time off to do the things I need to do.

Legal marriage

I’m hesitant to mention this since we haven’t decided 100% one way or another yet, but Mike and I are considering recanting our position on legal marriage. For those of you who aren’t aware of our initial stance, it was/is as follows: we’re not big fan of licenses. It seems like you have to get a license for just about everything these days, and we don’t think marriage ought to be one of those things. We understand the legal implications of a resource-sharing contract between two adults, which marriage functions as, but we’re not on board with the idea that what ought to be separate from the law (marriage) has become a legal construct rather than a spiritual/social one. Over the last couple of years, we’ve discussed the idea of only getting ceremonially married, and not establishing a legal marriage via license. Again, we have no problem with the concept of a legal union of two individuals who are sharing property and resources, but the fact that it is a license vs. a contract is - perhaps only semantically - a problem for us. Anyway, we found out that Montana still has common-law marriage, so we thought it might be a good solution for us to get ceremonially married in Idaho as intended, and then move to Montana in the future and establish a legal marriage by common law.

Now, I hate to think of myself as a sellout, but all of these ideas that sounded wonderful in hypothetical principle are now sounding rather dubious when we’re being faced with the actual institution of marriage. I confess to having both the original anti-marriage-license stance and now the “perhaps we should consider it” stance first (out of the two of us, that is)… Either I’m more fickle than Mike, or I just am ahead of the curve. :) Anyway, our considerations are largely financial - we’ll both be students for at least another year, and the fact that I still have to claim financial aid through my parents handicaps us significantly. We also cannot establish health insurance together. I want to change my legal name, and to do so will require a long process and approval from a judge - which, theoretically, I should be able to get, but could also be denied if the judge does not approve of the way we’re doing things. Silly as it sounds, being able to change my name is quite important to both of us. Oh, and here’s an obvious one I almost forgot: we don’t want to be tied to a state (Montana) that it may or may not actually work out for us to move to. If we’re putting all our eggs in that basket and then can’t relocate there anytime soon, we might wind up having to go get a stupid courthouse “marriage” months after our ceremony anyway!

Again, I hate to think I’ve found my “price” and am willing to sacrifice something I believe in… But frankly, I’d prefer to consider it an evolution of thought. (I also fully recognize that I could be in denial and rationalizing to myself.) Like I said, my/our ideas on legal marriage were all well and good until it was an actual option. Now that it is staring me in the face, I realize there are things I value more than this particular issue. There are things I’m willing to sacrifice for, things I’d go to jail for and even things I’d lose my life for. This is simply not one of them - not that the last two “punishments” are really an issue, but my point is that I’m recognizing that the ability to share in joint financial agreements with my husband, share health care options and a legal last name, as well as the other things granted to legally married couples, are more important to me than making a stand on a license I really don’t agree with.

I guess it’s kind of like driving a car - before you have a drivers’ license, you can drive on private roads all you want. Some of those roads may take you where you need to go, some may not. When you get a drivers’ license, it doesn’t necessarily make you a better driver, but it does grant you access to those areas that were otherwise restricted. Whether those areas are important enough to warrant obtaining a license are up to an individual’s judgment. If Mike and I were planning on being very financially independent of one another, not have children, etc., then the “areas” we are granted access to with a legal marriage would not necessarily be worth the license. Since we intend, instead, to have a fairly traditional marriage arrangement - those areas are of greater importance, and the principles they represent are becoming more important to me than the principle of licensing vs. avoiding it.

Maybe I’m just being hypersensitive about submitting to The Man right now, because I’m also starting the process for obtaining a concealed carry permit, and last week I got this year’s fishing license, and I have to go clear a fix-it ticket for not having my insurance on me when I got pulled over for not having my front license plate on my truck (and then got a warning for having expired plates, since the ones I already paid a metric assload for were behind the seat instead of on the vehicle) and I am thoroughly annoyed about having the government have its finger in everything! I feel complicit in tyranny when I go along with these things, but also like to, oh I don’t know, function in society. Gah!

It may, however, turn into a wedding with firearms blog.

Seriously though, this is already consuming all my soul life free time. As well it should, since I’m all antsy in the pantsy about being a wife (OMG!1!1!!!!1!!!) and want to do it NOW rather than later. I’m like… really effing excited about this. Bizarrely excited. Totally weirded out. And excited. So anyway, it was either “wedding in a year plus” or “wedding ASAP” aaaaaand I lobbied successfully for the latter. Okay, not really ASAP - early August. THIS YEAR.

*Deep breath* I’m now in a frantic search for a venue, because it’s obviously really fun to try to find one when everyone else in the world booked ‘em six months ago, and figure out guests lists and a budget and all that fun stuff. I know nothing about proper etiquette, such as how to politely tell people that their well-behaved, polite kids are welcome, but screaming, running amok hellions are not. (Help?)

Guest list, venue, save-the-date magnets/wedding invitations, name change stuff (we’re not getting legally married at this time - don’t believe in obtaining a license for such a thing - more on this later), budget, DRESS!!!, photographer, food… Oh hell. So much to do.

Of course, this all comes at a time when the movement for carry at UI is getting into full swing, so I have to balance that planning and activism with wedding stuff… Fortunately, I’m good at this stuff. I’m good when I’m busy. I just don’t… sleep.

In commemoration of the 232nd anniversary of the Battle of Lexington and Concord, Mike and I set out to spend a day shooting and lighting fireworks and otherwise enjoying a day of historical, revolutionary significance.

On the way to the range, he turned off at the road to a lake we have frequented since back before we were even an item, and said he had something to show me. I imagined this was part of the fireworks-shooting plan, and lo and behold he got a few firecrackers out of the truck when we got there, so I figured I was right.

We walked part of the way around the lake, back to the inlet where a freshwater stream feeds into the main body of the reservoir, and he pointed out a bridge that spans the water. He said something to the effect of, “Look… a bridge!” meaning, of course, just like at Lexington and Concord. I thought “Oookay… you’re a bit silly” - but of course I went with it, because I wouldn’t love him any other way.

Then he launched into this whole talk about historical stuff, and I thought it was a little strange, as he seemed rather more emotional about the whole thing than I thought he would… But he is, after all, a history nerd on par with myself, so I assumed he was just serious about the significance and lost in the moment.

He certainly was, but he also eventually turned the conversation to us, and while I remember a good portion of what he proceeded to say, I frankly want it for myself won’t share it here or elsewhere. It all made sense then, the historical stuff was meaningful to him, but also a bit of skillful stalling while he was looking for the words he was now saying…

And ultimately, he told me he wanted me for his wife, got down on one knee, and asked me to marry him.

Of course, I said yes.

Somebody please explain to me why a woman who has no idea what she is talking about is sponsoring bills banning my firearms?

ETA: After watching this about 230853125 times, I STILL can’t for the life of me figure out what she might even be ALLUDING to at the end. Can anybody interpret her little pantomime as a description of any particular part of a firearm? Does anybody know what the eff “I think it’s a shoulder thing that goes up” is supposed to mean? I’m serious - what in the hell is she talking about? Discuss.

But you don’t get to find out why until a little later today.

Seriously - I think it was only trumped by the first one, 232 years ago. :)

Letter from White #1:

The following letter was sent out to all University of Idaho students via email:

April 17, 2007

To the Students, Faculty and Staff of the University of Idaho:

The United States flag flies at half-mast at the University of Idaho, as we mourn the horrific carnage of Monday’s events at Virginia Tech University. We send the thoughts and prayers of a sister institution, and a sister community, to all connected with Virginia Tech.

It is so difficult to imagine the pain that families and friends of the dead are feeling, what the wounded and their friends and families are going through, and how they and their beloved institution—faculty, staff, students and alumni—can move through, and beyond, this dark week.

Several among us at the University of Idaho have connections and relationships with Virginia Tech, as former students and employees, and through friends and colleagues. Many will now develop a connection with Virginia Tech because of the commonalities of our universities. In addition, some of us may have our own histories of personal trauma or tragedy. And after all, as a university community we have just experienced a tragic killing in Moscow.

As I have all too recently written to you, violence has no place in environments of discovery, learning and teaching, where reason, dialogue and respectful debate—not violence—are the means to solve differences, reach common understanding and effect positive change in the world. Yet violence has intruded into our own world of learning in Moscowand elsewhere, and now in Blacksburg. These are inexplicable and unacceptable violations of the open, thoughtful and contemplative environment we consider important for creativity and learning at a university.

I ask that while we keep the Virginia Tech community—and all affected by acts such as these, past and present—in our thoughts, we also be certain to take care of ourselves here at the University of Idaho. Following a horrendous event like this, some of us may experience some variation of a normal stress reaction. The form and severity of the reaction varies with each individual. If you develop symptoms such as difficulty in concentrating, deep sadness, anxiety or depression, loss of appetite, sleep difficulties, etc., talk with those whom you trust about your feelings, and—particularly if symptoms persist—seek professional assistance. Also, consider limiting the amount of media coverage that you expose yourself to, as otherwise you run the risk of increasing your level of anxiety and distress.

Students who are experiencing distress can seek assistance at the University’s Counseling & Testing Center, in the Moscow campus Continuing Education Building, Room 306, (208) 885-6716. Crisis services are available 24 hours per day.

Sincerely,

Timothy P. White

President

Mike’s response:

President White:

Considering the recent “accostings” of women, the recent armed robbery and battery by a UI football player, the stabbing and mugging of another student in the restroom, the death of David Boss and now the shootings at Virginia Tech, you must understand that to myself and many other University of Idaho students your words come across as hollow and insincere. So long as you remain inactive in searching for an actual solution to these problems and foster the the same environment that allowed those shootings to happen that Virginia Tech, no progress will be made to prevent the same from happening here.

The University of Idaho maintains an almost identical firearms policy to that of Virginia Tech. You say that violence has no place in a University, and you are right, but you also perpetuate a policy where a student’s most basic right of self preservation is denied. Several dozen students are dead now thanks to a system in Virginia Tech that chose to endorse victimhood over self defense. Recently the mall shooting in Utah was ended when an off duty police officer confronted the gunman with his personal firearm. In 2002 at the Appalachian School of Law, a gunman was subdued by students running to their cars and retrieving personal firearms. Yet here in Moscow, even with an abundance of students who are trained military and war veterans, as well as those that have gone through the requirements to earn a concealed carry permit no student is allowed to have access to a firearm on campus. The University of Idaho policy is also in direct conflict with the state constitution which allows the open carry of firearms by all adults except in federal buildings and K-12 schools.

Criminals do not follow the law. A no firearms policy on campus did not prevent a gunman from entering a Virginia Tech campus. Instead a no firearms policy disarmed responsible and law abiding students on campus which led to their deaths. Sir, I charge that you be proactive and brave. Take a stand rather than throw out token condolences while keeping the grounds of UI fertile for the same event. Myself and many others cannot shake the feeling that you are keeping your head in the sand about this and are merely rolling the dice and hoping it doesn’t happen here. For a school whose motto is “Open Spaces, Open Minds,” we have an exceptionally closed minded firearms policy.

Sincerely,

Michael [omitted] (History, ‘08)

[omitted]@uidaho.edu

White’s reply:

This is almost verbatim the response I predicted; I am saddened, but not surprised, that an administrator in academia is more interested in political agendas and talking points than working for a safe campus.

Michael,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I acknowledge your opinion, but please know it differs from the policy of the university and that I have no intention of softening our policy with respect to firearms.

I regret that you found my words hollow and insecure, because they are not.

Sincerely,

Timothy White, President

NOTE: Mike never called him “insecure” - he said “insincere.” Freudian slip or typo? Hmm.

Mike’s response, also known as “Well… it’s on now, then!”

President White:

I appreciate the quick reply. Do understand however that I find your response unsatisfactory. You are the school president and I but a lowly student, so I will honor the school policy though I do intend to organize like-minded students and create some noise in protest. My younger sister will soon be attending and during my time here this campus has proven woefully inept at preventative measures regarding violence against women. I intend to see that she be allowed to carry a defensive firearm instead, as it seems to be more effective than another “Take back the night” march. I shudder to think that in an event similiar to the Virginia Tech massacre all I have to protect me are the police, as they are rarely available to end a crime, only to clean up after it is over as we have just witnessed. If you are truly sincere in your words then you will put action to them. In what ways are the students of this campus more secure than those of Virginia Tech? In any case, nothing personal, though I intend to find a legal route to resolve this and allow students to protect themselves if the administration refuses its duties. Thanks again for the reply.

Michael [omitted]

[omitted]@uidaho.edu

P.S. I’ve omitted Mike’s last name and email address for personal reasons; he has no problem attaching his name to this cause, but I prefer not to publish it on my blog.

Two hundred and thirty-two years ago, Paul Revere had embarked on his midnight ride. The rest, as they say, is history.

Does that give anyone else chills, or am I just that big of a history nerd? If it doesn’t… maybe it should.

Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.

He said to his friend, “If the British march
By land or sea from the town to-night,
Hang a lantern aloft in the belfry arch
Of the North Church tower as a signal light,–
One if by land, and two if by sea;
And I on the opposite shore will be,
Ready to ride and spread the alarm
Through every Middlesex village and farm,
For the country folk to be up and to arm.”

Then he said “Good-night!” and with muffled oar
Silently rowed to the Charlestown shore,
Just as the moon rose over the bay,
Where swinging wide at her moorings lay
The Somerset, British man-of-war;
A phantom ship, with each mast and spar
Across the moon like a prison bar,
And a huge black hulk, that was magnified
By its own reflection in the tide.

Meanwhile, his friend through alley and street
Wanders and watches, with eager ears,
Till in the silence around him he hears
The muster of men at the barrack door,
The sound of arms, and the tramp of feet,
And the measured tread of the grenadiers,
Marching down to their boats on the shore.

Then he climbed the tower of the Old North Church,
By the wooden stairs, with stealthy tread,
To the belfry chamber overhead,
And startled the pigeons from their perch
On the sombre rafters, that round him made
Masses and moving shapes of shade,–
By the trembling ladder, steep and tall,
To the highest window in the wall,
Where he paused to listen and look down
A moment on the roofs of the town
And the moonlight flowing over all.

Beneath, in the churchyard, lay the dead,
In their night encampment on the hill,
Wrapped in silence so deep and still
That he could hear, like a sentinel’s tread,
The watchful night-wind, as it went
Creeping along from tent to tent,
And seeming to whisper, “All is well!”
A moment only he feels the spell
Of the place and the hour, and the secret dread
Of the lonely belfry and the dead;
For suddenly all his thoughts are bent
On a shadowy something far away,
Where the river widens to meet the bay,–
A line of black that bends and floats
On the rising tide like a bridge of boats.

Meanwhile, impatient to mount and ride,
Booted and spurred, with a heavy stride
On the opposite shore walked Paul Revere.
Now he patted his horse’s side,
Now he gazed at the landscape far and near,
Then, impetuous, stamped the earth,
And turned and tightened his saddle girth;
But mostly he watched with eager search
The belfry tower of the Old North Church,
As it rose above the graves on the hill,
Lonely and spectral and sombre and still.
And lo! as he looks, on the belfry’s height
A glimmer, and then a gleam of light!
He springs to the saddle, the bridle he turns,
But lingers and gazes, till full on his sight
A second lamp in the belfry burns.

A hurry of hoofs in a village street,
A shape in the moonlight, a bulk in the dark,
And beneath, from the pebbles, in passing, a spark
Struck out by a steed flying fearless and fleet;
That was all! And yet, through the gloom and the light,
The fate of a nation was riding that night;
And the spark struck out by that steed, in his flight,
Kindled the land into flame with its heat.
He has left the village and mounted the steep,
And beneath him, tranquil and broad and deep,
Is the Mystic, meeting the ocean tides;
And under the alders that skirt its edge,
Now soft on the sand, now loud on the ledge,
Is heard the tramp of his steed as he rides.

It was twelve by the village clock
When he crossed the bridge into Medford town.
He heard the crowing of the cock,
And the barking of the farmer’s dog,
And felt the damp of the river fog,
That rises after the sun goes down.

It was one by the village clock,
When he galloped into Lexington.
He saw the gilded weathercock
Swim in the moonlight as he passed,
And the meeting-house windows, black and bare,
Gaze at him with a spectral glare,
As if they already stood aghast
At the bloody work they would look upon.

It was two by the village clock,
When he came to the bridge in Concord town.
He heard the bleating of the flock,
And the twitter of birds among the trees,
And felt the breath of the morning breeze
Blowing over the meadow brown.
And one was safe and asleep in his bed
Who at the bridge would be first to fall,
Who that day would be lying dead,
Pierced by a British musket ball.

You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the British Regulars fired and fled,—
How the farmers gave them ball for ball,
From behind each fence and farmyard wall,
Chasing the redcoats down the lane,
Then crossing the fields to emerge again
Under the trees at the turn of the road,
And only pausing to fire and load.

So through the night rode Paul Revere;
And so through the night went his cry of alarm
To every Middlesex village and farm,—
A cry of defiance, and not of fear,
A voice in the darkness, a knock at the door,
And a word that shall echo for evermore!
For, borne on the night-wind of the Past,
Through all our history, to the last,
In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
The people will waken and listen to hear
The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
And the midnight message of Paul Revere.

– Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
April 19, 1860

The following is the text of an email I just sent to several student organizations on the University of Idaho campus. If you are interested in helping out, please contact me. Even if you’re not at UI or in the state of Idaho, these policies are found on campuses nationwide - we can accomplish more if we work together, so let’s team up to defeat deadly firearm policies from Alaska to Maine!

Hello,

I’m sending this email to the most recent contacts I could find for campus organizations I feel might be interested in this subject. If you are not a current contact for your club, please do me a favor and pass it along to the appropriate representative.

In light of recent events in the University of Idaho/Moscow community, as well as national events, I feel the time has come to revisit the University of Idaho policy on firearms. Across the country, other students and concerned individuals are calling for the same - why have law-abiding adults been denied their right to carry a personal protection firearm on almost every university campus in the nation?

Unfortunately, we live in a world where nobody can safely say “That would never happen here.” Blacksburg, VA is strikingly similar to Moscow, ID - they didn’t see Monday’s tragedy coming, either. The women on UI’s campus who have been accosted in recent years didn’t expect to be attacked; the gentleman who was mugged and stabbed in an engineering building bathroom certainly didn’t expect to find himself in that situation, either.

The Idaho state constitution has state-level preemption of firearms laws, meaning no local public entity can prohibit what the state allows. In other words, Moscow, ID could not issue a sweeping prohibition of firearm carry - the state constitution guarantees it as a right. Why, then, has the University of Idaho - a publicly funded institution - been allowed to issue a sweeping ban of firearms on campus, regardless of the legality of carry?

This is a non-partisan issue. I have friends on both the right and left who own firearms for self-defense. I sincerely hope your organizations - or even individual members - will join me in fighting the University of Idaho policy, which deprives law-abiding adults of their rights, and leaves us all ripe for more violence.

My goal here is not to promote willy-nilly carrying of firearms by people who shouldn’t. My goal is to promote the recognition of the right of law-abiding individuals, those who have undertaken the responsibility of training themselves in firearm use and safety (for example, our active duty, reserve and former military, those who have undergone the required formal training to obtain a concealed carry permit, etc.) to carry in their own self-defense and the self-defense of those around them.

Thanks to the Virginia Tech murderer, we know what happens when a criminal defies laws and policies and meets up with an unarmed populace. Unfortunately in this case, we do not know what would have happened if those policies did not exist, and law-abiding students and faculty were able to resist with their personal firearms. We do, however, know what happened in 2002 at the Appalachian School of Law, where an armed gunman was subdued by two students who ran to their vehicles to retrieve their personal firearms and then used them to stop his rampage. We also know what happened this February in Utah, where a mall shooter was stopped by an off-duty police officer with his own personal firearm.

Next time a criminal attempts to assault a woman on campus, let’s give her the best tools possible to resist and escape without harm. If, God forbid, we ever find ourselves in the midst of a rampage like what just happened at Virginia Tech, let’s give students and faculty the chance to save lives.

Please pass this message along to your email lists, or discuss it at your next meeting. If your organization, or any individual members, are interested in getting on board with this “project,” please contact me via email (laurelzimmer@gmail.com) or phone (omitted) as soon as possible. I realize this is a busy time of year for everyone, so even if you cannot dedicate a lot of time to the issue right now, let me know that you’re interested in contributing in the future.

Thank you for your time, and feel free to contact me with any questions.

Best regards,
Laurel Zimmer
(omitted)
laurelzimmer@gmail.com

Note: I’m not going to include my phone number in this post, but contact me via email or the blog’s contact feature and I’ll be happy to share it with those who wish to work with me.