Page 2 of 3 [ 37 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author
Message
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:41 am
Liberty wrote:
Pretherius wrote:
Yeah but then guess who's the first target when the gunman opens fire in a classroom.

Is this not perpetuating one of the Brady Bunch's myths that carrying a weapon makes you a target and creates crime? If your assumption is right, then the best way to make everyone safe is to completely ban firearms.

I certainly didn't say any of that, nor is that my "assumption" so I'd kindly ask you to refrain from putting words in my mouth.

Carrying a weapon does not make you a target per se. Being the only one permitted a carry a weapon does.
Top
Offline
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:59 am
Posts: 300
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:46 am
They want us to arm one or certain folks, then yea, people can become a target (which is the way they want it). When you arm them all ... there are no specific targets. The Bradys want certain individuals to be targets, ie those who legally carry guns.
Top
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:32 pm
Pretherius wrote:
Liberty wrote:
Pretherius wrote:
Yeah but then guess who's the first target when the gunman opens fire in a classroom.

Is this not perpetuating one of the Brady Bunch's myths that carrying a weapon makes you a target and creates crime? If your assumption is right, then the best way to make everyone safe is to completely ban firearms.

I certainly didn't say any of that, nor is that my "assumption" so I'd kindly ask you to refrain from putting words in my mouth.

Carrying a weapon does not make you a target per se. Being the only one permitted a carry a weapon does.

Sorry. I did not mean to put you on the spot, but I think the point had to be made. The assumption that carrying a weapon makes you a target is a fallacy that has been perpetuated in Hollyweird and the news mafia for so long it has become a thinking error even among self-defense advocates.

When schools have police officers in the schools for security, are the police officers targeted? Are police officers at malls or out in the community targeted? They are not and neither are individuals who open carry. Criminals avoid them because they don't want to get shot. Armed citizens are only targets of the communists in the democrat party and the fascists in the republican party.

Arming faculty would be a deterrent to a Virginia Tech. style attack and demonstrate that civilians carrying weapons on college campuses makes it safer and does not cause anarchy, which can serve as a documented argument for campus carry for all CHL holders.

We can argue all we want about how allowing anyone with a CHL on college campuses is best, but the current legislators will not pass such a bill. I offered this as an alternative because I think they may consider it, and it could lead to allowing all CHL holders on campuses.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:39 pm
I think you assume that if the staff and faculty is carrying that will in itself deter mass killers.

Don't say the guys with the guns will not be targeted. Anyone with law enforcement training or military training is going straight for the guys with guns. That is why they are such a danger to LACs who carry. From the onset of their training anyone who is not one of them with a gun IS the bad guy. Silhouette and uniform recognition are a key part of their training. It's also a key reason the entry teams stay in close quarters to each other and fan out from a central location. Everyone beyond that point that is armed is a combatant. Even in hostage situations everyone in the room is a bad guy until the threat is assessed and singled out. How do they single out the bad guy/guys? The ones with the most dominant postures first and weaponry second.

A good way to get yourself killed is to display your weapon with police in proximity. I don't care if you are wearing a priests uniform. Why wouldn't a criminal not behave the same way or train the same way? Maybe the bad guy is ex law or military. You would do well to study the Fort Hood shootings.

If a whacko wanted to take on a school with armed staff and faculty then most certainly the staff and faculty would be the primary target if they were known to be armed. I believe the body count would be much lower of course but the first bullet entering the classroom would almost always be the teacher for someone looking for a body count.

When a classroom has the potential for mystery carriers and more than one of them...Now that is a deterrent. It would more than likely limit any future attacks to one on one grudges with a completely suicidal shooter. But not always.

Proud Member of the NRA, Crossbow Nation, Buckeye Firearms Association, Ohio Freedom Alliance

So! This is how liberty dies...With thunderous applause.
Top
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:46 pm
Posts: 3243
Location: Newark, OH
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:30 pm
Buckeye Dan wrote:
I think you assume that if the staff and faculty is carrying that will in itself deter mass killers.

Don't say the guys with the guns will not be targeted. Anyone with law enforcement training or military training is going straight for the guys with guns. That is why they are such a danger to LACs who carry. From the onset of their training anyone who is not one of them with a gun IS the bad guy. Silhouette and uniform recognition are a key part of their training. It's also a key reason the entry teams stay in close quarters to each other and fan out from a central location. Everyone beyond that point that is armed is a combatant. Even in hostage situations everyone in the room is a bad guy until the threat is assessed and singled out. How do they single out the bad guy/guys? The ones with the most dominant postures first and weaponry second.

A good way to get yourself killed is to display your weapon with police in proximity. I don't care if you are wearing a priests uniform. Why wouldn't a criminal not behave the same way or train the same way? Maybe the bad guy is ex law or military. You would do well to study the Fort Hood shootings.

If a whacko wanted to take on a school with armed staff and faculty then most certainly the staff and faculty would be the primary target if they were known to be armed. I believe the body count would be much lower of course but the first bullet entering the classroom would almost always be the teacher for someone looking for a body count.

When a classroom has the potential for mystery carriers and more than one of them...Now that is a deterrent. It would more than likely limit any future attacks to one on one grudges with a completely suicidal shooter. But not always.

Interesting theory, but it just does not happen that way in real life. It is interesting that you bring up Fort Hood. Nidal Kalik Hasan chose one of the buildings where he knew that no one would be armed. He only fired on police (the only armed individuals on base) after they confronted him. Would he have done what he did if he knew that there was potentially an armed person in each room of the buildings?

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:36 pm
My "Education in a Democratic Society" professor is a liberal lesbian animal rights activist...I'd rather not depend on her to protect me...Just sayin'...

Beth

Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound. -Anon.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:39 pm
Posts: 865
Location: Akron area
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 8:11 pm
Quote:
I think you assume that if the staff and faculty is carrying that will in itself deter mass killers.

Don't say the guys with the guns will not be targeted. Anyone with law enforcement training or military training is going straight for the guys with guns. That is why they are such a danger to LACs who carry. From the onset of their training anyone who is not one of them with a gun IS the bad guy. Silhouette and uniform recognition are a key part of their training. It's also a key reason the entry teams stay in close quarters to each other and fan out from a central location. Everyone beyond that point that is armed is a combatant. Even in hostage situations everyone in the room is a bad guy until the threat is assessed and singled out. How do they single out the bad guy/guys? The ones with the most dominant postures first and weaponry second.

A good way to get yourself killed is to display your weapon with police in proximity. I don't care if you are wearing a priests uniform. Why wouldn't a criminal not behave the same way or train the same way? Maybe the bad guy is ex law or military. You would do well to study the Fort Hood shootings.

If a whacko wanted to take on a school with armed staff and faculty then most certainly the staff and faculty would be the primary target if they were known to be armed. I believe the body count would be much lower of course but the first bullet entering the classroom would almost always be the teacher for someone looking for a body count.

When a classroom has the potential for mystery carriers and more than one of them...Now that is a deterrent. It would more than likely limit any future attacks to one on one grudges with a completely suicidal shooter. But not always.


I see where you are coming from with this, but remember if another Virginia Tech style shooting occurred and the teachers were all armed the only ones in real trouble are the first ones targeted. I know, sucks to be them, but after the first handful of shots go off on the first teacher most likely teachers in other classrooms would respond and fire back, at least I know I would. If I were a killer looking for a high body count I would not relish the idea of attempting my mass killing in a place where I am likely to be shot back at after I start firing. I think I will settle for an easier target like say the Joyce Foundation Headquarters, NPR studios, Democrat Headquarters, Obama's house, well, you get the idea. :mrgreen:

Fortune Hunter

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:17 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Northwest Ohio
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 8:36 pm
Liberty wrote:
Sorry. I did not mean to put you on the spot, but I think the point had to be made. The assumption that carrying a weapon makes you a target is a fallacy that has been perpetuated in Hollyweird and the news mafia for so long it has become a thinking error even among self-defense advocates.

When schools have police officers in the schools for security, are the police officers targeted? Are police officers at malls or out in the community targeted? They are not and neither are individuals who open carry. Criminals avoid them because they don't want to get shot. Armed citizens are only targets of the communists in the democrat party and the fascists in the republican party.

Arming faculty would be a deterrent to a Virginia Tech. style attack and demonstrate that civilians carrying weapons on college campuses makes it safer and does not cause anarchy, which can serve as a documented argument for campus carry for all CHL holders.

We can argue all we want about how allowing anyone with a CHL on college campuses is best, but the current legislators will not pass such a bill. I offered this as an alternative because I think they may consider it, and it could lead to allowing all CHL holders on campuses.


I think the point that was being made is IF someone was determined to shoot up a school, and IF they knew only teachers was armed, then the logic that the Teacher will be a target 1st before students is valid.

If a shooter knows someone is armed they're not going to ignore them and shoot everyone else while the person who is armed pulls their weapon and kills them.. that makes no sense at all.

When people say "target" what they mean is that they are a higher priority then the unarmed.
It does not mean that any one carrying a gun at any time is a target as in they are the catalyst for a shooting, we can all agree that is ignorant.

Put your self in the shooters shoes, are you going to burst into a class room, ignore the teacher who you KNOW is armed? they're crazy not stupid.

To take your line of reasoning above when people rob banks take over style do they ignore the security guard?

  • If you can't hit the broad side of a barn, You're not using enough bullets.
  • Zombies are the Trash-men of Humanity.
  • Certified Ammosexual, lolzImage
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:53 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Columbus
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:08 pm
Liberty wrote:
Buckeye Dan wrote:
I think you assume that if the staff and faculty is carrying that will in itself deter mass killers.

Don't say the guys with the guns will not be targeted. Anyone with law enforcement training or military training is going straight for the guys with guns. That is why they are such a danger to LACs who carry. From the onset of their training anyone who is not one of them with a gun IS the bad guy. Silhouette and uniform recognition are a key part of their training. It's also a key reason the entry teams stay in close quarters to each other and fan out from a central location. Everyone beyond that point that is armed is a combatant. Even in hostage situations everyone in the room is a bad guy until the threat is assessed and singled out. How do they single out the bad guy/guys? The ones with the most dominant postures first and weaponry second.

A good way to get yourself killed is to display your weapon with police in proximity. I don't care if you are wearing a priests uniform. Why wouldn't a criminal not behave the same way or train the same way? Maybe the bad guy is ex law or military. You would do well to study the Fort Hood shootings.

If a whacko wanted to take on a school with armed staff and faculty then most certainly the staff and faculty would be the primary target if they were known to be armed. I believe the body count would be much lower of course but the first bullet entering the classroom would almost always be the teacher for someone looking for a body count.

When a classroom has the potential for mystery carriers and more than one of them...Now that is a deterrent. It would more than likely limit any future attacks to one on one grudges with a completely suicidal shooter. But not always.

Interesting theory, but it just does not happen that way in real life. It is interesting that you bring up Fort Hood. Nidal Kalik Hasan chose one of the buildings where he knew that no one would be armed. He only fired on police (the only armed individuals on base) after they confronted him. Would he have done what he did if he knew that there was potentially an armed person in each room of the buildings?


I didn't offer a theory. I stated fact. Hasan specifically targeted uniformed personnel. He walked past non-uniformed civilians after he had already painted them with a laser. They weren't the targets he sought. When the resistance with firearms arrived he let everything go and focused on the people that were armed. This is while he was chasing wounded out the door. Got that? He disregarded the wounded and immediately focused on the what became the new primary target and the nearest threat.

He picked a gun free zone to rack up a body count yes. But this assumes that your hypothetical classroom is entirely unarmed. They aren't. In this scenario it is a possibility for at least the teacher to be armed but we know the students are not. Why would an individual bypass the only potential resistance in the room to start shooting the unarmed? Logic dictates that you kill the threat first. In this case the staff member that could potentially be armed then proceed to shoot up the classroom.

As for hero faculty rushing in to save the day, the shooter would naturally do the exact same thing Hasan did. Forget whomever is crawling around on the floor and shoot whomever comes through the door. Armed staff could probably secure the hallway and pin him in the room but I imagine the room's occupants would be long dead by then unless it becomes a hostage situation after the fact. The later scenario just doesn't play out historically.

Like I said. Lessor body count but the person hell bent on doing it is going to do it using the path of least resistance until they are forced to cross another bridge. If they want everyone in that particular classroom to die you don't start with unarmed students and create chaos ignoring the only real potential threat in the room. Anyone with any formal training would attack the known threat first then approach any following threat on a case by case basis as it arises. Just like LEO's and the military do.

Who robs a bank and leaves the guard armed and unattended? That is a different scenario however because robbers typically want to live long enough to spend the money. Someone hell bent on shooting up a campus is probably already suicidal but they aren't going to walk past the guards to begin their spree.

Proud Member of the NRA, Crossbow Nation, Buckeye Firearms Association, Ohio Freedom Alliance

So! This is how liberty dies...With thunderous applause.
Top
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:46 pm
Posts: 3243
Location: Newark, OH
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 11:35 pm
Bang Bang Beth wrote:
My "Education in a Democratic Society" professor is a liberal lesbian animal rights activist...I'd rather not depend on her to protect me...Just sayin'...

If we had professor carry, the nut job would probably start in your class and steer clear of the criminal law for police class. I don't believe, as others here do, that the nut job would go first to the criminal law class to neutralize the professor there before shooting up your class. That scenario would make a good movie, but it just doesn't happen that way.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:00 am
Buckeye Dan wrote:
Hasan specifically targeted uniformed personnel. He walked past non-uniformed civilians after he had already painted them with a laser. They weren't the targets he sought.

The uniformed personnel were not armed. He avoided the armed police officers and only fired upon them when they confronted him.

Another thing that bothers me is that you keep saying that former police officers and former military may do a Virginia Tech style attack on a college campus. I just don't see that happening. None of the school shooters in the U.S. fit that profile. Fort Hood was different. Hasan was an al qaeda operative executing an attack on a military target. But even his behavior would have been different if there were potentially a weapon in every room or en route to every room.

And I agree that colleges should not be criminal protection zones; no one should be prohibited from carrying. The question is how do we get there, would professor carry be better than no carry and could it lead to all CHL carry on campus? I think we could get the general assembly to consider professor carry. If they would consider allowing all CHL holders to carry on campuses, there would be a bill pending right now. If everyone had an all or nothing attitude, we would not have restaurant carry or even CHL's. We have to improvise, adapt and overcome.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 2:28 pm
Pretherius wrote:
Yeah but then guess who's the first target when the gunman opens fire in a classroom.


Maybe so, but faculty and staff can take classes for free, and may be intermixed with the other students...

Tanfoglio 45/22 Target Pistol
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:52 am
Posts: 191
Location: Columbus, OH USA
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:58 pm
This whole debate was based on an assumption that ALL professors/staff WOULD carry. I went to college and I can accurately say that MOST of them are all liberal Marxist Dbags and don't own guns. When I was in college, SWIM carried anyway. He felt that due to the area the University was in, his life was worth the risk of breaking an unjust, unconstitutional law.
Top
Offline
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 11:08 am
Posts: 21
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:58 pm
theBrewmeister wrote:
This whole debate was based on an assumption that ALL professors/staff WOULD carry. I went to college and I can accurately say that MOST of them are all liberal Marxist Dbags and don't own guns. When I was in college, SWIM carried anyway. He felt that due to the area the University was in, his life was worth the risk of breaking an unjust, unconstitutional law.

Luckilly some of us lowly staf would certainly carry were it legal.
Top
Offline
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 396
Location: Columbus, Oh
Post subject: Re: Guns on college campus debate
Post Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:20 am
techguy85 wrote:
Luckilly some of us lowly staf would certainly carry were it legal.


And that's why I said ''most'' with emphasis. I still think staff, such as yourself, are a small minority.
Top
Offline
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 11:08 am
Posts: 21
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 2 of 3 [ 37 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to: