Answer to Glock directed to all
Glock06
Warning: I am going to say some things you all don't agree with. Hell, I am going to say some things I disagree with. I don't like it but it makes it no less true as it has been portrayed to me. As I said, I am not a security person, not law enforcement, I am a professor of electronics. Save the sarchasm, the insults, the personal attacks, the inuendo for someone else.
Nope. Don't now. Never did. A couple of threads emerge at least from the studies I have read, and conversations I have had with people whom I consider to be experts. Larry Barton for one. Google his name. I can't say this is universal and I am remembering some of it vaguely. Much of this came from a national seminar of college emergency response folks I attended a couple weeks ago.
1. Active shooters frequently give warning signs of severe mental instability well in advance.
2. Many shooters have been through unsuccessful mental therapy.
3. During the active shooter event, the shooter is calm, detached, almost serene. Columbine was a little different because there were two shooters.
3. Active shooters do not expect to come out of the event alive.
4. The people closest to the shooter ignored warning signs. (Statements, giving away belongings, changes in personality)
5. Nothing that any college could reasonably do would have prevented any of the events. Gun free zone..No gun free zone..
6. The weapons used in a lot of cases were legally purshased. (Not in Columbine. They were given, I think to Kliebold by a female friend whose family is now being sued. Lawyers can find a way to make money in the most repulsive of situations)
7. No action prior to the shooting event against the shooter would have been legal which would have prevented the shooting. No legal action, no medical action, no family or friend's action. Law enforcement hands are tied. The community realizes after the fact that they are at the mercy of the shooter. And the shooter is almost always crazy.
8. In some of the cases, perhaps most, I am not sure, the victims were unknown to or only distantly acquainted with the shooter. (Not true in workplace shootings)
9. In a lot of cases, the event was well planned to overcome the things that would have prevented it.
10. Many of the security people see gun free zones as unavoidable in the grand scheme of things. Larry Barton would not render an opinion.
The likelyhood of an active shooter event is remote. I was given some statistics which I can not remember but it is remote. Struck-by-lightening remote. We may find that to be not reconcilable but the fact is that these events are burned into our awareness by news coverage because of
1. the helplessness of the community.
2. the extreme visciousness of the attacks
3. victims are frequently among young people and not restricted to males
4. victims are completely vulnerable..Yes because they were disarmed by the policies.
5. the event is shocking on many levels
So we will begin to practice active shooter responses as part of our emergency response routine, not because we are afraid it is going to happen, but because we must be prepared. We will examine our response options. We will beef up physical security. Put telephones in every classroom. Two way radios for principle actors. We will acquiese to national ferver and create an essentially gun free zone. Then if it happens we will kick ourselves and swear at those who we will blame for forcing our hand.
I can tell you I don't fear anything from my students, nor do my students fear anything from one another. I swear to you this is fact. I think this is true on the vast majority of campuses nationwide. It certainly was true as represented by those at the conference. At the conference, the people from California schools were worried most about earthquakes. The people from the corn belt were worried about tornados. At that time most were remarkably calm about swine flu. BY then we knew it was a fool's errand.
I have seen people so angry that I remember thinking that I was glad they didn't have a pistol. BUT. I have been so angry at other drivers that I was glad that I didn't have a pistol with me. There would be some cell phones with bullet holes. My wife is a professor at a local university and she is not in any fear, nor are her students to her knowledge. There is a good bit of crime on that campus, but it is primarily because the campus is in a bad part of town and the violence spills over from the surrounding community. There has never been an instance of a student being injured or victimized.
Glock is right IMO about the constitution. I doubt that any shooter ever checked to see if he was authorized to carry the weapons he used. And even where weapons are not prohibited you won't find many in classrooms. Not enough to make it likely that a school could rely solely upon that to mount a credible defense. Certainly a person who is armed feels at least some additional safety. Only a fool would deny that.
The sad truth is that an alarmingly large segment of our population is either not comfortable around handguns or not properly respectful of handguns. We now have seen fit to elect a government which will soon find the time to attack the second amendment. I have been and off and on recreational black powder shooter for 35 years. I just joined the NRA.
Glock06
Warning: I am going to say some things you all don't agree with. Hell, I am going to say some things I disagree with. I don't like it but it makes it no less true as it has been portrayed to me. As I said, I am not a security person, not law enforcement, I am a professor of electronics. Save the sarchasm, the insults, the personal attacks, the inuendo for someone else.
Nope. Don't now. Never did. A couple of threads emerge at least from the studies I have read, and conversations I have had with people whom I consider to be experts. Larry Barton for one. Google his name. I can't say this is universal and I am remembering some of it vaguely. Much of this came from a national seminar of college emergency response folks I attended a couple weeks ago.
1. Active shooters frequently give warning signs of severe mental instability well in advance.
2. Many shooters have been through unsuccessful mental therapy.
3. During the active shooter event, the shooter is calm, detached, almost serene. Columbine was a little different because there were two shooters.
3. Active shooters do not expect to come out of the event alive.
4. The people closest to the shooter ignored warning signs. (Statements, giving away belongings, changes in personality)
5. Nothing that any college could reasonably do would have prevented any of the events. Gun free zone..No gun free zone..
6. The weapons used in a lot of cases were legally purshased. (Not in Columbine. They were given, I think to Kliebold by a female friend whose family is now being sued. Lawyers can find a way to make money in the most repulsive of situations)
7. No action prior to the shooting event against the shooter would have been legal which would have prevented the shooting. No legal action, no medical action, no family or friend's action. Law enforcement hands are tied. The community realizes after the fact that they are at the mercy of the shooter. And the shooter is almost always crazy.
8. In some of the cases, perhaps most, I am not sure, the victims were unknown to or only distantly acquainted with the shooter. (Not true in workplace shootings)
9. In a lot of cases, the event was well planned to overcome the things that would have prevented it.
10. Many of the security people see gun free zones as unavoidable in the grand scheme of things. Larry Barton would not render an opinion.
The likelyhood of an active shooter event is remote. I was given some statistics which I can not remember but it is remote. Struck-by-lightening remote. We may find that to be not reconcilable but the fact is that these events are burned into our awareness by news coverage because of
1. the helplessness of the community.
2. the extreme visciousness of the attacks
3. victims are frequently among young people and not restricted to males
4. victims are completely vulnerable..Yes because they were disarmed by the policies.
5. the event is shocking on many levels
So we will begin to practice active shooter responses as part of our emergency response routine, not because we are afraid it is going to happen, but because we must be prepared. We will examine our response options. We will beef up physical security. Put telephones in every classroom. Two way radios for principle actors. We will acquiese to national ferver and create an essentially gun free zone. Then if it happens we will kick ourselves and swear at those who we will blame for forcing our hand.
I can tell you I don't fear anything from my students, nor do my students fear anything from one another. I swear to you this is fact. I think this is true on the vast majority of campuses nationwide. It certainly was true as represented by those at the conference. At the conference, the people from California schools were worried most about earthquakes. The people from the corn belt were worried about tornados. At that time most were remarkably calm about swine flu. BY then we knew it was a fool's errand.
I have seen people so angry that I remember thinking that I was glad they didn't have a pistol. BUT. I have been so angry at other drivers that I was glad that I didn't have a pistol with me. There would be some cell phones with bullet holes. My wife is a professor at a local university and she is not in any fear, nor are her students to her knowledge. There is a good bit of crime on that campus, but it is primarily because the campus is in a bad part of town and the violence spills over from the surrounding community. There has never been an instance of a student being injured or victimized.
Glock is right IMO about the constitution. I doubt that any shooter ever checked to see if he was authorized to carry the weapons he used. And even where weapons are not prohibited you won't find many in classrooms. Not enough to make it likely that a school could rely solely upon that to mount a credible defense. Certainly a person who is armed feels at least some additional safety. Only a fool would deny that.
The sad truth is that an alarmingly large segment of our population is either not comfortable around handguns or not properly respectful of handguns. We now have seen fit to elect a government which will soon find the time to attack the second amendment. I have been and off and on recreational black powder shooter for 35 years. I just joined the NRA.
Last edited: