Whether Students Carrying Their Own Guns Could Have Prevented Massacre

[natty bumppo 297]

Whoever led that debate against the students carrying firearms must feel pretty stupid about now.

Oh please. Do you honestly think FEWER people would have died if students all of a sudden started shooting at each other? You wouldn't have been able to tell who the shooter was. Also, most of the students would miss what they were shooting at since most people are piss-poor shots with a handgun. It's a retarded idea. Completely retarded.

i don't see how you can interpret what he said into "...students all of a sudden started shooting at each other"

we don't need to know who the shooter is, just the ones on the scene do so they can neutralize the threat. shooting a pistol is a bit different than a shotgun, yes, but then again, competency with the firearm is required to be demonstrated for a cch license.

My father has a concealed carry permit in Texas and demonstrated competency with a handgun, but he is still a piss-poor shot. Most people shooting with a handgun will miss if they're more than 5 feet from the target. Now imagine 20-30 students spraying bullets all over a classroom instead of just the one. It isn't hard to imagine what would happen.

i'd say he probably knows that and won't shoot at something unless he's got a reasonable chance of hitting it and he knows the backstop too. i think saying 20-30 students firing at one time in a classroom is going overboard from what is being discussed

A CCW permit holder, with training, who practices, and misses from 5 feet? Darn, 2 feet of that is arms length. So missing from 3 feet? Wow

It just takes one person who keeps their wits, remembers training, and does the right thing to end the situation.

[homesick_american 1]

i'd say he probably knows that and won't shoot at something unless he's got a reasonable chance of hitting it and he knows the backstop too. i think saying 20-30 students firing at one time in a classroom is going overboard from what is being discussed

Sure...my DAD knows that, he's 61 years old and isn't an idiot. We're talking about kids here. College kids. Most of them don't have much common sense. I didn't when I was a college kid.

[homesick_american 1]

A CCW permit holder, with training, who practices, and misses from 5 feet? Darn, 2 feet of that is arms length. So missing from 3 feet? Wow

I didn't say he'd miss. I said most people would miss. Most people don't have any training on handguns. My dad would probably miss from 10+ feet, but he also has cataracts. I'd call that piss-poor; my mom can hit a target at triple that distance, and her grouping is better at shorter distances too. Even my father admits that a handgun is a poor weapon for self-defense, but he carries them because they're portable. A shotgun is a much better (and accurate) weapon, but it's not very portable.

It just takes one person who keeps their wits, remembers training, and does the right thing to end the situation.

Do you honestly think that it's a good idea for a bunch of noid, pumped-up-on-hormones college kids to pack heat on the off chance that someone comes into the classroom and starts shooting at them? I mean, really...think about how ridiculous that sounds.

Edited April 19, 2007 by homesick_american

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

i'd say he probably knows that and won't shoot at something unless he's got a reasonable chance of hitting it and he knows the backstop too. i think saying 20-30 students firing at one time in a classroom is going overboard from what is being discussed

Sure...my DAD knows that, he's 61 years old and isn't an idiot. We're talking about kids here. College kids. Most of them don't have much common sense. I didn't when I was a college kid.

i think that's a stretch, saying they don't because you didn't.

and btw, i knew quite a bit about gun safety when i was 12..........

[homesick_american 1]

i'd say he probably knows that and won't shoot at something unless he's got a reasonable chance of hitting it and he knows the backstop too. i think saying 20-30 students firing at one time in a classroom is going overboard from what is being discussed

Sure...my DAD knows that, he's 61 years old and isn't an idiot. We're talking about kids here. College kids. Most of them don't have much common sense. I didn't when I was a college kid.

i think that's a stretch, saying they don't because you didn't.

and btw, i knew quite a bit about gun safety when i was 12..........

Not really. When I went to college I knew other college kids...sort of goes with the territory. In the common sense department they were severely lacking. It's a consequence of being that age.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

A CCW permit holder, with training, who practices, and misses from 5 feet? Darn, 2 feet of that is arms length. So missing from 3 feet? Wow

I didn't say he'd miss. I said most people would miss. Most people don't have any training on handguns. My dad would probably miss from 10+ feet, but he also has cataracts. I'd call that piss-poor; my mom can hit a target at triple that distance, and her grouping is better at shorter distances too. Even my father admits that a handgun is a poor weapon for self-defense, but he carries them because they're portable. A shotgun is a much better (and accurate) weapon, but it's not very portable.

It just takes one person who keeps their wits, remembers training, and does the right thing to end the situation.

Do you honestly think that it's a good idea for a bunch of noid, pumped-up-on-hormones college kids to pack heat on the off chance that someone comes into the classroom and starts shooting at them? I mean, really...think about how ridiculous that sounds.

i think the statement about "most people would miss" is conjecture on your part. with just a little practice, people can consistently hit a human torso at 25 plus feet. a shotgun is better up to a certain distance, but also has the drawback of being more cumbersome to bear on a target than a pistol and is not what i'd term a good choice in close quarters.

i also don't believe that anyone is suggesting that a classroom of kids pack heat. given the minimum age requirements for a cch, many in college would be excluded from such. however, teachers certainly could be eligible to do so, and a few of the older students, true, but all you need is one armed citizen to stop the tragedy we have been discussing.

Not really. When I went to college I knew other college kids...sort of goes with the territory. In the common sense department they were severely lacking. It's a consequence of being that age.

yet one of them could rise to the occasion when the situation warrents, eh?

[homesick_american 1]

i think the statement about "most people would miss" is conjecture on your part. with just a little practice, people can consistently hit a human torso at 25 plus feet. a shotgun is better up to a certain distance, but also has the drawback of being more cumbersome to bear on a target than a pistol and is not what i'd term a good choice in close quarters.

With practice, your accuracy can improve. Nobody is going to argue that with you. However, hitting a target at 25 feet on a range is not the same as hitting a moving target in a panic situation. You can't compare the two.

i also don't believe that anyone is suggesting that a classroom of kids pack heat. given the minimum age requirements for a cch, many in college would be excluded from such. however, teachers certainly could be eligible to do so, and a few of the older students, true, but all you need is one armed citizen to stop the tragedy we have been discussing.

Maybe if all the planets had been aligned correctly, that could have happened. Realistically, the odds are very slim that it would have made a difference. I do not condone arming professors in order to prevent something like this. The last major campus shooting was waaaaaaaaaaay the hell back in 1966. Suggesting we arm professors to prevent situations like this would be akin to putting armed air marshalls on every flight in, into, or out of the USA in order to prevent another 9/11. We don't do that, so we're definitely not going to do this.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

i think the statement about "most people would miss" is conjecture on your part. with just a little practice, people can consistently hit a human torso at 25 plus feet. a shotgun is better up to a certain distance, but also has the drawback of being more cumbersome to bear on a target than a pistol and is not what i'd term a good choice in close quarters.

With practice, your accuracy can improve. Nobody is going to argue that with you. However, hitting a target at 25 feet on a range is not the same as hitting a moving target in a panic situation. You can't compare the two.

i also don't believe that anyone is suggesting that a classroom of kids pack heat. given the minimum age requirements for a cch, many in college would be excluded from such. however, teachers certainly could be eligible to do so, and a few of the older students, true, but all you need is one armed citizen to stop the tragedy we have been discussing.

Maybe if all the planets had been aligned correctly, that could have happened. Realistically, the odds are very slim that it would have made a difference. I do not condone arming professors in order to prevent something like this. The last major campus shooting was waaaaaaaaaaay the hell back in 1966. Suggesting we arm professors to prevent situations like this would be akin to putting armed air marshalls on every flight in, into, or out of the USA in order to prevent another 9/11. We don't do that, so we're definitely not going to do this.

actually, most shootings occur at a range of less than 15 feet. that's why most of the cch classes have a firing course that is not "olympic distance" in qualification terms. nor did i try to compare hitting a moving target versus a stationary one while under stress. it's obvious that such is more difficult.

i'm not suggesting that we arm professors either, but........why take away their ability to bear arms as a cch holder? they can, if exercising that right, nip such in the bud before it goes any further. btw, at least one of the profs at vt was former military. i bet if he was armed the events of that day might have been far less tragic.

Edited April 19, 2007 by charlesandnessa

[homesick_american 1]

actually, most shootings occur at a range of less than 15 feet. that's why most of the cch classes have a firing course that is not "olympic distance" in qualification terms. nor did i try to compare hitting a moving target versus a stationary one while under stress. it's obvious that such is more difficult.

i'm not suggesting that we arm professors either, but........why take away their ability to bear arms as a cch holder? they can, if exercising that right, nip such in the bud before it goes any further. btw, at least one of the profs at vt was former military. i bet if he was armed the events of that day might have been far less tragic.

Bet all you like; I strongly disagree with arming professors and students on college campuses. Campuses are usually very safe and secure and something like this is extremely unusual. People were asking these same hypothetical questions after the Luby's shooting in Killeen in 1991, which is probably why Texas has concealed carry laws today. It is very unusual for a concealed carry permit holder to actually use his/her weapon in self-defense, and obviously nobody else has crashed their truck into a cafeteria again to put the theory to the test that things in 1991 would have been different if everyone had been packing heat.

Your argument assumes that A.) universities would ever permit this, B.) that profs would be stupid enough to carry around their weapon cocked and locked all day long, C.) that profs would be able to hit a moving target at some distance in a room filling with smoke and running people, D.) that profs would be able to react QUICKLY enough to avoid being shot first, since if they were all armed they would be the first thing the spree shooter would aim for, then he'd take their gun off them and he'd have an extra, E.) that this will happen again within our lifetimes.

Nobody has come close to changing my mind on this issue, and I consider myself to be pretty open-minded. I've changed sides on some issues, but I don't see myself ever changing sides on this one. People can keep trying, but I just don't think it will ever happen. Guns are bad, mmkay?

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

Bet all you like; I strongly disagree with arming professors and students on college campuses. Campuses are usually very safe and secure and something like this is extremely unusual. People were asking these same hypothetical questions after the Luby's shooting in Killeen in 1991, which is probably why Texas has concealed carry laws today. It is very unusual for a concealed carry permit holder to actually use his/her weapon in self-defense, and obviously nobody else has crashed their truck into a cafeteria again to put the theory to the test that things in 1991 would have been different if everyone had been packing heat.

Your argument assumes that A.) universities would ever permit this, B.) that profs would be stupid enough to carry around their weapon cocked and locked all day long, C.) that profs would be able to hit a moving target at some distance in a room filling with smoke and running people, D.) that profs would be able to react QUICKLY enough to avoid being shot first, since if they were all armed they would be the first thing the spree shooter would aim for, then he'd take their gun off them and he'd have an extra, E.) that this will happen again within our lifetimes.

Nobody has come close to changing my mind on this issue, and I consider myself to be pretty open-minded. I've changed sides on some issues, but I don't see myself ever changing sides on this one. People can keep trying, but I just don't think it will ever happen. Guns are bad, mmkay?

actually, i lived about a mile from luby's in killeen when that happened. some in there wished they had their pistols with them but they were following the law! lot of good their pistols did them eh?

my arguement assumes that such is legal and that the profs carried such. nowhere in any statement did i mention "locked and cocked" though. anyone just walking around with a cocked pistol needs to have their license revoked. so let's be a bit more accurate in our words, shall we?

so assumptions on your part is - that the target is moving, that it will be "some distance" to the perpetrator (alluding to a long shot?), that there is smoke and running people, and that the shooter would take out the prof first.

my thoughts are:

1. the target won't be moving fast, if at all, as it affects his/her aim too

2. distance is a factor for both, as is surprise. it can be negative or positive for either in the above scenario. but often the predator is surprised when the prey is armed, eh?

3. if the prof is carrying concealed, then how would the perpetrator know he/she is armed?

4. where did all of this smoke come from that you speak of? lots of rounds would have to be fired for such to occur.

5. do people run or cower when there is a shooting? i'm betting most take cover.

lastly, while you are on your "guns are bad mmkay" trek, ponder this: how many of the victims at vt probably wished they had one?

[homesick_american 1]

so assumptions on your part is - that the target is moving, that it will be "some distance" to the perpetrator (alluding to a long shot?), that there is smoke and running people, and that the shooter would take out the prof first.

my thoughts are:

1. the target won't be moving fast, if at all, as it affects his/her aim too

In this case he wasn't because there wasn't any danger of him being shot. If he knew the profs were packing heat he probably would keep moving unless he WANTS to get shot.

2. distance is a factor for both, as is surprise. it can be negative or positive for either in the above scenario. but often the predator is surprised when the prey is armed, eh?

Again, everyone would know the profs were packing heat. Moot point.

3. if the prof is carrying concealed, then how would the perpetrator know he/she is armed?

There is no way you'd keep that a secret on a college campus.

4. where did all of this smoke come from that you speak of? lots of rounds would have to be fired for such to occur.

Lots of rounds were fired at Virginia Tech. If the classrooms were as small as you think they were, they'd get smoky.

5. do people run or cower when there is a shooting? i'm betting most take cover.

Well, when someone shot at me I didn't cower. I ran. Away. And zig-zagged.

lastly, while you are on your "guns are bad mmkay" trek, ponder this: how many of the victims at vt probably wished they had one?

You're assuming the gun would have saved their lives. I don't agree that it would have.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

In this case he wasn't because there wasn't any danger of him being shot. If he knew the profs were packing heat he probably would keep moving unless he WANTS to get shot.

again, how would he know? part of cch is not advertising the fact.

Again, everyone would know the profs were packing heat. Moot point.

agreed, it's moot when one does not know for certain if the target is armed.

There is no way you'd keep that a secret on a college campus.

supposition on your part. one does not advertise the fact that he/she is armed.

Lots of rounds were fired at Virginia Tech. If the classrooms were as small as you think they were, they'd get smoky.

yes, lots of rounds fired. i fully expect anyone capable of returning fire to wait until the atmosphere is clouded like you portray.

Well, when someone shot at me I didn't cower. I ran. Away. And zig-zagged.

good idea. but when in a confined area with only one escape route like a classroom..........

You're assuming the gun would have saved their lives. I don't agree that it would have.

just as you assume they would not

[homesick_american 1]

supposition on your part. one does not advertise the fact that he/she is armed.

ROFL...did you go to college? We knew more about our professors' personal lives than their families did in some cases. Like I said before, there is no way you could arm professors and NOT have people know about it.

good idea. but when in a confined area with only one escape route like a classroom..........

The kids jumped out the windows.

[Ban Hammer 13,429]

ROFL...did you go to college? We knew more about our professors' personal lives than their families did in some cases. Like I said before, there is no way you could arm professors and NOT have people know about it.

yes, but that's a red herring on your part. and like i said before numerous times, a cch holder does not advertise such. so how else would one know what a prof has under his/her clothes?

The kids jumped out the windows.

in this case, some did. most probably just froze. but leaping from windows is not always an option is it?

[homesick_american 1]

yes, but that's a red herring on your part. and like i said before numerous times, a cch holder does not advertise such. so how else would one know what a prof has under his/her clothes?

You grew up in Texas same as I did; you're telling me you can't tell when someone has a shoulder holster on?

in this case, some did. most probably just froze. but leaping from windows is not always an option is it?

Not always, but I say a broken leg beats getting shot. Even on 9/11 people jumped out of the World Trade Center knowing full well they wouldn't survive the jump; they weren't trying to save themselves, they just wanted some control over when and how they died. Sometimes it's the only bit of control you have.