You shoot first without identifying targets? I would hate to have you as a cop. :eek:
So you see guy A shooting at guy B but you shoot both? Excellent logic and I commend you. :rolleyes: Good guy whether A or B will drop his/her gun when seeing the cops making it easier, but if you go in like Rambo, I pity the innocents in your crossfire.
First: Whichever throws down his gun when the cops come. You don’t round a corner spraying.
Second: As a private citizen I probably wouldn’t run towards the BG unless BG is in my path. It all depends but if someone is engaged with another, I sit out until one of them wins and if that winner continues to shoot that makes the decision easy. Assuming I’m still sticking around. However, I’m not a one man entry team and probably won’t go on the offensive but rather defensive.
This sounds like a TOS masturbatory fantasy. What duty would require this person to run to the sound of gunfire? The CCW is to protect him and, perhaps, those in close proximity to him. Most folks are concerned about a gunfight finding them and dealing with it, not looking for a gunfight.
Avoidance. Deterrence. De-escalation.
There is a Plan C. Online degree programs which avoid living/working in the gun-free zone while still carrying. We have two doing it now.
Agreed. And plausible as hell, unfortunately.
The target is the non-Cop inside an Active Shooter scene who has a gun. Simple. This is one of the rare examples in modern law enforcement where an officer will be justified in engaging a subject without so much as saying a word. Because the person had shown their intentions… to kill as many as possible. You wait that second or two and you have more victims and the media starts asking why did the officers hesitate?
There is no true right or wrong answer to this question and I wish I could take each of you through a training session in a school with blanks and the alarms going off to show you somewhat how the real thing actually feels. But I can’t.
I believe someone here made mention of the CCW holder not seeking the subject to engage but rather defend themself and those around them if confronted by the suspect…
IF, someone did not pursue the subject to engage, I would be more abt to agree with CCW on a university campus. Problem is… we have a population of “adults” who are still catered to as if they are children. (Don’t blame me on that one… that is the liberal pussifiction of society at work there). While You all have the maturity and life experiences to possibly make the right choices in such a situation, I highly doubt a 21 year old whose mind is on the bar that night will do the same in regards to keeping a tactical frame of mind and not feeling like “Superman.”
IF, someone did not pursue the subject to engage, I would be more abt to agree with CCW on a university campus. Problem is… we have a population of “adults” who are still catered to as if they are children. (Don’t blame me on that one… that is the liberal pussifiction of society at work there). While You all have the maturity and life experiences to possibly make the right choices in such a situation, I highly doubt a 21 year old whose mind is on the bar that night will do the same in regards to keeping a tactical frame of mind and not feeling like “Superman.”
Sorry, but I can’t buy that line of reasoning. The pussification acceptance party isn’t going to be carrying a gun or pursuing anyone. I have no doubt there are 21 year olds who have no business with a gun, much like there are 40 year olds in the same category, some cops belong in there as well. Here is the major problem I have with that argument. There are in fact 21 year olds making those decisions both in the military and in police departments everyday. The majority of people who CCW do so to protect themselves and family, not to compliment the “S” on their chest.
This is the problem. These adults have the mindset of children. Too many of them have the mindset of big brother will protect me if I am good. This mindset is what leads to the slaughters on campus. None of these “children” know and understand that THEY are resposible for their security, and surrendering this power is going to get them dead.
So if giving these “children” a gun is anathema to the campus police, how about giving them a wake up. Tell them that if someone starts shooting they are on their own for X number of minutes, and if they want to have a chance to have another hangover they will have to handle themselves for that amount of time.
I whole heartedly agree, the problem lies in that the 21 year olds who can handle that responsibility are already in the law enforcement/military in lieu of doing the sterotypical college and frat thing.
Just as with secured government facilities and hi-tech
workplaces, I believe in the near future all schools will
require some type of scanned entry to enter the building.
Every school from elementary to college. This will be a
start to controlling those not authorized to enter and alerting
staff of a student who has been “flagged” is now entering.
I’m not talking about just metal scans, but card scanning
with matching photo. I laughed about this years ago when
boarding a cruise ship. My wife’s hospital just implement
such a system, she goes through 3 scans to get to her office.
We all know that this is not a gun problem…it is a people
problem and we have to bring it down to a individual problem.
Sounds an awful lot like big brother is watching, but as a
parent, knowing that my child is “locked-up” has benefits.
I know…once they start doing this…what’s next!!!
Your arguments seem to be sinking. There are plenty of responsible 18-25 year olds in school. I would suggest your view point is skewed because the only ones you come in contact with are the “stereotypical” types on the job. You never notice the others because they give you no reason to notice them. I’ve met quite a few through my daughter while she was in college. Did they like to party, you bet. Would I trust their judgment? I would say greater than 50% of them. I just don’t see making rules that affect everyone, because of the actions of a few. I’ve had issue with the military for do it for coming up on 21 years. I’ve never done it when I have been in the position to do so. I handle the problem individual and don’t rely a new rule to hamper those with common sense. Yes, it’s more work, but I’d rather work more than try to dumb everyone down to the point they don’t have to think for themselves.
That is how our residence halls are setup in addition to buildings that contain radioactive or biologic items. Everytime I use my I.D. to swipe in someplace it is logged as that is where I was and at what time. In turn, should someone be a “threat” they can just deactivate his/her card. I hated it at first but have grown used to it.
Doesn’t feel much like “Big Brother” since I am really not worried about them knowing where I am and there is nothing they can do with that info anyways. Is nice that they can add restrictions to people though so they cannot access areas.
As former LEO and able to carry pretty much where I want in my state, I’d definetely take my chances with being shot by the responding officers rather than being executed by a Cho type assailant.
In a most situations an armed teacher/student would have/could have dispatched Cho long before LE was on scene.
So when LE arrives hopefully they find the CCW’er who ended the incident with his weapon reholstered and the either showing his hands or on his knees with his hands on his or her head.
To follow ZGXtreme’s line of reasoning is fallacy, the police cannot and will not protect us all the time. They can’t watch us all the time and we wouldn’t stand for it.
I guess for me me, if I’m forced to fire on a bad guy and I get whacked by the responders, then at least I hopefully saved others. In my mind that is part of the risk and repsonsibilty of going armed in todays society.
Repectfully,
Jeff
With all due respect, sir, you are wrong.
I was in a college class just a couple of hours away when the VT thing was going down.
I would not have been engaged by responding officers if I was in Norris hall and armed. Cho would have been dead or I would have been dead by the time the police could finally mobilize and get in the building.
And frankly, if I am going to risk getting shot, I’d rather risk staring down the wrong end of a police issue weapon than be left absolutely helpless while some waste of sperm blows me away. At least the friggin’ cops aren’t there to murder me and aren’t likely to cap me if I act like I have a brain.
The idea that cops are going to end up smoking CCW holders at the scene of a crime is oft repeated but to my knowledge hasn’t happened.
Disclaimer before I am pegged as The Man… I have no problems with CCW and even advocate it. But… if it will complicate my job in an already chaotic environment and in turn place that CCW holder’s life in even more danger then I will openly speak out against it.
Sir, I fail to see how on earth my life could possibly be in more danger by posessing an effective means of self defense against some sh*thead that you and your colleagues can’t get to for at least a few minutes.
At the very least I can make the bastard duck, and that means he gets less time to wantonly slaughter people.
Further, I know I am better trained with a weapon than the majority of the campus police officers on the campus I’m at regularly.
I’m not trying to jump on you here, but I think you are in serious error on several points.
And because you’ve been on a college campus daily you must also realize that not even 1% of the people on the campus have any normal day to day awareness of security and frequently let people PAST things like card scanners.
Hell, I can get into any dorm in a 350 mile radius with a pizza claiming it is for delivery.
Ditto many other “secure” campus facilities.
There is nothing “secure” about a college campus. They aren’t built for it.
If they had that mindset, why would they apply for a CCW in the first place?
I don’t know anyone with a CCW permit who is eager to try and play hunt the bad guy.
That’s why citizens with CCW permits are effective in the first place…they don’t hunt down criminals and engage them…they engage criminals who are in the process of trying to kill them and at the very least cause them to come up with a new plan.
If I was in a classroom in Norris hall when the shooting started on that fateful day with my M&P and my S&W 442, Cho would have had a really bad day.
If I was in another building and not under direct threat, I would have gotten the hell out of dodge and let the police handle it.
While You all have the maturity and life experiences to possibly make the right choices in such a situation, I highly doubt a 21 year old whose mind is on the bar that night will do the same in regards to keeping a tactical frame of mind and not feeling like “Superman.”
…but a 21 year old police officer (like a number of our campus police) are going to show up and save the day?
Look…training is a wonderful thing. I believe in it. I have spent a small fortune obtaining it. I will spend more getting more training in the future…but let’s not be so obtuse as to pretend that you MUST have 300 hours of formal weapons training to successfully defend yourself against somebody like Cho.
Cho shows up…starts shooting through the classroom door…you draw your weapon, and you start putting some rounds back at him. That’s one room he isn’t going to be wantonly slaughtering people in.
That’s a hell of a lot better than your elderly professor trying desperately to hold the door shut because that’s the ONLY option available to him in a crackerbox room with one way in and one way out like most college classrooms.
And this plan doesn’t require a bunch of scared people spontaneously and instantaneously organizing and bum-rushing the shooter…it just requires a single individual with an effective means of self defense and the resolve to use it.
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” - An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759)
I’m as pro-gun as anyone else here but I’m going to have to disagree with a NEED for teachers to have CCW. The truth is trouble can strike you anywhere. My mother is a school teacher and has been for nearly 30 years now. She grew up around firearms her whole life but chooses to not own one herself. My father is the same way. I on the other hand have many firearms and am a CCW holder. I just like them and my grandfathers took me shooting with them on occasion.
In the case of school shootings we need RESPONSIBLE PARENTING and ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING GUN LAWS. In most cases the parents claimed that they weren’t aware of things going on with their children and in some cases the children had various explosives not to mention various firearms the parents knew nothing about. All these things are objects that shouldn’t be easy to “smuggle” in or out the house if you are paying attention to your children. I’m not much older than a lot of these people doing these things and I’m probably about the same age as the Columbine kids. The simple fact is that people need to RAISE THEIR CHILDREN and know the telling your child “NO” isn’t the worst thing in the world sometimes. Children don’t require or need that much privacy and don’t have ANY right to it while living under your roof. Should you allow them some privacy they need to know it’s a PRIVILEDGE.
*I know I may be preaching to the choir but it needs to be reiterated that these school shootings happen mostly because of parental negligence (Virginia Tech not withstanding.) It’s criminal and the parents should be charged with manslaughter at least if not second degree murder IMO.
MerQ,
That is what we’re talking about, a choice. Your mom chooses not to own firearms. I simply can’t endorse making someones choice about self protection and that’s what is being done with gun free zones.
Legislators are making the choice for you, that’s rich coming from a group of people who have security details.:rolleyes:
Well I understand where people are coming from but should we allow bank tellers to carry firearms too because some banks get knocked off? I mean some armed guards were killed in Philadelphia a few weeks ago so having a firearm doesn’t guarantee safety either. Things happen very fast and we are talking about hypothetical best case scenarios. There would be a good chance you didn’t know trouble was coming until it got there in which case it’s usually too late.