Purdue Editorial board re: Concealed Carry On Campus

[IndianaBoy]

They contrive a 'what-if' scenario to argue against all of the valid points made by Boilermakers a few weeks ago in opinions articles.

http://www.purdueexponent.org/?module=article&story_id=10060

Giving targets in lecture hall shootings the opportunity to shoot back would bring more damage than protection.

The initial response from Exponent letter writers to last week's NIU shooting has proclaimed that Purdue and other schools should lift campus bans on firearms, arguing that students and faculty should be allowed to carry concealed weapons to defend themselves and others in the event of a lecture hall shooting.

There may be several convincing arguments for getting rid of gun-free zones; this isn't one of them.

Envision this scenario: A disillusioned individual carrying a handgun enters a packed lecture hall and opens fire. A lawful gun owner who happens to have a permitted firearm on his or her person feels a civic duty, returning fire. A third person, after recovering from the initial instinct to duck and cover, is pressed by the same civic duty, drawing a third weapon. This third individual likely didn't see where shots came from and now sees two people with drawn weapons. How does this person know who the threat is, or if both shooters are a threat? After a few minutes, police arrive possibly to discover several wounded and three or more people firing shots, unable to immediately determine who is who in the resulting mayhem.

"That's the same problem you have when undercover officers respond to something," said Ron Fosnaugh, a 33-year veteran of the Purdue Police Department who retired in 2003. "You have undercover officers being shot by police officers."

The difference, Fosnaugh said, is that police operations include extensive communication. He also said 99 percent of officers ﾐ across Purdue, West Lafayette, Lafayette and Tippecanoe Country departments ﾐ recognize each other, giving them a chance to know who the "good guy" is.

If officers still end up shooting each other, despite all that communication and recognition, imagine what would happen if unknown, unrecognized gun owners started responding. Police officers ﾐ and even gun owners, who may be trained to shoot well but probably not to diffuse crisis situations ﾐ would be confronted by that confusion.

This circumstance seems best avoided.

What should happen is finding a better way to balance individuals' rights with keeping firearms out of the hands of mentally distressed individuals.

Fosnaugh said one characteristic police have seen in NIU-type situations is people knowing an individual could be dangerous and not saying something.

That sounds like a better place to start.

 

[IndianaBoy]

Original thread about this topic, regarding a student more concerned about a semi-auto AK than the fact that his neighbor was dealing drugs.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=334019

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

Wow. They did it again.

I'll have to start composing a reply letter. It would be great if as many people as possible would do the same. If we could get a response as overwhelming as we did in the last thread it would be great.

 

[jlbraun]

My 3 responses are:

"Given that armed citizens shoot bystanders 5 times less often than cops do in a shooting incident, I'd rather have a CCW holder in the classroom than a cop. (source: Kleck)"

"Remember Charles Whitman in the UT bell tower? Half of Texas went and got their deer rifles and kept his head down. Saved a lot of lives, and none of them shot each other."

"I asked an Israeli about this once. He was a citizen responder in an incident where a terrorist with an AK started shooting up a shopping mall. He said 'The bad guy was the one shooting at women and children. We shot him.' The bad guy's behaviour will peg him as such. Humans are good at this."

Overall, this "but what if multiple CCWers shoot each other" shows that we're winning by framing the debate.

 

[IndianaBoy]

Wow. They did it again.

The Purdue journalism department never lets me down when it comes to nitwittery. They have been at this since I was a naive freshman, unaware of the infiltration of leftists into college campuses and media in general.

 

[bogie]

"If it is legal off campus, why don't they allow it on-campus? Do they think we are a bunch of immature idiots or something?"

That'll get noticed.

 

[nplant]

Well, again, the gun-ignorant focus on a single problem instead of the bigger picture. Could their scenario happen? Yes. Is it likely? Depends - the more instruction that people who carry have had, I'd say the less likely. Nobody that I know who carries concealed has any desire to kill people, which makes it more likely that they'll make pretty damn sure that when they shoot they have a threat.

And the scenario they portray assumes that nobody is asking questions or giving verbal commands or responses. In a real, dynamic shooting situation, that might happen, but I think it'd be more likely a case that the first defender is telling the potential murderer to drop his weapon or risk being shot, etc.

Lastly, even if it all went to heck and the second defender isn't sure who is the bad guy, if there isn't a gun being pointed at them, then there's no reason to shoot. Period. The police have a difficult job, and they won't know the students in a class, but I have to believe that someone who carries a gun is a bit more observant than the average bear, and would probably recognize a classmate over an unknown guy with a gun. Who would you shoot first? Wouldn't you pause before just wailing away on the trigger? This assumes that any memory or observation goes out the window during a shoot, but studies don't show that at all - indeed some training and some observation usually enables more appropriate action. Cops are at a disadvantage when responding to these, because to them, everyone is in the same class - a potential suspect.

But I guess the minds at Purdue are clearly more learned than I.

 

[IndianaBoy]

But I guess the minds at Purdue are clearly more learned than I.

The journalism school has their soapbox. The Ag school and to a slightly smaller degree the Engineering school has a lot of practical minded people. Most of the liberals at Purdue spend a lot of time complaining that they are in a 'conservative hell' and they can't wait to get back to their East/West coast city of origin. We are only too happy to see them leave.

 

[woad_yurt]

If a crazy starts shooting, I honestly don't think the whole place would start firing away. Very few people, per capita, go through all of the rigamarole necessary to get a carry permit. Tons of people wouldn't touch a gun if you paid them. Probably, in a crowd of a hundred, there may a few at most with a permit to carry. The scenario reminds me of an old Get Smart episode. It's simply not realistic.

 

[El Tejon]

In this state (Indiana), how many LTCH (License to Carry Handgun) on LTCH shootings have we had? Can the newspaper or Ronnie name a single one?

I repeat my challenge to Purdue University. We will test their groundless theory--I bring my carry pistols loaded with Sims and sit in class. The editor-in-chief will attack the lecture hall. I shall defend myself. The editor should bring eye and groin protection as I am just back from Thunder Ranch and feeling salty.

Let's see how that works out for the editor.

 

[TwitchALot]

Instead of "envisioning" a scenario (which gun control advocates happen to be very bad at), why don't we look at, you know, reality.

Scenario One: No shots fired (this refers to the good guys from now on), shooter captured alive (Appalachian Law).

Scenario Two: No shots fired, shooter captured alive (Edinboro).

Scenario Three: No shots fired, shooter captured alive (Pearl High School).

So. Three school shootings, all stopped by armed citizens who didn’t even need to fire a shot, suspect taken alive in all three cases, fewer casualties than VT or Columbine. Now, can he point me to a single school shooting whereby an armed citizen made the situation worse by unarguably killing/shooting more people than the actual shooter would have killed/shot had he not been stopped right then and there?

No need to hold your breath: I didn't think so.


These guys slay me.

 

[nobius]

"That's the same problem you have when undercover officers respond to something," said Ron Fosnaugh, a 33-year veteran of the Purdue Police Department who retired in 2003. "You have undercover officers being shot by police officers."

My response to this is:

Show me.

I can tell you, with sources. Times of CCW holders stopping crimes. Not just multiple shootings, but assaults, rapes, burglaries, robberies, etc. How many undercover officers were shot by uniformed officers repsonding to any scene? Did any of these turn out to be the UC officers' fault? i.e. Did they disobey an order to drop their weapon? Did they turn toward the responding officer with gun in hand? Has this even happened with any statistical relevant frequency?

 

[wbh]

Once again Purdue's journalists drop the ball. There's a reason we always called it "The Purdue Excrement"

maybe it's time to pull my alumni donations....Purdue has always listened to it's pocketbook more than it's students/graduates (in my experiences anyway)

 

[polekitty]

Hey---very simple solution to all this crap. If I found myself in situation like that, first I would not fire at anyone unless that person were threatening me personally, UNLESS: I could see who that person was shooting at. He would have to be shooting at me or obviously killing a few other people. I would certainly not shoot at anyone just because he happened to be holding a gun!!

 

[retgarr]

There is a reason that this article had the author listed as the Purdue Editorial Board. It's because last time the individual writing the article had his inbox absolutely filled and couldn't cope with all the emails. My roomate writes for the exponent (no, I doubt it was him, he's a Ron Paul guy and is aware of the large amount of firepower in our apartment), let me see if I can find out who the writers of this were. For the most part Purdue is a conservative school with many students who support CCW on campus or haven't formed and opinion. This is a school were we can show what our argument is about.

 

[Eagle103]

In this typically well thought out scenario we need to have a CCW holder engaged in a shootout long enough for the cops to show up, probably several minutes, or waving an empty weapon around after the shootout just asking for some lead poisoning. What sort of weapon and ammo supply do they think a CCW carrying student might have? Nice try. These arguments are so lame and foolish it's almost boring. SURELY they can come up with something better.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I'm going to hedge my bets that 99% of us have already thought of this scenario and what we'd do. My bet is that Mr. Crazy will probably be by the lecture hall door. If he's not, then whoever is sitting next to Mr. Crazy when he starts going bezerk will say, "he's got a gun!" In which case, when Mr. Crazy starts pulling out his weapon, all eyes will instinctively go towards Mr. Crazy. Can we also assume that Mr. Crazy will be the one shooting indiscriminately into the class whereas CCW persons 1 & 2 will be the ones aiming in one direction and one direction only?

Also, I'd hope that as the defensive action was going on, someone would be smart enough to phone campus police and give a description of both the shooters and the CCWers.

Hell, you could even have drills during Freshman O' to prepare students for stuff like this.

Also, shooting an innocent person lands you a murder charge. There won't be shootouts in the classroom. None of us wants to go to jail for murder. Nice try Purdue.

 

[rainbowbob]

nitwittery

Definitely my "new word for the day"!

 

[Neo-Luddite]

They bring NIU into this; the Cole Hall scenario was probably a more-likely-to-succeed CCW defensive scenario than most. The assailant was on a stage facing an auditorium with late 1960's constructed seats bolted to the ground. If someone had been able to shoot back, they had fair cover to take up a defensive position.

This nonsense response of 'oh, the police that MIGHT show up minutes later might be confused as to who the good guy is' is a sad grasping at straws to defend a truly defensless position. I love "Oh, the police 'round these parts recognize each other" is pure bull dink. If they haven't yet made it in time (or rarely) to kill the assailant, how big is the added 'risk' of shooting back---just nonsense.

 

[ptmmatssc]

but I have to believe that someone who carries a gun is a bit more observant than the average bear, and would probably recognize a classmate over an unknown guy with a gun

Man walks out onto a stage and starts shooting . Do we really have to guess who the criminal is in that situation?
Man walks around with 2 pistols and a tactical vest loaded with magazines . Do we really have to guess who the criminal is in that situation?
2 kids are walking around with a carbine , a , couple of shotguns and a pistol shooting indiscriminately . Do we really have to guess who the criminal is in that situation?

As mentioned above , the people that ARE the shooters are "outsiders" to the group being shot at . The argument of not knowing who the bad guy is , is a red herring at best .

 

[grimjaw]

The flaw in the article, is that where concealed carry is allowed these kinds of things generally DON'T HAPPEN AT ALL. Duh.

jm

 

[Phil DeGraves]

So are they saying that 30 dead students is a better alternative than the remote possibility of a couple of CCW or police officers not being able to determine who the good guy is?

 

[RKBABob]

Oh, this is just too confusing. I can't tell who the bad guy is... Is it the senior who was sitting next to me? Or the professor? Certainly it couldn't be the guy who just walked in with a shotgun while muttering something about killing the cheerleading team. Oh, what to do, what to do.

You know, think I'll just let the crazy gunman kill me, rather than create confusion and stress for the responding officers.

A lawful gun owner who happens to have a permitted firearm on his or her person feels a civic duty, returning fire.

The way this is written makes it sound like "feeling a civic duty" to protect one's classmates is a BAD thing in the author's opinion, doesn't it?

"That's the same problem you have when undercover officers respond to something," said Ron Fosnaugh, a 33-year veteran of the Purdue Police Department who retired in 2003. "You have undercover officers being shot by police officers."

Don't worry, Ron. By the time the police arrive on the scene the shooting, stabbing, beating, whipping, or clubbing will be over... it always is.

 

[Henry Bowman]

So are they saying that 30 dead students is a better alternative than the remote possibility of a couple of CCW or police officers not being able to determine who the good guy is?

Yep.

 

[ZeSpectre]

"That's the same problem you have when undercover officers respond to something," said Ron Fosnaugh, a 33-year veteran of the Purdue Police Department who retired in 2003. "You have undercover officers being shot by police officers."

It's not the same problem at all. Speaking as someone who worked in LE I can tell you that being on the scene when something happens is COMPLETELY different from arriving "cold" and having to discern what happened/is happening. Any "cop" who says different is playing an angle. Where DO they find these people????