Just Plain Ruff Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Will it be a deterrent? Probably not. Will it end a rampage sooner? Hopefully yes. but if you look back at the last couple of shootings like this, the rampage is over in less than several minutes and in the end the shooter has taken his own life. I don't think that someone with a gun could get it out quick enough to end a rampage like that.
IUemt Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 but if you look back at the last couple of shootings like this, the rampage is over in less than several minutes and in the end the shooter has taken his own life. I don't think that someone with a gun could get it out quick enough to end a rampage like that. Don't take this the wrong way Ruff, but are you more-or-less advocating the thought that students have to stand by and have nothing to protect themselves or the lives of others?
paramedicmike Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Will it end a rampage sooner? Possibly. But what happens when it doesn't? Then the cops arrive and instead of one nut job walking around with a gun there's one nut job and 20 law abiding citizens legally carrying. How's the cop supposed to determine who's the nut job and who isn't? And then what? Now there's a nut job with a gun out there and a few innocent, law abiding citizens who are dead because the cops couldn't tell who was who and shot the wrong guy. Then suddenly the cops are the bad guys. Or, the attention of the cops is diverted to those who are legally carrying and away from the nut job who's the real threat. There's not an easy answer. The pro-gun side will yell and scream that they're right. The anti-gun lobby will yell and scream that they're right. Everyone has statistics that supports their side. Nobody wins. Do we really have to go down this road again? -be safe
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 you did take it wrong. did you not read my first reply on the subject, I disagreed that it will not curb violence but I also said let em have their guns. I would never advocate that. I'm all for the right to carry. I'm also a realist and we all know that someone out there who is hell bent on causing this type of incident will end it before another student can pull his gun out. let the students have guns and try to finish the violence but more than likely it will be over before the hero can try to finish it themself. I would never advocate that with conceal and carry that students just sit there. Let's get that clear in our heads. But what I also envision is that if the hero does not take out the shooter then the shooter will kill the hero, then will continue to fire into the crowd and kill more people because the hero was playing hero. These incidents turn my stomach everytime it happens and I cry for the victims and I cry for the lost souls and the fact that we don't have laws in place that allow them to protect themselves but let's be real, is it really gonna make a difference to the students who are dead or a difference to their families?
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 but if you look back at the last couple of shootings like this, the rampage is over in less than several minutes and in the end the shooter has taken his own life. I don't think that someone with a gun could get it out quick enough to end a rampage like that. I'm curious, where did you get from what I typed that students should sit back and take getting shot. I never once advocated that. Just not sure where you got that impression?
JPINFV Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 It doesn't take that long to spring into action. The main VT attack lasted 10 minutes, which would be plenty of time for 1 armed student to end/attempt to end the attack. The alternative, though, is fish in a barrel. In reply to your last message: What are the students supposed to do? Charge a gunman with pencils, pens, and text books? Call 911 and pray?
IUemt Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 Will it end a rampage sooner? Possibly. But what happens when it doesn't? Then the cops arrive and instead of one nut job walking around with a gun there's one nut job and 20 law abiding citizens legally carrying. How's the cop supposed to determine who's the nut job and who isn't? And then what? Now there's a nut job with a gun out there and a few innocent, law abiding citizens who are dead because the cops couldn't tell who was who and shot the wrong guy. Then suddenly the cops are the bad guys. Or, the attention of the cops is diverted to those who are legally carrying and away from the nut job who's the real threat. People carry concealed weapons on a daily basis in the general public. I haven't heard of too many instances of this happening. :wink: But you're right - lobbyists ultimately decide the fate of this decision, and unfortunately I don't see this changing any time soon. After VA Tech last year, I read this article about University of Utah students being allowed to carry their personal concealed on campus now after the supreme court struck down the ban in 2006. I just don't understand someone's logic who says, "I'm terrified the student next to me may have a gun!" http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/20/cnnu.guns/index.html
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 well yeah if you take into account the two distinct crime scenes. The one in the dorm and then the one in the class. by my recollection the classroom shooting if I remember right, took less than a minute to go from start to finish. He came out , started shooting and then ended in a short time
IUemt Posted April 16, 2008 Posted April 16, 2008 you did take it wrong. did you not read my first reply on the subject, I disagreed that it will not curb violence but I also said let em have their guns. I read it as sarcasm, sorry - it's hard to interpret* the tone of messages through the internets
Recommended Posts