Virginia Tech did not teach people much -- ducking under the desks might be a good idea during an earthquake, but it is extremely bad one when facing a shooter. The response must always be - run for your life. It is a miracle the shooter stopped his rampage. Still, whatever low opinion some have about "Shots on Campus" video, it is probably worth watching.

Let me guess, the campus was a "gun-free zone" so noone in the classroom had any way to defend himself. If this gunman wanted he could have slaughtered everyone in the room at his leisure. The only question is how did he manage to get a gun into the gun-free zone. Duh!

I was right:

http://www.nvcc.edu/current-students/police/college-safety-report/policies/index.html

Firearms/Dangerous Weapons and Materials Policy

Bringing firearms and other dangerous weapons onto campus is prohibited. It is a violation of the rules to carry weapons or to leave them in a car parked on the campus. The only exception applies to duly sworn law enforcement officers. While civilian-attired police officers have the authority to carry firearms, they must do so by keeping them concealed so as not to alarm others. Bringing explosives and other dangerous chemicals onto campus is also prohibited.

So rightwing...let me get this straight, you feel that everyone would be much safer on campus (and there would be fewer such incidents) if everyone on campus was packing heat? REALLY? Wow, that certainly explains a lot about the logic of many other "right wing" views. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Lontraman, your logic is not much better. From Rightwingprofessor's argument that it is a bad idea to forbid everybody to carry concealed (and a safe assumption that Rightwingprofessor is in favor of allowing that) there is a great leap towards claiming he wants to arm everyone.

I have already seen one response to "rightwing professor" and there will probably be more. But to address the dear professor(...of the Department of Idiocy?) let me understand the trainwreck of your logic. You would like to open up the classroom for all people to have weapons so then what...anyone with the desire to shoot professors and students is free to do so? I live in Seattle and four police oficers with unconcealed loaded weapons were just gunned down in a coffee shop. Did being armed help them? Having easy access to weapons certainly helped the mentally ill man who killed them. Do you think mentally disturbed people give a rat's ass who else is packing in the classroom? Generally seems these "rampagers" are the homicide-suicide types and are looking to be taken out of this world. But in your case professor, I hope in the very near future you have the opprotunity to enter a "weapons friendly" classroom of paraoid schizophrenics with their Glock 9 mm guns loaded. Let me know how it works out for you.

I agree that having everyone armed is not the solution to gun violence. However, I really doubt that a no-gun policy is what keeps the level of violence low. I don't think there are a lot of would-be rampagers sitting home thinking, "I'd really LIKE to bring a gun and kill all my professors... oh but there's that no-gun sign. Curses, foiled again."

I just have to point out that as a technology professional that works on campus I cringe whenever somebody says let students and faculty have concealed carry. It's preposterous. We spend hours and hours training folks to use computers and you propose we give them access to something far more lethal like fire-arms as a preventative measure? Seriously? What's next? We have on-campus training in tactical hand-gun engagement? Then there's the issue of crossfire. Most people can't hit with a hanggun reliably under the best of circumstances, let alone in a crowded room with lots of potential for collateral damage. It's just not sane. I'm sorry, but more guns on campus doesn't solve the problem. No, it won't prevent the disturbed from shooting the place up, because you post a sign, but it does prevent one or a few potential tragedies from turning into several because everybody opens fire.

The University of Utah has allowed concealed carry on campus since 2006. According to the anti-CCW posters, this campus should be rife with gun violence because the campus is saturated with guns. Can anybody comment on the number of shootings on the UofUtah campus in tha past four years? Has it been staggeringly higher than the number of shootings on campuses that ban concealed carry?

And did the University of Utah have a successful tactical engagement with zero casualties of a gun-carrying perpertrator since that rule took effect in 2006? I fail to see how making concealed carry available equates to everyone having the discipline to engage an individual without wreaking further havoc? Again, we make people take driving and safety courses to checkout the Univeristy fleet van and you want to let everyone have guns in the hope someone will fire on a perpetrator at some point and will completely miss everyone else in the room...

I think both sides of this argument want to have their cake and eat it too.

1. It's almost certainly true that incidents like the VT massacre, where one person kills a large number of people indiscriminately, would be less likely to happen if there were concealed carry on campus. Even conceding the dangers of crossfire and so on, at least some time could have been bought so that others could get away. Further, there are numerous examples of shootings that were stopped by by an armed bystander (the recent one that comes to mind is the mall shooting in Utah, but more can be found with a quick google search).

2. Nonetheless, more guns on campus would very possibly mean many more smaller, localized incidents. There'd be a greater chance that a gun would be pulled in what otherwise would just be a shoving match or fistfight. The universe is not divided between people who never hurt others and those who premeditate mass murder. There would, very possibly, be more heat-of-the-moment shootings.

What the no-guns-on-campus side has to admit, but usually doesn't, is that by having a policy that is (probably) safer overall, we also increase the risks of bigger massacres when someone really just wants to kill people indiscriminately.

What the concealed-carry people have to admit, but usually don't, is that college is not exactly the ideal environment for responsible gun use! Not when the youth and average alcohol consumption of college students is taken into account.

So the appropriate response to rightwingprofessor's argument, as applied to cases like VT, is not that he's wrong about those kinds of cases, but that those cases are few and far between, and do not justify a policy that would result in more overall danger and death.

Does anyone really want to stand at the front of a class, not knowing which students might be carrying concealed weapons, and engage in a discussion of a truly controversial topic? Perhaps everyone else teaches students who are unfailingly logical, mature, and self-controlled, but I teach students who are, at times, upset, immature, and obviously lacking in self-discipline. I've had a few students get so angry about a test grade that they stomped out of the room. What might happen if such a student had a weapon? Would I become less willing to stand my ground regarding grades? I have to wonder.

"Does anyone really want to stand at the front of a class, not knowing which students might be carrying concealed weapons, and engage in a discussion of a truly controversial topic? What might happen if such a student had a weapon?"

Snwiedmann, are you sure it never happened to you before, now that students are TOLD not to bring guns to schools? Do you have a metal detector on your campuse? What about a knife? It is much easier to conceal than a gun.

There's some pretty good information about this issue at http://www.concealedcampus.org

I would emphasize that in Texas and all other states I'm aware of you have to be 21 and pass state and FBI background checks to get a concealed carry permit. That means that most of the people who would be carrying concealed on campus would be employees, faculty and staff, not students. I've met a lot of people in Texas who have their permits and they are pretty much just average people. I've met a lot of faculty and staff who would be very trustworthy with a concealed weapon and I would have no problem being in a classroom or other college facility with them. I've met a lot of students, particularly seniors and grad students, who would be equally trustworthy with a concealed weapon.

This discussion is not worthy of academics. Allowing concealed carry does not meaen EVERYONE is armed. It means people who passed a background check and some requirement for gun-safety training are allowed to carry. These people essentially never cause any trouble, and I'm happy to lecture in front of a classroom where such people might be carrying. And in case a nutcase comes through the door I sure hope one of my students is carrying and can stop him. Of course I won't need to worry because I woulud also be carrying.

And let's not forget the liberty argument. In order for government to curtail our liberty ( to carry arms for instance) there better be a damn good reason. In this case there is no reason, states that allow concealed carry do not have higher rates of gun violence.

rightwingnutjobprofessor, why don't you produce the evidence to back up your claims and make sure it is relevant evidence. For states that allow concealed carry, how many of them also have universities that allow weapons on campus? If guns aren't allowed on campus then what is the point of your argument. Plus, please produce the evidence of your unstated "greater good" argument. I will tell you right now without a doubt that every year handguns concealed or not, legal or not end up taking far more innocent lives than are ever saved because someone had a gun and used it to protect their life and liberty. But for your precious liberty innocent children can die, great!

#17, if you are interested in how much more often handguns are used in self-defense that in crimes, why don't you start reading
the results of national survey conducted by G. Kleck.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

"There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually."