Shooting At My School

[QED 4]

Thoughts with OP

I must point out to you that the vast majority of people are truly good people. They love their families, they pay their taxes, andthey are trying to do good for their fellow man. I would feel very safe walking through a crowded street knowing that people are carrying guns.For the simple fact that it makes it safer for me. Sure you can have the nut that will go nuts and try to kill someone, but withso many people carrying guns, the second he pulls the gun he wouldn't have a chance.

The problem I have with this line of thinking is that you are assuming that all members of the public with fire arms can correctly and accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations in split seconds as well as accurately use any fire arms they are carrying. We let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse.

[chgocubs99 0]

Thoughts with OP The problem I have with this line of thinking is that you are assuming that all members of the public with fire arms can correctly and accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations in split seconds as well as accurately use any fire arms they are carrying. We let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse.

I would really love to hear a valid counter argument to this one.

[Poker Addict 0]

I would really love to hear a valid counter argument to this one.

Well, obviously when things become illegal they become impossible to get. Especially criminals, I mean if something is illegal how could they get it? Pot is illegal and I don't anyone that is able to get this... particularly high school or college kids.When alcohol was illegal, the nation was a much safer place. I am from Chicago and I used to remember when I was a kid all of the old timers reminiscing about the good ole days of Capone because they just felt safe... and sober. Wait, that didn't actually work out that well, did it. hmmmmmmm.Anyway, I don't have a valid argument one way or the other. PVFIDTS (Political Views Forum Is Down The Street).All I know is that this was another horrible tragedy. And my thoughts are with the friends and families of those that were directly effected... and the rest of the school because it no doubt effects everyone.OP - I hope that you are doing well.

[gvl 0]

The NIU Web site shows that Kazmierczak had been vice president of the university's Academic Criminal Justice Association.

Wow@ this part.This whole thing really sucks, can't believe what the world is coming to.

[Kaveros 0]

Thoughts with OP :(The problem I have with this line of thinking is that you are assuming that all members of the public with fire arms can correctly and accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations in split seconds as well as accurately use any fire arms they are carrying. We let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse.

Well I think it is important for me to address the latter part of your post first.You have said "accurately use any fire arms they are carrying".People who use firearms are people who are passionate about firearms. You have to be passionate if you are goingto carry a firearm (I know I never want to touch or use one in my lifetime!). They already know how to use them.Allowing people to carry firearms wherever they please (excepting of course private property where rules and regulations may differ) wouldnot FORCE everyone to. The old lady from down the street would not be strapped with a .45. Only the people who want to carry would carry.These are the people who already know how to operate and use a firearm.Firearms in themself's are not the hardest thing to figure out. Hell, if the 12 year old homeboy can join a gang and kill someone with a gun, anyone could.Onto the first part of your post. I will once again quote just to start off, "accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations".I would like to use an example from one of these high pressure situations. One of the flights that was hijacked on 911 (I cannot for the lifeof me remember which one, and I am not going to go looking) had a group of passengers who knew that without acting they were probably going to die.So what did these average people do? They fought back. These were people who didn't have any firearm or combat training. They werethe average joe's, your neighbours. They were buisness men and lawyers and stewardess'.They had to act under extreme and pressured circumstances, and they prevailed. Granted that is just one example, but since 911 came up, I thought it would be a fitting one.The last part of your post "we let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse."Exactly. We do let idiots drive cars. And infact people driving cars kill more people in the united states than people shooting guns. Therefore, cars should be banned right?

[nutzbuster 7]

Thoughts with OP :(The problem I have with this line of thinking is that you are assuming that all members of the public with fire arms can correctly and accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations in split seconds as well as accurately use any fire arms they are carrying. We let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse.

I would really love to hear a valid counter argument to this one.

I said "TRAINED AND CERTIFIED" gun owners.HUGE difference. College campuses should have several dozen well armed and certified SECRET individuals ready willing and able to handle these types of threats, ala I.C.E. FAA Sky Marshals.And if there are regular students who can complete a rigorous Psychological and threat/risk assessment situations training (students who may be ex military, pre law enforcement, ROTC, etc.) then the more the merrier. There is no other way to stem this tide. That said, as horrible as this event was, it is an isolated event just the same. I am sure the anti gun folks are spewing all over themselves to use this as yet another reason to take guns out of the millions of law abiding responsible gun owners hands. Then only the criminals, who pay no attention to guns laws, will be the only ones left with the guns. So stupid. God have mercy on the victims and surviving families of this senseless crime. May the perp rot in Hell.

[QED 4]

FWIW Nutzbuster I wasn't responding to your post but Kaveros who didn't once mention trained and certified only "good" people. I don't have a problem with trained and certified people carrying guns in public, how much training and how regularly this should have to be renewed is something I have no knowledge on though. I would imagine that people in the police and armed forces who are expected to respond to gun crime train constantly and rigorously so they are able to make the right decisions instantly and I don't honestly know if you can expect civilians to reach a similar level? I do find the gun debate in the US fascinating just because it highlights that we still do have at least a few cultural differences between the UK and US and it is such a non issue here but in terms of this thread I think it might be more respectful if we knock it on the head here.

[Kaveros 0]

FWIW Nutzbuster I wasn't responding to your post but Kaveros who didn't once mention trained and certified only "good" people. I don't have a problem with trained and certified people carrying guns in public, how much training and how regularly this should have to be renewed is something I have no knowledge on though. I would imagine that people in the police and armed forces who are expected to respond to gun crime train constantly and rigorously so they are able to make the right decisions instantly and I don't honestly know if you can expect civilians to reach a similar level? I do find the gun debate in the US fascinating just because it highlights that we still do have at least a few cultural differences between the UK and US and it is such a non issue here but in terms of this thread I think it might be more respectful if we knock it on the head here.

If you read my abovie post, I stated that the good people who WANT to carry guns, already know how touse them anyway. Not every good person would be forced do carry, that is just going from one extreme of the spectrum (onlybad people should have access to guns by making them illegal) to the other (every good person, experienced or not should carry).Just to clarify, the good people who carry, know how to use the weapon already.I am against regulations of this kind. People will do the right thing whether you force it on them or not.

[chgocubs99 0]

Well I think it is important for me to address the latter part of your post first.You have said "accurately use any fire arms they are carrying".People who use firearms are people who are passionate about firearms. You have to be passionate if you are goingto carry a firearm (I know I never want to touch or use one in my lifetime!). They already know how to use them.Allowing people to carry firearms wherever they please (excepting of course private property where rules and regulations may differ) wouldnot FORCE everyone to. The old lady from down the street would not be strapped with a .45. Only the people who want to carry would carry.These are the people who already know how to operate and use a firearm.Firearms in themself's are not the hardest thing to figure out. Hell, if the 12 year old homeboy can join a gang and kill someone with a gun, anyone could.Onto the first part of your post. I will once again quote just to start off, "accurately make threat assessment decisions in high pressure and confusing situations".I would like to use an example from one of these high pressure situations. One of the flights that was hijacked on 911 (I cannot for the lifeof me remember which one, and I am not going to go looking) had a group of passengers who knew that without acting they were probably going to die.So what did these average people do? They fought back. These were people who didn't have any firearm or combat training. They werethe average joe's, your neighbours. They were buisness men and lawyers and stewardess'.They had to act under extreme and pressured circumstances, and they prevailed. Granted that is just one example, but since 911 came up, I thought it would be a fitting one.The last part of your post "we let enough idiots drive cars without giving them guns to make the situation worse."Exactly. We do let idiots drive cars. And infact people driving cars kill more people in the united states than people shooting guns. Therefore, cars should be banned right?

I cannot begin to find all the flaws in this post but I will do as good as I can.Your whole first paragraph doesn't really make any sense at all. Just because you would not personally carry a firearm, you cannot possibly know what decisions millions of other Americans will do. Just because I buy a firearm and use it at a range doesn't mean I will be able to accurately determine WHEN to use this weapon. You don't see police pulling guns on people that are speeding, do you? This is because they have extensive training on when and how to use these weapons. The average Joe is not able to make these judgements, and certainly without the benefit of back up, training exercises, etc.Second, your 9-11 example is interesting except what about the hundreds and thousands of other, less serious examples. Let's take a look at a department store robbery. Someone is robbing the counter at a department store. Someone that is packing heat sees this happen and decides to take matters into their own hands and pulls a weapon on the guy. Someone else that is packing sees this weapon and pulls a gun on the wrong person. The person who was trying to defend the department store thinks that they are working together and opens fire on that guy. Someone else in the store that is packing sees him taking someone out and says, "WOAH, BETTER STOP HIM FROM TAKING OUT MORE PEOPLE, REMEMBER NIU???!!!!" So he unloads on this guy, accidently killing a couple of fleeing innocent bystanders in the process. See where the problem comes in with letting people take the law into their own hands? It's the reason that every ship needs a captain, every team needs a coach, every department store needs a manager. If you don't have that leader, or in this case, the LAW, that are entrusted by society to protect and serve as best as possible, then chaos would ensue. Basketball teams would bicker, the ships operation would fall apart, and the entire law system as we know it would become meaningless. Your last paragraph makes the least sense of all. Society has decided to accept that there will be a certain amount of car accidents and fatailities in order to improve our quality of life. Your scenario does not improve the quality of life at all. The people that are willing to die anyway will still commit these heinous acts. Yea, you may prememptively stop a carjacking or a robbery because the assailant would be worried that the other person may be carrying. But the edge would be more than negated by the amount of people that are NOT TRAINED to use guns that, "Well, since everyone else has a gun", I need one. Your argument would be akin to that of an ARMS race or the Cold War. But you are forgetting that those decisions are made by the most highly trained specialists in the entire world with advanced knowledge that the average Joe doesn't have or want. But yet, you are trying to put weapons in those same people's hands.

[speedz99 145]

For years I've been trying to convince people that everyone should be allowed to own nuclear weapons. Except for redheads, lefties, and people with attached earlobes.

[Kaveros 0]

I cannot begin to find all the flaws in this post but I will do as good as I can.Your whole first paragraph doesn't really make any sense at all. Just because you would not personally carry a firearm, you cannot possibly know what decisions millions of other Americans will do. Just because I buy a firearm and use it at a range doesn't mean I will be able to accurately determine WHEN to use this weapon. You don't see police pulling guns on people that are speeding, do you? This is because they have extensive training on when and how to use these weapons. The average Joe is not able to make these judgements, and certainly without the benefit of back up, training exercises, etc.Second, your 9-11 example is interesting except what about the hundreds and thousands of other, less serious examples. Let's take a look at a department store robbery. Someone is robbing the counter at a department store. Someone that is packing heat sees this happen and decides to take matters into their own hands and pulls a weapon on the guy. Someone else that is packing sees this weapon and pulls a gun on the wrong person. The person who was trying to defend the department store thinks that they are working together and opens fire on that guy. Someone else in the store that is packing sees him taking someone out and says, "WOAH, BETTER STOP HIM FROM TAKING OUT MORE PEOPLE, REMEMBER NIU???!!!!" So he unloads on this guy, accidently killing a couple of fleeing innocent bystanders in the process. See where the problem comes in with letting people take the law into their own hands? It's the reason that every ship needs a captain, every team needs a coach, every department store needs a manager. If you don't have that leader, or in this case, the LAW, that are entrusted by society to protect and serve as best as possible, then chaos would ensue. Basketball teams would bicker, the ships operation would fall apart, and the entire law system as we know it would become meaningless. Your last paragraph makes the least sense of all. Society has decided to accept that there will be a certain amount of car accidents and fatailities in order to improve our quality of life. Your scenario does not improve the quality of life at all. The people that are willing to die anyway will still commit these heinous acts. Yea, you may prememptively stop a carjacking or a robbery because the assailant would be worried that the other person may be carrying. But the edge would be more than negated by the amount of people that are NOT TRAINED to use guns that, "Well, since everyone else has a gun", I need one. Your argument would be akin to that of an ARMS race or the Cold War. But you are forgetting that those decisions are made by the most highly trained specialists in the entire world with advanced knowledge that the average Joe doesn't have or want. But yet, you are trying to put weapons in those same people's hands.

I guess that since you have broken down my arguement in a sequential manner, I will do the same.You have talked about police not pulling guns on people who are speeding. I don't really see how this correlates with anything I have said.I think your arguement about the grocery store robbery is a little bit skewed. Lets first look at the motives of two different things, a robberyand a situation like this current school shooting.First lets look at the robbery. A robber is comming in with two things on his mind. One is to get as much money as he possibley can, and the other is to not screw up, murder and get caught. He is thinking clearly because he has planned it out. He knows that if he murders someone, thesituation is going to be a lot worse, a greater investigation, and if things don't go his way, he will probably be spending a great deal of the rest of his life behind bars.He will be less trigger happy than he would be if he were just that loon who gunned down a school, and therefore the end resultwill be less likley to be a bloodbath massacre (ie he shoots, the good person pulling and shooting). When he sees that person pull a gun on him, he will most likley just give up.Now lets look at a school shooting. Someone like Stephen Kazmierczak is going in there with one thing on his mind.To kill and hurt as many people as he possibley can in a certain period of time.Now usually the perp will be dressed a certain way, in this case dressed all in black, with a balaclava, and a shotgun in hand.Do you really think that the good guy is going to see that guy, walking in firing upon people, and say "Oh shit! Lets start blasting everyone?"No, he will target that person, and most likely, being the experienced gun owner that he is (people who want to carry know how to use the firearm already)will gun that man down, before he kills those 6 people.I will move on now to your idea of the "law" being there to help us.It takes an average of I believe 6 minutes for a cop to reach you when you call for help.In a situation like this school shooting, who is comming to help you? The cops? They won't get there in time.By the time the cops could have gotten there, Stephen Kazmierczak had already shot 18 people, and put a bullet in his own head.We must protect ourselves, and all the other good people around us from the Kazmierczak's.I will quote you now from an exact line, "Your scenario does not improve the quality of life at all."How is that? How does saving the life's of 6 people, and their families not qualify as improving quality of life?Just to quote you again "The people that are willing to die anyway will still commit these heinous acts. "Agreed. That is why I have made a difference between people like Kazmierczak and the terrorists who planned 911.The people who planned 911 were smart, and would not have even thought about trying to hijack their planes if they thoughttheir plans would be completely destroyed.Now someone like Kazmierczak was not thinking about the consequences of his actions."negated by the amount of people that are NOT TRAINED to use guns that, "Well, since everyone else has a gun""Well once again, people who are going to get a gun are trained. They know how to use it, they are gun lovers.They have fired it, cleaned it and taken care of it. They know how to use it. People who don't want to use a gun, won't use one.Sure there will be those few people who will get one just because everyone else has one, but when they get thatgun, they will inevitably learn how to use it properly."you are trying to put weapons in those same people's hands."I am not trying to put any weapon into anyone's hands. I am not trying to do anything.What I do BELEIVE is that people should have the freedoms and rights to carry a weapon unrestricted.And like I have said many times, people who WANT to carry a firearm, are going to know how to use that firearm.From what I have heard, a gun (lets take a Glock, the most popular pistol on the US) is not that hard to use.If a baby gangster can pick one up and learn how to shoot and kill someone that quickly, then someone else whois sane minded can surely learn how to defend themselves with it.

[speedz99 145]

When he sees that person pull a gun on him, he will most likley just give up.

There are just too many directions in which one could go with a statement like this. Please admit that this is ridiculous. It'll save us all a lot of time and effort.

[timwakefield 68]

For years I've been trying to convince people that everyone should be allowed to own nuclear weapons. Except for redheads, lefties, and people with attached earlobes.

Let my people go!

[JoeyJoJo 18]

Let my people go!

[fatman 1]

Why have you automatically classed me as a loon. I am perfectly happy to have a civil discussion about it.How is being able to carry a gun on board a plane insane?Just think. Bad people won't even try to hijack it, if they think there is a good chance that they will be gunned down before they can show the bomb.Good people won't want to use the weapon, because they are good people.And the majority of the world are very, very good people. Doing this would put the power back into the right hands, and keep it out of the wrong hands.

I'm all for people being able to own guns but I tell you the first time I get on a plane, and somebody takes a shot and misses, I am going to be some pissed off as I am being sucked out like what happens in the movies.

[throwemaway 0]

Thoughts and prayers go out to you OP..I go to ISU, so its crazy to think something so tragic happened to a college so close to me...Be thankful for all you have, friends, family, and health

[ROGUE06 0]

hey guys, lastest update i got is I went a few vigils in the past day. Went to the Pike house yesterday to pay my respects to 2 sorority girls in the hospital recovering and the Pike that died in this tragedy. It went real well, very inspiring and touching to see the entire greek community put all their differences and rivalries aside to unite as one community. Went to a couple more vigils today, really good to see all the support. Really sucks everybody pretty much went home today, the campus is pretty much deserted. I can only be optimistic and hope we learn, while growing stronger through all of this. Keeping all the familes of the victims of this tragedy in my prayers.

[Kaveros 0]

There are just too many directions in which one could go with a statement like this. Please admit that this is ridiculous. It'll save us all a lot of time and effort.

Sorry for the late reply, I went to my brothers 21st birthday which started at a waterfront restaurant, moved onto Lowenbrau for german beerand ended at in a 2 day party where we ended up sleeping in my brothers car -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will not, as it is not ridiculous.The situations I have given you are just a few examples of situations that could go down, and just a few of the results.You cannot judge the idea just from a few messages over a poker forum. So far any point that you have shown me as to whyit would be a bad idea, to make people as free as possible, has been debunked, including the idea that a gun fired in a plane would cause it to crash.I still cannot understand how you cannot grasp the idea that more good people with guns than bad peoplewho will harm other people, is a bad idea.

[speedz99 145]

I will not, as it is not ridiculous.

Ok. Let's go back and read the entire passage that I quoted the one line from. I'll go ahead and bold my favorite part.

First lets look at the robbery. A robber is comming in with two things on his mind. One is to get as much money as he possibley can, and the other is to not screw up, murder and get caught. He is thinking clearly because he has planned it out. He knows that if he murders someone, thesituation is going to be a lot worse, a greater investigation, and if things don't go his way, he will probably be spending a great deal of the rest of his life behind bars.He will be less trigger happy than he would be if he were just that loon who gunned down a school, and therefore the end resultwill be less likley to be a bloodbath massacre (ie he shoots, the good person pulling and shooting). When he sees that person pull a gun on him, he will most likley just give up.

Until you admit that this is ridiculous and in no way based on reality, nothing you say can be taken seriously.

[Kaveros 0]

After this entire conversation, and after how sane minded I have proven myself to be, youstill cannot take me seriously?I would also like to point out that this is not "Kaveros' idea". This is a viewpoint held very widely by many people in the world.Sure there may be some holes in it, but so does taking away personal freedom thorugh restricting the use of guns to criminals only.EDIT:When I say "just give up" I do not mean he will say "Oh crap! You got me, here I surrender", I mean he probably won't start shooting, and ifhe does, he will probably in most situations, be in a position where the person with the gun on him (the robber) will be able to shoot him beforehe can shoot them, or anyone else (by this I mean from behind, the side, somewhere from which he is safe, and will probably pull the gunon him when the gun is not pointed at anyone.

[chgocubs99 0]

After this entire conversation, and after how sane minded I have proven myself to be, youstill cannot take me seriously?I would also like to point out that this is not "Kaveros' idea". This is a viewpoint held very widely by many people in the world.Sure there may be some holes in it, but so does taking away personal freedom thorugh restricting the use of guns to criminals only.EDIT:When I say "just give up" I do not mean he will say "Oh crap! You got me, here I surrender", I mean he probably won't start shooting, and ifhe does, he will probably in most situations, be in a position where the person with the gun on him (the robber) will be able to shoot him beforehe can shoot them, or anyone else (by this I mean from behind, the side, somewhere from which he is safe, and will probably pull the gunon him when the gun is not pointed at anyone.

Because this view is held by 1% of the population does not mean it is "very widely held".

[speedz99 145]

After this entire conversation, and after how sane minded I have proven myself to be, youstill cannot take me seriously?

Correct. You kind of lost me with your "let anyone and everyone carry guns on airplanes" idea. I'm guessing that you don't know the basic defining trait of the insane. They don't know that they're crazy.There's a reason why no government or private company in the world puts guns in between the airline magazine and the barf bag in front of every seat. But maybe you think you're more well-versed in security measures than all the experts. Sounds pretty sane to me.

I would also like to point out that this is not "Kaveros' idea". This is a viewpoint held very widely by many people in the world.Sure there may be some holes in it, but so does taking away personal freedom thorugh restricting the use of guns to criminals only.

I'm not arguing against the general idea of letting people carry weapons.

When I say "just give up" I do not mean he will say "Oh crap! You got me, here I surrender", I mean he probably won't start shooting, and ifhe does, he will probably in most situations, be in a position where the person with the gun on him (the robber) will be able to shoot him beforehe can shoot them, or anyone else (by this I mean from behind, the side, somewhere from which he is safe, and will probably pull the gunon him when the gun is not pointed at anyone.

If you were a girl this is the time when I'd call you cute and change the subject.1. I think your main problem is that you're giving everyone too much credit, including these generic "robbers". Most people are not able to stay under total control and act rationally during crisis situations. Most criminals are not in their right minds. Life isn't like the movies.2. You don't get to change the meaning of phrases like "just give up" in the middle of a conversation. You can admit that this was the wrong phrase (re: that you were wrong when you said it) and amend your position. I think you have good intentions, but you're getting carried away. Just reel it back and bit and you'll find that people will be less apt to dismiss you as insane.

[Doug 0]

I just love how he said "towel heads" then in his signature it says he's liberal. You're not.

[Gallo 1]

At 3:06 p.m. Thursday, Northern Illinois University will go completely silent.Precisely one week after a gunman shot and killed five students, the university and surrounding community will observe five minutes of silence - one minute for each victim.NIU President John Peters will make brief remarks at 3 p.m. in the Martin Luther King Commons, in the middle of campus.Bells at the Holmes Student Center and at churches in the surrounding community will chime until 3:11 p.m. - one minute for each of the students killed in the shooting.The university invites all Illinoisans - wherever they are - to join in remembering the lost students at 3:06 p.m.

[Poker Addict 0]

At 3:06 p.m. Thursday, Northern Illinois University will go completely silent.Precisely one week after a gunman shot and killed five students, the university and surrounding community will observe five minutes of silence - one minute for each victim.NIU President John Peters will make brief remarks at 3 p.m. in the Martin Luther King Commons, in the middle of campus.Bells at the Holmes Student Center and at churches in the surrounding community will chime until 3:11 p.m. - one minute for each of the students killed in the shooting.The university invites all Illinoisans - wherever they are - to join in remembering the lost students at 3:06 p.m.

Thank you for bringing this back on topic.