VA tech

[kwillia]

One person carrying legally could have stopped this.. maybe not saved everyone, but even if they could have saved one.

I agree with this theory, but because this isn't the reality in which we live in today.

At first, I was upset over the timeline of notification and such, but now that I have a better understanding of the circumstances, I agree with Catt that there isn't anything that could have been done different that would have stopped him from finding a group of people to take out with him.

 

[itsbob]

Unfortunately, I'm not proponent of guns. I understand what you are saying. I just don't agree with it. I see potential for more problems than good.

The potential is out there, and it's fact..
Everywhere this is legal there are less problems.

PA, I carried to school, I carried at work, and even carried at church, and so did many others.. when a lunatic in PA wanted to shoot up a school he went to an Amish school where he knew nobody would be armed.

 

[nachomama]

I understand the desire to place blame somewhere. There were 32 too many people killed yesterday. It is heartbreaking. But the shooter wanted to kill people, and I doubt that anything would have stopped him.

Paula Zahn was grilling some kid last night on CNN. She kept asking him if he blamed the school/police, etc. for not doing more to protect them. He, very calmly, replied by saying, "There is only one person that I blame for all of this, and that is the gunman."

 

[Dondi]

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/photo/VaTech/slides/VATECH_0005.html

^ That one? I thought I heard that person was among the injured, not the dead. If he survived, fine, I feel a bit better about the picture, but if he is dead, no, that has to be awful for the parents to see that over and over again.

I don't want to appear vulgar, and I don't go looking for these kind of things, but it doesn't appear that the victim here is covered very decently. Is that what I think it is? I mean if you are going to spash a picture for the world to see, please have some dignity.

 

[cattitude]

The potential is out there, and it's fact..
Everywhere this is legal there are less problems.

PA, I carried to school, I carried at work, and even carried at church, and so did many others.. when a lunatic in PA wanted to shoot up a school he went to an Amish school where he knew nobody would be armed.

I happened to have been married to a nice, upstanding citizen who owned a gun, even wanted to show me how to use it to protect myself. Lucky for me I wasn't carrying when he chose to put the gun to my head because I cut my hair. Mind you, he wasn't going to shoot me, he just wanted to scare me.

I don't want this to be a "gun thread." I'm asking given the circumstances as they are now, what was the school/police supposed to do? What do people intend a lockdown to be in this case?

 

[Nickel]

Imagine how effective the profesor that gave his life for his students would have been if he was allowed to be armed.

That still doesn't guarantee that he would exercise that right, though. I understand and agree with the idea that if guns were allowed on campus, it would deter most criminals, because a rational person would assume that someone may be armed. But how do you guarantee that the stars will align and the person who's being attacked is also carrying a gun? It was a senseless tragedy, for sure. But like someone said, there are too many "What if's". Speculation after the fact can't guarantee that those 32 people still wouldn't have ended up dead.

 

[Larry Gude]

Are there?

But like someone said, there are too many "What if's". Speculation after the fact can't guarantee that those 32 people still wouldn't have ended up dead.

...if so, then we all shrug and wait until our number is up and get back to baning cigarettes?

 

[itsbob]

That still doesn't guarantee that he would exercise that right, though. I understand and agree with the idea that if guns were allowed on campus, it would deter most criminals, because a rational person would assume that someone may be armed. But how do you guarantee that the stars will align and the person who's being attacked is also carrying a gun? It was a senseless tragedy, for sure. But like someone said, there are too many "What if's". Speculation after the fact can't guarantee that those 32 people still wouldn't have ended up dead.

By making it illegal for law abiding citizens, to include ones with permits to carry concealed wepaons, to carry on campus we don't even have a chance of getting the stars to align. We just know that 32 people are dead, and there was no chance of anyone being there to stop it. AND he didn't attack A person, he attacked a building full of people.. hundreds of people. Chances are REAL good that ONE of them would have been carryng if allowed.

We should ask James Webb if he has an assistant carry his handguns on campus for him when he visits schools in VA..

 

[Midnightrider]

Imagine how effective the profesor that gave his life for his students would have been if he was allowed to be armed. He, and many others would still be alive. The chances are IF person's with CCW permits were allowed to carry on campus, there would have been at least one (more than likely several) people in that building carrying. I know many secretaries (peaceful little citizens that they are) that when allowed by law, carry handguns in their purses. One person carrying legally could have stopped this.. maybe not saved everyone, but even if they could have saved one.

Knowing that his victims had the probability of being armed didn't deter that guy from driving into the Luby's a few years ago and shooting people repeatedly, and that was TEXAS!
The truth is that some people are just crazy

 

[itsbob]

Knowing that his victims had the probability of being armed didn't deter that guy from driving into the Luby's a few years ago and shooting people repeatedly, and that was TEXAS!
The truth is that some people are just crazy

Suzanna Gratia Hupp remembers reaching for a butter knife as a madman shot her parents dead at a packed cafeteria one cold October day in 1991.

"I was looking for a weapon, any weapon, because my handgun was 100 feet away, outside in my car. I made an incredibly stupid decision to follow the law, and that cost my family's lives," she says as she reflects on the massacre that ended with 24 people dead inside the Luby's Cafeteria at Killeen, a military town in Central Texas.


Again, by law, no armed citizens allowed, they didn't change their laws concerning self defense until 1996

 

[aps45819]

I agree with this theory, but because this isn't the reality in which we live in today.

At first, I was upset over the timeline of notification and such, but now that I have a better understanding of the circumstances, I agree with Catt that there isn't anything that could have been done different that would have stopped him from finding a group of people to take out with him.

"Run and hide" doesn't seem like a very good plan. We've become conditiond to think the police will resolve problems like this. Our welfare is dependant on a rapid response. Since we're welfare dependants of thae state, let's say the police arrive in force in 5 minutes which is not unreasonable. A person with a semi-auto pistol can aim and fire every 2 seconds.
Count it out, one thousand one, one thousand two.
Aim, bang, aim, bang.
That's being slow and deliberate and would allow time to drop a clip and slap in a new one to reload. One shot every 2 seconds is 150 rounds in 5 minutes and the BEST response the leaders or a major instution of higher learning can propose is to hide under your desk and hope the guy next to you gets shot instead of you.

 

[Larry Gude]

Think about that...

The truth is that some people are just crazy

...if some people are just crazy, meaning you can't count on talking them out of it, showing them an ACLU card or giving them a hug, wouldn't it make sense, KNOWING some people are crazy, to be able to carry a weapon suitable for dealing with a crazy person?

 

[cattitude]

...if some people are just crazy, meaning you can't count on talking them out of it, showing them an ACLU card or giving them a hug, wouldn't it make sense, KNOWING some people are crazy, to be able to carry a weapon suitable for dealing with a crazy person?

And...I worry about the crazy person who is carrying, legally.

 

[Nickel]

The truth is that some people are just crazy

The end. That's what it all boils down to. :shrug:

And Bob, I do not disagree at all with your point.

 

[Midnightrider]

Suzanna Gratia Hupp remembers reaching for a butter knife as a madman shot her parents dead at a packed cafeteria one cold October day in 1991.

"I was looking for a weapon, any weapon, because my handgun was 100 feet away, outside in my car. I made an incredibly stupid decision to follow the law, and that cost my family's lives," she says as she reflects on the massacre that ended with 24 people dead inside the Luby's Cafeteria at Killeen, a military town in Central Texas.


Again, by law, no armed citizens allowed, they didn't change their laws concerning self defense until 1996

Bob, there are going to be limits on where you can carry your gun. Thats all there is to it. Places like bars and banks come to mind for obvious reasons.

 

[Larry Gude]

And what of...

And...I worry about the crazy person who is carrying, legally.

...the crazy person carrying illegally?

 

[nachomama]

And...I worry about the crazy person who is carrying, legally.

 

[Larry Gude]

What would those obvious...

Bob, there are going to be limits on where you can carry your gun. Thats all there is to it. Places like bars and banks come to mind for obvious reasons.

...reasons be?

Would a person never have need in a bar to defend themselves with a weapon?

Are there never bad guys in banks?

 

[Ken King]

And...I worry about the crazy person who is carrying, legally.

If they are known crazy then they would be illegally carrying a weapon.

 

[Dougstermd]

And...I worry about the crazy person who is carrying, legally.

not to worry I quit carrying mines