18 Shot at Northern Illinois University

[JimH52]

who cares "why" he did it

the point is that the school was a gun free zone and because of that more people were injured and killed.

if someone there had a weapon and fired on this asshole, do you think that he might be the on on a slab and more of those kids would be alive and/or unhurt?

the liberal idea that if we clould only have known about this poor kid we could have helped him is not the way to think. what about the people this scum bag killed? i don't care that he was on meds. the fact that he chose to go off of them is indicative of his irresponsibility to himself and the people around him. in short he was just another selfish asshole who thought the world should revolve around him and when he finally figured out that it didn't he had a tantrum and killed some innocent kids.

if only someone had been able to carry a weapon, he might be the one with a bullet in the brain and more of those inocent kids would be here today

So you are advocating allowing fire arms on school property? Yes...No?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So you are advocating allowing fire arms on school property? Yes...No?

i am for law abiding citizens being able to protect themselves from harm. if that chosen means of protection is a firearm then so be it.

 

[jillian]

Sure, that's what we need. A bunch of hormonal, beer drinking frat boys with guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sure, that's what we need. A bunch of hormonal, beer drinking frat boys with guns.

those "boys" happen to be young men old enough to fight and die for our country if they choose. would you rather we leave our personal protection to a bunch of giggly self obsessed sorority girls

 

[jillian]

those "boys" happen to be young men old enough to fight and die for our country if they choose. would you rather we leave pur personal protection to a bunch of giggly self obsessed sorority girls

Nope. But likelihood is that they aren't the one who are going to be walking around with guns.

You can justify it any way you see fit. Guns don't belong on campus. And don't think I'm an anti-gun type because I'm not. But they really don't belong in school.

The answer is keeping guns away from the type of mentally ill at-risk people who commit these kinds of acts.

 

[JimH52]

It would be crazy to allow students to pack heat. A better solution would be to have plain clothes security among the students. Professionals capable and trained to use fire arms. Maybe that is a bit over the edge also but I mean, it seems to be working with the airlines.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Nope. But likelihood is that they aren't the one who are going to be walking around with guns.

You can justify it any way you see fit. Guns don't belong on campus. And don't think I'm an anti-gun type because I'm not. But they really don't belong in school.

The answer is keeping guns away from the type of mentally ill at-risk people who commit these kinds of acts.

and just how do you propose we do that? global psych testing??

the best way to stop assholes like this is to be able to take the guy down as soon as he starts shooting

 

[Annie]

Nope. But likelihood is that they aren't the one who are going to be walking around with guns.

You can justify it any way you see fit. Guns don't belong on campus. And don't think I'm an anti-gun type because I'm not. But they really don't belong in school.

The answer is keeping guns away from the type of mentally ill at-risk people who commit these kinds of acts.

Jillian I agree with you to a point, but they are on campus, in the wrong hands. I'm going to try and find something...Here it is.

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.

...

All we need to do is take the existing plans for maximum security prisons and convert them to college campuses.

The same model can also work for shopping malls, ...

That, it seems to me, is what it would take to set up a truly safe "gun-free zone." Anything less just makes these places little more than hunting preserves for psychos.

As was shown at Virginia Tech.

And the Omaha mall.

And Northern Illinois University.

And who knows where next?

 

[JeffWartman]

Shooting at Northern Illinois University a product of gun free zones

 

[CrimsonWhite]

It would be crazy to allow students to pack heat. A better solution would be to have plain clothes security among the students. Professionals capable and trained to use fire arms. Maybe that is a bit over the edge also but I mean, it seems to be working with the airlines.

An airplane is little different than a college campus. A 747 holds about 420 people and it takes two to three Sky Marshals on a full flight. A campus, the likes of NIU has student body of upwards 25,000 students. There is no way to be able to that many officers in every classroom across the nation. An airliner is enclosed with limited access. A college campus is spralling with many different buildings and normally have open access. On an airplane, a sky marshall can respond within 3 to 7 seconds. The first officers on the scene at NIU were in that lecture hall in under two minutes. Two minutes was all it took for 18 to be wounded and 5 to die. Now, put a concealed weapon on the ankle of a student. It is only speculation, but perhaps the casualty list would have been alot shorter.