Arming students? Are these people for real?

College Confidential Community
1

<p>In the wake of the VT tragedy, some people want to find someone, other than the deranged murderer of course, to blame. Most seem to be targeting the VT administration and police, who allowed a 2-hour gap between the first two murders and the rest of the massacre. Some fringe lunatics are trying to blame immigrants and/or Asians. But some even more crazy people are trying to blame gun free zones for making the student populace helpless against the shooter.</p>

<p>It would be a nightmare world if every college student was allowed to carry a firearm. Is this a campus, or Compton?. I just can't believe how stupid some people can be, thinking that if a lot of students carried guns, they'd take down a school-shooter with the precision and efficiency of an operative from a Tom Clancy novel. I shudder to think how many Asian guys would've been wounded or killed once people heard a rumour that an Asian guy was going berserk at VT. Maybe, by some fortuitous chance, this tragedy MIGHT'VE been averted by an armed student with the mental calmness of a seasoned FBI veteran. But while this particular incident might've been prevented, many more would spring up to take its place, until campus violence doesn't strike the same tragic chord anymore.</p>

<p>These gun nuts are probably trying to brace themselves for the inevitable media and public backlash, once again, at America's gun culture. They're going to point fingers at everything they can, from gun-free zones to "no good chinks", to distract people from the fact that while people kill people, guns make it a helluva lot easier. Somehow, I don't see a mass knifing in the near future, as I see yet another gun-related tragedy. Using the gun lobbyist's logic, why should we have any kind of nuclear anti-proliferation treaties? After all, people reduce the Earth to cinders, not nuclear arms.</p>

2

<p>It's idiotically naive to believe that any of those 30 students would have had a chance to find cover, remove their gun from its concealed holster, load it, aim, and get a good shot at the guy in self-defense in the span of the 1.5 minutes the gunman was shooting at the students.</p>

3

<p>Exactly^.<br>
Take into account the average college student. Better yet the average citizen. Arming STUDENTS is one of the worst ideas I've heard of, maybe next to France's law to fire kids without reason (hey it HAD to be bad, people were tipping and setting fire to cars...sarcasm). </p>

<p>I can see it now. Walk into my german class and as everyone is taking out their books and notebooks, they take out their glocks as well. </p>

<p>'Cause we all KNOW that college students are the most mentally stable people out there...</p>

4

<p>I find myself feeling really sad and angry when I have to question why the Foudning Fathers wanted EVERYONE to have freedom of speech...sigh</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
I find myself feeling really sad and angry when I have to question why the Foudning Fathers wanted EVERYONE to have freedom of speech...sigh

[/quote]

Maybe it was so we can see how utterly dumb some opinions are.</p>

<p>While we're on the topic of the Founding Fathers, these gun-rights activists are blatantly twisting the Second Amendment as the Founders had intended it. The Second Amendment was designed so that local militias (i.e. the National Guard) could defend themselves against a marauding federal government. It was not meant to promote vigilante justice, and even if it was, any vigilante justice that would've been necessary back then is unneeded in today's society because we have a professional law enforcement force.</p>

6

<p>Blink182, I think you mean the right to bear arms.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
A lot of students have cars. Oh ****, guess what!?!?!? Cars kill a heluva lot more people than people with guns.

[/quote]

You usually don't murder people with cars. You don't see someone walking on the sidewalk and deliberately slam into them to kill them. You don't plan to kill someone by running them over.
I doubt Cho Seung-Hui could've killed 32 people had he only been armed with a car.</p>

8

<p>Yeah, remember that time when those two drunk college students got into a fight then proceeded to whip out their cars to run each other over? I have to agree with you: guns, like cars, have a useful value that makes up for the fatalities they cause. With a shiny new Beretta, you can point at things, stir your pot, play catch, etc. All such essential functions!</p>

<p>The cars argument. How lame.</p>

9

<p>I dont agree with "arming students" but if these people are saying that we should allow those who are legally armed, and who legally have a conceal and carry permit, to bring their firearm with them where they please...then I completely agree. To he who said that none of the students would have time to find, load, fire their weapon....it is obvious you have never fired a handgun.</p>

10

<p>"A lot of students have cars. Oh **, guess what!?!?!? Cars kill a heluva lot more people than people with guns."**</p>

<p>Try using your brain a little more.</p>

<p>This is not that different from the "well, they could have just as well used a knife or bat as a weapon."</p>

<p>Armed with only a knife or bat - a group of people (or a single person) would have a much easier time of rushing the assailant and eventually incapacitating him/her.</p>

<p>Possibly, some would get wounded in the process and maybe a person or two may suffer a fatal injury, but there is no way that a mass killing like this would occur.</p>

<p>Look at countries in Asia and Europe with more stringent gun laws - the gangsters fight each other predominantly with blades and blunt weapons and they, for the most part, don't the indiscriminate killings of innocents with drive-by shootings.</p>

11

<p>
[quote]
I dont agree with "arming students" but if these people are saying that we should allow those who are legally armed, and who legally have a conceal and carry permit, to bring their firearm with them where they please...then I completely agree. To he who said that none of the students would have time to find, load, fire their weapon....it is obvious you have never fired a handgun.

[/quote]

I don't deny that I have never fired a handgun or recieved any kind of training to deal with such a situation. I doubt that any of the students in that room had either.
Besides, my point is not that it takes a long time to fire a semi-automatic weapon. It doesn't. It takes time to react to someone suddenly bursting into your college classroom on a regular day with two pistols and shooting everybody.</p>

12

<p>Fair enough gzhang. I admit that if you were the first classroom tht was barged into, having a gun or not wouldn't really make a difference, however in the classrooms where they heard the shots and had time to figure out what was going on...that's where I think a difference could be made. And the way I see it, if you're going to get a handgun (not a cheap investment) you probably want to be trianed on how to use it. </p>

<p>To what K&S said: I agree, the car analogy is completely bogus. However it is impossible to eliminate guns in the united states. We could make laws that made them illegal, the fact is they would still be around. I'd have no problem eliminating guns if I was sure that they would be just that, completely eliminated. However being that they never will be eliminated, I want to have the same method of self defense as an offender has to commit an offense upon me.</p>

13

<p>my son was friends with one of the girls that was killed yesterday and and I still can't believe the whole thing. there needs to be different gun control laws. Why should anyone need to buy a pistol, but especially a 23 year old student. When the founding fathers wrote the constitution there were rifles and muskets. Now I am no expert on guns but I double that in 1776 you could go into a room and kill 30 people with those guns. There has to some sort of change in our laws before more of our children are killed by more crazies with guns. We parents need to get together and lobby against the NRA for better gun control to save our children How many more times must we read about these school shootings until things change? Or will it take the shooting of some Politician or celebrities child at college until some change happens?</p>

14

<p>Mochasmom, first off I'm sorry about your sons friend. I would be all for what you are advocating, however it is impossible to eliminate guns. We can make laws as tight as hell, we can ban handguns, but they will still exist. Look at drugs, all banned, however I can take a 30 minute drive and get any kind of drug I want. If we could eliminate all handguns I dont see how people would NOT want to do this...it would make complete sense. However as long as guns are out there, and people can obtain them, I want the right to bring a gun around with me to protect myself against these people. I think gun laws should deff be made stricter, and the fact that the assault weapon ban wasn't renewed is ridiculous...however I believe that once you are legally able to obtain a gun, once you pass all the checks, you have the right to carry that gun on you...including in a backup in a classroom.</p>

15

<p>"To what K&S said: I agree, the car analogy is completely bogus. However it is impossible to eliminate guns in the united states. We could make laws that made them illegal, the fact is they would still be around. I'd have no problem eliminating guns if I was sure that they would be just that, completely eliminated. However being that they never will be eliminated, I want to have the same method of self defense as an offender has to commit an offense upon me."</p>

<p>Having grown up in an area where hunting is a big deal - I'm not advocating a ban on all firearms (I don't really have a problem with issuing carry-permits as long as the checks are thorough; otoh, Texas rushed through its process where a no. of people w/ criminal records were able to get carry permits).</p>

<p>However, there are sensible laws and enforcement that can be done to cut down on the rate of gun deaths (close down the small % of gunshops which are responsible for the majority of guns that make it to the black market; limit the no. of guns a person can buy to 1 a month - which VA has; crack down on straw-purchases; exclude military or near-military grade weapons).</p>

<p>All of these can be done w/o infringing on a person right to own a firearm.</p>

<p>Under this administration, the ATF no longer keeps records on irresponsible gun-shops and the gun industry has also stopped keeping such records ("see no evil" policy) - which is plain crazy in my opinion (but then again, I'm hardly surprised what this admin does - and I'm a lifelong Republican).</p>

16

<p>I guess we hole-heartedly agree then k&s. I just feel like if you are able to go through all the checks, obtain a gun, you should have the right to carry it on you. In Virginia you have this right...except at Virginia Tech where this right was taken away a few months ago...</p>

17

<p>I understand what you are saying but the background checks are pretty lame. This student who did the shooting was obviously not right, and he was still able to buy a handgun three weeks ago. He did not have a criminal record but he was clinically depressed and on antidepresents from some physician. That should preclude him from buying a gun. maybe there should be medical checks just like there are checksfor past criminall activity. You cannot have students sitting in class with guns. That is just looking for trouble.</p>

18

<p>Having background checks is better than not having background checks (tho, this issue gets more complicated w/ ID theft).</p>

<p>As for medical/psych checks - I'm all in favor of that, but good luck getting that past the privacy wonks.</p>

19

<p>I agree the background checks are pretty lame (see: Texas), however it's gonna be hard to allow someone to look into medical/psych conditions. Like k/s said, all the privacy people will be up in arms. And it wouldn't be "students sitting in class with guns"....I doubt the whole student population would go buy up guns, but if you are someone who owns a gun, and has a C&C permit, you should be allowed to bring them into a classroom in a backpack. I don't see how this is looking for trouble? There was a case in texas a while back, guy walked into a fast food joint and started shooting it up. Woman goes to her purse where her gun is, realized she left it in the car because texas just passed a law prohibiting people who can legally C&C a gun from bringin it into public places...</p>

20

<p>The Supreme Court recently ruled on the 2nd Amendment in the DC Handgun Ban decision. The court, with legal minds far more reputable than ours, ruled that blanket handgun bands are illegal. That decision effectively endorsed the two clause interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.</p>

<p>Section 1 - "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State,"</p>

<p>Section 2- "the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."</p>

<p>The militia is a separate entity from the People. The proper noun 'People' is used several times in the Constitution and has an accepted definition. Unless you want to get the country to repeal the 2nd Amendment, I suggest you put your anger aside for a moment and realize the facts. </p>

<p>Anyone willing to go on a murderous rampage like this one will find a way to get the means to commit the crime, be they firearms or explosives. This shooter filed off the serial numbers of his weapons, an illegal act. Illegal weapons were used in the first place and he was possessing them on a gun-free campus, another crime. Certainly someone to kill 32 people and then himself isn't going to care about illegally possessing a firearm. How is realistic gun legislation going to affect someone who has an obvious disregard for both human life and gun legislation? Maybe this question can be answered in the coming investigation, but the black market could have supplied him more easily than the legal channels. I say the answer is not more legislation, but greater enforcement, funded by greater taxes on firearms. Taxes on ammunition would prevent legal gun owners from maintaining their expertise to effectively respond to a crisis.</p>

<p>The current vogue gun control legislation is the AWB. Was this student carrying an AK-47, using a bayonet, or a grenade launcher? And if you want a ban on handguns, the instrument in this case, it'd be illegal. The legal climate in this country is not one, even in the wake of this tragedy, where guns are going to be banned. This reality segways directly into the second issue. If guns are a fact of life, do we only want people willing to commit crimes carrying them?</p>

<p>Put yourself in the shoes of a student in the classroom next door to one being fired in. You hear the shots. You hear the screams. You look into the hall and see a man standing in the doorway, armed with 2 pistols. Presented with that situation, would you rather be armed or not? A janitor was confronted with this situation in Norris Hall, where he was in the hallway and the gunman came out from the room. He was unarmed of course, and was fired at 5 times.</p>

<p>Concealed carry pistols, for those of you who don't know, are generally carried with a full magazine and a round in the chamber. To draw and fire the weapon, you remove it from the holster, push the safety down with your thumb, and fire. Drawing the weapon is most time consuming element of this act but in reality, it takes seconds. It is feasible that one armed person against a gunman can reduce or stop a rampage, as the recent Utah mall shooting shows. As a calm, rational person who is not going to get drunk and shoot someone over, I would rather have an additional option in that situation.</p>

<p>All of this is philosophy. Current federal law prohibits anyone under 21 from buying a handgun and concealed carry permits are only issued to those over 21. This prohibits many college students from carrying guns, irrespective of college policy. That said, colleges still aren't going to permit or condone the possession of firearms by students. Combining the easy access of dorms (possible theft), general intoxication of some college students (irresponsibility), and the history of violent school shootings in this country, it's dangerous and impractical.</p>

<p>GZhang - Have you ever drawn a weapon? Have you ever fired a weapon? I heard a radio report on NPR that the shooting lasted as long as 30 minutes. It's been confirmed that the shooting was not in 1.5 minutes. Training and skill are important, as are nerves, but it is not "idiotically naive." If students had time to barricade a door or dive behind a desk, it's probably they would have had time to draw and fire a weapon. The shooter left room 204 for 2 minutes and then returned. That is sufficient time to find cover, draw a gun, and cover the entrance.</p>