The latest college mass shooting, in which a former graduate student opened fire in a classroom at Northern Illinois University, killing five, will raise more questions about campus security and gun laws.
Police revealed Friday that the suspect had stopped taking medication (no specifics on what kind) and had become erratic in the days leading up to the shooting.
He bought two of the guns just a week ago. The immediate questions: Did he have a history of depression or other mental problems, as the Virginia Tech shooter did? If so, how was he able to buy guns?
186 Comments
Oh boy, this ought to get Phil Journey’s gun nuts off and ranting
I did see reference to ‘he quit taking his meds’
Too bad there’s so many unarmed people everywhere you go.
I can see it now..another round of knee jerk reaction gun laws. Seems to me if he was going to break some laws–like killing other people–another law or two won’t make a big difference.
See, I could never understand how the Koncealed Karry Koalition was so hung up on hiding their best weapon?
If you really want to ward off criminals, let ‘em see you gun! Let ‘em know you’re packin’ heat and ready to use it if they perturb you!
Don’t *conceal* your power! Show it off!
As much as we dismiss you as powerless if we can’t see your gun, we’ll all come to respect your power if we know you’re armed and dangerous!
So own it!
Realize that your power is that gun in your pocket and let us all know just how powerful you are!
So why don’t you advocate open-carry laws?!
Could it possibly be even you realize if you advocated open-carry rithts to go to your kid’s birthday party, or church services, or a saunter down the mall on a Sunday afternoon… and everyone knew you were staping heat on your hip… they might consider you a bit of a crazy?
Bring your guns anywhere, just let me know you’ve got ‘em.
I’ll probably opt for another place where your guns aren’t as welcome.
And some crazy guy might walk into the room and open fire. If I propose efforts to make it more difficult for crazy guys to get guns, what’s your gripe?
I think all would agree that this is a crazy person issue and not a gun issue.
Randy,
How about the question of, what if the school allowed concealed carry on campus and someone who was armed was able to stop this person from shooting so many people?
He may only have killed 5, but he ended up shooting something like 20 people.
The guy had free reign to kill until swat would have shown up, set up, and found the guy. If he wouldn’t have shot himself he could have killed many more and no one would have/could have stopped him because they were defensless targets at that point.
MonkeyHawk,
Some places do allow open carry and people do just that.
The reasoning for concealed carry is so that the person who is carrying concealed has the advantage.
If the only person carrying a gun has it strapped to his hip then the criminal has the advantage of surprise by hiding his weapon and engaging the good guy at his pleasure.
The guy with the gun on his hip will be the first target of a crazy person or criminal so that they can eliminate the threat.
If the criminal doesn’t know who is armed or if anyone is, then the advantage is with the person armed.
The person carrying concealed now has the choice of how and when to try to stop the bad person for the greatest amount of success.
If you are carrying open, you no longer have the same ability to control the situation and must simply hope that you can do something quick enough or before the bad guy gets you.
Exactly Nathan
Did owning a gun keep people from getting killed back in the old west days? Nope. But more people died. It’s all in how big your gun is, and how good you are at using it.
Suggesting that everyone carry a gun for protection is stupid. The killer is still going to kill. He just might reach over and grab yours to do it with.
how’s this. If he gets a gun, I’ll get a bazooka. If he has a bazooka, I’ll get a bomb.
Arms arms arms….we had the most nukes and Russia kept building more till we had so many they had no useful purpose.
How about we PREVENT people from killing IN THE FIRST PLACE??
This kid has signs and symptoms. We need to enact laws that will allow hospitalization for people before it is too late.
Also, Concealed carry more indirectly benefits everyone, regardless if they carry or not, by giving everyone the assumed possibility of carrying concealed.
If you have to carry in the open, then the criminal knows exactly who is and who is not armed and may then attack those who are not.
Criminals are predators. They look to attack those who are weak. If you forced everyone to carry in the open, you would basically be painting a big target on those who did not as open game for the predators.
Monkeyhawk, I know you were being somewhat facetious, but I’ve felt for years that citzens in the right place should bear and display arms. What’s the old saw, a well-armed society is a polite society? I firmly believe the founding fathers stuck that bit in as insurance against a nut-case government. I’m just not a fervent zealot on the concept. The couple rifles I have are packed away 200 miles from here and haven’t been fired in about 35 years. Don’t realy have the desire or feel the need to have one close, and certainly not a handgun with kids in the vicinity.
So, gun legislation really doesn’t affect me. I can go either way on conceal carry, but wonder ‘what’s the point’? Go ahead an show it. The claim, ‘ya never know who has a gun and who doesn’t’ doesn’t quite cut it with me. You never know who has a claymore strapped to their chest either.
What worries me is the crazies that are so fervently vocal about the gun rights issue. Makes me wonder if they’re just too stupid of a nutjob they can’t figure how to procure their ersatz phallus, or just too craven to slink out of their bunker to get one.
“someone who was armed was able to stop this person from shooting so many people?”
Yeah, I could see how that would play out……
Deranged bad guy appears from behind a curtain and begins opening fire with a shotgun.
CCP holder “A” jumps up to take a shot, and in his haste, accidentally shoots the person sitting in front of him.
CCP holder “B” thinking that “A” is part of the original gunman’s conspiracy, shoots “A.”
Friends of “A” thinking that “B” IS the one that is part of the Columbine-like conspiracy, shoot “B.”
Friends of “A” and “B” begin shooting at one another while the original gunman mows down “C” “D” and “E.”
At the end of the day, there is a bunch of dead people.
The guy with the gun on his hip will be the first target of a crazy person or criminal so that they can eliminate the threat.
“Ok, you 250 people walking around in the mall, don’t move will I check to see who’s carrying the gun so I can shoot him first”
“Oh boy, this ought to get Phil Journey’s gun nuts off and ranting”
“… and everyone knew you were staping heat on your hip”
Gun nuts? I think your nuts for not having one. But you’ll find someone to protect you, won’t you?
And I gotta know what “staping heat” means?
Wow, “Nathan” –
You’ve really thought this through, haven’t you?
What a bizzare sequence of events you’re relying on to justify concealed carry vs. open carry.
Are you really that afraid of life in Kansas?!
Wow, “Nathan.” You’re really afraid of life, aren’t you?
I’ve been in restaurants and bars and fast-food places and church services and have never had to face a nut with a gun… although I realize that restaurants and bars and church services have resulted in some nut shooting up the audience. Actually worrying about that happening seems to me to be a fool’s errand.
Political Mama,
No where are we suggesting everyone be armed. We are asking that the law allow those who wish to be armed to do so with concealed carry.
A criminal is not going to be able to simply “reach over” and take a weapon from someone he doesn’t know has it let alone one that is CONCEALED and he can’t easily grab.
I do agree with your statement that the killer is still going to kill. Duh! Obviously someone didn’t tell this guy he was in a “gun free zone” where guns were not allowed.
However, if someone in that class had been legally carrying concealed they could have stopped this person from shooting or killing as many as he did.
Look at the church shooting in Colorado. It is clear, that having a person carrying concealed saves lives.
WSCLARK-
I understand your aregument. ANd it is one to ponder, however,
“CCP holder “A” jumps up to take a shot, and in his haste, accidentally shoots the person sitting in front of him.
CCP holder “B” thinking that “A” is part of the original gunman’s conspiracy, shoots “A.”
Friends of “A” thinking that “B” IS the one that is part of the Columbine-like conspiracy, shoot “B.”
Friends of “A” and “B” begin shooting at one another while the original gunman mows down “C” “D” and “E.””
has never happened.
But,
“Deranged bad guy appears from behind a curtain and begins opening fire with a shotgun.
At the end of the day, there is a bunch of dead people.”
Has. Okay, to be tchnical, a shotgun ws not used, but you see the point?
“
MonkeyHawk,
I responded to your post in a very reasonable fasion. You reply by mocking me.
I am not afraid of life in Kansas either. I simply choose to not be a sheep. I choose to have the means and ability to protect myself, my family, and others if someone does try to hurt them.
I drive all the time, all over town, and across the country too. I don’t get in accidents and have only been in one serious one. I still wear my seatbelt though. It is not because I am afraid, it is because I am proactive.
I have smoke alarms in my home too. Never ever even knew anyone who had their house burn down. But I still protect myself.
“It is clear, that having a person carrying concealed saves lives.”
The person that ended the Colorado Church nut shooting situation was an armed guard.
Not a CCP holder.
For the record, I am for cc for those who wish it. Except for the few times I have been carrying larger amounts of cash (from a legal business) I would not ever consider it for myself. Too much hassle. and, I do not think it is the panacea for the violence of today’s society either.
I don’t understand the attitude of the educational institutions in this great country we live in. If they keep telling everyone that they are gun free, drug free and so on, that their campuses are safe but supply no means to keep the kids safe from evil. At just what point does everyone step over the dead and accept the retoric. There will be point in time in this country when we will stand up for our kids’ safety or just build more boxes for the crazies to put them in.
Clark, should everyone in the room just let the nut job kill them and hope the police get there before everyone is dead? I for one would rather be proactive and not a defenseless victim waiting inline to be killed.
““Deranged bad guy appears from behind a curtain and begins opening fire with a shotgun.”
It is the underlying cause that needs to be addressed – not merely addressing who has or does not have a gun.
As I stated on the other thread, I don’t have the answers, but I know that more guns is not the answer.
And no guns is not the answer either.
But realistically, the thought that concealed carriers are going to ride to the rescue and save the day is just a fantasy.
WS Clark,
Jeanne Assam was a VOLUNTEER guard for the church with a concealed carry license.
“I for one would rather be proactive and not a defenseless victim waiting inline to be killed.”
I would venture to say that you would be more likely to shoot yourself or another innocent than you would be to disable the perp.
Remember, TRAINED police officers usually miss their targets unless it is at close range, and they are prepared to expect violence. Your average Joe Citizen at school, work or shopping is not expecting to deal with a violent situation.
You can have all the target practice you want, NOTHING is going to prepare the average citizen to deal with a situation like the Omaha Mall or NIU shootings.
Actually,
Several members of my church are talking about doing the same thing. There are those of us who carry concealed and would also be unofficial volunteers to be security as well.
“Jeanne Assam was a VOLUNTEER guard for the church with a concealed carry license.”
She was still a guard, volunteer or not, and she was wearing a uniform – hardly your average Joe Gun Carrier.
And she knew that it was likely that the perp was coming.
As I have said many, many times before, I could truly care less about guns, but it remains, the Knight in Shining Armor scenario is just a fantasy.
“But realistically, the thought that concealed carriers are going to ride to the rescue and save the day is just a fantasy.”
Probably. But perhaps not. CC is just too new to know the real impact. In any case, even if if stops one incident, is it not worth it? Has there not been a hue and cry (and I am not saying from you–I have no idea about your position) “that even if it saves just ONE life, it is worth it? I think it is not the answer either, but I do think it may be part of the bandaid until we can actually do something real, like stopping the dehumanizing of those we oppose, dislike, and distrust, and stopping the mythos and culture of violence pervasive in our society.
WS Clark,
Most of the people I know, who carry concealed, have more training than the average police officer.
Actually, you probably don’t realize just how little firearms training the average Police Officer gets. It is very little. Even when they are given free practice ammo, only a few use it.
Even if the “average joe” is out of practice, his having a gun still gives him some ability to defend himself and others instead of just dying.
Typical left wing liberal sheep mentality.
You would rather line up against the wall and be shot execution style than have an “average joe” with a concealed carry permit be afforded the option to save you because he might not have all the perfect training.
“There are those of us who carry concealed and would also be unofficial volunteers to be security as well.”
I am sure that God would be smiling down on you…..
“You can have all the target practice you want, NOTHING is going to prepare the average citizen to deal with a situation like the Omaha Mall or NIU shootings.”
True statement.
“You can have all the target practice you want, NOTHING is going to prepare the average citizen to deal with a situation like the Omaha Mall or NIU shootings.”
True statement.
WS Clark,
Where do you get that she was wearing a uniform?
Clark, I been shot at and I will tell you there is generally two reactions humans take in that situation. 1. Crippling Fear or 2. Fear and extreme focus. And you are right you cannot fully prepare for that type of situation. But I still prefer the option to defend myself from death.
“You would rather line up against the wall and be shot execution style than have an “average joe” with a concealed carry permit be afforded the option to save you because he might not have all the perfect training.”
Get over your Dirty Harry fantasies, Nathan. You act like a teenaged boy that just discovered that thing is for more than just pissing.
The point is not who has target practice experience, it is who has real world experience in dealing with violent situations.
To paraphrase Bruce Lee, “targets don’t shoot back.”
Christ.
WS Clark,
Serious question:
Would you rather line up on the wall and be shot execution style or have the “average joe” carrying concealed next to you, try to stop the bad guy?
“Where do you get that she was wearing a uniform?”
Saw the interview after the incident.
“But I still prefer the option to defend myself from death.”
I would not want to deny you that option, but CC is NOT going to be the solution for NIU-type situations.
Remember, TRAINED police officers usually miss their targets unless it is at close range, and they are prepared to expect violence. Your average Joe Citizen at school, work or shopping is not expecting to deal with a violent situation
(Visons of Don Knotts in Shakiest Gun and he shakes it apart as he aims)
Ghotiphaze,
I train more than the average Police Officer. Everyone I know who has a concealed carry permit has more time at the range than the average police officer.
Most anyone, who goes out and gets a concealed carry permit, is not simply carrying for the hell of it. We are carrying because we are prepared to deal with a violent situation or at least have the choice to do so.
I remember that ‘real’ tv episode about the robbery. the two guys are less than 5 feet from each other, both fired multiple times at each other, neither was hit.
You throw enough fish in a barrel and you’re going to hit one with every shot. Try to shoot one particular fish in a lake…
“We are carrying because we are prepared to deal with a violent situation”
Right. (Heavy, heavy sarcasm.)
Shooting a target is one thing, shooting another human being, one that is looking to shoot you is another.
As I have stated, on and on and on, ad nauseum, I really don’t care if you have a CCP and you pack a .45 under one arm, a .357 under the other or even if you have a RPG launcher jammed up your butt, it really doesn’t matter to me.
But to think that CC is going to be the answer to NIU-type situations is just naive.
“Try to shoot one particular fish in a lake…”
I remember reading about the homeowner that cornered a burglar in his dinning room and took six shots at him at point blank range – and missed with all six shots.
It happens.
CCP is fine for those that think that it will benefit them, but it ain’t no solution for the whole of society.
We have to do better.
Personally, if I’m ever in that situation, God forbid, I want to be right next to the 1st one shot. Handy-dandy body armor. It amazes me that’s not the first thing people do. Since they’re already dead, and no longer function as a distraction, at least use them for cover.
(ok, it’s a joke, alright!)
“Would you rather line up on the wall and be shot execution style or have the “average joe” carrying concealed next to you, try to stop the bad guy?”
Ridiculous scenario.
It is just as likely that Average Joe would end up shooting me as he would shooting the perp.
Average joe would never make the wall. If he didn’t outright run at the first sign of trouble, he’d be shot the minute his finger flinched.
In the V Tech, Omaha Mall and NIU situations, the gunmen were already predisposed to die. They were planning on dying. They were out to kill as many as they could before they died.
Your average citizen does not go to school or the store thinking about violence and dying.
Advantage = bad guy.
They already KNOW that they are going to die that day. They don’t care. They are not looking to protect themselves.
They have every advantage and none of the disadvantages. What is the worst that can happen for them – they die – and they are already planning that.
When the NIU gunman stopped to reload, why didn’t the students rush the stage?
Because when it comes to fight or flight, it is human nature to flee.
WS Clark,
You serioulsy think that? That you would rather line up and die, like those kids at VT (It is not a ridiculous scenario), than have someone there with a gun to try to stop the bad guy?
Ghotiphaze,
Lets look at this from a math perspective and see if you are any more reasonable.
From many of these mass shootings, we learn a couple of things.
The shooter or shooters are not stopped by the police. They either run out of ammo and kill themselves or they simply kill themselves before they run out of ammo.
So, in VT you have 30 killed and others wounded.
Would you rather have had the gun man stopped after he was only able to kill a few and the good guy accidently killing one or two or just let the gun man kill 30 plus?
WS Clark,
Since you claim to not care about Concealed carry, will you then support concealed carry on campus?
WS Clark,
It is human nature to flee when you don’t have a weapon to match that of the one attacking you.
If I were there or anyone other concealed carry holder, then I would have stopped the shooter far before he even got to killing over 5 people.
So what if the killer is prepared to die? Why not kill him before he is able to kill even more?
Would you rather have had the gun man stopped after he was only able to kill a few and the good guy accidently killing one or two or just let the gun man kill 30 plus?
I would rather not have the guy shaking so badly that not only do the shots do no good, but when he hits the floor the gunman doesn’t have enough ammo for 35, and then 40 because of the next Rambo wannabe.
Political_mama
Posted February 15, 2008 at 2:46 pm | Permalink
This kid has signs and symptoms. We need to enact laws that will allow hospitalization for people before it is too late.
——————————-
That’s right, FORCE more people into mental institutions! HillaryCare!
Another nail in the coffin of Freedom.
Nate, everyone is a supreme Monday morning quarterback.
That’s right, FORCE more people into mental institutions! HillaryCare!
Another nail in the coffin of Freedom
Max, you’re mixing your metaphalucinations
Nathan, you speculate that you or any other concealed carry holder would have stopped the shooter…. Maybe so. Maybe not.
First: would you agree that in order to do so you or any other CC holder would have needed to not be seated in the first row or two when the perp kicked in the door and started firing the shotgun into that area?
Second: would you agree that you would have needed to fire from a position of relative safety, and have a clear shot? I ask this because of the panic that ensued once the first shotgun blast occurred, and while not present, I speculate that it might well have been difficult to get a clear shot off under those circumstances.
The above presume, of course, that you might have been able to get to the weapon that was being carried concealed.
Yes, I’m speculating. So are you.
Ghotiphaze,
How will those 30 killed at VT be a monday morning QB when they are dead?
My point is that having someone, even anyone, with the ability to stop the killer before he kills 30 plus is a good thing.
Somehow, you think that is bad.
I will never understand your reasoning and it appears as if you will never understand mine.
That is why you are and will most likely always be nothing more than a sheep.
I choose to be a sheep dog.
Just practice going BAA and lining up to die with the rest of the sheep.
BAA! BAA!
The gun-banners feign support for open carry, only so they can see who they need to disarm.
Concealed carry is better then open carry for several reasons:
1. Makes it more difficult for someone to steal your gun. If they can’t see it, they can’t steal it.
2. Keeps gun-banners from going into a hysterical white-faced panic attack.
3. Most importantly, keeps the criminals from knowing who does or does not have a gun. A criminal can’t tell for sure if any of those 50 people in the pancake house have a gun to defend themselves. Does he take a chance? THE Deterrent power is stronger when you can’t see and don’t know who is or isn’t carrying.
I really think the criminals who carry guns without a permit, should be required to open carry.
Vaughn,
Im off to work and will answer your questions later.
“That you would rather line up and die, like those kids at VT”
One, the kids at V Tech did not line up and die, they were shot while trying to flee in a panic.
Two, I never said that I would rather “line up.” I said that Average Joe was just as likely to shoot me as the perp.
But no, I would not line up, I just do not live my life in constant fear that someone is going to try to shoot me.
“It is human nature to flee when you don’t have a weapon to match that of the one attacking you.”
Wrong. Self-preservation is a primary emotion, shooting people is not. I don’t think most would compare the size of their weapons with the shooter’s before making a fight or flight decision.
Stated before – I don’t care about you and your guns.
But more guns is not the answer to NIU-type scenarios.
You are just living in a Dirty Harry fantasy world if you think that CC is the answer.
OK, Nathan; I’ll be off for home soon, so will look tomorrow. Have a good evening.
Max, are you twelve years old? Are you capable of discussing an issue like an adult without making juvenile over the top claims that add nothing to the discussion?
Maybe you should find a Hannah Montana board that has posters more in line with your maturity level.
Well, when you characterize people who want to be able to legally carry their firearms as the gang who can’t shoot straight, you shouldn’t be surprised when people take umbrage to it and attack you personally. Many, many people spend as much or more time on the shooting range than your average donut-eating cop does.
Citizens who defend themselves
http://www.kressworks.com/Politics/Gun_Control/dgu/defensive_gun_uses.html
looks like it works for some
These people that go nuts and plan school shootings are nihilists. Essentially there brain is in no mans land. They alienate their selves from soceity, not the other way around.
I didn’t see it repeated in the one article I just read a few minutes ago, but it was stated in a previous article read that this is the fourth “school” shooting in the last month.
How many of those “perps” were legally carrying concealed? Had bought a gun shortly before they went on their shooting spree? Two that I know of: the VT incident and yesterday’s. Anybody else know about the two others?
Many, many people spend as much or more time on the shooting range than your average donut-eating cop does.
Oh, I don’t know about that. I knew a cop (sheriff officer then wpo) who was known to have been nailed for drive by shootings at pop machines. Don’t be fooled that all cops are sane. ;)
RD, good question. I’ve not been able to find the answer myself.
Take that, pop machine, with your evil plots to dispense sugary refreshments everywhere.
Was he carryinga copy of cather in rye?
Was he carryinga copy of cather in rye?
“Many, many people spend as much or more time on the shooting range than your average donut-eating cop does.”
Being able to shoot well at the range does not translate into being able to shoot another human being that is shooting at you.
When I owned a gun, I was a pretty damned good shot.
That doesn’t mean that I would turn into Dirty Harry if faced with a NIU situation.
And you wouldn’t either.
ATF agent Kevin Cronin says the shooter purchased a Remington 12-gauge shotgun and a 9mm Glock from the dealer in Champaign, Ill.
“As far as we know, it was a lawful purchase,” Cronin says, adding that traces are underway on two other handguns — a 9mm SIG Sauer and a .380 High Point.
Littlejohn, the guy was a Sociology major/grad student. The more pertinent question is whether he was carrying a copy of one of Max Weber’s works.
Check the dates on these campus shootings. This problem is escalating. We need to find out why.
List of recent deadly campus shootings
The Associated Press
Fatal shootings at U.S. colleges or universities in recent years:
•Feb. 14, 2008: A former graduate student at Northern Illinois University in Dekalb opens fire in a lecture hall, killing five students and wounding 16 others. He then commits suicide.
•Feb. 8, 2008: Latina Williams, 23, opens fire during an emergency medical technology class at Louisiana Technical College in Baton Rouge, killing Karsheika Graves and Taneshia Butler. She then kills herself.
•Dec. 13, 2007: Two Ph.D. students from India are found shot to death in a home invasion at an apartment on the campus of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge.
•Oct. 1, 2007: University of Memphis football player Taylor Bradford, 21, who had been rumored to have won more than $3,000 at a casino, is fatally shot on campus in a botched robbery. Four men are later charged in the slaying, including one student.
•Sept. 21, 2007: Two students are wounded at a late-night shooting at a campus dining hall at Delaware State University in Dover. Shalita K. Middleton, 17, dies Oct. 23 from her injuries. A student is charged in the shooting.
•April 16, 2007: Cho Seung-Hui, 23, fatally shoots 32 people in a dorm and a classroom at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, then kills himself in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
•April 2, 2007: A 26-year-old researcher at the University of Washington in Seattle is shot to death in her office by her ex-boyfriend. Jonathan Rowan, 41, then kills himself.
•Sept. 2, 2006: Douglas W. Pennington, 49, kills himself and his two sons, Logan P. Pennington, 26, and Benjamin M. Pennington, 24, during a visit to the campus of Shepherd University in Shepherdstown, W.Va.
•May 9, 2003: A 62-year-old man with two handguns and a bulletproof vest fires hundreds of rounds during a seven-hour shooting spree and standoff at a Case Western Reserve University building in Cleveland. One student is killed and two others are wounded. Biswanath Halder, who authorities say was upset because he believed a student hacked into his website, is later sentenced to life in prison.
•Oct. 28, 2002: Failing student and Gulf War veteran Robert Flores, 40, walks into an instructor’s office at the University of Arizona Nursing College in Tucson and fatally shoots her. A few minutes later, armed with five guns, he enters one of his nursing classrooms and kills two more of his instructors before fatally shooting himself.
•Jan. 16, 2002: Graduate student Peter Odighizuwa, 42, recently dismissed from Virginia’s Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, returns to campus and kills the dean, a professor and a student before being tackled by students. The attack also wounds three female students. Odighizuwa is serving six life sentences after pleading guilty.
•May 17, 2001: Donald Cowan, 55, fatally shoots assistant music professor James Holloway at a dorm at Pacific Lutheran University in Parkland, Wash., then turns the gun on himself. He leaves a 16-page suicide note expressing anger at a colleague of Holloway’s whom he dated briefly as a teenager.
•Aug. 28, 2000: James Easton Kelly, 36, a University of Arkansas graduate student recently dropped from a doctoral program after a decade of study and John Locke, 67, the English professor overseeing his coursework, are shot to death in an apparent murder-suicide by Kelly.
•June 28, 2000: Medical resident Dr. Jian Chen kills his supervisor and then himself in his supervisor’s office at the University of Washington in Seattle. Faculty say Chen, 42, was upset he’d be forced to return to China because of his academic shortcomings.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-15-campus-shootings_N.htm?csp=34
WSClark
Posted February 15, 2008 at 4:15 pm | Permalink
“hat doesn’t mean that I would turn into Dirty Harry if faced with a NIU situation.
And you wouldn’t either.”
It also doesn;t mean someone would not.
I hit that nail on the head, didn’t I?
“It also doesn;t mean someone would not.”
I’ll trust my Doc Martens over your Smith and Wesson any day.
RD, from your posted list, I count two, not four. You are correct that there seems to be an escalation, and we should be asking “why”.
BTW, the posting was “school shootings” not “campus shootings”.
WS-
Currently, the argument is rather moot. The one side is of a believe that a cc holder would and could stop such a scenario if they were witness to it. The second, believes or at least states that the cch would eithe be ineffectual, or shoot someone else by mistake. it is ALL speculation. The scenario has yet to be played out. The scenario that has been played out, with devastating results, is the gun free zone killings.
The truth is probably somewhere in between. However true it is that nobody can be prepared for the emotional effect on just such a situation, it is also true that training can and will take over. I have seen it many times with newbies on both fire departments and ems. Especially EMS. There is no training to prepare you for the scene of even one person dying or horribly misfigured in an accident, besides the “horror” of multiple children casualties in a motor vehicle accident. None. However, your training does take over, gives you something to do, and overcomes the disability that might be there, until the scene is over.
Indeed, the training does prepare you for overcoming the scenario, and it not overcoming you
Dennis,
As soon as I read the first news report, I expected to see Nathan posting about CC. It’s inevitable.
Okay, here are the other two school shootings in the past WEEK. No one died in either of these two, and because these were minors, I doubt they were carrying legally.
February 13, 2008
Atlanta’s McNair High School.
The youth was picked up earlier Wednesday for probation violation, said Dale Davis, spokesman for the DeKalb County School System. He was later charged with four counts of aggravated assault. Davis would not release the name of the teen and would not say whether he was a student at McNair High.
The arrest came one day after the shooting of 15-year-old student at the MARTA bus stop, located near the school’s entrance on Bouldercrest and Key roads.
The student’s injuries were not life-threatening.
The earlier shooting involved a 19-year-old standing at the same bus stop Friday night. In that incident, Davis said, students alerted officers at a basketball game inside the school that someone outside had a weapon. As officers approached the bus stop, they heard two or three gunshots.
The victim, who is not a McNair student, suffered non-life threatening injuries.
February 11, 2008
“Memphis Teen Critically Injured In School Shooting”
A 17-year-old high school senior is in critical condition after being shot at Mitchell High School Monday.
Police said the student was in the school cafeteria when the shooter, believed to be an eleventh grader, shot him at least twice.
Yes, VT, you’re right. And that’s “shootings”, not necessarily “killings”, in addition to “school”, not “campus”. :)
Anyway, I did some digging and found the other two, so I didn’t imagine what I read. One never knows…
“Currently, the argument is rather moot.”
The point of my argument is that CCP is not a magic bullet (pun not fully intended.)
To think that a CCP holder is going to Dirty Harry Up and save the day is just foolish and naive. It is a fantasy, one that many CCP holders apparently share. One day, there MAY be a mass shooting that is foiled by a CCP holder, but that fails to address the issue. If it happens, it will just be a fluke, an abberation, an unlikely stroke of luck.
More guns and gunners is not the answer.
Banning guns is not the answer either.
When faced with a problem, reasonable adults look for the root of the problem, not a means of addressing the symptoms of a problem.
WSClark, posted
“When faced with a problem, reasonable adults look for the root of the problem, not a means of addressing the symptoms of a problem.”
Well that’s all well and good but pretty impractical for the average citizen facing an immediate threat. CCL at least allows the RIGHT of the individual to attempt to protect themselves, their family and friends in immediate threat situations.
ansas Residents with a State Concealed Carry License insures those individuals;
1. Have NO felony Convictions.
2. Have NEVER been convicted of domestic violence.
3. Have NO history of mental illness.
4. Have passed a background check and have their fingerprints on file with the KBI.
5. Have passed mandatory STATE training in both the use of a firearm and the applicable law.
Very good people to have around. I shop and eat where there are NO ‘No-Gun’ signs!
Check the dates on these campus shootings. This problem is escalating. We need to find out why.
RD
_______________________________________________
RD, I know why, it is nihilists, whether they know they are nihilists or not, they are the ones that shoot up schools.
“Being able to shoot well at the range does not translate into being able to shoot another human being that is shooting at you.”
You won’t even be able to try if you’re not carrying a weapon. I’m no less prepared to shoot straight than some pimply faced college kid whose clock is sprung because his girlfriend broke up with him or whatever.
Well, I have to agree with Leo Strauss then, that a liberal soceity perpetuates nihilism. Or it may be the people that can’t adapt to soceity, turn into nihilist, and sadly weed themselves out of their pointless existence, while taking good people with them.
“Very good people to have around. I shop and eat where there are NO ‘No-Gun’ signs!”
Good for you. I don’t worry about people shooting me or my family.
I am not paranoid. I don’t have delusions of a Dirty Harry moment. I have no Knight in Shining armor fantasies.
Whatever works for you.
Some of us choose not to live in fear on a daily basis.
“I’m no less prepared to shoot straight than some pimply faced college kid”
Really?
Keep living that Dirty Harry fantasy – it just might come true.
But probably not.
Christ……………………………………
The article did mention “no prior criminal history” and he had a keen interest in sociology, wanted to focus on mental health issues, and enrolled in a course about human behavior and the social environment.
Stop taking his medicine then erratically change his moods indicates a schizophrenia, bipolar disorder.
The weakness in the background checks appears to be once again mental illness history.
The truth is that there is nothing anybody could have done to prevent this. Even if the students were armed to the teeth all they could have done is perhaps minimize the body count. When somebody is willing, ready and able to give up their own lives in order to kill others, there is little that anybody can do to stop them.
Thought both sides would enjoy this video on “gun-free zones.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beUQBXI22CA
Marty, that’s the perfect solution.
Everyone must see the video at your link!
WS –
The “dirty Harry”/ Knight in Shining Armor fantasy is yours, not the typical CA carrier’s that I know. YOU ascribe that ‘fantasy’ to them, and you do so simply to mock what you disagree with.
CC is one thing, and one thing only: a chance to act to protect my, or another’s life, if the SHTF. Remember, when seconds count, police are only minutes away. It is not a magic bullet, it will not solve all the world’s problems. It may or may not be able save my butt if, God forbid, I ever really need it; that depends entirely on the situation. And I’m not impressed with the “trained” officer comparison – you’d be amazed how little “trained” officers actually shoot. Actually, the civilian shooter in defense situations has a significantly higher hit ratio than officers (that speaks to the diferent situations more than anything else, of course). I’ve personally passed officer’s qualifying courses three times (and I’m not a ‘trained officer’. The first time I passed it, I had probably fired less than 200 rounds in my life. It’s simply not that hard.
Most CC holders I know shoot far more than the cops do. They are people you are around, daily, and you don’t even know it. You are in restaurants, shopping centers, parks, etc. with CC holders daily. And note Boxlock’s list above – they are hardly a threat to a soul.
Your scenario where the CC holder shot made the situation worse? Show me one. CC has been law in much of the country for 20 years+ now. If that was a problem, it would have happened – show it to me.
You can’t.
And situations where a weapon has been taken from a CC holder and used against them are simply unknown, as are CC holders going off and harming others. There is a reason 48 states permit CC in one form or another. Your “blood in the streets” scenario simply does not happen.
Open carry? Go ahead, if you like; it’s legal in most of Kansas. But I’ll pass. Open carry makes just makes me a target for thieves or a bad guy, while CC gives me, hopefully, a tactical advantage: surprise. It may be the only advantage I have. I’ll not give it up.
You know all that, of course. You’re a bright guy.
So: How do we lessen the carnage?
Your ’side’ attempts to use tragedies like this to enact more “reasonable” laws which will accomplish nothing. NOTHING would have stopped this shooter except a prepared person capable of defending himself and others in the right place at the right time – and NIU, like most schools, deprives their students of that, mindlessly proclaiming the area a “gun free zone.” How’s that working out?
We know that persons with arms, in the right place at the right time, save lives. We’ve seen it, again and again, just this year. The church in Utah (”but she was a guard in uniform!!” So what? Do you think there is something magic about a uniform?). The off duty officer at the mall.
Yet you ridicule permitting citizens who choose to do so take some responsibility for their own lives and carry a means of defending themselves if the SHTF. Why? Why do you like your victims defenseless?
MH makes his lack of reason known by by the KKK initials. Yea – I should give him any credibility on this issue, why, exactly? He’s shown his stripes – he has no interest in reason; he seeks only to demonize what he disagrees with. Typical of the DemoKratic party of Kompassion (yes, two can play that game).
But you, and your party says you don’t seek to ban guns. As to your party, it’s simple: I DON’T BELIEVE THEM. Actions speak otherwise. Your response to these tragedies is always the same: more restrictions, more “commonsense” laws. They will fail, and the same suspects will be back with another “commonsense” proposal. It’s the appearance of doing something, the appearance of caring, but in actuality, it’s just the same old agenda. Insanity is sometimes defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result – well there ya go. Let’s just pass another gun law on top of the thousands now in place. “But THIS one will make a difference.” Riiight. Many in your party really don’t care to stop the carnage – they have another agenda in mind, and the carnage assists that agenda.
And yes, that’s a terrible accusaiont to make. But it’s hard to come up with a different rationale to explain the actions of the Hillary/Shumer/Feinstein/Brady/VPC crowd.
And I think at this point I’ve said all I intend to say. I’ve rambled enough. I may respond to persons who respond in good faith; but I’ll ignore those who simply mock what they cannot understand.
Boxlock,
I asked on the other thread, and I’ll ask again here, only because I don’t know the answer and maybe you or someone else does. I am NOT trying to start a fight.
3. Have NO history of mental illness.
How is the history determined?
What is considered “mental illness”?
And one more…
2. Have NEVER been convicted of domestic violence.
That’s “convincted”, correct? If there’s no arrest, is there a record? Lots of domestic violence calls never result in legal proceedings.
I think we need a concealed sword law. Neosavage sword fights. Nothing like watching an arm or a leg detached from some joker. Maybe even an Olympic event.
Not sure why all are questioning Nathan’s prowess with weapons. He is a firearms master with the Marine Corp, combat and urban combat trained.
I couldn’t think of a better person to have watching my back than Nathan.
WSClark, Posted February 15, 2008 at 5:15 pm
““Very good people to have around. I shop and eat where there are NO ‘No-Gun’ signs!”
Good for you. I don’t worry about people shooting me or my family.
I am not paranoid. I don’t have delusions of a Dirty Harry moment. I have no Knight in Shining armor fantasies.
Whatever works for you.
Some of us choose not to live in fear on a daily basis.”
Well good for you WSClark!
Do you not carry life insurance because you are not afraid of dieing? Do not have a fire extinguisher around because you are not afraid of a fire. How about a bicycle or motorcycle helmet if you ride because you aren’t planning on having an accident. This list could go on ad infinitum.
CCL holders don’t live in fear either, but they have made a commitment to take on the personal responsibility of protecting themselves and their families. Just because you don’t fear violence, and I don’t either, doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
CCL holders have no “delusions of a Dirty Harry moment”, or “Knight in Shining armor fantasies”. What they have is the intelligence to know by simple observation that bad things happen and they will take the trouble time and expense to prepare. Obviously something you are not willing to do and ridicule in others. Wonder why that is WS, maybe you know you’re not up to it, uh?
RD, from the other post;
It has in the past required a legal proceeding, a legal commitment, for it to show up in the background checks done by the state CCL licensing agencies, ie the Kansas Attorney Generals Office.
After the campus shooting at Virginia Tech measures are, to my understanding, in place to have access to an applicants medical history for that determination as well.
The licensing authority has the latitude of determination based on diagnosis.
From the KS Attorney Generals website on CCL.
“No person ordered by the court to receive
treatment for mental illness or alcohol/
substance abuse is allowed to have a concealed
carry license unless the person has a certificate
issued by a court, at least five (5) years prior to the date of application, restoring the applicant’s ability to possess a firearm;”
So that includes all those who even voluntarily submit to undergo treatment as a result of any court action including DUI, which is the norm, not the exception.
Political Mom wrote:
This kid has signs and symptoms. We need to enact laws that will allow hospitalization for people before it is too late.
So are you saying polmom that we should be forcing people into hospitalization?
Now the whole idea of MORE mental health may make your liberal guilt feel better but ask ANY mental health provider or police officer and they will tell you that you could put a mental health care facility on every corner and put medication dispensers on every corner and NONE of it will make a difference as long as the patient wants to walk on by.
“When faced with a problem, reasonable adults look for the root of the problem, not a means of addressing the symptoms of a problem.”
Seems like a reasonable thought out statement Clark. The problem in this case is, however, some nut walking in and killing defenseless civilians.
So, the key to finding the solution to any problem is the ability to define the problem. In this case if you define the root cause of the problem as the ability of a nut to get a gun, then the solution would be to ensure that nuts aren’t allowed guns.
You seem to dismiss the symptoms. In this case, the symptom of the problem is a bunch of dead people. It might be helpful to reevaluate your approach. In some cases it is mandatory to address the symptoms before finding a solution to the problem!
If you are having a heart attack, the root cause might be the fact that you like rib eye steaks with butter on them. Would your immediate solution be to go to a vegetarian restaurant and order heart friendly items from the menu?
When I define the problem in Illinois, I don’t see a lack of understanding and insufficient restrictions on the ability to obtain a gun. I see an idiot killing defenseless people. The are defenseless because they have obeyed the law. Because they are law abiding citizens they did not have the option of self defense against an armed crazy man. The law that does not allow a law abiding citizen the right to protect themselvse is the problem.
Now if I’m wrong, should your house catch on fire some day (merely the symptom of faulty wiring) I would expect you to immediately set down and GOOGLE the Sedgwick County wiring codes and try to determine how to make them more responsive to your problem. For heaven’s sake don’t try to save your family and dog, don’t call the fire department, just set in your little living room and address the root cause!
Good point Nathan and I think people who have a concealed permit should be better trained and back gound checks for depression and medication. a 8hour course in some states is a laugh.
I don’t care if you have a permit. your worthless to me and others if you can not handle the gun, shoot it properly and be able to hit the perp. I see many who do not know their weapon..hell, if they have to use it is it on safety, is it racked and ready and can you use it properly without hurting innocent people?
When you have to pull your weapon, can you deal with the dry mouth, increase pulse and the knot in your stomach and the rush of the pounding in your head. If not..leave it at home cowboy.
WSClark
..you need to get your head out of your butt when commenting on the Colorado shooting. She was not wearing a uniform, she was carrying and concealed. I have partner who is a SWAT sniper and he took out a rapist holding a 8 year old girl with a gun to her head from 200 yards. News people asked how much he practices and he said I fire 5000 rounds a year through my weapon. Thats why he made the kill. Your average beat cop has to qualify 1 time per year and most are better writing speeding tickets than practicing with their side arm. Practice…practice
Hopefully anti gun clowns like you will get through life okay.
Regards
In KC, MO they recently allotted the police officers 100 rounds a month to practice once a month on their own time. Less than 10% of the officers used their monthly allotment.
I go through several thousand rounds a year. Could I kill somebody if I had to? Hell, I don’t know. I’d like to think I’m ready to do what ever is required to protect my family, but I don’t know.
I do know that not being prepared and trained is not an option.
Nathan is a Marine. He is a battle tested Marine. He is a marksman instructor in the Marine Corps. He is a range safety director in the Marine Corps. If I had to choose between him and any policeman I know to do the right thing to protect me and mine I would pick him any time.
The class I took to satisfy the requirement for my CCH was a cross section of society. Couple of bikers, a few businessmen, young men, old men, a few ladies. It wuld be hard to classify them as gun nuts or to put them into some preconceived category. Just people that wanted the right to protect themselves.
CC laws will not make a difference in our society, violence and guns are so accepted in America, it doesn’t matter how many people are carrying guns, because the shootings by the deranged will continue. CC laws are not going to really protect anyone from someone who is hell bent on taking out as many as possible before he blows his own head off.
Address the underlying problems of our culture’s desensitization to violence, the culture of fear and paranoia we live in that’s perpetrated by the media, and the easy access to guns…then maybe we could make a difference, but not until then.
Nathan wrote earlier >>>>
“Most anyone, who goes out and gets a concealed carry permit, is not simply carrying for the hell of it. We are carrying because we are prepared to deal with a violent situation or at least have the choice to do so.”
So, Nathan, do you have this personal self-image of you and other CC folks being this sort of “invisible” vigilante police squad of highly trained shooters, even more than the Police Dept… Who are just out doing your thing, but all the while prepared to jump in and defend the rest of the defenseless population??
Is that what you are REALLY doing???
If not, fine… BUT…That is most definitely what your post earlier LOOKS like you are saying…
Hank says >>>>
Nathan is a Marine. He is a battle tested Marine. He is a marksman instructor in the Marine Corps. He is a range safety director in the Marine Corps. If I had to choose between him and any policeman I know to do the right thing to protect me and mine I would pick him any time.
IF that is all true, and I have no reason to believe otherwise, THEN, I would highly suggest Nathan, the battle tested Marine Marksman instructor, apply SOON to either the Wichita PD Academy, OR to the Kansas Highway Patrol Academy… Perhaps we need more firearm trained police officers…
What are the consequences if a person with a CCL is found to be carrying a weapon in a mall that says no guns and some one rats him / her out to security folks?
Hank — How many rounds of ammo would you guess the AVERAGE CC permit holder fires per year?? The AVERAGE permit holder…
And please explain how firing rounds on a shooting range prepares a individual for a shooting encounter with a real live human being??
I am a little confused by that concept… In my younger years, I used to be half way proficient in skeet shooting… But, come Fall, and hunting season, I found it MOST difficult to shoot Bambi, or Bambi’s mama…
Ken — My thinking is that person would be in violation of some sort of law… might get a fine, I doubt any jail time… not in Kansas at least…
Nathan
Posted February 15, 2008 at 3:50 pm | Permalink
Ghotiphaze,
My point is that having someone, even anyone, with the ability to stop the killer before he kills 30 plus is a good thing.
Somehow, you think that is bad.
I will never understand your reasoning and it appears as if you will never understand mine.
That is why you are and will most likely always be nothing more than a sheep.
I choose to be a sheep dog.
Just practice going BAA and lining up to die with the rest of the sheep.
BAA! BAA!”
Saints be praised our salvation is here — quick every one line up behind our big bad part time Marine he’ll protect us BAAA BAAA
I wonder if there were any CC folks at any of the sights of the shootings — especially the malls — that bolted –
“Address the underlying problems of our culture’s desensitization to violence, the culture of fear and paranoia we live in that’s perpetrated by the media, and the easy access to guns…then maybe we could make a difference, but not until then.”
Dave Grossman, Nathan & Hank’s hero agrees with you (and not them):
http://mwkworks.com/onsheepwolvesandsheepdogs.html
But of course, they don’t get that. Big surprise there…
Amazing how they disappear… hit and run posters… most intriguing…
The gunners really crack me up – that is really funny shit.
There are too many stupid and deliberately misinterpreted comments to address, but……..
The language of the gunners here suggest that they DO have Knight in Shining Armor and Dirty Harry fantasies. It suggests that they DO feel that guns are the answer. It does suggest that they would rather consider the symptoms and not the problems.
As I have stated over and over again, more guns is not the solution and neither is banning all guns.
Perhaps the gunners might want to consider that the possibility of LESS violence may actually help the situation.
And how we get to a LESS violent society may just be the best avenue to prevent more NIU situations.
“Hopefully anti gun clowns like you will get through life okay.”
Get a life Juan, I am not anti-gun and have said so many, many times.
But to think that more guns is the answer is just flat out stupid, even for you.
And stop making up stupid, fantasy stories, it just makes your gun fantasies more apparent.
The smaller the cheney they have, the bigger the gun they want.
Vaughn,
No I wouldn’t agree on your first point. The problem in most of these discussions, is that most times, those who don’t agree with CC always want to introuduce very specific situations in which they know things will not work or may not work.
I would agree that if you were carrying concealed and were one of the first targeted than you probably wouldn’t have had a chance. So what?
The point is that allowing people to carry concealed increases the odds that the bad guy will be stopped before he is able to kill more. Will it always work? No. Will there always be someone there in every situation? Probably not. It is about giving those individuals who choose to do so the ability to defend themselves and others if they choose to do so. This will naturally make everyone more safe as well.
On your second point, of course you would need a clear shot. I don’t think I would ever recommend just firing blindly at a target in an area like that. Perhaps in some other situation where cover fire was needed… but that is completely off topic.
Once again, so what? So what if it might be difficult to get a shot off? Once again, would it be better or worse to at least have the possibility of stopping the bad guy or none at all?
Of course it is all speculation. That is exactly what happens in these very specific arguments. That is exactly why those who don’t agree with concealed carry will try to make the argument as specific as possible to inturn make everything just speculation.
I deal in principle, possibility, and odds. This is about giving people a fighting chance.
Now, would you agree that having some random person in the classroom would have possibly reduced the number of those killed in these types of shootings?
What if a young man was carrying concealed and was able to stop the shooter before he was able to shoot over 20 people?
Instead of thinking of every possible thing that could go wrong or prevent the concealed carry holder from shooting the bad guy, why not think of the possibility that the concealed carry holder could end things before they got worse?
It doesn’t take that long to draw a concealed weapon. I keep mine in a holster on my hip. All it takes is a quick motion of pulling my shirt up and drawing the gun.
It is some common misconception that it is both hard to draw a concealed weapon yet so easy for a bad guy to take it from someone. In one argument opponents will say it could be taken away, in the next they will say it will be too hard to draw.
Quite frankly, most of the people making those arguments have no idea what they are talking about. I have been handling weapons most of my life. I teach tactics with weapons to Marines. I practice shooting at least once a month. When you make those types of arguments it is very obvious to me that you have either never handled a firearm or have never carry concealed.
So you can say I am speculating all you want.
I ask you this final question:
If you were in some place where a shooter just started shooting people would you rather have no one carrying concealed or someone like me there with the possibility that I would be able to stop that shooter before he killed you and your entire family? Or… would you like to be carrying concealed so you could stop that person from killing your family?
Jwayne,
If you were in that classroom, would you rather just die like the rest of the sheep or have a sheepdog like me there to protect you?
It is still absolutely amazing to me, that you people have no regards for defending yourselves or your family.
Would you even try to stop someone from killing your wife, kids, parents or would you just sit there and die like a sheep… maybe try to run away in the hopes that you wont get shot in the back?
WS Clark,
That is obviously a huge difference between you and I.
When I hear gun fire, someone in trouble, or someone in need of help, I will run towards them and help. I don’t plan on running away.
You might trust your shoes more than someones gun, but who cares about all the other people in there getting killed who can’t run away? Obviously not you.
WS Clark,
Also, upon further review my initial assumption was correct.
Jeanne Assam, the lasy who stopped the killer in Colorado, was wearing no uniform and was legally carrying concealed. She was a volunteer security guard though.
So you were wrong on both counts by saying she was in uniform and not carrying concealed.
Steven,
Did you even read the article you linked?
I am just wondering, that if you did, how you could come to the conclusion that someone he disagrees with my fahter and I?
That is where I get my calling people sheep and myself a sheepdog from.
This is mostly a response to WSClark, but is being made in general.
This debate is getting stupid. I advocate carrying concealed, but there are some serious caveats there.
I served four years in the Marine Corps (LCpl / 0844 FDC / 5/14), worked in a gun store for more than a year, and carried when I lived in Arizona, so this is coming from what experience I have.
In general, a trained marksman loses up to 85% of their shooting ability off of their best on the range when in a live-fire combat situation. This is true across the board, for military, police, or citizens. Innocents and bystanders can and do get shot when the police intervene against an armed suspect with some regularity. It happens.
Experience is no help here. The fact is that there are no very experienced pistol gunfighters anywhere in the world, even among police. First of all, less than 15% of police ever fire their weapons in the line of duty. Secondly, a pistol is a defensive weapon, used as a last resort to defend against unexpected lethal force. Anyone who has access to a long gun before a gunfight will go for it. A pistol gunfight is simply too rare and dangerous an event for anyone to develop much experience.
The solution to this is sustained and realistic training, and, more generally, taking very seriously the responsibility that comes with the decision to carry. That means making the decision that you are prepared to kill someone if and when they credibly threaten you or someone else with death or serious harm. Rigorous training (train as you fight, fight as you train) and weapons familiarization should start before anyone carries or receives a CCW, and should be kept up (at least 2-4 times a year) for anyone who carries.
Given good training, and a responsible and realistic mindset, the odds are actually pretty reasonable for a concealed carrier to effectively defend themselves and others, particularly given the ‘active shooter’ scenario and the likely alternative of many casualties. The point of training, and of a killer mindset, is that you have drilled down the actions you need to take to respond effectively, and you have the full and firm intent to kill as soon as you clear the leather. Things certainly are more promising under such circumstances than the usual situation in most of these mass shootings, when it turns into one gunman and a whole lot of fish in the barrel.
Carrying concealed is an effective response in the hands of an effective combat shooter. The issue is that becoming an effective combat shooter requires an ongoing commitment and responsibility that probably exceeds the ability of most people. If you want to carry concealed, you should do three things: a) train regularly and realistically, b) take the responsibility that comes with carrying, and that comes with potentially having to take a human life and all the dire personal and psychological consequences that comes with that, even under the best and most justifiable of circumstances, and c) have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
“Tom” –
“…and c) have a plan to kill everyone you meet.”
You’re right, of course, but a) and b) aren’t quite as profound. Regular, realistic training and responibility are the only things I want from anyone who’s holding a firearm.
Boxlock was kind enough to post the 5 things stated in the Kansas CCL that are checked and to answer my questions about them, or at least to attempt to answer as best he could. I’d asked about the one below.
3. Have NO history of mental illness.
No one here is able to define “mental illness”. There seems to be no definition by the State, except when an individual is court ordered to receive treatment.
As I understand it, Illinois is not a CC state, yet even if it was, the young man who took a gun into an auditorium at NIU probably would still have been able to buy two of the guns he used in the week(s) before the shooting.
This was obviously a distrubed young man.
A former employee at a Chicago psychiatric treatment center said Kazmierczak was placed there after high school by his parents. She said he used to cut himself, and had resisted taking his medications.
He also had a short-lived stint as a prison guard that ended abruptly when he didn’t show up for work. He was in the Army for about six months in 2001-02, but he told a friend he’d gotten a psychological discharge.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080216/ap_on_re_us/niu_shooting_143;_ylt=AunEzV_tq0MYgqPceI_pYMkL1vAI
or
http://tinyurl.com/33y72b
What the NRA says must be true: “Guns don’t kill people, people do.”
Does this mean we should have no laws regarding gun ownership? That some of the “rules” already on the books should be tightened? That we should allow guns in some areas (colleges), but not in others? That there should be a Federal CCL that all states must follow?
If only Nathan could clone himself and position himself in every school classroom, cafeteria, gymnasium, campus, public eating establishment, living room, kitchen, bedroom, or any other place someone might draw a gun and shoot someone else, maybe we could feel safer. Until then, let’s just let anyone who “passes” the test buy a gun and use it when the mood strikes.
This is not the first school shooting involving antidepressant use or antidepressant withdrawal.
Go to: http://www.SSRIstories.com for a complete list of 29 school shootings, plus over 500 murders and almost 200 murder-suicides that involved antidepressants, especially the SSRI antidepressants. The full media article is available on each case.
A National Tragedy.
There seems to me to be a common thread in this discussion. Those against CCL, and encouraging more restrictive gun laws, also place their confidence in and want others to take the complete responsibility of protecting them. Same for many social questions arising here. They totally place their confidence in the government, the police or other public entities instead of wanting to take much personal responsibly themselves, and they resent others who accept personal responsibility for at least some of these things . Seems they fail to realize that those entities are simply people too, far from infallible, and many times not truly acting in a fiduciary capacity or the best interest of those they are supposed to be acting on behalf of. Government is fine as far as it goes, it does not, can not and will not ever replace an individuals own involvement in any of this.
When will otherwise rational people figure out that innocent, law-abiding people have a human right to carry guns for the protection of themselves and others?
How many people have died now, over the past few decades, in incidents like this? How many could have been spared if one of the ‘good guys’ had had the means to shoot back? How many of these shooters would have even attempted their crime of they knew somebody could shoot back at them?
Darlene,
I haven’t checked out your link, but from your comment, I can’t interpret if you’re for the use of anti-depressants or against. If against, what would be your chosen method of dealing with this illness?
When will otherwise rational people figure out that innocent, law-abiding people have a human right to carry guns for the protection of themselves and others?
Obviously the recent shooters were determined by someone to be rational people. Under the law, they were sold weapons. Are you able to tell by looking at someone that s/he is rational or irrantional? Just where do you draw the line? If, even in the Kansas CCL, a person must be determined mentally ill BY THE COURT, how is that working out, considering most states probably use the same criteria?
Isn’t “rational” subjective? Don’t we prove that daily on this little blog? Even “innocent,” and “law-abiding” seems to depend on who is making the determination.
We’ve been arguing for months over whether bushco is or isn’t law-abiding, rational, innocent or guilty. Same arguments for Kline / Tiller, Libby (include here cheney, rove…), Clinton(s), many others I don’t want to remember.
Northern Illinois University Police Chief Donald Grady said, this a direct quote:
“At one time I was very against arming teachers or allowing qualified students to carry on campus. I’m not any more. These maniacs go to those schools KNOWING that their’s will be the only gun there – until police arrive. And that can take minutes.
If you know anything about guns, or ever fire on a range, take any semi-automatic pistol with, say, two extra loaded magazines, and see how long it will take you to fire every single round in those magazines. It doesn’t take but a few seconds. Then imagine firing into a crowded room filled with unarmed people.
Like shooting fish in a barrel.
This one, like some others before him, even stopped to reload. One gun. That’s all it would have taken. But that campus, like all the others, is a “gun free zone”.
To everyone except the killer.”
Hum,and that from the top law enforcement officer responsible for the campus, and one of the group you anti-CCL/anti gun folks so completely place your confidence in.
“Really?
Keep living that Dirty Harry fantasy – it just might come true.
But probably not.
Christ……………………………………”
I love how your responses are completely out of proportion with what’s being said to you. Wanting the ability to be able to protect yourself and others from random nutjobs who start shooting does not equate to what you refer to as a dirty harry fantasy, any more than learning cpr equates to wanting to be Marcus Welby.
“After all of this carnage, how stupid does one have to be to avoid seeing that it is the “gun-free zones” that are the problem? Almost without exception, these multiple victim psycho shootings take place in “gun-free zones.” How slow on the uptake does one need to be to not see this? How deeply brainwashed with the nanny state dogma does one have to be in order to cling to the delusion that “gun-free zones” do anything but draw maniacs to them like moths to a flame?
We are not advocating that every college freshman show up for orientation with a laptop, a semi-auto pistol and 250 rounds of ammunition. That is absurd. That is the caricature of our position that the gun prohibitionists try to hang in the air whenever we criticize their utter failure known as the “gun-free zone.” They know they have failed, but instead of discussing the issue intelligently they move to the reduction to the absurd because they know how quickly the flaws in their logic will be revealed in the light of rational analysis.
We advocate the complete abolition of gun free zones. Law-abiding adults have a natural right to self-defense regardless of where they are, be it church, shopping mall, school or any other public place. Everybody and their brother does not need to be armed, just remove the advertisement that this is one place where a psychopath can be absolutely guaranteed to meet no resistance. It’s simple. Not only do “gun-free zones” not work, they actual have the opposite effect. They draw murderous maniacs like a magnet.”
Syd at Front sight press
Heckler,
You have a misleading ‘nic’ as far as I’m concerned.
You don’t ‘heckle’ me in the least. And in fact I agree with you 100%.
Though you contribute often, maybe not often enough.
Good Post!
Good point Heckler, when is the last time you saw a crazed gunman attack a Police station full of armed police officers?
Suicide by cop…
Box
Heckler, intentional double entendre. Years ago when thinking up a nick for an online forum I had an HK91 sitting next to my desk. I picked a nick I could remember, something to do with guns. (Heckler and Koch)
Nathan,
You obviously missed my point and that is, neither more guns is the answer nor is it banning all guns.
Further, I have said repeatedly that I really don’t care about CCP and gunners in general.
I don’t care. Damn it, I just don’t care.
But to suggest that even part of the answer to NIU-type situations is arming everyone or most everyone is just plain foolish.
And……………………………
“When I hear gun fire, someone in trouble, or someone in need of help, I will run towards them and help. I don’t plan on running away.”
Helping people – I do it all the time. First aid, water safety, assistance, etc.
Gunfire? I have a family, three children, two grandchildren, many, many brothers, sisters, nieces and nephews.
My FIRST responsibility is to my family and part of that is staying alive. If my family was in direct danger, you can damn well bet that I would deal with that directly, but I am not going to run towards gunfire unless their lives are dependent on my taking that action.
In my world, my family is first and foremost.
Heckler,
As a firearms enthusiast you can undoubtedly guess what ‘Boxlock’ refers to.
‘Boxlock’, the Anson & Deeley Boxlock Action dating to 1875. Conservative mechanically, beautifully and straight forwardly functional and reliable. Hasn’t really been improved on for 130+ years. Characteristics I would like to emulate.
Hope you still have the H&K.
“Characteristics I would like to emulate.”
I don’t think you’ll make it to 130 Box, but the firearm sounds interesting.
Oh! Yeah that is right, I ACTUALLY have an appreciation for fine workmanship and mechanical excellence.
I’ll have to visit the Google to look it up.
WSClark,
You’re right, I don’t think I’ll make it to 130, something you are probably quite relieved about, ha.
For what it’s worth I’m am glad you “have an appreciation for fine workmanship and mechanical excellence”, it give us at least something in common that maybe we can go forward on in understanding our obviously different points of view on something.
Thanks for your comment. Here is a link to a quick description of the A&D Boxlock.
Link: http://www.sidebysideshotgun.com/articles/anson_deeley_article.html
Funny, it just Google the exact same article, Box.
Years ago, my father had a similar shotgun, double barrel, breach load (if that is the correct description.) I am sure that it wasn’t Anson & Deeley. He bought it pre-war when he worked for a hardware chain in Detroit.
Unfortunately, he gave it away, along with a real nice Remington 30.06. This was about 1985 or so, when he and my mother retired to Florida.
When I found out that he had just given them away, I wasn’t a real happy camper.
WSClark,
Your father’s shotgun well may have been a A&D Boxlock. The term describes the action style not the maker of the shotgun. When the patent ran out companies all over the world copied and incorporated them into their product. I wish you still had his firearms, they are wonderful remembrances.
I think the reason I am such a firearms/reloading/hunting enthusiast is a throw back to the excitement and pride I had when my father would take me hunting with my uncles and older cousins of which I had many. I learned a great deal about responsibility and was punished severely yet lovingly when I failed to live up to those responsibilities given to my by those men. Maybe that’s the reason I am so fiercely independent and conservative both politically and socially.
Well, enough of that, got’a run, but I’m am glad we have finally conversed on a more pleasant subject in less confrontational terms.
Boxlock
Posted February 16, 2008 at 9:22 am | Permalink
There seems to me to be a common thread in this discussion.
——————————————-
Excellent observation Boxlock!
And the two groups you identify tend to split in the same manner on just about every other issue besides gun control.
There are those who want Government to take over complete responsibility for individuals VS those who want complete responsibility for themselves – and the Freedom that comes with self-reliance.
And this is why you NEVER hear Democrats proclaiming FREEDOM anymore.
You don’t hear about Individual Rights, you hear about Collective Rights.
WS Clark,
For someone who seems to want to clarify your stance as if I am not getting the point, you sure do love to completely misconstrue others.
No where have I made the argument that we should arm most everyone or everyone.
My argument is that we should allow concealed carry on campus by those who wish to do so. (And have passed the requirements by law to do so)
Once again, you say you simply don’t care. So does that mean you don’t care if we allow concealed carry on campus and will either: Support concealed carry or at least not oppose it?
Also, you keep talking about you obligation to your family. So what exactly would you do if someone started shooting? Hope that you could get your entire family to run away fast enough?
I think Clark would just Blog the attacker to death!
“My argument is that we should allow concealed carry on campus by those who wish to do so. (And have passed the requirements by law to do so)”
Then contract your representatives to get the ban on on campus guns repealed.
“So what exactly would you do if someone started shooting?”
Put my body between them and the shooter.
“Support concealed carry or at least not oppose it?”
Will not oppose – I don’t think it will do a damned bit of good, but I have no opposition.
I do have an opposition to doing away with “no gun zones” and that is, a private businesses should have the right to demand that no guns be allowed.
Just as I feel that a private business should have the choice to allow smoking or not.
The operative word is private.
Like I said, Nathan, CCP? Go for it. Buy whatever gun you like? Go for it.
It really makes no difference to me.
But we still have to determine just what the Hell is going wrong that so many have chosen a path of murder – suicide.
That was my original point.
“I think Clark would just Blog the attacker to death!”
Max, work on that humor aspect – you still haven’t made it up to the fourth grade.
Ouch! Another Blog dagger from Clark.
WSClark
Posted February 15, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Permalink
“Try to shoot one particular fish in a lake…”
I remember reading about the homeowner that cornered a burglar in his dinning room and took six shots at him at point blank range – and missed with all six shots.
It happens.
CCP is fine for those that think that it will benefit them, but it ain’t no solution for the whole of society.
We have to do better.
——————————————–
Dang right we have to do better.
Glock 17 = 19 + 1 rounds of 9mm
Glock 22 = 17 + 1 rounds of 40 S&W
Springfield 45 XD = 13+ 1 rounds of 45
You should be used to it by now, Max. You ought to have calluses since you get your behind kicked on the Blog so often.
I have a question for those who conceal carry.
Answer honestly.
Do you respect the no carry zones now?
Be honest.
And, if you are currently breaking the law, what sort of message should others take from that?
JR,
First, do you think people are going to admit to breaking the law?
I respect those who post the signs properly.
Also, there are times where I weigh my safety and means to protect myself as being over the law.
The message you should take from that is that I believe in being able to protect myself reagardless of some anti-gun liberal laws which might prevent me from doing so.
It is a matter of the cost/benefit ratio.
“Springfield 45 XD = 13+ 1 rounds of 45″
If you miss six shots at point blank range, shooting at a cornered target, perhaps you need to forget about the gun and get a baseball bat.
“The message you should take from that is that I believe in being able to protect myself reagardless of some anti-gun liberal laws which might prevent me from doing so.”
You are violating the rights of the owner of the business – it is THEIR choice to ban guns on THEIR property.
It is not a “anti-gun liberal” law.
Don’t you respect the rights of property owners?
WS Clark,
Did you skip over this sentence, completely ignore it, or can you simply not read?
“I respect those who post the signs properly.”
Nope, and I did read this one…………..
“Also, there are times where I weigh my safety and means to protect myself as being over the law.”
……………as being over the law, or commonly referred to as putting yourself ABOVE the law.
And, Nathan, phuck you.
“or can you simply not read?”
You whine about the lack of civility and respect on the blog and then you throw out a piece of shit like that?
WS Clark,
I only said that because you seem to have this constant ability to always misconstrue what I am saying.
It was plain as day that I just post:
“I respect those who post properly.”
Yet you then start acting like I don’t respect peoples property owner rights.
This is not the first time you have done this in this argument.
Just like how you keep saying the solution is not to arm everyone or most everyone. When have I argued it was?
And don’t act like I am the one who even started to be mean in this thread. I have sat through you constant posts of dirty harry fantasy, calling me a teenage boy with gun fantasies, saying God would be smiling on me…
This is about the most mean thing I have said to you in this thread and now you start crying.
Those gun free zones are always respected.
They work every time.
No one can cross that line with a firearm.
And no one can carry a concealed weapon without a permit to carry.
“This is about the most mean thing I have said to you in this thread and now you start crying.”
Blow it out your fleetwood, Nathan. Everytime I think that you are starting to mature a little bit, you prove once again that you are mentally and emotionally at a seventh grade level.
But, addressing the point at hand……………
You stated……………..
“Also, there are times where I weigh my safety and means to protect myself as being over the law.”
So, does that mean that you at times ignore the law or does it mean that you at times ignore the law.
I thought all you Republicans were all about the Rule of Law.
When did that change?
“Do you respect the no carry zones now?”
I do.
Though I try to avoid public places and private business where there are no gun signs as I feel they are an advertisement for crazies that there are defenseless people there.
I once ignored one though. The Marriott Hotel here in Wichita. No gun sign on the front door main entrance, but once inside and way back in the convention/meeting rooms area I noticed one on the back door. Hum, what do I do now. I ignored it. Later I called the Kansas Attorney Generals office and ‘turned myself in’, even identifying myself by name and CCL number first thing. I ask what I should have done and if I could have been prosecuted. I was told I didn’t have to do anything, they would never prosecute me as the building was not properly posted and if the establishment had tried they would have a very difficult time as the AG’s office, if subpoenaed, would support my side. Now if they ask me to leave I would be trespassing to not do so.
We then got into a discussion of the consequences of ignoring improperly posted businesses and again I was told there are no grounds for prosecution if all entrances are not posted according to the law, and with the approved sign.
Actually there was one other time I remember also. My wife and I entered a restaurant through a public side door leading to the side parking lot. Well after being there I noticed a ‘NO-GUN’ sign posted on the front glass completely down at the bottom, foot level, next to the front door. It easily could be missed even using that door….I ignored it.
I don’t look for opportunities to break the law at all, that is part of the responsibility of carrying even though I don’t agree with the posting. I also believe in the right of the owner to make the decision about his own property and I will respect that or not go there.
Used a different ‘nic’and email address, cleared cookies and hopped onto who knows wireless because I don’t trust any of you no gun liberals.
“Steven Kazmierczak”
Yeah, and the murder of five innocent people is REAL forkin’ funny.
Moron. Must be a Republican.
CC is one of those issues on which I have very mixed feelings. On the one hand I am uncomfortable with people carrying guns around. On the other hand, a properly trained gun carryer just might be able to pick off someone like this crazy. I guess my position would be just to make sure the screening and training are rigorous.
There was NO ‘NO-GUN’ sign on the Marriott front door is what should be understood.
“because I don’t trust any of you no gun liberals.”
(in a hoarse whisper, bloody fingernails dripping)
Yeah, we ARE coming for your guns, your teenaged daughters and kinda want to know how good looking your wife may be.
We might even steal your dog.
(laughs uproariously, cackling like Vincent Price.)
We ARE going after you!!!!!!!!!!
“(in a hoarse whisper, bloody fingernails dripping)
Yeah, we ARE coming for your guns, your teenaged daughters and kinda want to know how good looking your wife may be.
We might even steal your dog.
laughs uproariously, cackling like Vincent Price.)
We ARE going after you!!!!!!!!!!”
WS, I like that, do you think the ‘ChangedNic’ poster just maybe was trying to make a joke.
In answer to your question J R, yes, I respect the signs.
There are places that I won’t shop now that they are posted. There are places that I will lock my gun in the car before I enter.
There is one restaurant in Wichita that is posted (any way I think it still is) that the owner has given me permission to carry concealed inside. It is one of my favorite places.
I have only entered it once carrying concealed, at his invitation. I don’t carry inside it because I’m not sure what the law thinks about ’special permission’.
I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would post their business. Doesn’t make sense! But I don’t know anyone that has a CCH permit that would consciously violate a posted place of business.
WS Clark,
Go back through this thread and look at how many times you made fun of me for being some teenage boy with a gun fantasy of some type, made fun of me for thinking I am some dirty harry, constantly insulted me and others with your various fantasy talks, and things like saying we have delusions of being a knight in shining armor… etc…etc…
Now, I say one thing about your reading ability, because you obviously didn’t read that one sentence and you start crying as if I just spit on your grand kids face and I am some immature kid.
What an egotistical retard you are.
With that, I am off to work.
Who knows, Box.
Back to a previous discussion………
My father took up golf (of all things) in the Sixties and never took me hunting, so therefore I am not a hunter.
I am, however, fascinated with the progression of “machines” over the years. To me, the development of a shotgun design in 1875 that is still basically used today is fantastic. I never knew that the particular design in mind was actually so old.
When I used to shoot, I always had revolvers, not pistols, because I enjoyed the history of the design.
I had a S & W .38, which replaced a (semi-useless) Rossi .38. My favorite gun was a Ruger .22 convertible. I could shoot .22 longs at Bullet Stop all day for just pennies, but I could put .22 Mags in a separate chamber if I wanted.
It was a nice gun – a friend really wanted it for his wife, so she could learn to shoot without spending a fortune on ammo, so I sold it to him, with regrets.
“because you obviously didn’t read that one sentence”
I obviously DID read that sentence, Price, and I caught your meaning immediately – sometimes you feel that you are ABOVE (or over) the law.
So piss off, Nathan.
Have I told you recently that I REALLY don’t like you, Nathan?
In the future, please remind me every few weeks to tell you that.
I REALLY, REALLY don’t like you, Nathan.
I guess my position would be just to make sure the screening and training are rigorous.
That’s been my point, Ben. I don’t know that the screening and/or training are rigorous enough.
When the NIU shooter recently bought a shotgun and a Glock, but obviously had a history of instability, I can’t put my faith in the screening.
And where are teens (non-gang members) getting the guns they take to school? The answer for Columbine was from a grandparent’s collection. I’m sure this grandfather was a good, decent man, who never ever considered his grandson and a friend might raid his guns and shoot innocent students and teachers in their school. But gun owners MUST learn to keep this thought in the back of their mind, so that they’ll be more vigilant of the fire arms.
I freely admit to not liking guns. That’s personal, though, and I am not against the 2nd Amendment and the right to “bear arms”. I’m more afraid those legally owned guns will either fall into the hands of the wrong people or that the wrong people will legally purchase them.
To be honest, it doesn’t keep me up at night, worrying about it.
The rule of law is the 2nd Amendment.
WSClark, back from the movie,
As much as I like hunting and firearms I didn’t take my son hunting but maybe once. What a waste and shame. I really think the neglect of taking him was my laziness, though I would like to think that times had changed, Dad and uncles gone, and it was much harder to find places to go, including less trust by landowners, especially towards those with Sedgwick Co. tags. Although he did and does have an interest too, growing up he was more interested in computers, games and his own stuff.
I too am fascinated with their mechanical design and am more interested in firearms of historical noteworthy design or history. My safe is full of oddball stuff. Single shots, early Browning auto-shotgun, muzzleloaders. I have a class 3, curios and relics federal firearms license and can purchase collectible firearms and anything over 50 years old on my own without going through a dealer. As a result I have several early WWI and WWII firearms both rifles, revolvers and pistols, both US and Russian.
And you are so right a design conceived in 1875 that is still used today and has not really been improved on for it’s purpose is utter genius.
“The rule of law is the 2nd Amendment.”
And all the rest of the amendments, also.
Hank,
You can ‘carry’ in a business that is posted with their permission…BUT, an owner has a right to have you prosecuted under the law if you do so without their permission if he likes. He would still have to object and file a complaint.
Thanks for the info Boxlock,
Sounds like you have a great hobby! Talk about designs that are timeless, I love the 1911!
There are a lot of modern semi-automatic pistol designs but I like none of them more than the 1911!
I have two that I currently carry, a regular Colt and my current favorite the Kimber Ultra Carry II.
Nothing like the stopping power of the .45 ACP!
Hank,
The 45 ACP is probably the pinnacle of cartridge design in my opinion, and it goes without mention that the 1911 is of pistol design. Unfortunately, I have but two 45s….so far, ha. Both your pistols are superb.
I have a Colt 1911 Series 70, without the Series 80 hammer block feature, and a S&W Model 22, 1917 Classic, 45 ACP revolver I love. My Colt 1911 has a polished nickel finish with Pau Ferro wraparound finger grove grips. Quite frankly….it looks like a pimps gun, ha.
Some of us on the BLOG in the past have gone to the range and wasted a few targets.
Last fall I tried to get a lib/con shoot out scheduled but never got a time when the boy and I could get together.
Hopefully, we can get together this spring. I got a lot of interest, enough libs committed to make it fun.
Target practice in the morning and a cookout in the afternoon. Something for everyone!
Got my wife a nice little Beretta .22 for her birthday last year. She can easily out shoot me and she can give the boy a run for his money.
Gee, I don’t know Hank.
As heated as some of these discussions get I’m not sure getting together with weapons is all that sensible an idea.
I like to consider myself a brave guy but that, I must admit, only goes so far, and then I don’t care who know it….I’m out’a there.
Were you guys wearing Ballistic Kevlar?
You’ll be OK. When every body is armed, we’re pretty polite!
Yeah, I guess that is the way it is.
Another good reason for CCL, uh?
Just to make it clear…
The law allows NO special permission for a business owner to someone else for carrying concealed in his business even if it is posted.
The law is only specific in making it against the law to carry concealed into any place which has the appropriate sign posted against concealed carry.
You could always argue that you had permission, but that would only be a legal grey area which would have to be ruled on in the courts.
Nothing in the law allows for such a special permission.
That was me…
Hank,
Thanks for your response to my possibly incorrect understanding of the law concerning CCL and who can carry in posted areas.
I got my info. from a phone conversation with the AG’s office and was told the business owner could control who could or couldn’t carry but to maybe clear this up, just from and academic view point I emailed the AG’s office and will post the rely when I get it. Here’s what I ask:
Dear Kansas Attorney General’s Office,
I have a rather simple question concerning the posting of businesses with a ‘NO GUN” sign, if I might inquire.
If in ALL of the above scenarios the person I am inquiring about HAS a Kansas Concealed Carry Permit.
Questions:
1. If I post my business with a ‘NO GUN’ sign may I, personally and with a valid CCL, carry concealed legally within my business?
2. If I post my business with a ‘NO GUN’ sign may I give an employee with a valid CCL permission to carry concealed within my business?
3. If I post my business with a ‘NO GUN’ sign may I give permission to select individuals having a valid CCL to carry concealed within my business?
Hank,
I did not wait for an email response and called the AG’s office this morning. Nice people by the way. A guy put me on hold for quite awhile and went into the ‘legal department’ to get a legal opinion.
1. CCL and posting, yes or no on either, has nothing to do with whether a business owner or any employee can carry concealed in the business if the business owner approves. Yes they can, CCL or not, if the business owner says so.
A third party, that’s the gray area and you are more correct than I. It would take someone filing a complaint though. Say a police officer is eating in a restaurant that is posted an observes someone carrying. The officer can be the complainant though he may well not if the business owner had approved, another customer could be the complainan,t and yes their would be grounds for prosecution, though a court action could go either way with the business owner supporting the individual carrying. They, the AG’s office said they would say that there are no allowances for a third party carrying in a posted business but that it would require someone filing a complaint for it to go anywhere.
Hope that helps.
8 Trackbacks
Jessie…
Geat post. I added you to my blog roll!…
Motorcycle Insurance Questions…
Found your blog on yahoo – thanks for the article but i still don’t get it….
Ann Online Dating…
This just sounds to liberal for me. This got me thinking of some…
Teen Girls Teen Titans Raven Tiffany Teen…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
What Is A Panic Attack Symptoms Of Panic Attack Panic…
Hi – just wanted to say good design and blog -…
Home Insurance Online Quote Utah…
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong….
Mervin…
I just came across your blog and wanted to drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here. I also have websites & blogs so I know what I am talking about when I say your site is top-notch! Keep up the great w…
Jessie…
I just wanted to write to say that you have a great site and a wonderful resource for all to share….