College Kids Demanding Second Amendment Rights

[Kathianne]

Interesting arguments. Yeah, there is an advertisment:

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/video/14518311/index.html?taf=den

[waterrescuedude2000]

Here in Reno same BS I have a concealed weapons permit and am not allowed to carry on the university campus. I am a Military Veteran Who has been trained to handle firearms and had to take a class on how to carry to get my permit. They make you go to the range and shoot from 7,14 and 21 feet 30 shots if even one misses then you don't get your permit. You have to retake the shooting part. You shoot ten rounds from each distance. They teach you when you can and can not carry when you can and can not use it. And the instructor that did mine also teaches law enforcement and is also a Range Master at Front Sight one of the most respected gun schools in the country. The guy who did mine also did scenarios what would you do if....... I also firmly believe that anyone who has the proper training should be allowed to carry on campus.

[red states rule]

Here in Reno same BS I have a concealed weapons permit and am not allowed to carry on the university campus. I am a Military Veteran Who has been trained to handle firearms and had to take a class on how to carry to get my permit. They make you go to the range and shoot from 7,14 and 21 feet 30 shots if even one misses then you don't get your permit. You have to retake the shooting part. You shoot ten rounds from each distance. They teach you when you can and can not carry when you can and can not use it. And the instructor that did mine also teaches law enforcement and is also a Range Master at Front Sight one of the most respected gun schools in the country. The guy who did mine also did scenarios what would you do if....... I also firmly believe that anyone who has the proper training should be allowed to carry on campus.

Some think putting up "Gun Free Zone" signs will stop people from bring a gun on campus and stop them from killing innocent people

[Gaffer]

Northern Illinois college will be reconsidering its no gun policies after today.

[gabosaurus]

Do you really think having a gun would have prevented someone from shooting up a lecture hall? When someone starts shooting, you duck for cover. This was established at the Virginia Tech shootings.
If someone is shooting, and you go for a gun, you are dead. You are a dead wannabe hero.
There is no reason to turn college campuses into Dodge City. The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

[Monkeybone]

The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

that is a load of crap. how do you know that having ppl with guns a known thing won't stop these ppl? or should every where start having an armed police force?

and even if you made it so that ppl couldn't have guns, the sort of person that wanted to do this would get a gun anyways.

[hjmick]

Do you really think having a gun would have prevented someone from shooting up a lecture hall? When someone starts shooting, you duck for cover. This was established at the Virginia Tech shootings.

No, it would not have stopped someone from shooting up a lecture hall. But it sure as hell would have evened the odds and quite possibly would have cut the number of dead and injured in half. The idea that an armed individual who knows how and when to use his or her weapon would simply "duck and cover" is unknown. The only thing established by the Virginia Tech shootings was that unarmed people have no chance against an armed individual hell bent on killing as many people as he can in as short a period of time as possible. Speaking for myself, were I armed during an event like this, I would duck just long enough to unholster my weapon and return fire. I say this because I know how and when to use my weapon. I frequent the shooting range and keep my skills honed. The sound of gunfire does not startle me, and this is what most people first respond to, the sound. This is what sends them running for cover initially. I can't say that I blame them.


If someone is shooting, and you go for a gun, you are dead. You are a dead wannabe hero.

In a situation like the one we are discussing, going for a gun or not going for a gun has nothing to do with whether or not you're going to be shot. The loons don't care one way or another. Most of them hope they will be killed, they don't care who they kill along the way.


There is no reason to turn college campuses into Dodge City. The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

This is simply not true. A very good study has been done on Multiple Victim Public Shootings and Right to Carry laws. It suggests that the very idea that people may be armed is a deterrent. Since the motive of most of the perpetrators of this type of crime is to kill as many people as possible, the idea that they could be stopped before achieving this goal makes some reconsider. Here is a link to the study: Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=161637). It is worth the read, I downloaded it a few months ago. Oddly enough, it was published by The Law School, The University Of Chicago.

To take this discussion one step further, armed students have prevented at least one campus massacre.

Six years ago, armed college students subdued a gunman about to begin a college killing spree.

On Jan. 16, 2002 , a killer stalked the campus of the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, Va., not far from the site of the massacre at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg. A disgruntled former student killed Law Dean L. Anthony Sutin, associate professor Thomas Blackwell and a student.

Two of the three law students who overpowered Peter Odighizuwa before he could kill more innocent victims were armed. Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges, seeing the killing spree begin, went to their cars, retrieved their guns and used them to disarm the shooter.

Mikael and Tracy were prepared to do something quite different: Both immediately ran to their cars and got their guns. Mikael had to run about one hundred yards to get to his car.

Along with Ted Besen (who was unarmed), they approached Peter from different sides. As Tracy explains it, "I stopped at my vehicle and got a handgun, a revolver. Ted went toward Peter, and I aimed the gun at him, and Peter tossed his gun down." Then the three jumped on the gunman and the killing stopped.

After the Virginia Tech massacre, VT administrators applauded the fact that its students couldn't do the same.

[gabosaurus]

That's conservative society for you -- it's permissible (and even encouraged) to own a gun, but not a dildo. :rolleyes:

[hjmick]

That's conservative society for you -- it's permissible (and even encouraged) to own a gun, but not a dildo. :rolleyes:

Now you see, I fully support the owning of dildos. Dildos, personal massagers, hell, any thing that can enhance sexual pleasure and intimacy between consenting adults.

[gabosaurus]

You must not live in the South. Cletus would be very angry with you for making that remark. :)

[hjmick]

You must not live in the South. Cletus would be very angry with you for making that remark. :)

I do live in the south...South California. :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

That's conservative society for you -- it's permissible (and even encouraged) to own a gun, but not a dildo. :rolleyes:

I cant imagine why conservatives might support the Constitutional right to defend ourselves. Maybe its because we understand there are bad people out there. Maybe it's because we understand the difference between Constitutional rights and non constitutional rights.

[waterrescuedude2000]

Do you really think having a gun would have prevented someone from shooting up a lecture hall? When someone starts shooting, you duck for cover. This was established at the Virginia Tech shootings.
If someone is shooting, and you go for a gun, you are dead. You are a dead wannabe hero.
There is no reason to turn college campuses into Dodge City. The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

But see I would rather have a shot at saving myself you yes I may die in the process but how do we know for sure?? Yes I agree you duck for cover or concealment then you draw your weapon. And if you have the military training I do you go for 2 rounds to the Thoracic Cavity and one to the cranio-ocular. See besides the military I took a 4 day tactical defensive shooting course at front sight. And I go shooting with one of their Range Masters who also happens to train both federal and local law enforcement angencies in shooting. One thing nice about the U.S Military they train you to fire with superior marksmanship. These clowns that go into schools and do this shooting are just the old school spray and pray kind usually. I guarantee that if everyone with a concealed weapons permit around it could of possibly stopped it. Did you hear about the school principal that stopped a school shooting??? I will dig for the link but he had locked his gun in his car and was walking towards the school when he heard gun fire. Well since guns aren't even allowed on school property he had to run across the street retrieve his weapon and he was able to stop the bloodbath

here is the link http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm

And actually it has been proven in states that have the concealed weapons permits have lower crime rates on average then say California where it is a bitch to get a permit.

[Lee~*]

A wise man once said "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"

Take a look at some of the crime statistics in countries that have outlawed gun ownership by private citizens ... If you have a brain in your head, it will scare the bejeebers out of you! Lee~*

[Kathianne]

Do you really think having a gun would have prevented someone from shooting up a lecture hall? When someone starts shooting, you duck for cover. This was established at the Virginia Tech shootings.
If someone is shooting, and you go for a gun, you are dead. You are a dead wannabe hero.
There is no reason to turn college campuses into Dodge City. The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

Gabby, there are substantive responses to you already, I can't add to those. What I can add though, is where concealed carry is being discussed on campuses there are caveats being added, it wouldn't be the same as being 'legally able to own a gun':

1. Those that would be 'permitted' to carry would have to be 21 years of age or older.

2. They would have to 'prove' their training, not just be legal to carry. In some discussions I've heard that perhaps it should be restricted to law enforcement and military trained, for much the reasons stated in the replies above. There is a world of difference between an encounter with someone hell bent on mass murder and someone that you stumble upon trying to rob your home or having an altercation with.

[-Cp]

Do you really think having a gun would have prevented someone from shooting up a lecture hall? When someone starts shooting, you duck for cover. This was established at the Virginia Tech shootings.
If someone is shooting, and you go for a gun, you are dead. You are a dead wannabe hero.
There is no reason to turn college campuses into Dodge City. The free availability of guns is what causes these massacres. If everyone gets to carry a gun, you will have even more of these events.

Really?? Huh.....hmm.. tell that to this town...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DC133CF932A25757C0A9619482 60

[Kathianne]

Gabby, there are substantive responses to you already, I can't add to those. What I can add though, is where concealed carry is being discussed on campuses there are caveats being added, it wouldn't be the same as being 'legally able to own a gun':

1. Those that would be 'permitted' to carry would have to be 21 years of age or older.

2. They would have to 'prove' their training, not just be legal to carry. In some discussions I've heard that perhaps it should be restricted to law enforcement and military trained, for much the reasons stated in the replies above. There is a world of difference between an encounter with someone hell bent on mass murder and someone that you stumble upon trying to rob your home or having an altercation with.

Here's one that restricts handguns to only school personnel. I don't think that is the best way to go:

http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/HB3014.pdf

[red states rule]

But see I would rather have a shot at saving myself you yes I may die in the process but how do we know for sure?? Yes I agree you duck for cover or concealment then you draw your weapon. And if you have the military training I do you go for 2 rounds to the Thoracic Cavity and one to the cranio-ocular. See besides the military I took a 4 day tactical defensive shooting course at front sight. And I go shooting with one of their Range Masters who also happens to train both federal and local law enforcement angencies in shooting. One thing nice about the U.S Military they train you to fire with superior marksmanship. These clowns that go into schools and do this shooting are just the old school spray and pray kind usually. I guarantee that if everyone with a concealed weapons permit around it could of possibly stopped it. Did you hear about the school principal that stopped a school shooting??? I will dig for the link but he had locked his gun in his car and was walking towards the school when he heard gun fire. Well since guns aren't even allowed on school property he had to run across the street retrieve his weapon and he was able to stop the bloodbath

here is the link http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm

And actually it has been proven in states that have the concealed weapons permits have lower crime rates on average then say California where it is a bitch to get a permit.

Amazing, there are maby examples of armed citizens putting an end to a crime being committed

And here is one, where those same people now face charges (more liberal logic?)


Omaha Mall Shooter Stopped by Armed Shoppers
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace · 49 Comments
(2007-12-07) — When 19-year-old Robert Hawkins entered the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, carrying an AK-47 assault rifle wrapped in a sweater, he intended to become famous by shooting as many people as possible and then turning the gun on himself.

The mentally-troubled teen left a suicide note, and a trail of evidence on his computer and elsewhere that he knew the police would spend months investigating. He had done everything possible to ensure that his name would be mentioned along with other mass killers at Virginia Tech, Columbine High School and the like.

He knew that the Westroads Mall was a gun-free zone, with signs on the entrances warning people with conceal-carry permits that they may not bring their firearms into the mall. He took comfort from those signs, as he pushed through the doors carrying the stolen assault rifle.

As he ascended to the upper deck, Mr. Hawkins could almost hear the screams of the shoppers as they tried to flee the sound of his shots, but due to the echo couldn’t discern the shooter’s position. He pictured the confused mall security guards talking over each other on the two-way radios. He rehearsed in his mind the final trigger pull that would end his mortal pain, and imagined the silence that would follow, punctuated only by the groaning of his dying victims.

That was the plan — careful, premeditated and nearly perfect.

There was only one problem: some people don’t read signs, and others ignore them.

As Mr. Hawkins moved into the ideal sniper position on the upper deck, an unnamed middle-aged man emerging from the nearby Von Maur department store noticed his odd behavior and glimpsed the muzzle of the rifle peeking out from the sweater. Almost instinctively the man moved toward Mr. Hawkins, reaching to his belt to draw out a Springfield EMP, a small, 9mm semi-automatic handgun.

As the would-be famous mass killer raised the rifle to his shoulder, the unnamed shopper commanded him to stop. Mr. Hawkins turned the muzzle of the AK-47 toward the commanding voice, a single shot rang out and Mr. Hawkins staggered, dropped his weapon and fell against the railing.

By this time, two other shoppers were aiming their pistols at Mr. Hawkins — a young, single woman pulled a .40 caliber Glock 27 from her purse, and a retired farmer drew his 9mm Ruger SR9 (an early Christmas gift from his wife). Together with the first man they moved in to separate Mr. Hawkins from his gun, search him for other weapons and restrain him until law enforcement arrived.

Robert Hawkins is recovering from his gunshot wound as he awaits trial for attempted murder and other charges. He faces the prospect of 15-to-25 years in prison, where police say he will be famous as “the guy who was almost famous.”

Westroads Mall officials said they had not decided yet whether to press charges against the three who interrupted Mr. Hawkins’ plan by violating the mall’s gun-free zone policy.

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2806

[Kathianne]

Amazing, there are maby examples of armed citizens putting an end to a crime being committed

And here is one, where those same people now face charges (more liberal logic?)


Omaha Mall Shooter Stopped by Armed Shoppers
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace · 49 Comments
(2007-12-07) — When 19-year-old Robert Hawkins entered the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska, carrying an AK-47 assault rifle wrapped in a sweater, he intended to become famous by shooting as many people as possible and then turning the gun on himself.

The mentally-troubled teen left a suicide note, and a trail of evidence on his computer and elsewhere that he knew the police would spend months investigating. He had done everything possible to ensure that his name would be mentioned along with other mass killers at Virginia Tech, Columbine High School and the like.

He knew that the Westroads Mall was a gun-free zone, with signs on the entrances warning people with conceal-carry permits that they may not bring their firearms into the mall. He took comfort from those signs, as he pushed through the doors carrying the stolen assault rifle.

As he ascended to the upper deck, Mr. Hawkins could almost hear the screams of the shoppers as they tried to flee the sound of his shots, but due to the echo couldn’t discern the shooter’s position. He pictured the confused mall security guards talking over each other on the two-way radios. He rehearsed in his mind the final trigger pull that would end his mortal pain, and imagined the silence that would follow, punctuated only by the groaning of his dying victims.

That was the plan — careful, premeditated and nearly perfect.

There was only one problem: some people don’t read signs, and others ignore them.

As Mr. Hawkins moved into the ideal sniper position on the upper deck, an unnamed middle-aged man emerging from the nearby Von Maur department store noticed his odd behavior and glimpsed the muzzle of the rifle peeking out from the sweater. Almost instinctively the man moved toward Mr. Hawkins, reaching to his belt to draw out a Springfield EMP, a small, 9mm semi-automatic handgun.

As the would-be famous mass killer raised the rifle to his shoulder, the unnamed shopper commanded him to stop. Mr. Hawkins turned the muzzle of the AK-47 toward the commanding voice, a single shot rang out and Mr. Hawkins staggered, dropped his weapon and fell against the railing.

By this time, two other shoppers were aiming their pistols at Mr. Hawkins — a young, single woman pulled a .40 caliber Glock 27 from her purse, and a retired farmer drew his 9mm Ruger SR9 (an early Christmas gift from his wife). Together with the first man they moved in to separate Mr. Hawkins from his gun, search him for other weapons and restrain him until law enforcement arrived.

Robert Hawkins is recovering from his gunshot wound as he awaits trial for attempted murder and other charges. He faces the prospect of 15-to-25 years in prison, where police say he will be famous as “the guy who was almost famous.”

Westroads Mall officials said they had not decided yet whether to press charges against the three who interrupted Mr. Hawkins’ plan by violating the mall’s gun-free zone policy.

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2806

RSR, that was 'Scrappleface; Ott was creating an 'alternative scenario', IF there had been people armed and willing to do the above. There weren't and 8 people were killed by Hawkings-who is also dead.

[red states rule]

RSR, that was 'Scrappleface; Ott was creating an 'alternative scenario', IF there had been people armed and willing to do the above. There weren't and 8 people were killed by Hawkings-who is also dead.

Sorry if I did not make that clear

Here is an example where armed people did stop a crime

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=43109

There are many others out there

[Kathianne]

Sorry if I did not make that clear

Here is an example where armed people did stop a crime

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=43109

There are many others out there

Yep, that was better and demonstrates that not all carrying a gun can't wait to shoot it. The 'subdoers' did not fire their weapons, just held the guy who did, until police arrived.

Very different scenario than one would encounter in the examples of the school shootings, as discussed in my previous post about discussions on campuses that are considering allowing faculty and some others to carry.

[red states rule]

Yep, that was better and demonstrates that not all carrying a gun can't wait to shoot it. The 'subdoers' did not fire their weapons, just held the guy who did, until police arrived.

Very different scenario than one would encounter in the examples of the school shootings, as discussed in my previous post about discussions on campuses that are considering allowing faculty and some others to carry.

I hust found this one Kathianne. An armed citizen did stop the last VA college shooting

I do not remeebr anyone pointing this out after the VT shooting. I wonder why?

An Armed Citizen With A Permit Stopped The Last VA College Shooting Rampage (2002)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1818798/posts

[Kathianne]

I hust found this one Kathianne. An armed citizen did stop the last VA college shooting

I do not remeebr anyone pointing this out after the VT shooting. I wonder why?

An Armed Citizen With A Permit Stopped The Last VA College Shooting Rampage (2002)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1818798/posts

It was a Virginia school, but not Virginia Tech, rather Appalachian Law School. Since it's so tiny, may not have come to mind.

I think it's something that is going to be discussed, I have to agree that most are not equipped to deal with the chaos that occurs in a school, mall or church, where so many are trying to escape, that's a different type of training than shooting practice-more law enforcement/military.

[Hugh Lincoln]

It was a Virginia school, but not Virginia Tech, rather Appalachian Law School.

I met the man who took out the attacker - very interesting story.

I have to say, this whole idea of the armed college campus strikes me as absurd. I'm open to arguments that it would work, and I am very strong on gun rights... to the point I don't think I would ban carrying weapons on campuses. But it's college, for God's sake... what the hell happened to our society?

[Kathianne]

I met the man who took out the attacker - very interesting story.

I have to say, this whole idea of the armed college campus strikes me as absurd. I'm open to arguments that it would work, and I am very strong on gun rights... to the point I don't think I would ban carrying weapons on campuses. But it's college, for God's sake... what the hell happened to our society?

I'm not going to disagree with you. It seems to me that a university campus should be one of the places that one is free to think, play, and work. With all of the shootings at schools, I still think there is much more danger in getting to and from school in an automobile than in being a target of a deranged shooter. The chances though of copycats is high right now, thus the discussion.

It's also why I would certainly shy away from having all that are issued gun permits to bring them on campus, the threats are very small, yet if encountered it's very different than the 'normal' situations that might call for an armed response. Total panic, unexpected behavior from targets, etc. I think the long response of age requirements, special training is worthwhile.

[red states rule]

I'm not going to disagree with you. It seems to me that a university campus should be one of the places that one is free to think, play, and work. With all of the shootings at schools, I still think there is much more danger in getting to and from school in an automobile than in being a target of a deranged shooter. The chances though of copycats is high right now, thus the discussion.

It's also why I would certainly shy away from having all that are issued gun permits to bring them on campus, the threats are very small, yet if encountered it's very different than the 'normal' situations that might call for an armed response. Total panic, unexpected behavior from targets, etc. I think the long response of age requirements, special training is worthwhile.

Why not arm the Security people? There are some who are opposed to that plan. What the hell are people to do when a nut starts shooting?

Anti gun nuts would rather have inncocent people be sitting ducks and targets rather then have the shooter taken out by another armed person

[Kathianne]

Why not arm the Security people? There are some who are opposed to that plan. What the hell are people to do when a nut starts shooting?

Anti gun nuts would rather have inncocent people be sitting ducks and targets rather then have the shooter taken out by another armed person

I think the answer to that, depends who are the security people. If they are off duty cops, probably yes. More likely they are rent a guard and having dealt with that type on campus, thank you, no.

[red states rule]

I think the answer to that, depends who are the security people. If they are off duty cops, probably yes. More likely they are rent a cop and having dealt with that type on campus, thank you, no.

Of course. The secuirty people must complete training, and have to pass regular continuing education gun courses

But I do not think the powers that be have a right to prevent folks who have a valid concealed weapon permit from carrying their gun

There is no way you are going to stop a nut from going on a campus from bringing a gun with the intent of killing people. People have a right to fight back, and shoot the SOB to save their and other people lives

[Kathianne]

Of course. The secuirty people must complete training, and have to pass regular continuing education gun courses

But I do not think the powers that be have a right to prevent folks who have a valid concealed weapon permit from carrying their gun

There is no way you are going to stop a nut from going on a campus from bringing a gun with the intent of killing people. People have a right to fight back, and shoot the SOB to save their and other people lives

Sure they do, at least on private property. Not sure how it applies to state schools, but I have every right to keep you from bringing a gun into my home.

The rent a guards are often wanna be cops, that couldn't get past the psych exam. No thanks. Did you notice that NIU shooter was a prison guard? Had been in military but 'released for undisclosed reasons'?

[red states rule]

Sure they do, at least on private property. Not sure how it applies to state schools, but I have every right to keep you from bringing a gun into my home.

The rent a guards are often wanna be cops, that couldn't get past the psych exam. No thanks. Did you notice that NIU shooter was a prison guard? Had been in military but 'released for undisclosed reasons'?

Valid point Kathianne, but you are more likely to be a target on a campus, or mall then your home

The more of these attacks that happen, the more pressure for logic and reason to prevail and allow people to defend their lives

[Kathianne]

Valid point Kathianne, but you are more likely to be a target on a campus, or mall then your home

The more of these attacks that happen, the more pressure for logic and reason to prevail and allow people to defend their lives

Do you have a link to the campus/mall being more likely a venue for being shot than home invasions?

[82Marine89]

Here in Reno same BS I have a concealed weapons permit and am not allowed to carry on the university campus. I am a Military Veteran Who has been trained to handle firearms and had to take a class on how to carry to get my permit. They make you go to the range and shoot from 7,14 and 21 feet 30 shots if even one misses then you don't get your permit. You have to retake the shooting part. You shoot ten rounds from each distance. They teach you when you can and can not carry when you can and can not use it. And the instructor that did mine also teaches law enforcement and is also a Range Master at Front Sight one of the most respected gun schools in the country. The guy who did mine also did scenarios what would you do if....... I also firmly believe that anyone who has the proper training should be allowed to carry on campus.

Since you advocate shooting illegal aliens for simply being here, I don't think you should be carrying a weapon.


Why not arm the Security people?

Think Nevadamedic.

[red states rule]

Since you advocate shooting illegal aliens for simply being here, I don't think you should be carrying a weapon.



Think Nevadamedic.

NV would have to complete the training, and the psych exam

There are some checks and balances in the plan

[Kathianne]

Since you advocate shooting illegal aliens for simply being here, I don't think you should be carrying a weapon.



Think Nevadamedic.

Exactly, if he can carry, I don't want him armed at my children's school.

[gabosaurus]

Armed and trained security I can go for. That is why most college campuses have their own police forces.
Armed students and instructors, I don't want. Let's suppose an crazed gun comes into a classroom and starts shooting. Who is going to be calm and level headed enough to respond? Are you more likely to hit the gunman, or another student?
Let's not turn our classrooms and public buildings into shooting ranges. There is a HUGE different between taking rounds on a shooting range and actually reacting on pressure of the moment. Even trained police officers have been known to hit their own. Not to mention the instances of military "friendly fire."

[Gaffer]

Armed and trained security I can go for. That is why most college campuses have their own police forces.
Armed students and instructors, I don't want. Let's suppose an crazed gun comes into a classroom and starts shooting. Who is going to be calm and level headed enough to respond? Are you more likely to hit the gunman, or another student?
Let's not turn our classrooms and public buildings into shooting ranges. There is a HUGE different between taking rounds on a shooting range and actually reacting on pressure of the moment. Even trained police officers have been known to hit their own. Not to mention the instances of military "friendly fire."

College campus have their own security. These are unarmed security officers. Campus police patrol the streets and grounds, not the class rooms. An armed person in the classroom at least gives the people there a chance. And it always comes down to the individual carrying the fire arm. If they panic they are useless to everyone. Some will duck in fear while others will stand and fight. I'm sure your a duck in fear person.

[red states rule]

No surprise how the liberal media feels about this issue


Concealed Carry: ABC Apparently Prefers Fish-In-a-Barrel To OK Corral
By Mark Finkelstein | February 16, 2008 - 12:24 ET

Interviewing a student advocate of concealed carry on campus, Good Morning America's Bill Weir fretted today that it could lead to an "OK Corral" situation.

Weir spoke with Mike Guzman, a student at Texas State University and a leader of a national group called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. Weir's opening question: "Are you carrying a gun now?"

Guzman said that he was, and does so everywhere but on campus. Sort of made me wish Guzman had asked Weir if he was unarmed.

You can view the video of the entire interview here, but I'd focus on this bit of editorializing by Weir:

BILL WEIR: The idea if there's two or three people in an economics class, and a gunfight breaks out, are you really saying, it's sort of like we're devolving to the OK Corral here.

Which raises the question posed in my headline. Do Weir and ABC believe that the current situation, in which killers can shoot defenseless students like fish in a barrel, is preferable to the prospect of an OK Corral in which the innocent at least have a chance?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/02/16/concealed-carry-abc-apparentlythinks-fish-barrel-better-ok-corral

[Kathianne]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/112174


CRIME
More Guns on Campus?
By Suzanne Smalley | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Feb 15, 2008

It was a sickeningly familiar scene. A student-gunman opened fire Thursday during a lecture at Northern Illinois University, killing five and wounding 15 before turning the gun on himself. The deadly spree was the fifth school shooting this week—and a traumatic reminder that for all the efforts to improve campus security nationwide since the massacre at Virginia Tech last year, students and faculty remain disturbingly vulnerable.

A nonprofit organization called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus would like to change that. The group, whose 12,000 members nationwide include college students, faculty and parents, champions legislation that would allow licensed gun owners to carry concealed weapons on campus, in the hope that an alert and well-trained citizen could stop a deranged shooter before he or she could do serious damage. According to the National Conference on State Legislatures, 13 states are currently considering some form of "concealed carry" legislation aimed at campuses. Utah is the group's model; after a state Supreme Court ruling found that the state university had violated a law allowing permit holders to carry concealed weapons, the school agreed that guns could legally be carried on its grounds. Some states, like Colorado, do not explicitly ban licensed students and faculty from carrying hidden weapons onto school grounds, though most universities in such states impose restrictions of their own.

There are signs that the "concealed carry" group was making headway even before the tragedy at Northern Illinois. Earlier this month the South Dakota House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to force state universities to allow students to carry weapons on campus, according to GOP state Rep. Tom Brunner. The bill, which Brunner sponsored, recently died in the state senate, but Brunner said he intends to bring it back as soon as he can. "It's not an issue that's going to go away," Brunner said. "We feel pretty passionate [that] students and teachers should have a right to defend themselves, and weapons on campus should be a part of the plan."...

[Kathianne]

Sue them and how to keep them:

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/02/17/the-zone-nondefense.php


The "Zone" Non-Defense
Posted by Jay Tea
Published: February 17, 2008 - 2:00 PM

With yet another mass shooting in a "gun-free zone," I find myself thinking a great deal about that concept.

The first idea is one that is bouncing around the blogosphere -- the notion that the powers that be that designate such places ought to be held legally liable for the carnage that erupts in them. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that they are making a promise -- possibly a legally binding one -- that "you don't need to defend yourself when you're here, because we'll protect you." They are using their authority as property owner (or manager) to supplant your right to keep and bear arms.

There's nothing wrong with that; it's perfectly legal and acceptable. Their place, their rules; if you don't like it, go somewhere else.

But it seems to this layman (who's done a smidgen of legal studying on my own) that there's an 'implied warranty" here -- they are taking these steps with the promise that this will make you safer. You are being asked to give up your 2nd Amendment right in the name of greater collective safety.

But it doesn't seem to work out like that. Nearly all of the mass shootings of late have been in "gun-free zones." And the ones that weren't -- at the New Life Church in Colorado and the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia -- were stopped by private citizens (and members of the community being attacked) with their own weapons.

Now for my second thought. If these places aren't going to get rid of their "gun-free zone" status, despite the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that they simply get more people killed, then how can they improve their security where it actually make the people inside safer?

I have a few ideas. And for the sake of simplicity, I'm going to apply them to a college.

First up, they need to absolutely control access to campus. They need to build hefty walls, with security features to keep people from going over, under, or through them. Then they need to put serious security measures on the few entrances through those walls. Metal detectors, hefty locks, repeated identity verification, and the like. No one gets in without going through multiple layers of screenings....

[Gaffer]

Good find Kath. I agree completely with that writer. Sue the shit out of any gun free zone establishment where a gunman strikes. Watch how quick those signs come down.

[red states rule]

Sue them and how to keep them:

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/02/17/the-zone-nondefense.php

So you think John Edwards will take a case like this?

[5stringJeff]

Here's the link to the site. I'm a memver of the Facebook group.

http://www.concealedcampus.org/