Collegiate Times

Charles Steger commented to the Richmond Times-Dispatch in an interview this past week: "if you have a student willing to take their own life, I don't know what defense you can have" http://wmvod.mgnetwork.com/vod/rtd/20080413steger1.wmv With concealed-carry, would be victims in Tech classrooms would have a fighting chance to survive, as opposed to the 4/16 duck and cover.

CORRECTION: "However, Stanton claims there were over 100 people in the proximity who did." IS NOT CORRECT. I said: "With probably 100 people in the proximity of the incident, some were -likely- to have permits and carry, if allowed."

The effect of concealed carry actually has two components. The first and most obvious would be that of an armed student or faculty member being able to stop an incident once it is already in progress by shooting or apprehending the perpetrator. Several incidents of that type have already occurred but notably have been underreported in the media. The second effect is that of causing a psychopath to choose another target by eliminating one of the "gun free" zones that they tend to favor. After all, they are looking to make headlines by taking out as many unarmed victims as possible, not to get into a gunfight.

Candace did a very good job showing two different sides of concealed carry. Most people think that SCCC members all want to be heroes and save the day if there is another classroom shooting. By sharing Ken Miller's story, however, it is evident that personal attacks are a huge reason we are working towards a change in campus policy. If you are a VT student and receive emails from the police, you can't deny the fact that a lot of attacks, muggings, assaults, etc have happened on or near campus in the past two semesters. Concealed carry is not about being a hero or saving the day; it is a personal choice that could possibly help you in a life-threatening situation.

Unfortunately the anti-gun folks would rather disarm you, have you die as a result of gun violence and then add you to their statistics to help further their cause.

Victims keep the Brady Campaign in business - no wonder they oppose self-defense. If only criminals died in attacks, Brady wouldn't have anyone to exploit. Kind of rings like Westboro...

Thanks for the comments everyone - Candace did do a great job on this. Please also note my correction, below. For those taking shots at anti-gun folks, remember that many of us were there at one time or another. We are in no way trying to convert everyone to people who DESIRE to carry, but at least increase the number of people who UNDERSTAND the choice to carry. If some people do decide to carry, so be it, but it is a personal choice and will remain that way.

Thank you Candace! I just want to respond to Sarah Johnson's comment in the last paragraph. I can totally appreciate that she would feel less safe if people carry concealed weapons on campus even though there is no reason for her to feel less safe - CHL holders are statistically less likely to be convicted of violent crime than the general population (I have stats to back that claim up BTW). However, there is a huge difference between BEING safe and FEELING safe. I would much rather BE safe than FEEL safe.

I wish other news outlets provided articles this good on this subject.

"A shoot-out is better than a massacre!"

I'm an older guy, who grew up in an era of common sense. Some of my generation were influenced by the socialists, & went on to become "hippies", flower children, mush minded cowards, college professors & politicians. Ive seen this same influence on college & university campuses all over the USA, & seen many mush-minded young fools who "played the game" with those socialist inspired "useful idiots" who are referred to as professors, in order to "earn" their various degrees. Now, finally we are witnessing a resurgance of common sense, THANK YOU GOD! And thanks for some news media outlets to shed more light on this! But most of all, thanks to the young men & women who now have a legitimate revolution worth fighting for, & the courage to do it! Freedom & liberty must be maintained. These kids are starting to understand that, & it is sad that so much horror has had to occur in order for that message to be comprehended.

Why not allow commuting students with licenses carry? Not so sure how I feel on students living on college campuses with guns.

As a faculty member, I would not be comfortable with students carrying guns, concealed or not, in my classroom. I don't think we should assume that all people with concealed carried permits are stable, well-intentioned individuals. We also shouldn't assume that they aren't, but armed students would make me extremely uncomfortable, especially on days when low test scores, etc, are handed back.

Concealed carry license holders have gone through more legal vetting by the GOVT than the vast majority of the population has. State AND federal background checks.

As a faculty member, I don't care beans what a student is carrying as long as it does not interfere with their learning. The Prof at 6:09 has an irrational fear that is his or her own problem. I've taught classes to police officers, every one of whom had a handgun and not a single one of them has shot me for giving them a failing grade. As a professor, I would want to have a handgun with me in the event that a deranged individual picks my school as a free fire zone. There is a reason they pick schools rather than police stations and military bases; they know most people won't be armed and won't put up a fight.

You're awfully combative and full of personal attacks for someone who claims to be an educator.

"Prof", you, like many anti-gunners, have a vast imagination. "Prof with a brain" points out that you have an irrational fear of an inanimate object, and that's a personal attack? Combative? You should look at your own statement, saying that students with carry permits aren't "stable" or would shoot you for a "low test score" - sounds like you have no faith in your relationship with your students. Besides, how do you know no one is carrying in your class now? You think some policy is going to stop someone willing to hurt another person? If anything, you should worry more about protecting yourself (and your class) than thinking that the "no guns" policy has any effect on anyone with bad intentions.

This is why I avoid making comments on CT articles. The personal attack I was referring to is the "Prof with a brain" label the other poster used. And, if you actually read my post, you would see that I didn't call concealed carry holders unstable, I just pointed out that we can't assume they are all stable. Also, "Prof with a brain" compared our students to police officers. Police officers undergo training, while people with concealed carry permits may not have had any training at all. I have no problem with trained campus police officers carrying guns. And, nowhere in my post did I mention the possibility of professors having concealed weapons - I don't have a firm opinion on that aspect of this discussion. Oh, and calling me an "anti-gunner" is another personal attack - you're attacking the person making the argument instead of addressing the argument itself.

Prof, in the state of Virginia demonstration of competent and safe firearms handling is one of the requirements to be issued a concealed weapons license.

Prof-san, I understand your not being comfortable with us carrying in class. However, there are a few things you should consider. First of all, those of us who have CHPs (the Commonwealth actually issues Concealed Handgun Permits, not Concealed Weapon Permits - many types of weapons, such as certain knives, are still verboten) have been vetted by the state and have a history of not being a problem. The last thing a crazed killer is going to want to do is give the State Police his fingerprints. So, actually, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that we are stable. None the less, while a CHP gives us permission to carry concealed, it doesn't mean that someone without one is physically unable to do so. Next time you walk into your classroom, understand that anybody and everybody could potentially be carrying (well, except for the one girl in the back row whose clothing choices leave less than nothing to the imagination). Hell, those backpacks? They could contain a small gun store worth of inventory. The point is, you DON'T know that your students aren't carrying. Except for those of us with CHPs, since we tend to follow the rules (which is why we went and got the thing in the first place). Now, do you trust all the rest of them to be mentally stable?

As for your suggestion that people with permits may not have had any training at all, most of us who have permits practice frequently (much to the chagrin of our bank books - have you seen the price of arugula... er, ammo lately?). Many Law Enforcement Officers shoot only twice a year, as required to maintain their qualification.

Empty Holsters = EMPTY GESTURES I prefer teeth in my gestures. So when I was a college student, the holster I wore to class was NOT empty. Had it been, I'd likely not be writing this today. The fact I was armed saved my life one night on my way to class. So I advise students who feel safer being armed, to IGNOR both State and University regulations and carry concealed weapons. I still do despite living in a State refusing to grant CCW permits. Remember: "When SECONDS count, police are only MINUTES away".

This is for my own personal curiousity, but how often do students get verbally abusive and threatening about their grades? I have sat through over 100 hours worth of classes and I've never seen anyone get combative in class. As a professor, I'm sure you've seen it happy and I'm curious how frequently. Further, how frequently do these outbursts happen in senior and graduate classes (because only those age 21 and up are eligible for concealed handgun licenses)? I'm also going to point out that you being uncomfortable does not take priority over my right to protect my life. As I said before, CHL holders are statistically less likely to be convicted of a serious crime. At the 11 colleges that allow students to carry concealed handguns over a combined total of more than 60 semesters, there has not been a single incident of gun violence, a single accident or a single handgun theft.

Typo: My previous post is supposed to say "happen" instead of "happy." I got in a hurry to wrap things up and forgot to proofread.

Prof, a simple question and please don't perceive this as a personal attack but accept it as a point of discussion to forward the discourse on this pressing public policy issue. What percentage of the general population is unstable in your opinion (support with facts and figures if possible)? Can you compare this to the percentage of law abiding CHP holders that you "feel" are not stable? Can you back this "feeling" with actual data? Is your argument an emotional response to a "stressful and scary situation" or is it a reasoned and logical analysis of facts that will eventually lead to a safer reality. To "reason with the heart" is romantic but in reality abandons reason all together. The romantic notion that, if I fear something all others should fear it as well and this will somehow dissuade those "unstable individuals" from acting irrationally is itself irrational. A reasonable individual does not wish to harm others but understands the real world enough to take responsibility for their own self protection as in normal and natural. If they fail to defend themselves they will loose all ability to help improve reality for all.

Prof. Please accept my apology. It's late and I can't count. I should have written 'a few simple questions".

I fully support the rights of students with CCW's/CHP's or whatever they're called in whichever state they're in. I have 2 college age sons both were raised with guns in the house have hunted and enjoy shooting sports. They're smart and level headed..I fear for them at school because they're forced to leave all means of self defense at home when they're at a school. Have you ever heard of a shooting at a police station, military base or gun shops/shows..NO...let's think..they happen at banks, post offices, malls, and schools (GUN FREE ZONES) Common sense is an armed society is a polite society. CCW holders are held to the highest level of law abiding behavior they realize they can lose their permit for something as small as a traffic ticket...Gimme a break...Guns are an emotional issue but since when should emotion rule logic and common sense. It's a choice each person should be allowed for themselves to arm themselves or not. They're the ones who'll have to look in the mirror and ask themselves if they can shoot to save themselves or others. if you can't I respect your choice but don't take away the choice of others who might save your kids from dying if the need arises. Logic not emotion should rule the day here!

Ken--I have to highly disagree with your statement, "The last thing a crazed killer...fingerprints." If the killer is planning on getting away, yes, but in what percentage of school or other mass shootings did it get deemed the killer planned on not going down at the scene? Also, while I understand you want to save lives, death is death, if Cho was stopped and only 5 had died it wouldn't have been any "better" in my mind. Unless no one gets killed it is never a "better" situation. If adding more and more guns is the way to have no death then I'm all for it, but CC or not people will still get killed if a killer plans on killing. Whether its 2 or 100 it's still tragic and in both situations lives can be saved, its all just numbers. A last point is for someone waaay down this forum who blames the PEG, who I don't support because of their protest on the 16th, for using victims as statistics to push their agendas, well I see the same thing from the CC side too. I have seen nothing about CC that did not say something about stopping school shootings.

Your last point is a good one, Chris. The fact that the emphasis is on school shootings is perhaps inappropriate. The reality is that estimates suggest that concealed weapons are used legally in self-defense at a rate of about .5 million times per year. Clearly, most of these are not school shooting incidents, but instead more common instances where someone intercedes to prevent an assailant from committing a forcible felony.

I should point out, because I don't know if I made it clear, that I am not against CC off campus only on campus. I will be a future gun owner myself but I just don't see the need for it on campus. Knives can work in assualts, muggings, and rape just as well as a gun, so carry that or mace on campus if you are going to be alone late at night. If your alone late at night off campus, wear your CC and have a knife to double your protection!

jason, i don't agree that chris's point is valid one. i've never seen sccc hold up pictures of victims or violence to make their point. i've never seen the victims in the group even speak out. the difference is that the anti groups only have emotion to rely on, not logic or fact, so they use and abuse it. further, chris, it appears that you have not read much on april 16th. many many people attempted to stop the shooter with various items-become-weapons with no luck. knife training also takes a significant amount more training to be effective than firearms so i'm not sure about that. finally, how many criminals honestly go through more hoops than they need to? that was the point that ken was making that you disagree with, chris. and if reducing deaths isn't the objective, i dont know what is. 1 death is better than 2 deaths, and i dont think you have grounds to argue that, honestly.

They don't show pictures but they talk about lives that could have been saved, so they use the situation. If you read my post you would realize I talked about the knife/mace in the context of rape/assault/robbery, not the extremely rare mass shooting. Would a knife have stopped Cho, no the chance of that is less then the chance of killing him with a book. Criminals may go through loopholes, but he said that crazed killers don't want to give up their identities to the police, yet Cho bought his guns legally and like I said, once again you didn't fully read, mass shootings happen by people who don't plan on getting away so why would they care about putting their fingerprints out? Please read a whole post before saying it isn't valid. I never said reducing deaths wasn't a good thing either, once again not reading, I was merely stating that when it comes to death, death is death and IMO there is no situation I consider better unless it is zero death. I would consider reduced death as less bad not better.

To Chris....I do not want to offend you or make any statement that might insult you, but lets say that your parents are out having dinner together. Shooter comes in and kills one of your parents and then your other parent (or other good person) kills shooter therefore leaving you with one parent still alive. Are you saying that grieving the loss of both parents vs just one (still having one alive) is the same? Unfortunately very few would agree with you. Even though individual liberty is very important, our culture and others will trade a few lives to save others. Look at flight 93 on 9/11. Those courageous folks basically knowingly gave up theirs lives in order to save hundreds, or thousands, etc.

In response to Wesley's question: "how often do students get verbally abusive and threatening about their grades? I have sat through over 100 hours worth of classes and I've never seen anyone get combative in class." You're right - students generally aren't combative during class. The combativeness (or I guess it would be more appropriate to call it intimidation) I've witnessed has happened before/after class, during office hours, via email, etc. I have heard quite a wide variety of reasons why I must give extra grade points: potential loss of scholarship, decreased chance of getting in to graduate or professional school, even "my dad will take my car away if I don't get at least a B." These situations can make students feel very desperate, and they do occasionally lash out in very inappropriate (and potentially harmful) ways. Examples I can think of right now would be racist graffiti on a professor's door and vandalism involving feces (yes, feces).

Prof, I hear ya. Some students have gotten "desperate" with me in my times I've been a GTA & instructor (I'll estimate 400 students in that time). But of them, none were seniors or grad students (i.e. 21+ who would be eligible for permits). Further, with only 2% of Virginians with permits, the odds of the confrontational student having a permit (and therefore be carrying lawfully) are minuscule. I did notice, however, you combated your own point: "I would not be comfortable with students carrying guns, concealed or not, in my classroom" and then "students generally aren't combative during class." Therefore I don't see the foundation of your argument. Also, neither of the cases you site were life-threatening, although intimidating and serious. If anything, I think this advocates professors being able to carry, as those unstable students occasionally (rarely) turn their attack onto the professor physically.

Chris, I can't disagree with you more. Maybe it's because I value every life, rather than merely the concept of having no shootings. That is, if a life can be saved, then I'm going to fight to do so. Yes, there is a big difference between five people dying and thirty-two dying. Yes, it IS better that fewer people die, even though both situations are bad. I honestly don't understand your all-or-nothing mentality. Life is not set up to support such absolutes. If there's no difference between five people and thirty-two people dying, then would it be no worse if three hundred died? Three thousand? If he had, somehow, killed the entire student body of Tech?

As for your belief that those of us on the CC side are no different than PEG, I have to cry foul. We chose not to protest on April 16th out of respect for the fallen. Ken Stanton made this decision before we ever heard of PEG. How is that morally the same as what they wanted to do? Do we cite tragedy in order to make our point? Yes, yes we do. And I make no apologies for that. Our very purpose is to make sure we can defend ourselves against things like this. How could we NOT point to the tragedies? Would you have paramedics not give examples of cases where they saved lives, in order to make sure they have enough funding to continue to do so? If we think what we're doing will save lives, then why should we not say so?

Just wanted to throw this out there - can't you be against "easy guns" (in favor of closing loopholes, in favor of more background checks) AND be in favor of CC? It seems like both groups have a similar goal - to make people safer - ?

This is a very well thought out and written article. I applaud you for being brave enough to champion this cause, and I agree with you whole-heartedly. If responsible citizens are given the right to carry concealed handguns, there would be many less tragedies of this sort. Criminals are going to get their hands on guns no matter what the law says, so responsible, law abiding citizens should have the right to carry concealed handguns in order to protect themselves and others.

It is great to hear that students are beginning to wake up and demand all constitutional, divinely inspired, natural rights of the USA. Never forget, an armed society is a polite society, and one that is disarmed has lost citizenship and become a subject to a tyranny.

Bottom line is this: Sane people carrying licensed concealed weapons, even if all the loopholes are closed would make the place safer. If someone decides it's their day to do a school or workplace shooting, then license or not, a shooting they will go. Face it, The guns are out there already, and people like Cho or anyone else who wants to commit a mass killing will do so, regardless of their "legality" in obtaining guns. They will get them and use them as soon as the voices in their heads tell them to. They will be more successful in doing so if the pool of victims is less likely to be armed. Do students in Colleges need to carry concealed? No, not usually. But hey, if they could even open carry, they'd be better off if faced with another Cho. If there was a chance that an assailant would be faced with a counter such as a licensed person concealed, there may be a deterrent factor...maybe not...but at least there won't be a mass of soft, fleshy, unarmed targets unable to defend themselves.

Apparently, the students have not read our Constitution. The Second Amendment gives citizens the Natural, God given right to bare arms, and any law passed by mortals restricting this right is null and void. Wear your guns;ignore the marxist,useful idiots that think they are God, that God created all men, but Sam Colt made them equal.