Time to Rethink Concealed Carry at Schools?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff Thomas

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
210
Location
Nashville, TN
Today on Drudge ( www.drudgereport.com ) there was a link to a report about Al Qaeda training to target kids in schools. [The link is now MIA, but perhaps someone else can provide the story.]

There has been discussion before on this topic (e.g. allowing teachers to carry concealed), and we know where the naive NEA stands on this matter ... but wouldn't it be a wise move to reconsider our woeful approach to school security? Our school districts put up these silly no-gun signs, and most act as if those are some marvelous talismans to prevent violence on campus. We know better.

Frankly, the bad guys should know that many Americans still carry on campuses. But the law is an impediment to others.

I know how I'd feel if our naive and barbaric anti-self defense laws contributed to the injury or death of those I love. Anyone else out there concerned about this obvious hole in some precious security? What are we going to do about it?

Regards from TX
 
It's old news. Shooting up schools, assaulting apartments, blowing up politicians in the golf course (okay, maybe they're not THAT bad ;) ) has been part and parcel of AQ tactics for a long time.

A CCW-holder would be facing multiple assaulters, probably equipped with assault rifles, LMGs, and RPGs. There might be a security element overwatching the assault, and the second you pull out your handgun, you might end up with a 168 grain slug between your eyes, delivered from a sniper.

On a practical level, these kind of operations require a great deal of support (guns, ammo, cash, vehicles, etc), and AQ would be hard pressed to organize such an attack since their command structure is wrecked, their support network scattered, and their fighting men dead or in hiding.

There is no practical defense with handguns. You might get one or two, but the attackers won't care because they're on a one-way mission to Paradise.

Continue to hunt down the leadership, cut off their cash, and destroy the nation-state who support them. America isn't ready for the Israeli option, and I seriously doubt that it ever will.
 
As far as a coordinated terrorist assault on the school, I basically agree with what the happypants guy said. However, one or two down may mean one or two less killin' kids so the total body count may be lower.

AS a general rule I believe that it is a total abdication of responsiblity to prohibit responsible adults including staff from cahaving a weapon on school grounds. Back in the day a number of us had weapons stashed. Principal and vp, at least, had a a pistol in the desk. I never knew of any that were drawn, much less fired in anger, but they were around if the need had ever arisen. Most folks kept theirs in the car since there is no truely secure place in a classroom to put one and carry on-person could always be inadvertantly detected in the sometimes unexpectedly close contacts of halls, etc. (While nothing to do with the intent of this topic: On Holloween a lot of us dressed as cowboys with real colts and rugers in the holsters and live rounds in the belts -but not in the guns.)
 
I think that the most vulnerable spot in America is our schools.

Certainly this has not escaped AQ.

2 guys with AKs could pull a fire alarm and have lots of targets lining up in rows :fire:

10 teams of 2 would permanently close our school system.
 
BRCC student (successfully) contests handgun violations
BRCC student contests handgun violations

University relations office says JMU weapons policy will not be reviewed

by Kelly Jasper / staff writer

Students at Blue Ridge Community College can now legally carry concealed
weapons on campus after a successful challenge to the school's weapons
policy. The Harrisonburg-Rockingham Libertarian Party, which backed the
challenge, is contesting weapons policies at several public universities
across the state, including JMU.

Students can now carry handguns, with the appropriate permits, according to
Dave Briggman, chairman of the HRLP. Although JMU's policy is not currently
under review, Briggman said, "There are going to be changes to the weapons
policies of schools all across the Commonwealth [of Virginia]."

The challenge to BRCC's policy on possession of concealed handguns on campus
was initiated by Briggman, a night school student at BRCC. He said the
situation developed when he brought his handgun to a night class in
mid-January.

"I had just come from the firing range and was running late for class,"
Briggman said. "It's irresponsible to just leave a gun unattended in my car,
so I brought it in." Because Briggman has a permit issued by order of the
Circuit Court Judge of Rockingham County to carry a concealed weapon, he
thought that "carrying the weapon in wouldn't be a problem."

Briggman made a comment after class to a fellow student with which he had
discussed gun possession. "I mentioned to her that I was always in support
of the Second Amendment and the right to carry a concealed weapon," Briggman
said. "She never saw my handgun and I never told her that I had it, but the
implication was there.

"The young lady basically freaked out and called the instructor after
class," he said. Briggman said the instructor called the chairman of the
English department, who contacted Briggman. "When I came in for a discussion
with the department chair, he asked me if I carried a gun into class and I
told him that I had," he said. "I was told that I was prohibited from
carrying a handgun on campus according to the student handbook."

BRCC's student handbook states, "Carrying firearms or other weapons on
college property or at any college activity except as explicitly authorized
for instructional purposes or as exempted by Virginia Code 18.2-308" is
prohibited.

Under the old interpretation of BRCC's weapons policy, a student must either
be a current police officer or a retired police officer with at least 15
years of service to carry a concealed weapon on campus.

Although Briggman said he served with the U.S. Air Force Security Police, he
did not meet either of these requirements.

"The college interpreted this as not allowing any concealed weapons on
campus," he said. Briggman carries a valid permit issued under section
18.2-308 of the Code of Virginia and said, "If a public university bars me
from carrying a concealed hand gun on campus, those regulations violate
state law."

A case involving possession of concealed weapons in Virginia State Parks
last September served as the basis of Briggman's objections. "The opinion of
that case came back saying that the institutions didn't have the ability to
create a regulation that conflicted with state law," he said. "That decision
also applies to colleges and prohibits them from enacting regulations that
contradict Virginia state law."

Through discussions and meetings with Robert Baldygo, vice president of
financial & administrative services at BRCC, Briggman voluntarily agreed to
relinquish his right to carry his weapon on campus while waiting for the
attorney general's office to issue an interpretation of the policy. Briggman
was advised that he would be suspended or expelled from school and referred
to law enforcement if caught on campus with a weapon prior to this decision.

By early February, Baldygo informed Briggman that BRCC's policy does, in
fact, allow students with the proper permit to carry a concealed handgun on
campus.

Because concealed weapons are now allowed on campus, BRCC currently is
working with the attorney general's office to revise the school's policy,
Baldygo said. "We don't feel that weapons on campus are compatible with an
educational environment and are considering restricting our current policy
further," he said.

Briggman said the HRLP will "strongly contest any regulations that
contradict state law" after he was advised that the current policy is under
review.

After examining BRCC's policies, the HRLP began to research the policies at
other universities in the state. The organization started with JMU
considering it is "right in the backyard of Blue Ridge use parentheses
[Community College] and has similar policy," Briggman said. He found that
"JMU's policy also conflicts with state law."

According to the JMU Manual of Policies and Procedures, JMU policy 1105 does
not allow students to possess a weapon on campus, including students who
possess a concealed weapons permit.

Briggman contacted Steven Knickrehm, assistant vice president of resource
planning, regarding the statutory authority of JMU to enact a weapons policy
contradictory to state law.

Knickrehm said that he was "unaware of any section of state code that either
allows or prohibits JMU to create such regulations." Knickrehm also said
that many of [JMU's policies have no specific code authorization, but are
designed to "minimize threats to campus security and protect the interests
of students, faculty and staff."

JMU's policy on the prohibition of weapons is not currently under review,
according to Fred Hilton, director of university relations. According to
Hilton, however, the university would be forced to adapt its policy if the
attorney general decides that the university regulations conflict the
opinion issued.

"JMU, like any university, has the right to establish regulations that are
required to uphold standards of conduct governing those employees and
students who work or attend the school," Hilton said. "[The University
thinks] that the policy is a reasonable standard that has been put in place
to protect students."

However, Briggman said that a public institution like JMU does not have the
ability to enact policies which are contrary to Virginia law, regardless of
the intentions of the regulations. "The goal here isn't to allow anyone … to
walk around campus with guns slung over his shoulder," he said. "But if the
Second Amendment rights of citizens are going to be challenged, they should
expect a fight.":what:
 
Yet more pathetic school administrators who think that guns (and knives, for that matter) are incompatible with a productive educational atmosphere. As if people who are going to use those guns and knives illegally are going to care about the atmosphere of learning the administrators are trying to create.
:banghead:
Not to mention that the people who are just idiots - you know, the ones who would play hot potato with a loaded handgun before class - are always going to find ways to put people in danger and disrupt the atmosphere of learning no matter what is banned.
 
The island that I live on has no more than two cops on duty at any given time. Area-wise, we are about the size of Manhattan. Population, roughly 10,000 people. We aren't much of a target.

That said, we have roughly 50 good ol' boys that carry all the time (long gun and/or handgun). Personally, I might be driven to pity the death-cult fools if they tried anything.;)
 
As I have said before, if CCW is not allowed in schools then what about "limited CCW"? In other words, administration would allow certain faculty, etc, to carry only if that person has already demonstrated good "conflict resolution skills", etc. I would even attend a special class or two for it (at my expense) if I was selected. - At least have a FEW guns here in case they are needed.

A little off topic again, BUT....The other night I was warned about a student that had already damaged their instructor's vehicle (no one actually saw it but we are certain). The school was afraid of physical violence when this same student received their "F" that night.

The plan? If the Instructor was threatened, they were to tell him to leave (yeah, right...), Plan B, get to my room (Hey, this guy is a lot bigger than *I* am!) - I was designated night supervisor at the time.

I had my own plan. I told the instructor.... if you have trouble... TRY to get to my room... but when you come through the door... be sure and step to one side.

Of course if I had ACTUALLY HAD a gun ;) I could have been terminated (or worse) if it had been discovered or used.
 
The Col. Tom Parker of AQ, Ziman Alzawaheir, has written a tome in which he and AQ specifically claim the right to kill 4 million American children. The fact his training video exists does not surprise me.

There is only one kind of target in the US that softer than a school and that target is a church or temple.

As we continue to have success in dismantling the AQ infrastructure the chances of a high profile hit like 911 decrease substantially. What increases is the chance of either a freelance hit (such as a guy at LAX who pulls out a gun and attempts to shoot up the El AL counter) or small unit operations such as a group of Islamofascist terrorists literally driving up to a school and killing as many children as possible before getting back in the car and leaving. It is just as simple as that. A hit on a temple or church is just as simple to pull off.

Would concealed carry at any institution stop it? Nope, but it MIGHT disrupt it and reduce the casualties.
 
Uh, sorry, but there is no way a church is softer than a school.

Schools are full of children who will do what they are told and they have to be there.

Churches mave many more adults and in many places, some of them are armed - in some places, most might be armed.

If AQ shot 20 church goers, it would not affect as many people (especially non church goers) as shooting 20 school children.

Phychologically and morally, the school thing is easily 10X more horrifying.
 
Gee whiz. This is a good idea. How come Tom Ridge and George Bush aren't suggesting this?

Maybe because they think duct tape is the solution.

It won't happen. The country is full of sheep who won't defend themselves. Every defensive measure has been passive.

BAAAAAH!
 
Frankly, and of course no flame or offense intended, but I don't understand why this thread has gone as long as it has.

Talk about preaching to the choir.

They *only* place that I personally find it questionable to allow people to carry is inside a courtroom during proceedings.

There is NO reason whatsoever to disarm law abiding citizens at ANY other place; church, school, "sacred" govt. buildings, etc.

Of COURSE teachers and students of age should be allowed to carry at school!!!

The sad thing is, most people (even some here) have been brainwashed so long into thinking that some reason actually exists for law-abiding citizens to be disarmed "for their own good."

Whenever someone does something "for your own good", the opposite effect is true.

What I mean, is that it is a knee-jerk reaction: "Well, of course we don't want guns at schools!"

But give it just a second of thought and we realize that those who would abide by a law prohibiting weapons at a certain place are NOT the ones we need to worry about.

/rant.
 
I don't like limits and laws on carry but, ...

I think with public parochial schools permit to carry should encompass any CCW parents picking children up, open carry where applicable and students maintaining hunting weapons in vehicles. As far as the school staph, we do this. Hold a public school board session where the community's parents vote on what teachers should be allowed to carry in their schools. I think the parents must be involved since the teacher is legally responsible for their children in absence of the parents. Criteria for helping the vote could be a Q&A betwixt the audience and canidate, prior firearms/LE experience, firearms schools attended, etc. To make it fun, require a quorom of parents, say representing 30% of the school districts children to be present. I hate apathetic people that whine later. Blissninny communities would whine and vote for none, emperiling their blissninny children by their own behest.
 
I suspect that it's going to take an attack to make any changes. And then, following the attack, the primary change will be to hire armed security. I suspect that the big-name rent-a-cop agencies are going to be making quite a bit of $$ in the near future.

Of course, this will make the public at large feel safe and secure - after all, a guy in a uniform with a high school education has _got_ to be safer around the children than a fellow without the uniform but with an advanced degree, right?
 
I think that the most vulnerable spot in America is our schools.
Amen to that.

And along with the terrorists, the criminal element knows it, too.

As to one armed person being able to do much good against an assaulting platoon-sized element, I would agree that it would basically be hopeless. But I don't see the terrorists operating that way, either. It's one thing to go 12 or 15 on one, but three or four is a totally different animal. Add in that you might not be the only armed person in the area, and you have the makings of a successful defense.

But one thing's for sure: Even if it's an assault by one guy it will be successful if NO ONE is packing.
 
It always irritates me to read a dismissive comment about self defense ... not meaning to offend, just being honest. Sure, one or even two individuals with pistols against determined terrorists with rifles is a grim picture. But, it is less grim than considering defenseless, innocent children up against terrorists ... with absolutely no good guys with guns around. Lousy odds are always better than no odds ... and it is the only moral choice, IMHO.

Should that day come, the bad guys will still likely be surprised at an armed response where they might expect none ... and whether or not the defense is 100% successful, or even survivable, would any of us still not attempt it?

Regards from TX
 
I take classes in a CC at night. We were talking about guns
during break. A big lard butt said, so many idiots have guns!!

I said, half the households have guns. Are all these idiots.
I have guns - I can work my calculator (it's a math class and we
are using a fancy one) and you can't (she's always pressing
random buttons and won't read the manual). Who's stupid?

I said look at you, if someone attacks you - are you going to
wave a donut? With a gun, you would at least have a chance.

It was rude but I didn't care.
 
I for one would be 100% in favor of having armed teachers. CCW of course. Well trained of course.

If the bad guys cannot tell who has a weapon and who does not it modifies their plan......and as such they may consider looking for another target.

To our disembodied masters we are all cattle...and of course they know what is best.....so, they can shoot down hijacked planes and kill some the passengers to save others on the ground. But arming pilots was just too darn risky except on a trail basis. I miss the logic.

Our handlers can protect our children best by keeping guns and gun training out of the hands of law abiding citizens (teachers) because some one might get hurt if terrorists take over a school.

BTW one and all.....if a school is taken the BGs will be on one of their suicide missions. Since they have no plans for getting out alive none of the people in that building will either. I wonder how some justify the logic of not protecting our schools. If there is one place that needs to be protected, its schools.

Two or three teachers with guns might get killed if and when they act ......but they might give the BGs a hard go of it till the SWAT team gets there, which could save kid's lives. Given some of the reports of how rank and file patrol officers respond at such a scene (was it Colombine? they stayed outside and the shooting was still going on inside) my guess is a lot of kids might be killed AFTER LE arrives and tries to figure out what to do.

I'm not too happy with the apparent non-response to this locally and the down right foolish rejection of arming ANYONE at school. Some people say that because there is an LEO at their kids' school they "feel safe". Hate to tell them that man or women is going to be the first victim of the BGs.
Our schools are naked.

BTW in my state the background checks to become a LE are not as stringent as those to get a CCW ticket. Why people put so much store in LE handling this kind of thing I have no idea. I don't see my local department as representing the cutting edge in counter-terrorism or hostage crisis resolution.


S-


:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top