Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

College Campus CCW

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • College Campus CCW

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4IoU...=rec-fresh+div

    I find the former FBI agent's view very contradictory to that expressed by most LEOs on this forum. He pretty much says that cops are the only ones who should carry because they are so much better trained.

    And it disrupts the learning environment?? Does an armed gunman killing students make for a better one?

    If it's properly concealed then it shouldn't make a difference.

    Any thoughts?
    If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

    "The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

    Ignored:
    juicesnn4e2

  • #2
    Well my views are kind of conflicting each other here.

    I understand that everyone has the right to carry however,

    You need to look at the campus enviroment. Some people are very mature and can handle themselfs as mature adults.

    Others CAN'T.

    For some reason in a school enviroment people tend to act like kids very often and adding guns with beer is not a good mix.

    So i agree with you... But also him.
    --I work Security--

    Question: "Why Don't they give you guys guns?"
    Answer: "Because i would shoot people who ask stupid questions"

    Florida Highway Patrol

    1) PAT-Passed
    1) CJ-BAT-TBD
    3) POLYGRAPH
    4) PSYCH SCREEN
    5) MEDICAL AND VISION
    6) B I
    7) COLONEL'S DECISION
    8) JOB OFFER
    9) ACADEMY START DATE

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by FF Expl. Lt. View Post
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4IoU...=rec-fresh+div

      I find the former FBI agent's view very contradictory to that expressed by most LEOs on this forum. He pretty much says that cops are the only ones who should carry because they are so much better trained.

      And it disrupts the learning environment?? Does an armed gunman killing students make for a better one?

      If it's properly concealed then it shouldn't make a difference.

      Any thoughts?

      I can also agree with both sides of the issue. Thinking back to my undergraduate years, I cannot think of that many people who I would want to be armed, and I was at one of the biggest universities in the state of TN, if not the biggest.

      The main argument for CCW holders is the fact they could take out the shooter. I do not have a problem with a CCW holder protecting himself or others around him, but I DO have a problem with a bunch of gun totin kids going after the shooter. It's not their job. If the shooter comes at them or in their classroom, then yes, fire away. But as far as seeking out the threat, this will only make matters worse for responding officers. With the adrenalin at 100mph for everyone involved and the new training we have received over the last few years in active-shooter situations, it is not our job to go about and guess which shooters are the good guys, and which shooters are the bad. It is our job to recognize the person with the gun and eliminate the threat.

      Three main concerns come to mind: (1) CCW holders lack of active shooter training, and (2) CCW holders getting shot by law enforcement, and (3) CCW holders attempting to do our job by seeking out the active shooter.

      My personal opinion.
      I'm 10-8 like a shark in a sea of crime..

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SgtScott31 View Post

        Three main concerns come to mind: (1) CCW holders lack of active shooter training, and (2) CCW holders getting shot by law enforcement, and (3) CCW holders attempting to do our job by seeking out the active shooter.

        My personal opinion.
        (1) Maybe law enforcement agencies need to face the fact that people are carrying handguns, and instead of hiding their heads in the sand and saying "NO...leave it to us...please...just let us handle the problem..." they should develop a class (heavy on force-on-force component) directed toward this situation FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC who carry firearms on a daily basis.

        If you can't beat them, join them.

        Maybe it won't be easy...but think of it this way...if enough members of the general public are being cycled through a 20 hour training block heavy on force on force simulation sessions run by the police (subsidized or completely at the student's own cost), isn't that going to increase the chances of an active shooter walking into a meat grinder with his eyes closes?

        You are never going to get enough trained people to cover every place...but like land mines, the thought of them can protect an area...or at least make criminals very, very wary...

        (2) If I decide to act in an active shooter situation, getting shot by law enforcement as they respond is just the price of doing business. I accept it, even if I do not like it.

        (3) Respectfully, it's everyone's job. I'll be happy to let you take point; however, if you are 3 minutes away at the other end of the shopping center, while someone is shooting up a department store in front of me, I think that situation calls for met to get off my ***, take a sip from the "flask of man" in my hip pocket, put the XS-Big Dot front sight on the target's head and press the trigger repeatedly till the bad guy falls down or until you arrive and either tell me to put the gun down or shoot me dead from behind cover.

        Active shooter situations suck worse that a 3-toothed tranny-hooker with VD...but they are what they are. (Yes, I know you didn't want the image I just gave you...but deal with it. I suggest by drinking heavily...)

        Police can't prevent them, only respond to them. That's not an accusation, just reality.

        Maybe it's time for a progressive, out of the box approach to this problem from both law enforcement AND the people carrying firearms as part of their daily lives?

        Comment


        • #5
          The concern of a bunch of drunk college kids runnin around with guns is stupid. So for some magical reason just because they are granted the privilege to carry on campus they will all rush to their local sheriff to get a permit, but have not entertained the thought of carrying prior? People will not go out to get permits simply because they can carry on campus. The people who want to carry and have permits for carry other than on campus are the same people who will carry on campus, and the people who don't already have them are still just as unlikey to get them.

          I know there is also a ridiculous fear of freshman and sophomores having weapons in the densely populated dorms; however, being that you typically have to be 21 to have a permit, there will still be no guns in the dorms. I also think a no weapons policy in the on-campus housing is reasonable due to the extensive controlled access in dorms these days.

          In my college experience, both community and state, the ovewhelming majority of students don't know what CCW is, think carrying is pointless, is for paranoid militants, or are afraid of guns altogether. So I kind of doubt the allowing of campus carry will give a reason for the typical student to do so. The handfull of people I know who have even entertained the idea are the older, more mature students who I would feel comfortable being around if they were armed. But even out of those who thought about it, not all would get a permit. So there really is a small amount of students who would actually take advantage of it. And it is my experience that those people are qualified to do so.
          Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity

          Comment


          • #6
            Might not work, but the system we have now sure does not work. Might as well try something. As for training all the school would have to do is have a police taught class on campus and students and faculty alike would take the class.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SgtScott31 View Post
              But as far as seeking out the threat, this will only make matters worse for responding officers. With the adrenalin at 100mph for everyone involved and the new training we have received over the last few years in active-shooter situations, it is not our job to go about and guess which shooters are the good guys, and which shooters are the bad. It is our job to recognize the person with the gun and eliminate the threat.
              In reflecting on the bold and underlined statements, I have to ask, "Did some well meaning fool totally ignore the posibility of an armed citizen intervening and the responding officers having to make a shoot-no shoot decission under stress?"

              I mean, take Virginia Tech and lets have Cho chain the doors and go on his merry shooting spree...but unbeknownst to Cho, their is a guy in the bathroom finishing off #2 as the shooting start...with a mini-glock in the pocket of his cargo shorts. He hears the shots upstairs, pulls up his pants, draws and steps out into the hallway to see the doors chained up and again hears shots coming from upstairs...so he figures if he can't run, he better do something, runs to the sound of the guns and sees Cho in a classroom letting off rounds...and gives him a controlled pair into his upper back (#1 gets the left lung, #2 turns the heart to hamburger...He shoots, he scores...nothing but net...)

              Meanwhile, the police have arrived, tore the doors off the hinges, made entry and haulled *** into the building, and see the above sceen...

              And NOBODY thought to include into the active shooter training the idea of "Oh, yeah...you MIGHT want to make sure the guy with the gun is the shooter, because we have about 250,000 permits to carry firearms in circulation in this state, and our state recgonizes 14 other state's permits... so just make sure you wack the shooter, not some well meaning guy trying to do the right thing..."

              If I read you correctly, that's a flaw that needs to be addressed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mitchell_in_CT View Post
                In reflecting on the bold and underlined statements, I have to ask, "Did some well meaning fool totally ignore the posibility of an armed citizen intervening and the responding officers having to make a shoot-no shoot decission under stress?"

                I mean, take Virginia Tech and lets have Cho chain the doors and go on his merry shooting spree...but unbeknownst to Cho, their is a guy in the bathroom finishing off #2 as the shooting start...with a mini-glock in the pocket of his cargo shorts. He hears the shots upstairs, pulls up his pants, draws and steps out into the hallway to see the doors chained up and again hears shots coming from upstairs...so he figures if he can't run, he better do something, runs to the sound of the guns and sees Cho in a classroom letting off rounds...and gives him a controlled pair into his upper back (#1 gets the left lung, #2 turns the heart to hamburger...He shoots, he scores...nothing but net...)

                Meanwhile, the police have arrived, tore the doors off the hinges, made entry and haulled *** into the building, and see the above sceen...

                And NOBODY thought to include into the active shooter training the idea of "Oh, yeah...you MIGHT want to make sure the guy with the gun is the shooter, because we have about 250,000 permits to carry firearms in circulation in this state, and our state recgonizes 14 other state's permits... so just make sure you wack the shooter, not some well meaning guy trying to do the right thing..."

                If I read you correctly, that's a flaw that needs to be addressed.
                I don't see how the gun would be drawn for more than a few seconds, the chance of the police barging in right after you've deployed your firearm and shot him is probably statistically insignificant. Obviously, you'd holster the firearm so the police do not instinctively shoot you.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by caseypj View Post
                  I don't see how the gun would be drawn for more than a few seconds, the chance of the police barging in right after you've deployed your firearm and shot him is probably statistically insignificant. Obviously, you'd holster the firearm so the police do not instinctively shoot you.
                  Because you are sure you will have to deal with only ONE shooter, right?

                  Because phycos never attack in pairs...like at Columbine or Jonesboro...

                  Yeah. Not.

                  (Active shooter situations are never simple, are they?)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I think that one of our problems as a society, especially as litigious as we are, is that we want to define all the parameters and plan for all the "what-ifs" and if we can't plan for them, we better just put blanket restrictions out there so we have our butts covered.

                    Personally, I'm all for the concealed carry oh school grounds (colleges). As a few have stated, those of us with or wanting our CC are TYPICALLY level-headed and mature enough to know the responsibility of carrying a firearm. We also realize that civic duty is not just letting others die if we can prevent it. Maybe civilian job descriptions as a teacher or a carpenter don't include "use of force" or "protecting the lives of others" but I'll slap down my man card that has a whole other job description. If I get shot and killed in the process, yes, it would be sad and tragic. Even if I didn't work for the Sheriff, I would still put my neck out there to try and assist someone. Why? Because as a human, I won't stand by and let others become victims simply on the off-chance I might get hurt. It's not about heroism. It's not about glory. It's about doing the right thing. If an officer mistook me for a gunmen, I would simply hope it wouldn't happen, but that would be the risk I took as an armed individual trying to help. As was said, it is unlikely in any scenario that the first responders would be coming into the room coincidentally when I am (hopefully) placing rounds into the attacker. More likely than that I will have my gun re-holstered or placed on the ground with my hands up, and prepared to be placed in cuffs until the situation was straightened out.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mitchell_in_CT View Post
                      Because you are sure you will have to deal with only ONE shooter, right?

                      Because phycos never attack in pairs...like at Columbine or Jonesboro...

                      Yeah. Not.

                      (Active shooter situations are never simple, are they?)
                      You're right. They're never simple. The question is, does a bunch of armed folks on campus make the problem better or worse? Instead of 2 or 3 armed bad guys, we have a dozen or so armed people flocking about. Reports start coming in to responding officers of multiple gunmen because the witnesses from a distance are not going to know the difference, and sure as he** not going to ask. Could you imagine the reports coming in on 3rd party information regarding a scene like this to dispatchers and responding units? I'm not totally against the idea of CCW on campus, but to even begin considering it, there should be some serious restrictions, training, and action plans involved. Although all of us would probably agree that we would risk the chance of being shot by responding law enforcement, put yourself in the shoes of a LEO that knew he shot an innocent 21/22 yr old. Not as easy as it sounds.
                      I'm 10-8 like a shark in a sea of crime..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SgtScott31 View Post
                        You're right. They're never simple. The question is, does a bunch of armed folks on campus make the problem better or worse? Instead of 2 or 3 armed bad guys, we have a dozen or so armed people flocking about. Reports start coming in to responding officers of multiple gunmen because the witnesses from a distance are not going to know the difference, and sure as he** not going to ask. Could you imagine the reports coming in on 3rd party information regarding a scene like this to dispatchers and responding units? I'm not totally against the idea of CCW on campus, but to even begin considering it, there should be some serious restrictions, training, and action plans involved. Although all of us would probably agree that we would risk the chance of being shot by responding law enforcement, put yourself in the shoes of a LEO that knew he shot an innocent 21/22 yr old. Not as easy as it sounds.
                        It is a shi+ sandwich any way you look at it...

                        But sometimes if you are going to be forced to eat it, you just add onions & mustard instead of eating it plain.

                        It doesn't make it any better...and might, just might brush off the main filling a bit.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SgtScott31 View Post
                          You're right. They're never simple. The question is, does a bunch of armed folks on campus make the problem better or worse? Instead of 2 or 3 armed bad guys, we have a dozen or so armed people flocking about. Reports start coming in to responding officers of multiple gunmen because the witnesses from a distance are not going to know the difference, and sure as he** not going to ask. Could you imagine the reports coming in on 3rd party information regarding a scene like this to dispatchers and responding units? I'm not totally against the idea of CCW on campus, but to even begin considering it, there should be some serious restrictions, training, and action plans involved. Although all of us would probably agree that we would risk the chance of being shot by responding law enforcement, put yourself in the shoes of a LEO that knew he shot an innocent 21/22 yr old. Not as easy as it sounds.
                          +1!

                          I am a 21 year old college student. Important to know I feel.

                          The majority of college kids belong far far away from guns...in that situation the only people that should have guns is the Police.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by VChopefull View Post
                            +1!

                            The majority of college kids belong far far away from guns...in that situation the only people that should have guns is the Police.
                            I'm sure they will feel that way when someone comes through a classroom door and starts killing people right in front of them.

                            Or not.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              When the SHTF I don't care who has a gun as long as they are on the good guys side. I'm sure the victims of the V-Tech shooting wished someone had a gun to defend themselves against the assailant.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 6189 users online. 351 members and 5838 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X