Handguns and Ammunition Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Don't really know where this belongs but it amazes me that everyone is not making use of this description of events which took place during the recent Jewish seminary shooting:

[u:jkx52gic]"One of the students, Yitzhak Dadon, said he shot the attacker twice in the head.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,867 Posts
Hello. Yes, to me it is.

Before it happens, do NOT let this thing become political. If you have a problem understanding what I mean, read the rules.

Again, do NOT let this thread become political as such is simply not allowed here.

Violators may very well be banned.
 

·
Regulator,
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
I agree. However I don't believe our 18 year old freshmen are across-the-board-as-mature-and-well-trained as an Israeli freshman who has lived with the sound of gunfire all his life.

In past years our colleges were filled with young men known as "ex-G.I.'s" going to school on the G.I. bill, and who were very conversant with firearms and who had developed a strong level of maturity in the services. We don't have that any more and the thought of random issuance of gun permits to immature youths without any training at all troubles me.

I would like to see the NRA or other responsible entity develop a course (specifically for college students) in basic defensive use of the pistol in crowds and closed areas, complete with some shoot/don't shoot scenarios and a strong block of instruction on the laws of defense in the particular state the University is located in. I'm thinking of a course lasting probably two to three classroom days and which would entail a range qualification that stresses precise shot placement at ranges of 15 yards and more. I would also make this course eligible for cost coverage under any and all student loan programs, and would blanket it's graduates into that state's concealed carry license for carry in places off campus.

Agreed that this would take some time to develop, so as an interim measure I would have the University Police Departments conduct firearms qualifications for all who wish to carry on campus, providing they have a clean background check and have no mental health issues. Those who qualify should then be allowed to carry on campus until the course I mentioned above can be developed.

I admit that these are not perfect solutions, but I think the issue of opening fire in a crowded area would try the expertise of even a veteran policeman. So I think that in the safety interests of all the other students, students who carry on campus should have to meet some sort of training standard, after which the issuing authority sould mandatorily have to issue a carry permit.

JayPee
PS - I'm a retired policeman with 28 years service, much of it as a police firearms instructor. I am a State Certified Handgun Instructor in the state of Tennessee and have taught the state's Handgun Carry Permit course. I will soon apply for my nationwide federal carry permit under statutes allowing same for retired peace officers, and despite a lifetime of firearms training I must pass a firearms qualification before the permit will be issued. So I don't think it unreasonable for novices to be required to meet some sort of training standard as well, thus my remarks above. No disrespect intended. JP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,399 Posts
Hello JayPee,

There's another element to consider.

In the poster's original post, it does seem reasonable to ascertain that the student may have already been trained/served in the IDF.

As to whether or not US students should/could carry on campus, I would agree that in most cases--valid concealed weapons permit holders should be allowed to do so as an extension of their curtilege to and from their housing to class.

Lot's of stuff to consider, but I've meet some really mature and dedicated college students that are far removed from my "original" Animal House antics when I was in college. (We were doing toga parties before the movie was even produced!).

My son is in the USMC and plans on college when he leaves the service. I can't think of a better person sitting next to me "armed" in the classroom. He has been trained to handle "his stuff".

It's all good stuff to discuss-but as Mr. Camp has warned--no politics, period!

Chris
 

·
Regulator,
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
The original post asked if the incident quoted was a justification for "qualified" carry on campus. My interests lie in addressing the issue of qualifications without spending much time on whether or not it should be allowed. By all means it should. Certainly we would lift the ban on licensed persons carrying on campus as an initial step because of the training required to get the permit. But after that we get into problems.....

Past experience with designing firearms training courses and training standards has left me with a belief that approval for concealed carry on campus will never be a reality without an attendant training program. The burden of civil liability on the approving authorities would just be too great without one. So I think the first reasonable step in getting it approved is to get started defining the needs of the licensees and the content of the course.

JayPee

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,064 Posts
Howdy folks,

Just another thought to factor into things as well. I think it is very much an individual thing. I have known 14 year olds who were more mature than some 25 year olds I have known. Also remember most states and Uncle Sugar will allow you to take the oath and hand you a badge and gun at 21. Some states, Florida comes to mind, allow police officers to be hired at 18, or at least they did.

I had a buddy back in south FL, who had originally joined a local south FL department at age 18. He joked it was embarrassing for him to be in uniform, with his mom beside him in a store, buying his duty ammo.

So I think the only blanket statement I feel comfortable making about maturity levels and ages, is that it is very much based on the individual under discussion.

Just some more logs for the fire. But has been said twice now, feel free to express your opinion, because after all, it is only your opinion. Others may or may not agree and are free to express their own.

But if this thread turns political it will be locked immediately, with possible consequences for the offender(s).

Personally I tend to agree with Mr. Chris. Anyone who has a valid CCW permit, should be allowed to continue to carry on campus. But again, that is simply my opinon.

twoguns
 

·
Regulator,
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
So far in this thread we have only two general members posting, while we have three staff members issuing warnings against political comments. With no disrespect intended, I don't feel comfortable saying anything else on this subject and will politely bow out. JP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,064 Posts
Howdy folks,

While I have not discussed this issue with the other two mods, I feel safe in saying I can speak for all 3 of us.

It is not our intent to try to kill comments on this thread. If that was our intent, the thread would simply have been locked. Rather I feel this post is right on the edge of being political by virtue of its topic.

All it would take is one poorly considered comment and then we have a political issue to deal with. Rather than having to deal with the possible ban of a member for making political comments, I think those of us who made comments, were simply trying to remind folks, say what you feel is relevant on this issue - but think before you write.

Again if we wanted to end all comments from members, we would have locked the thread. We did not do that, instead we simply elected to remind folks to think before they typed.

If anyone has an issue with our comments, feel free to pm me and I will be happy to explain my thoughts on the matter.

twoguns
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
In Iraq it was difficult to discern friend from foe bc everyone there carried ak47s and the foe did not wear a uniform.

In a Columbine type scenario how would law enforcement be able to discern the number and location of gunmen if there were also law abiding citizens carrying and or firing firearms?

How would students work together with law enforcement and campus security to contain a threat without appropriate training and communication equipment?

CCW on campus is a good idea but its implementation would need to be carefully orchestrated so as to keep incidents of friendly fire to an acceptably low level.

Students with ccw permits should have to take part in tactical urban scenario drills alongside campus and local police in the same way that we have fire drills in grade schools.

With proper training, they could form the well regulated militia that the 2nd amendment calls for, but without the appropriate training they could become a liability in a true emergency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
525 Posts
I will note that the Second Amendment, CCW, and discussion in general, particularly the use of guns, are in fact political issues. So drawing a line between what is forbidden, and what is not, is indeed a fine art!

Given that arguments, apparently in opposition to or caution of CCW carry on campus, have been raised, I will plunge ahead with three comments that address those arguments, and I believe to be based on observable facts, versus political rhetoric or ideology. (Some may disagree!) I.e. I am not talking about the right to self-defense, to be armed, etc, only to the logic of it.

1. On the issue of training -- Getting training from others, and training yourself, is much to be desired, whether you are wielding a keyboard, a hammer, or a gun. I believe one has a duty to make himself as proficient as possible.

However, I wonder if it is over-emphasized to the point of becoming a roadblock, to some degree. I read every account I can find on actual self-defense shootings, and while I often find something to criticize about a defenders tactics and shootings, the fact is the large majority of genuine citizen self-defense shootings result in the good guy coming out on top, with the bad guy dead, wounded or driven off, and seldom are bystanders wounded by the citizen. There is usually not a reference to any training, but I find it hard to believe that each one of them attended Gunsite or its equivalent and shoots 50 rounds a week to stay in practice.

Just as I brought up the comment thread, I was listening to the 911 call of the woman in Hesseville, Indiana, who called 911 about the creep breaking into her house. She got the call off before the guy actually got in, hid in her bedroom closet, and he still managed to break in, work his way upstairs, find her, and start to strangle her -- whereupon she shot him three times with a handgun someone had just given her that morning or the day before, I forget which. Not a lot of training there, but she pulled it off.

The question is not "will someone screw up and shoot the wrong guy," but "are the number of good and bad outcomes of having armed citizens superior to the number of good and bad outcomes of not having armed citizens." The answer is overwhelmingly in favor of the former. If you've seen a screwed up shooting or been part of it, I have no doubt you will remember it vividly, but that should not overshadow the evaluation of ALL S.D. shootings. A good place to catch up on news articles about citizens self-defense shootings is at this link: http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/ They print the good, the bad, and the ugly. Thankfully, it's mostly good.

2. As to interactions with the police, confusion about who is a good guy, and so forth -- I believe this is also a red herring. In most citizen self-defense shootings, particularly those involving schools and churches (e.g. the "mass" shooting scenario), the shooting problem is resolved long before the police arrive. Picking out the difference between the good guys and the bad guys turns out not to be a big problem. I am not saying that things are not tense, or that the police are not worried, or that it isn't scary, but that the end result does not seem to be cops regularly shooting at good guys because they mistake them for bad guys.

I will specifically cite the following:

- The Appalachian Law School shooting -- two people (I think -- not more than that) died before armed students took the shooter prisoner, held him until the police arrived. Police had to sort out good guys from bad, but no fratricide between citizens and police.

- Mississippi High School Shooting: Couple people shot, Asst. principal ran to his car, got handgun, took student shooter prisoner, held him until police arrived. Police had to sort out good guys from bad, but no fratricide among the good guys.

- New Life Church attack in C-Springs, last December: Police were on scene PRIOR to the attacker arriving, but the police left once the church services were over. The shooter arrived less than 10 minutes later, with much ammo and two or three guns, obviously intending to kill many. Killed two girls, wounded a few people. Before he could do more, was engaged and downed by church member, shooter then killed himself. Police arrived, had to sort out good guys from bad, but no fratricide among the good guys.

- Columbine - two shooters killed 13, wounded 24, and as I recall, planted some bombs, engaged in fire with a police officer, and still had time to wander around and shoot some others, before killing themselves. No citizen/teacher was able to defend himself or his students, and many died. And when the police arrived, they still had to sort out who was who.

- Virginia Tech -- Shooter had time to kill 30+ people, reloading several times, only stopped when he decided to shoot himself. Police arrived too late to deal with him. Again, no citizen defenders.

Me, I'd rather be armed and defending myself, and risk sorting things out with the cops when they arrive. They seem to be reasonably good at it. And again, the policy argument is "Would things be better overall if teachers and eligible students could be armed, even if there were tense interactions with arriving police?" Oh yes.

3. Specifically to college students: Allowing CCW on campus does not change other parts of the CCW law. They still have to be old enough to have a CCW license -- and I am unaware of any state that has licensing for those under 21 (and if they do, that means that non-student 18 year-olds can carry -- why not students?). Thus the numbers of students armed are not likely to be high, but it does not take a lot. And of course, professors, administrators, and other non-students on campus can be armed too. I suspect the majority would not choose it, but there are some, and that's better than what they have now.

And finally, if we believe our students and young people are not trained enough/experienced enough/mature enough, the solution is to train them, expose them, educate them. I find it something of a wonder that not so long ago teens were exploring the world, making livings, etc, and now we barely trust them to flip burgers. Sometimes the solution is not to lower the standards, but raise them and demand better.

(hmm, that sounds a bit political, but I think I will let it stand).

Best to all.

elb
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,951 Posts
They still have to be old enough to have a CCW license -- and I am unaware of any state that has licensing for those under 21 (and if they do, that means that non-student 18 year-olds can carry -- why not students?).
Indiana law allows 18 year olds to legally carry concealed.

ELB, that was a great post on the issue, and I don't feel you got too political there. In fact, probably not at all. These are the types of responses we need on this, and similar, posts which tread the line.

Thank you!

Josh <><
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,132 Posts
I'm a CCW holder and a member of the professoriate, and a long-time college student. I am absolutely forbidden to carry, and even to have a firearm in my car, under lock and key in a parking lot like the MS incident posted up top. Unfortunately, statistics seem to bear out that many of our college students are depressed and suffer much from anxieties about future job and career prospects, and find college requirements taxing. So there are numbers of mentally ill folks who can crack up, afraid to say.

Of course, a student population is often vulnerable for more mundane but dangerous threats than massacres or terrorist threats. The security on some campuses is not good, with robberies and sexual assaults as a risk. Some schools install "panic buttons" or police call boxes and have patrols, but certainly there are students, both men and women, who would want to carry pending local and state carry laws.

If I could, I would carry at work, but I cannot: it is grounds for immediate termination. I think that discussion of what jobs Americans work in where they *don't* have 2nd. Amendment rights is a thorny one, and perhaps, inherently political. I think one will see this issue before the courts frequently, like in the DC city-wide ban, although on the level of campuses it will probably go the way of the recent woman/teacher in Oregon who lost her appeal to carry at work in light of fears of a deranged ex-husband/ex-boyfriend who had made threats,etc.

ELB, I would agree: it seems that the "childhood" and "teenage" years are being extended further and further instead of full rights and responsibilities coming early-on in society. Hope that's not too political a statement to make either...
--d.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
In my opinion CCW permit holders should be allowed to carry pretty much anywhere they dhoose. Private property aside, if it is a public place where I am entitled to be, I should be allowed to carry there if I choose.

The imposition of training requirements different for various locales calls into question the underlying concept of concealed carry. There should be one standard in each state.

Just my .02

CB
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top