Proposed Bill Would Allow Students To Carry Concealed Weapons On Campus

[Defensory]

OSU-Tulsa Police Chief Melvin Murdock showed us the complex system already in place -- security cameras inside and outside all of the buildings send live video back to the command center. The school also has an emergency alert system and a full police force...."It certainly causes immediate concern from a law enforcement point of view," Murdock says. "And one of those concerns is it doesn't allow us to distinguish between the good guy and the bad guy when we go into a situation."

Hey Mel!

Hate to burst your bubble, but can you give some documented examples of where the police have gotten to the scene on time to stop the carnage in any of these mass shootings?

In virtually every mass shooting I can think of, going back a number of years, the police were a day late and a dollar short getting to the scene on time to stop the shooter(s). By the time they got their, the perp(s) had already killed and wounded numerous innocents, then killed themselves.

As for the rationalization that students with CCW's carrying guns might make it difficult for the police to distinguish between the bad guys and good guys--to be quite frank, Mel--it comes back to what I just saying. In virtually all the mass shootings, the perp had killed himself long before the police got there.

So it's shouldn't be too difficult to distinguish who the CCW's are, since they're obviously going to immediately identify themselves and cooperate with police. They're required by law to carry their photo ID permits with them, so I think trained police officers should be able to handle identifying somebody with a photo ID.

Security cameras serve a useful specific purpose, but are virtually worthless in preventing or stopping the shootings. Virginia Tech had security cameras, NIU had security cameras, virtually every other school where these shootings occurred had them---but not one of those cameras prevented dozens of people from being shot.

 

[Defensory]

Posted by ConstitutionCowboy:
Hmm, If I were law enforcement or security, I think walking into a situation while in uniform would result in guns being pointed at me by the bad guy(s). That, and the people who do not put their guns down when told to by such an officer would be a clue, too.

Good points, Woody.

I doubt a mentally unbalanced individual in a "killing frenzy", is all of a sudden going to drop his weapon when told to, and calmly say "Gee officers, I was just going to class with my trusty AK-47 here, when a few young hoodlums with handguns started shooting at me."

These perps rarely want to be taken alive, so if they're approached by cops they're either going to fire on the officers or kill themselves immediately.

Whereas the CCW holders are immediately going to be yelling something like "I'm not the shooter! Don't shoot, I have a concealed weapons permit!"

Having formerly been in law enforcement myself, I don't see much of a problem making a proper identification in this type of situation.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

The reason these "law enforcement officials," uniformly chiefs of police, are against Concealed Handgun Licenses is that they depend upon the patronage of their civilian bosses, e.g. mayors, college presidents, to get and keep their jobs. The past and current Tulsa chief of police, Ron Palmer, spoke out vehemently against the CHL law when it was under consideration and said he didn't like it even after it passed. I'm really not surprised the OSU-Tulsa chief of police doesn't like the idea. It will make his job as a "police official" redundant.

I'm waiting for KTUL to ask a street cop what HE or SHE thinks.

ECS

 

[Prince Yamato]

Don't forget that somebody in the room will probably call cops on a cell phone with a description of the shooter. Plus, in all honesty, a "shoot-out" won't last more than 10-15 seconds. By the time the cops arrive (1-5 minutes later), the shooter will be dead.

 

[Nobody's_Hero]

I never understood police officials who feel their job security will be at risk if people start using guns to defend themselves. There are still huge roles needed to be filled by authorized personnel in our society. We still need trained people to serve the warrants, write the traffic tickets, and have arresting powers.

If anything, gun owners make officers' jobs easier. When they get to the scene and the rapist is shot dead by the woman with a sub-compact, hell, all they have to do is write up a report. The hardest part is over.

It just doesn't hold water, in my opinion.

 

[Nobody's_Hero]

As to the issue of misidentification, there was a similar argument on SCCC's facebook message board. One reply was that, typically, the 'stance and attitude' of the CCW holder will resemble a well trained shooter's. Most of us, I hope, use some of the same tried and true tactics of holding a firearm as the ones we see officers use when they go to the range, such as the straight-armed and feet-shoulder-length-apart, weaver stance, for increased accuracy and quicker recoil recovery, for example. I'm not saying that all CCW holders look like an elite CIA agent when they aim, but I'd wager they're not running around with a .22 and a 9mm in each hand, shooting like a gangsta from da hood (and the popping off of unarmed people would be a big hint).

As someone also mentioned earlier, the 'good guys' are going to be the ones using cover, as they actually want to survive the encounter. The crazies are going to be standing up when everyone else is ducking and covering.

There could be exceptions, of course, but this would definitely be something I would look for in a hostile situation.

 

[Wineoceros]

Most of us, I hope, use some of the same tried and true tactics of holding a firearm as the ones we see officers use when they go to the range, such as the straight-armed and feet-shoulder-length-apart, weaver stance, for increased accuracy and quicker recoil recovery, for example.

Sure...at the range. What you do under stress in a life-or-death, duck-for-cover-and-shoot-when-you-can situation is likely quite different.

 

[Crimp]

Forgive me, but I can envision Natasha Meza, Arrica Bailey and Kerri Ishel crouching in a classroom corner during a shooting, thinking "I'm so glad no students have handguns to stop this madman."

 

[MaMa PyCb]

"Sure...at the range. What you do under stress in a life-or-death, duck-for-cover-and-shoot-when-you-can situation is likely quite different."

This is why we train though. Running around blind firing won't help you defend yourself. I agree that under duress the average CCW holder will probably not keep composure and have a good stance, but there will be visible signs that the CCW is in this to survive and actually hit his mark, as opposed to the normal wild flailing of a wacko with a 9mm just blasting for the sheer and total insanity of it. Heck the CCW holder might blind fire a round around a corner just to get the wackos head down but for the most part if you have a weapon, the point is to use it, and its not doing any good if the bullets are failing to make there mark. This means you have to aim the weapon, and more than just in the general direction. Also I don't know many CCW holders that can conceal a case of ammo with them so even if you have high cap mags your looking at 30 shots tops ( someone like me only 16 2x clips of 8) with that in mind every shot HAS to count for something.

Also another reason a CCW holder will be having more composure is that they are responsible for every bullet that leaves the barrel of there weapon. If theres others still in the area of the gunfight and the CCW shoots a bystander... well there going to jail as well as the wacko. I seriously doubt that any bystander that was shot and survived would say " Oh I just took one for the team, I'm still alive and thats what matters."

The aforementioned "blind fire a round around a corner " Isn't really a bright idea ( but I'm not going to say it wouldn't happen.. I am saying its a bad idea.)unless you know that theres no one around or anywhere behind the wacko( which you can never be certain of).

So even though a CCW holder would be under duress, I'm sure that there method will be identifiably different than that of a I'ma-gonna-kill-people-for-the-sheer-ducks-smoking-cigarettes-insanity-of-it-wacko.

.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

"Sure...at the range. What you do under stress in a life-or-death, duck-for-cover-and-shoot-when-you-can situation is likely quite different."

That's where the "well regulated" part comes into practice. We keep and bear so that we might be well regulated when the time comes - what ever the time might bring us. You know, like if we practice a little. But, it's like getting in a fist fight. Not many of us box a lot, but when needed, we seem to be able to come up with a hay-maker when needed. It's the same with pointing a gun and pulling the trigger. I'd bet there aren't too many in this country (the world?) who have never seen it done on TV or in real live, or at least heard of how to point a gun and find and pull the trigger.

You'd be surprised what you can find within yourself when push comes to shove. It's the premeditated stuff most of us have difficulty with - meaning to plot and commit crime.

Woody

 

[Wineoceros]

I think you both missed the essence of the quote I was replying to:

"the straight-armed and feet-shoulder-length-apart, weaver stance"

Of course we practice so that under stress we'll be more likely to shoot well, which means a lot of things. But I wouldn't expect to arrive at the scene of a classroom shoot-out to find one or more good guys standing erect and exposed in a weaver stance. I think it far more likely to find two or more people shooting at one another from behind whatever cover was available, which would mostly mean from under desks, around bookshelves, etc.

 

[Dale00]

Tulsa seems to have the strongest anti-gun rights bias by the local power structure of anywhere in Oklahoma. The mayor is a fan of Bloomberg's gun control ideology. Fortunately the opinions expressed in the article do not represent the opinions of the average person or their representatives in the legislature. The house committee that passed the bill did so by a 14-2 vote.

The outlook for passage of the legislation appears good. My main worry is that it may be crafted in such a way that university administrators will still be able to expel students or fire employees who are discovered to be legally carrying with a permit. Other states appear to have been caught in this situation - hopefully our legislators will be able to prevent it. We expect some revisions of the bill and a house vote within two weeks.

 

[another okie]

I heard from the bill sponsor after I pointed out the "student code" problem to him, so he's now aware of it.

 

[Desertdog]

It actually allows any concealed permit holder to carry onto campus, not just students. Actually most college students would be too young to get a permit, and most faculty wouldn't want one, so I don't think it would produce that many guns on campus. But a few would. Like me!

Just the fact that there MIGHT be one or more armed students in a classroom or nearby could be enough to prevent a mass shooting, robbery or rape attempt.