More Guns on Campus?

Many Americans still struggle with concealed weapon permits because there is a discrimination campaign against firearms owners in the USA, which seeks to confuse people ( theme: Those Peoplles' Rights Are A Threat!...Call to action: Remove Those Rights!) but itis established in the many States which allow concealed carry that violence is reduced.
And that THE WORSTTE FEARFULL CONSEQUENCES as presented by anti-gun discriminators DON"T HAPPEN!.
When the first States relaxed excessive restrictions, anti- gunners hissed " lisence to kill!" ....and our streets "The OK Corral!".
Lies are an important weapon in any discrimination campaign.
Campuses are most dangerous for 72 hours to one week following "news coverage" of a school shooting.And they happen in gun free zones!

Ten students at a birthday party in an apartment were saved from massacre by a concealed firearm carrier. Just a few days ago. Ten more non-victivms saved by the action of one gun owner. http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html

The best book analysis of all- Joseph A. (not the senator) Lieberman's book, *SCHOOL SHOOTINGS - What Every Parent and Educator Needs to Know to Protect Our Children* (Citadel Press, ISBN: 978-0-8065-3071-0) came out late last year and gives an excellent perspective of the entire spectrum of school shootings from the earliest in 1966 through Columbine and Virginia Tech to the most recent US campus massacre at Northern Illinois University on Valentine???s Day, 2008. I think it is THE definitive book on this subject. The Website is: www.schoolshootingsbook.com

I agree with Mr. Lewis. Why give criminals the upper hand? I like how all the nay sayers seem to place these shooters on some sort of godlike status that makes them invulnerable or something to anyone else except the police. They are mortal like all of us, one shot to the head and they are dead.
There are three kinds of people in this world, sheep, sheep dogs and wolves as LTC (RET) Dave Grossman put it, the way the world works is simple, wolves attack and kill the sheep, sheep dogs protect the sheep from the wolves, not all the sheep dogs are in law enforcement or the military. There will be those to arise to the occasion to stop a massacre or keep one from getting worse. However if the sheep keep a leash on the sheep dogs and file down their teeth, what right do the sheep have to complain when the wolves attack and the sheep dog can do nothing? All because they sheep fear the sheep dogs capacity for violence?
Laws do not protect, laws keep honest people honest, laws did not protect the students and VA Tech, it did not protect the students at Columbine. What will more control laws and losing more freedoms protect us from?

Don't worry, it's very simple. When seconds count, the police can be there in minutes, I'm tired of the false claim that the police "are there to protect you." It's a lie and it's not their legal obligation. Law "enforcement" is their job. Ipso facto, when the shooting starts the police have failed their responsibility/ Someone else is dead because they were prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment right to defend themselves,.

Might want to view the video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp senate testimony (the survivor of the Luby's massacre mentioned in the article) at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4948538901303259236
and Texas did in fact have a law banning concealed at the time and that was the reason folks left their pistols in the car.......not always very helpful.........

t seems as if too much emphasis is put on the object of the "gun." making them more or less present is wholly ineffective on the mind of the typical single-shooter multiple murder and subsequent suicide. it is simply the most handy tool to carry out their "final will" on the outside world. these people who commit these types of crimes are essentially committing public suicide, but not after performing non-rational and unspecific vandalism to humanity (viewed as the "counterfeit reality" and thought of as categorically problematic and having no intrinsic value.) these are usually highly intelligent and motivated people who know that the media will commemorate their death and that they will have achieved some type of immortality through the communication of their "own" historical event. if more people had handguns, their kill rate would go down, but it would not substantially deter these localized (yet becoming more numerous).
There was a statistical psychological test done on a group of college students from many different US colleges, of mediocre and also particularly high reputation and ranking. it showed a rough diagnosis that 50% of students exhibited more than 75% of the signs of either a depression-category illness or an anxiety illness, (which affect the psyche on a very deep level, but are usually not treated, as the symptoms reduce the chance of going out and seeking help)
This suggests that colleges are a veritable breeding ground for unguided imagination, coupled with an environment that allows radical action and planning to ferment unchecked. If you don't go out there and "play the social game" to make x friends that (ideally) keep you grounded, you will sometimes seek to change your reality radically, in some way to make up for your non-specifically insufficient reality.
There is rf technology (prototype) that works like a long-range super-sensitive metal detector, that can hone in on the specific radio signatures of weapons, and their parts. further research hopes to detect a loaded weapon (and distinguish it from an unloaded one) from a range of 1000m in a city landscape. These should become commonplace in high-risk areas, especially where the campus security/university police is completely unarmed (not even mace in DC) and sometimes completely worthless when confronted with intense situations outside their training.
this debate is hard when it is focused to this increasingly common single-shooter/suicide situation because more guns would mean more access, (they could be stolen or borrowed) and also more accidental shootings (drinking and drug use is extremely common).
Anybody here have an opinion on the best non-IIlethal or less-than-lethal weapons? Ilike the ultrasonic nauseating waves and LED disorientation/nauseating technology. both have been around for decades.

t seems as if too much emphasis is put on the object of the "gun." making them more or less present is wholly ineffective on the mind of the typical single-shooter multiple murder and subsequent suicide. it is simply the most handy tool to carry out their "final will" on the outside world. these people who commit these types of crimes are essentially committing public suicide, but not after performing non-rational and unspecific vandalism to humanity (viewed as the "counterfeit reality" and thought of as categorically problematic and having no intrinsic value.) these are usually highly intelligent and motivated people who know that the media will commemorate their death and that they will have achieved some type of immortality through the communication of their "own" historical event. if more people had handguns, their kill rate would go down, but it would not substantially deter these localized (yet becoming more numerous).
There was a statistical psychological test done on a group of college students from many different US colleges, of mediocre and also particularly high reputation and ranking. it showed a rough diagnosis that 50% of students exhibited more than 75% of the signs of either a depression-category illness or an anxiety illness, (which affect the psyche on a very deep level, but are usually not treated, as the symptoms reduce the chance of going out and seeking help)
This suggests that colleges are a veritable breeding ground for unguided imagination, coupled with an environment that allows radical action and planning to ferment unchecked. If you don't go out there and "play the social game" to make x friends that (ideally) keep you grounded, you will sometimes seek to change your reality radically, in some way to make up for your non-specifically insufficient reality.
There is rf technology (prototype) that works like a long-range super-sensitive metal detector, that can hone in on the specific radio signatures of weapons, and their parts. further research hopes to detect a loaded weapon (and distinguish it from an unloaded one) from a range of 1000m in a city landscape. These should become commonplace in high-risk areas, especially where the campus security/university police is completely unarmed (not even mace in DC) and sometimes completely worthless when confronted with intense situations outside their training.
this debate is hard when it is focused to this increasingly common single-shooter/suicide situation because more guns would mean more access, (they could be stolen or borrowed) and also more accidental shootings (drinking and drug use is extremely common).
Anybody here have an opinion on the best non-IIlethal or less-than-lethal weapons? Ilike the ultrasonic nauseating waves and LED disorientation/nauseating technology. both have been around for decades.

The response regarding the Luby's massacre in 1991 is full of inaccuracies. First, there was no concealed gun permit law in Texas at the time. The lady whose parents were killed by George Hennard did testify before the state legislature in honor of her parents' legacy and her testimony was instrumental in getting a concealed gun carry permit law enacted, but that didn't take effect until 1993. Prior to that, a licensed gun owner had to display his gun or rifle in plain view. And all that stuff about being able to stop her parents' murder if she hadn't left her gun in her car is just literary fiction. She wasn't even there.

I want to congratulate Newsweek.com for posting this interview. I hope that you publish it in your magazine as well. Common sense seems to be rare in the mainstream media.

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That accurately describes the situation at most American schools when it comes to defending our kids. Rather than employ the one method that has proved successful, we persist in letting insane people with guns slaughter our sons and daughters, rather than allowing sane people with guns to protect them.

Well, enough is enough. The tantrum-throwing, anti-gun hysterics have had their chance, and they???ve failed miserably.

We need armed and trained personnel inside the school, people who are not easily identified by an attacker. And security guards aren???t enough; they???re too easily spotted. We need armed principles, teachers, office workers and other staff, and, in the case of universities, students who have handgun carry permits.

And we need them now.

The world has changed, and we need to change with it. If we don???t, one day soon we will most certainly be faced with carnage on the scale of the Beslan, Russia school massacre, when hundreds of men, women, and children were murdered by Muslim extremists.

[John Caile is Communications Director of the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, a grassroots gun rights organization in Minnesota]

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That accurately describes the situation at most American schools when it comes to defending our kids. Rather than employ the one method that has proved successful, we persist in letting insane people with guns slaughter our sons and daughters, rather than allowing sane people with guns to protect them.

Well, enough is enough. The tantrum-throwing, anti-gun hysterics have had their chance, and they???ve failed miserably.

We need armed and trained personnel inside the school, people who are not easily identified by an attacker. And security guards aren???t enough; they???re too easily spotted. We need armed principles, teachers, office workers and other staff, and, in the case of universities, students who have handgun carry permits.

And we need them now.

The world has changed, and we need to change with it. If we don???t, one day soon we will most certainly be faced with carnage on the scale of the Beslan, Russia school massacre, when hundreds of men, women, and children were murdered by Muslim extremists.

[John Caile is Communications Director of the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, a grassroots gun rights organization in Minnesota]

You are now six times more likely to be mugged in London than New York. Why? Because as common law appreciated, not only does an armed individual have the ability to protect himself or herself but criminals are less likely to attack them. They help keep the peace. A study found American burglars fear armed home-owners more than the police. As a result burglaries are much rarer and only 13% occur when people are at home, in contrast to 53% in England."

*http://www.concealedcampus.org/
http://www.concealedcampus.org/faq.htm
http://www.concealedcampus.org/arguments.htm

1) Police are under no legal obligation to protect individual citizens. See the case Warren v. DC and Castle Rock v. Gonzales. In layman's terms, it means that you are responsible for your own personal security.

2)Mexico and Russia both have higher rates of violence committed with a firearm compared to the United States and those are places where you will be thrown in a kangaroo court if caught with a firearm.

3)The majority of crimes are predatory by their very nature. The perpetrator wants absolute control/domination over their victim(s). Even in cases of mass murder such as VT and NIU.

A crime short-circuited or prevented is a crime stopped. In the case of mass murderers such as Cho Seung-Hui and the New Life Church killer both of them killed themselves when they knew they were going to face someone who could defeat them.

Cho killed himself when the police FINALLY broke down the doors that he had chained shut.

When a volunteer security guard named Jeanne Assam shot the New Life Church killer, the murderer shot himself as he was on the ground to essentially end his life on his own terms. He had been a loser his whole life and with his final act he could still keep absolute power over life and death.

There is still that element of predatory behavior. A murderer/rapist/spree killer wants absolute control over his victims and will go to places/people where he perceives that disparity of power. Why should we give someone like that exactly what they want?