Last year Va Assembly rejected all gun-carry permits for VaTech

[Creek_George]

I think having security & armed students at the same time could back fire in some cases..more so than save life...Maybe in just some cases.

I don't have any studies to show you on something like this..especialy my opinion.

The law in my "opinion" should be at least 26-27 years of age to get one..(hand gun)...People don't start growing up till then..or could say start learning the hard lessons of life...Give us more time to screen an adult record too...have some history to it.

These cases are not normal...This sickoo was determined to take as much life as possible...

A trained security team...then those who pull a gun are an easy target once the shooting starts...Couple people start shooting it out...Now 2 seconds go by..because security has to hessitate...Who who?....Some other kid across the hall who watched "The Road Warrior" the night before...Pulls his gun out..and runs into that class to be hero etc...

You go through a background check..and they are meaningless to a killer with a clean record.We all know that.

We all know what friendly fire is...In schools I can only imagine in a case like this..but it may have saved life as well...We will never know that.

To talk blue in the face about it...will be the outcome..Till this same exact thing happens again.

Self defense..and comming to the rescue are two different things also.

Then you're going to school with more guns...and possibly a gun in the hands of somebody who would panic in a situation such as this as well....This was the front line of death....Even some with training..and in law/millitary have panicked and started opening fire on the innocent....Then a kid Like this monster joins in as well...

In the bathroom compare there chrome .45's...

Look at kids these days...Hello?

A school was never intendened to be like this in the first place.

Well...More security has to be in place...Parents will want to send there kids to the most secure college now as well....College Tuition will rise sharply if security is now upgraded big time.As that of our airports.

I do believe those with a normal head..and feel they need a gun for protection..then so be it.

More guns in the hands of the good..don't always stop the senseless tragedy the bad want to inflict on the innocent, such as this case....They are sneaky like this bastard...This was a suicide terrorist attack..with out explosives straped to his body....It's hard to protect yourself even armed against shit heads like this.

Could this of been avoided at 7:15 A.M..A sneak attack from this killer with other armed students?...No...Less death?..maybe.

Would in the long run..armed students in our colleges save life from tragedies like this, that are for sure to happen again?

In this case..it would of taken the balls to attack as well...Not just defend.

I guess it's up to our schools to allow..or not....I can tell ya this much...Go drive by a high-school in a big city...Alot are off to college in a year,or two...I'm sorry..but I feel the generation of kids now days won't be responsible with a gun till there 30's....

I always thought people had to answer a question "why" they feel the need to carry a consealed weapon?..Is not that asked when applying for one??

What's the answer now?...Well I go to college?

Can we armed..protect ourself from Pearl Harbor type attacks?

To have the best security..a college would look like a prison/concentration camp....It would feel like going to the airport everyday through security.

I enjoy my freedom to have a gun...

Society is gona be armed to the teeth..and security soon will be every part of our life because of one.

Sorry so much..and just opinion from me..

It's just so sad one loses it...and has such easy access to a weapon to unleash such lethal cruelty...

I think it's sad it takes one to feel safe..and to put in the hands of another hoping it's a positive force..(a gun).

It only has one purpose...To be good at one..ya gota be able to pull the trigger faster than the one meaning to pull his...

I don't see many good cowboys left anymore....especialy ones carrying consealed weapon permits.

I'm not gona bash gun laws...

Society is the problem..and I don't have faith in those with consealed weapons are gona make our streets & schools any safer.....I question the mentality of them as well...

I have strong expectations of myself..and of others when it comes to a gun..(weapon)...Our forefathers..and our family generations showed the responsibilty one was..when placed in our hands for the first time..What it was for...The responsibilty..Our right.

I can't use that right..to justify this tradegy.

Good posting from everybody...

Creek

 

[Bern80]

Ok genius, so when the cops yell "freeze" everyone pauses for a second, the killer shoots the hero. And the killer gets shot. Wow, great solution.....you just allowed the killer enough time to get one more shot off. Great job you idiot. Without this law, the cops would know that ANYONE with a gun is the suspect. Seriously, you must start taking your own advice and think logically.

Again try and count the asanine assumptions your stupid scenario and ask yourself how plausible they really are

1) Everyone will have guns
2) A 'hero' and killer find themselves in the same room just as the cops barge in.
3) The killer would shoot the hero in this split second the cop yells freeze.
4) All of the gun carriers would encounter the police.
5) They would all be a part of the incident.
6) They would all be using their guns in the incident.

Look at this for second from a broader persepective. Look at the ludicrous scenario you have had to concoct in an attempt to make your point. Answer honestly why is that you think it is even remotely reasonable that this scenario you've made up is reasonable approximation of what would really happen?

You tell me why the following isn't more likely.

Student's can legally conceal and carry on campus. Is it not reasonable to think that the # of people that are carrying on campus be reflective of the community at large?

http://www.policefoundation.org/pdf/GunsInAmerica.pdf

The above link contains information on Gun ownership in the U.S. Using the scenario, at most, 25% of the student would own firearms. Not have conceal and carry permits, just own them. It also states that 1 in 6 of gun owners carry it on there person so thats about 24% of the 25% that we can expect to actually have guns on them. VA Tech has approximately 25,000 students. Using this data, thats about 6% of the student body that we could expect to be carrying a gun on them which about 1,500 students.

There are some other factors though that I think it is reasonable to believe would significantly reduce that 1,500 that would have gun on them at all times.

Primarily is that it is in fact a school. I and two sibilings are recentluy out of college. We all have used and own guns, yet we didn't have to be presented with some rule saying we couldn't carry our guns to class. We just knew that, that probably would not be acceptable.

The only way I can think that it would be realistic that students would be carrying guns to class is if they were actually encourage to for their own safety. You can imagine what that would do for enrollment.

Also assumption one) Why wouldnt everyone have a gun? If the few "honest" people have guns decide to sell them or circulate them. Guess what, now "un honest" people have guns. Not to mention, this gunman had no record, meaning he was "honest" before he killed 31 people.

Why would they decide to sell them. Look at the fear you are working off of.
"What if this, then what if that, then o my god this will happen" You're are the only raving lunatic here.

 

[Vintij]

Why would anyone decide to sell them? WHy not !!!!!!! Why would anyone decide to kill 31 people!!!!

Crazy senario? Thats exactly what they said when they got to the first shooting and assumed it would be a crazy senario to think the killer would still be on campus! Did you expect the gunman to masacur 30 people 2 hours after the first shooting? No you didnt. Maybe if you thought of every "crazy" senario, you would have closed the campus and at least cancelled classes. Was it a crazy senario to think that another plane would hit the other tower in new york? Yes it was a crazy senario. Guess what, instead of assuming that things like that can never happen, maybe we should start ignoring people like you and start assuming that ANYTHING can happen. Please dont come at me with the "this is a stupid scenario" because unless you can prove that it can not physically be done, or it has not ever been physically accomplished. Then you cant argue with me. This scenario is possible and just because you think it sounds like a movie, does not make it impossible. It is a chance that congress and the American people are not willing to take. Once again, you are alone on this issue. Nobody in a million years will allow students to carry weapons on campus, especially not in a classroom.

 

[Shogun]

In regards to guns on campus and such...



What if campus Criminal Justice programs were integrated in to campus safety so that students getting those degrees could, in effect, get ctual law enforcement experience while working for campus police and be eligable for carrying concealed weapons (as long as they clear the current standard requirements)?


Not only would this provide a bevy of relevant experience for students in that field of acedemia but also the patrolling security population on campus would grow larger so as to promote safety and circumvent a clash with the pro gunners and the anti gunners...


any thoughts?


pounce away!

 

[Vintij]

Only in association with campus police, and only with extensive training and background checks, along with medical record checks. That would be the only way I would agree to this.

 

[Shogun]

well shit..

progress in finding compramise instead of a polar shouting match...


how 'bout that...


Would you not expect med school students to be competent before interning? likewise, can you not fathom a way to both increase those on campus who provide safety AND create a program that provides better trained and experienced criminal justice majors?

I assure you that the midigating variable yesterday was not simply that a gun was available any more than kids killed themselves in the 80s just because judas priest was on the turntable.

 

[Bern80]

Why would anyone decide to sell them? WHy not !!!!!!! Why would anyone decide to kill 31 people!!!!

Crazy senario? Thats exactly what they said when they got to the first shooting and assumed it would be a crazy senario to think the killer would still be on campus! Did you expect the gunman to masacur 30 people 2 hours after the first shooting? No you didnt. Maybe if you thought of every "crazy" senario, you would have closed the campus and at least cancelled classes. Was it a crazy senario to think that another plane would hit the other tower in new york? Yes it was a crazy senario. Guess what, instead of assuming that things like that can never happen, maybe we should start ignoring people like you and start assuming that ANYTHING can happen. Please dont come at me with the "this is a stupid scenario" because unless you can prove that it can not physically be done, or it has not ever been physically accomplished. Then you cant argue with me. This scenario is possible and just because you think it sounds like a movie, does not make it impossible. It is a chance that congress and the American people are not willing to take. Once again, you are alone on this issue. Nobody in a million years will allow students to carry weapons on campus, especially not in a classroom.

I am not saying that multiple scenarios are not possible. Some are more likely than others. What a rationale person does not do is try to create balnket policy over the least likely one. the raw emotion in your posts clearly shows that you don't yet have the capability of thinking things through rationally.

For the record I never said I am for arming kids in the class room. In fact I have stated there are better ways to protect students. All I was arguing was your asanine scenario.

 

[Paul Revere]

Here's what happens when a would-be school shooter encounters armed resistance:



http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott14.html

BRAVO!!!!

 

[Paul Revere]

Does anyone agree that to argue for concealed weapons on campus and in the classroom is ridiculess?

NOT ME!

 

[Paul Revere]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. More campus security and better trained local law enforcement will mean a quicker response time. More guns in the hands of more students means a greater chance that a student will go on a shooting rampage.

Campus Security and law enforcement did not help 32 innocent victems. You seem to have watched too many shoot 'em up westerns. In those golden Lone Ranger days, the fact that many chose to be armed for protection against rattlesnakes, indians, etc., keep violence low. The law was not always around to protect the citizens of yester-year, same goes for today.

 

[Paul Revere]

I am for keeping concealed weapons out of classrooms and off of campuses

I disagree.

Every criminal, every murderer was at one point a law abiding citizen.

If I had been there, I may have been shot, but I can guarantee that I would have been the last one shot.
The only thing that would have prevented that from happening is that I am a law abiding citizen, and because of an un-Constitutional law I would have been un-armed.

It may be that the killer set out to commit mass murder, or it may be that he had no real plan other than to kill the first two victims. Then upon 2 hours of reflection decided that his life was over and he was taking as many students as he could with him. If some armed person or persons had been on campus, some lives would have been spared and the killer would have been shot. Another advantage of this scenario is that most people are not killers. Most armed people including myself, would have tried to have disabled him without dispatching him if at all possible. If he had been taken out alive, many questions would eventually have been answered.

 

[red states rule]

If people are in favor of allowing the guns on the college campus, I'm just wondering how far you think people should be able to go to protect themselves. Do you think that people in high school should be able to carry guns to be able to protect themselves. Who knows, if some 18 year olds were allowed to carry guns in high school, then perhaps Columbine would have been prevented. If people were allowed to carry concealed firearms on airplanes, then maybe they could have prevented 9/11. I think that some of you will likely disagree with letting people carry guns in the two situations I proposed, so could you add some other principles other than the "self protection" principle that should govern where people can take guns. Clarify where you draw the line and why.

CBS Suggests More Gun Control Could Impede Terrorism
Posted by Ken Shepherd on April 18, 2007 - 01:32.
In an April 17 article at CBSNews.com, investigative reporter Armen Keteyian tracked down the origin of the guns used by Virginia Tech mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui.

While Keteyian failed to consider what part restrictive anti-concealed carry policies on the Virginia Tech campus may have played in ensuring Cho faced no opposition from armed civilians, he found a former ATF agent to criticize current gun laws as too little to thwart terrorism.:

“The incident just gets us to think how vulnerable we are,” says [Joseph] Vince, who now runs Crime Gun Solutions, a Maryland-based consulting firm. “We leave ourselves open for people like al Qaeda. If we saw this individual, who’s a student, killing 33 people and wounding 30 others, how could trained al Qaeda people react when they’re able to buy this kind of weaponry and ammunition?”

Keteyian doesn't inform readers that in 2002 following the D.C. sniper killing spree, Vince had been a proponent of ballistic "fingerprinting" schemes in New York and Maryland, both of which have since been proven ineffective.

What's more, while Keteyian consulted research on state gun laws compiled by the pro-gun control Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, there's no indication the investigative reporter even approached the National Rifle Association or other pro-gun rights groups for research or comment.

 

[Vintij]

I just really think its rather useless to debate something like this because, like I said, there are reasonably sane people running this country and not you. Therfore high school kids will not get guns, (I cant believe i just said that) and to be honest, I cant believe anyone would literally want a high school kid, under legal age, to carry a gun around campus. He cant legaly drink, cant drive, cant even wipe his own ass and you want him to have a gun? Do you know how utterly ridiculess that sounds? Luckily we have smarter people in congress who will not allow this, nor will they allow any student to bring any weapon on any campus. The only thing that is going to change about that is, well nothing. The only thing that will change in terms of gun controll is, stricter enforced laws of obtaining weapons and ammo.

The NRA may not be nutjobs, but they protect certain nutjobs rights to hold a weapon. Maybe we will never stop violence but we sure can make it harder to get a gun and 15 boxes of ammo, especially if you have never bought a weapon. Medical records need to be attached to background checks for weapons. Any type of mental instability, stalking, sexualy offensive, depression, therapy (non physical), agressive behavior, and medication should be a warning sign.

Another great idea, put tracking devises in all new over the counter guns. Know where they are and if they are being fired outside of a hunting zone, or a gun shooting facility. This would be so amazing, because 1) It would alert police stations when a weapon is being fired outside of a designated weapon area, 2) It would come in handy in case of lost or stolen guns. 3) They can track a gun that has been fired to find out where the "gunman" is.

We have the technology to track our dogs, so we have the technology to track our guns.

 

[Bern80]

I just really think its rather useless to debate something like this because, like I said, there are reasonably sane people running this country and not you. Therfore high school kids will not get guns, (I cant believe i just said that) and to be honest, I cant believe anyone would literally want a high school kid, under legal age, to carry a gun around campus. He cant legaly drink, cant drive, cant even wipe his own ass and you want him to have a gun? Do you know how utterly ridiculess that sounds? Luckily we have smarter people in congress who will not allow this, nor will they allow any student to bring any weapon on any campus. The only thing that is going to change about that is, well nothing. The only thing that will change in terms of gun controll is, stricter enforced laws of obtaining weapons and ammo.

thanks for answering my questions by the way.

The above kinda answers for it anyway and shows how very little you understand about guns in this country. In most states a person is allowed to carry a gun, alone, by their mid teens. In order to do this they must undergoe Firearm Safety training, which I have. If one has not undergone Firearm Safety training they may not purchase a firearm until they are 18 yrs of age.

You call for stricter rules on the purchase of ammunition and handguns. Again showing a lack of comprehension of the strict rules already in place.

The NRA may not be nutjobs, but they protect certain nutjobs rights to hold a weapon.

How? please be specific.

Maybe we will never stop violence but we sure can make it harder to get a gun and 15 boxes of ammo, especially if you have never bought a weapon.

What legal methods are there to be in posession of a firearm if you have never bought one? You can buy shotgun shells by the case in most states. My dad stocks up before fall every year, no one thinks much of it, nor should they.

Another great idea, put tracking devises in all new over the counter guns. Know where they are and if they are being fired outside of a hunting zone, or a gun shooting facility. This would be so amazing, because 1) It would alert police stations when a weapon is being fired outside of a designated weapon area,

"outside of a designated weapon area" where prey tell would these be? Inside my own home perhaps? Urban areas?

2) It would come in handy in case of lost or stolen guns. 3) They can track a gun that has been fired to find out where the "gunman" is.

Again your lack of knowledge is amazing. This can already be done. All guns must be already be registered to a person. If the person who commits the crime is not the person the gun is registered to, then problem solved.

We have the technology to track our dogs, so we have the technology to track our guns.

We don't need the ability to track our guns. It would be a colossal waste of time and money. Less then 1% of guns sold in this country are used for illegal purposes.

 

[Vintij]

thanks for answering my questions by the way.

The above kinda answers for it anyway and shows how very little you understand about guns in this country. In most states a person is allowed to carry a gun, alone, by their mid teens. In order to do this they must undergoe Firearm Safety training, which I have. If one has not undergone Firearm Safety training they may not purchase a firearm until they are 18 yrs of age.

You call for stricter rules on the purchase of ammunition and handguns. Again showing a lack of comprehension of the strict rules already in place.




How? please be specific.



What legal methods are there to be in posession of a firearm if you have never bought one? You can buy shotgun shells by the case in most states. My dad stocks up before fall every year, no one thinks much of it, nor should they.



"outside of a designated weapon area" where prey tell would these be? Inside my own home perhaps? Urban areas?



Again your lack of knowledge is amazing. This can already be done. All guns must be already be registered to a person. If the person who commits the crime is not the person the gun is registered to, then problem solved.



We don't need the ability to track our guns. It would be a colossal waste of time and money. Less then 1% of guns sold in this country are used for illegal purposes.

Really 1%? That shows how little you know about anything in this country. Please show me where you got that data.

"Regrettably, 40% of all gun sales are made through the secondary market, where background checks are not required".

http://www.csgv.org/issues/illegalmarkets/

Meaning Illegal gun trafficing! 40% of ALL guns are sold this way. Why would they be sold illegally if nobody plans to do anything illegal? Are you going to tell me that those are good honest people that just wanted to buy a gun ilegally? Good luck making sense on that argument. 40% is almost half of all guns. And that is a number I did NOT pull out of my ass.

Really you must stop attacking my intelect on this issue, the fact that you own a gun does not make you right on a gun related issue, infact it makes you biased. I do not own a gun therefore I form opinions based on violence in america, not based on my excitement and passion for shooting things.

Designated gun areas are rural areas sir, and gun ranges. Anything other than that, like say the backyard of a home in downtown LA. That would be out of the regulated zone. The backyard of a rural town like yours, would be IN the zone. Its not brain surgury to understand plain english. Am I alluding you? Am I using symbolism or impressionism? No Im using plain english and you are twisting it into the language of a uneducated gun basher. I am not that. Whens the last time you mailed your senator about gun rights? I mailed my senators this week about gun control, and the difference between our arguments is, they wont laugh at mine. Because from what I understand, you want it to be legal for a child to carry a gun on campus, in any state. Well Thankfully I dont live in your state, and I am for state votes on this issue. So I leave you at that, dont preach your logic to me, preach it to your state senator and I will enjoy normal gun laws in my state where technology is driving growth, not cowboys.

A final note, where was it in the bible that said we should give guns to everyone and there kids? I dont remember that part.

 

[CTRLALTDEL]

Have any of you campus pro gun ever thought of this scenario.


Law abiding student with no past criminal history or mental illness + carries concealed gun + bullied/bad grades/financial problems/dumped by GF/depression + ALCOHOL.

 

[Bern80]

Have any of you campus pro gun ever thought of this scenario.


Law abiding student with no past criminal history or mental illness + carries concealed gun + bullied/bad grades/financial problems/dumped by GF/depression + ALCOHOL.

Have you ever thought that same scenario could be applied to damn near everyone in this country at some point in their lives?

 

[Bern80]

Really 1%? That shows how little you know about anything in this country. Please show me where you got that data.

That was a guess, turns out I was off by a couple percentage points. It's about 3% actually.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/more/facts.html

This is the most recent info I found. I took the number of guns violent crimes involving guns that they reported and divided it by the total number of guns they reported.

"Regrettably, 40% of all gun sales are made through the secondary market, where background checks are not required".

http://www.csgv.org/issues/illegalmarkets/

Meaning Illegal gun trafficing! 40% of ALL guns are sold this way. Why would they be sold illegally if nobody plans to do anything illegal? Are you going to tell me that those are good honest people that just wanted to buy a gun ilegally? Good luck making sense on that argument. 40% is almost half of all guns. And that is a number I did NOT pull out of my ass.

Seems like a completely objective site you found there.

Really you must stop attacking my intelect on this issue, the fact that you own a gun does not make you right on a gun related issue, infact it makes you biased. I do not own a gun therefore I form opinions based on violence in america, not based on my excitement and passion for shooting things.

Why do assume I have an 'excitement and passion for shooting things"?

Designated gun areas are rural areas sir, and gun ranges. Anything other than that, like say the backyard of a home in downtown LA. That would be out of the regulated zone. The backyard of a rural town like yours, would be IN the zone. Its not brain surgury to understand plain english. Am I alluding you? Am I using symbolism or impressionism? No Im using plain english and you are twisting it into the language of a uneducated gun basher. I am not that. Whens the last time you mailed your senator about gun rights? I mailed my senators this week about gun control, and the difference between our arguments is, they wont laugh at mine. Because from what I understand, you want it to be legal for a child to carry a gun on campus, in any state. Well Thankfully I dont live in your state, and I am for state votes on this issue. So I leave you at that, dont preach your logic to me, preach it to your state senator and I will enjoy normal gun laws in my state where technology is driving growth, not cowboys.

Nice rant. So an inner city I'm just supposed to hope the cops show up in time right?

You are an uneducated gun basher. You are the one creating this make believe cowboy psyche of the avg gun owner.

A final note, where was it in the bible that said we should give guns to everyone and there kids? I dont remember that part.

What does the bible have to do with this?

 

[boedicca]

A final note, where was it in the bible that said we should give guns to everyone and there kids? I dont remember that part.

Where does it say in the Bible that we should have computers and post on the internets?

 

[Bern80]

Where does it say in the Bible that we should have computers and post on the internets?

See Vintij this is the kinda stuff your gonna get until you form the capacity to think rationally