What If?? CCL stops gunman.


PDA






oneshooter
April 18, 2007, 11:25 PM
This is a chance to let your self go. WHAT IF, the VT gunman had been stopped by a CCl holder. Soon enough to prevent the massive death toll, but unfortunatly, not soon enough to prevent the begginings. There would be suffecent evidence to show the gunmans intentions.
How would this be shown by todays media? Would the CCL be arrested and tried for carrying? Let your selfs go gentelmen, and ladies.:D

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

If you enjoyed reading about "What If?? CCL stops gunman." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
chongfa
April 18, 2007, 11:37 PM
I rather be trialed by twelve, than carried by six.

That is all that I have to say about that one.

Soybomb
April 18, 2007, 11:39 PM
Would the CCL be arrested and tried for carrying?
No, my understanding is in VA is legal to carry on campus, he would have been violating school rules though and subject to expulsion.

tinygnat219
April 18, 2007, 11:46 PM
The person would have been expelled by VT per their policy. It's against their rules, not the law to carry on VT property. Notice they say "will be asked to remove it immediately. Failure to comply may result in a student judicial referral and/or arrest, or an employee disciplinary action and/or arrest."

Methinks the charges would have been dropped if a VA CHP holder had been there.

2.2 Prohibition of Weapons

The universityís employees, students, and volunteers, or any visitor or other third party attending a sporting, entertainment, or educational event, or visiting an academic or administrative office building or residence hall, are further prohibited from carrying, maintaining, or storing a firearm or weapon on any university facility, even if the owner has a valid permit, when it is not required by the individualís job, or in accordance with the relevant University Student Life Policies.

Any such individual who is reported or discovered to possess a firearm or weapon on university property will be asked to remove it immediately. Failure to comply may result in a student judicial referral and/or arrest, or an
employee disciplinary action and/or arrest.

Gray Peterson
April 19, 2007, 01:01 AM
I heard a report that one of the wounded students had a CHP. Can you say "lawsuit"?

Ratzinger_p38
April 19, 2007, 01:15 AM
You have to wonder how many would-be tragedies have been prevented thanks to CCL holder. MSM wont report on that.

Henry Bowman
April 19, 2007, 10:52 AM
Need a specific example of "what if"? Look here: http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=43109

FW
April 19, 2007, 11:12 AM
If a legal ccw had stopped the massacre before it started, it with either get little press attention or the the legal individual would get accused of "taking the law in his own hands". The criminal would be called a vicitm then.

In 2001, the fourth airplane that crashed in PA supposedy because the passengers stopped the hijackers from completing their mission. If the other three airplanes had not reached their targets for the same reason (and all four crashed without hitting their targets) there would be more of the "taking th law in their own hands" rhetoric.

No different than a convenience store employee stopping a robbery and getting fired for it because it violated company policy.

Chrontius
April 19, 2007, 11:50 AM
Didn't the exact proposed scenario happen last time someone tried shooting up a school? A teacher with a gun in the trunk?

Who else's heard of this?

I rest my case.

sarge83
April 19, 2007, 11:57 AM
Had it been stopped by a person with a CCW, the MSM new report would have went something like this:

"A deranged gunman shot and killed two people today at VT. After attempting to shoot more students he was detained and stopped by a fellow VT student/staff/faculty until police arrived."

Only on alternative news outlets and the Internet would the reason he was "detained and stopped" be revealed.

uriel
April 19, 2007, 12:13 PM
...to NPR, MSNBC and CNN. Got tired of hearing "gunman" and "gun violence", usual victimspeak. My question was simple:

Virginia Tech-4/16/2007
What kind of environment should we ensure our children are in every day? We send our children away to this wonderful, sunlit, progressive adult institution where they can thrive, and what do we find? It canít keep our children safe. It wonít teach them how to fend for or defend themselves. The security personnel donít even know a shooting has taken place, much less where. And the staff is gutless and cowardly. So ask yourself:

Where were the ADULTS? When my daughter steps foot on that campus, doesn't EVERY adult there bear a responsibility to protect and defend her, and every other student? Scott Hendricks, associate professor of engineering science and mechanics at Virginia Tech, barricaded himself in his office "until the police broke the door down". He admitted on the phone he has two children at the school. Did he go to find them and protect them, or any of the other students? No, he cowered in his office till the police "rescued" him. The janitor ran down the stairs, not to get help, but to escape. Meanwhile, Professor Librescu was blocking the door to protect the students. He was killed with them. The University is at fault for making the campus a gun free zone--do you think a person carrying legally could have made a difference? Could 28 of those people still be alive but for University policy? 29? If my daughter had been killed there and the University and professors, et al, failed to protect her, could I sue for criminal misconduct and wrongful death due to a University policy which denied her the tools and access to trained professionals that would have ensured her life?

So many stories about the "gunman". When Russel Weller ran his car into the crowds at the Farmers Market in California killing nine people, he wasnít called the "carman", he was called the driver. Language is power, and somebodyís bias is showing.

armoredman
April 19, 2007, 01:12 PM
Hmm, wonder if A) there were any fire extinguishers handy, and B) could CO2 to the eyes blind....

To answer the question here, the is an AZ law that states no civil liabilty for justified conductunder self defense/defense of a third person. All our universities are also victim zones, but I can hope after this some of our gutsier state politiciains might work to change that.

Soybomb
April 19, 2007, 03:27 PM
Where were the ADULTS? When my daughter steps foot on that campus, doesn't EVERY adult there bear a responsibility to protect and defend her, and every other student?
I mean no offense with this but if your daughter is in college she and everyone around her is an adult and responsible for their own well being. We just need to get the school to acknowledge that.

Hmm, wonder if A) there were any fire extinguishers handy, and B) could CO2 to the eyes blind....
I believe most fire extinguishers would be a powder type with the general exception of chem lab areas that have co2 fire extinguisers. I'm not sure how well they'd work for blinding, but they'd all be excellent clubs.

SDC
April 19, 2007, 05:42 PM
Simple; it would get buried on page 14, and you wouldn't hear about it ever again.

Sheldon J
April 19, 2007, 07:03 PM
:banghead: On another forum it was brought up about how they defeated a bill that would have opened up the campus to CCW, :fire: and how statistically over 500 students and faculty could have carried. :what: Damn Criminal Empowerment Zones!!!:barf:

petrel800
April 19, 2007, 07:31 PM
The media would find students that would get on camara and say something to the effect,

"I can't believe that someone is allowed to just carry a gun around like that."

While they would present the permit holder somewhat as a hero, they would find plenty of idiots to question the reason for him to carry or need a firearm.

Also, the story would have been over Monday night. No way it would drag on this long.

School would pursue action against the permit holder, some outrage would insue, and the student would probably wind up counting parking spaces for violating the schools handbook.

TheFederalistWeasel
April 19, 2007, 07:36 PM
If these same events had unfolded in another time exactly as they did with respect to this nutjob and a lawful CCW holder.

My guess is, the first shooting would likely had gone down as it did IRL. Then this nut would have gone about his business and made that tape and mailed it off and then returned 2 hours later.

Where in the spirit of this post he would have began his attack and Jimbo-Billybob who was there studying reversed civil underwater moonshine still construction would have recognized the threat and reacted promptly by drilling this POS a new ********* right between his eyes.

Cops would be called and respond, Jimbo would lawfully report to the cops he was the one who fired the last shots that ended the rampage.

Cops would have taken him into an investigative custody and placed his gun into evidence.

Based on witness statements Jimbo would be let go.

The prosecutor would then let a Grand Jury decide the case, which would be no-billed.

Jimbo would get his gun back and a pat on the back for stopping the potential slaughter of many once the video tape came to light.

The school would then decide to keep him or expel him for violating policy.

RealGun
April 19, 2007, 08:18 PM
The school would then decide to keep him or expel him for violating policy.

That may not be the ending. The state could cancel the CCL due to being untrustworthy to abide by the law. How are they going to just ignore it?

oneshooter
April 19, 2007, 09:16 PM
The CCL would have to be a student. It could be a visitor, professor, vendor, or anybody else.

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

modifiedbrowning
April 19, 2007, 10:52 PM
That may not be the ending. The state could cancel the CCL due to being untrustworthy to abide by the law. How are they going to just ignore it?

My understanding is that it is legal to carry on VT campus per state law, but it is school policy that says it is not allowed.

Zoogster
April 20, 2007, 12:37 AM
Had it been stopped by a person with a CCW, the MSM new report would have went something like this:

"A deranged gunman shot and killed two people today at VT. After attempting to shoot more students he was detained and stopped by a fellow VT student/staff/faculty until police arrived."

Only on alternative news outlets and the Internet would the reason he was "detained and stopped" be revealed.

More likely it would have been:

"A gunman opened fire killing two today in a...the gunman was stopped by an off duty police officer (usual term for someone not in trouble and carrying a concealed firearm even if not really a police officer)" Or simply "...was detained until police could arrive."

Always leaving the impression that the day was always saved by a professional or someone hired or present for just for that purpose. Whether they properly or improperly identfy them as security or off duty police is a minor detail. The main focus of the story is "Gunman" and a big picture of a handgun or scary EBR in the corner of the screen while the story is told.

Giving the impression that some random mere civilian "took the law into thier own hands" is seen as unprofessional and that is only the story if it is extremely obvious and undeniable. So only professionals save people on such news. The identity is either not mentioned and he was merely "detained" or the story mentions off duty cop or security etc which sometimes it is and sometimes it is not. They were armed and acted appropriately and stopped a situation that is less news worthy because of thier actions.

If a person with a concealed handgun had stopped him it would not have been national media and merely a story told in local media about two murders that took place at the local college.

So all big stories are going to be bad for us, for the others are smaller stories not suitable for national attention and definately not worthy of constant news coverage for days. That is just the unfortunate facts. When someone intervenes and stops a massacre before many are killed, it is not a massacre and it is only local news not a national tragedy if it makes the news at all. If nobody dies, or only the gunman, it likely wont even be mentioned outside the local county.

Mortech
April 20, 2007, 12:45 AM
Already has happened here in WA state , just google Tacoma Mall shootings , the CPL holder didn't have to fire a shot (he did get shot ) and it turned into a plain hostage situation once the gunman learned peole were going to fight back .

Sam Adams
April 20, 2007, 12:48 AM
If someone had put a couple of slugs in his chest and/or head and stopped this thing after 5 or 10 deaths, especially considering the quantity of ammo he had, that person would be hailed as a hero (except by the Brady Boobs and their fellow morons and Morans). VA wouldn't have charged the person (assuming a legal carry license), and the school wouldn't have been allowed to expel or fire the person due to public opinion. I think that there would also have been a boost in the chances of reviving the VA law allowing carry on campus (which may happen now, despite and maybe because of the horrific toll).

cbsbyte
April 20, 2007, 12:51 AM
THe story would be pushed to the last page of the papers, and barely covered on network TV.

joab
April 20, 2007, 01:15 AM
What are your recollections on the Appalachian School of Law shooting or the Pearl Mississippi incident
those would be the general recollections of the public if the scenario had unfolded as you present

If you enjoyed reading about "What If?? CCL stops gunman." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!