Nice read.

Very true -> 'what the e-mailer meant was that schools have systematically beaten the fighting spirit out of American children, who then grow into dispirited adults, for whom "fighting back is not an option."'

I am certainly ready to defend myself if the situation calls for it. I have trained in karate, have a CCW permit (I carry 50% of the time. I cant carry at work because I work in a school district), and I always carry a knife.

Had even a small percentage of the VT students been armed, I think far fewer people would have been killed. I disagree with Samhain. These students are ADULTS, not kids, and I would think they'd be responsible enough to carry guns. I was brought up around them and was taught gun safety as a child, beginng at age 5. I was responsible enough to NOT kill people at that age. What's the difference in a 23 year old laborer vs a 23 year old college student carrying a gun?

You cant wait for the police. I called the police when a guy was beating his girlfriend in a parked car that I had driven by, and the police never showed. I wish I'd had my CCW permit then. I did manage to get him to take his attention off her and direct it toward me. I told him I'd called the cops and jumped back into my car because this guy was in a rage.

Our gun laws are strict enough. The root of the problem of violence in our society is the breakdown of the family, although in the VT case, this guy was just nuts to begin with. Why are so many of these mass killers on prescription anti-depressants? That's another valid question.

Our canadian readers may recall a campus shooting some years ago. One of the victims was found to have a revolver still in her purse.In the end, she was more afraid of legal repercussions than a gunman shooting her classmates. Incidents like this are frustrating. The killer himself is dead, and society looks around for ANYONE or ANYTHING to vent it's horror and pretend it is doing something. This is why nail clipers are on EBAY people.Meanwhile, I'm still trying to figure out if the 'large black males' were Newfoundlands with rabies, a ninja gang or something else. We live in a pluralistic society, one that unfortunately seems to include tolerance for people obviously of threat to the majority.

http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/newsl/prozac.html
http://www.advancedhealthplan.com/prozac.html
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/08/zoloft.defense.ap/index.html?eref=rss_law

columbine + luvox=?
http://www.boulderclassifieds.com/shooting/30cluvox.html

http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/Profs/PUarticles/SSRI.htm
http://www.newstarget.com/020787.html
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/DDIL/prozac.html

...etc...etc..

It seems like people at large believe that there's a magic pill to cure behavior issues. Unfortunately it seems to me at least that we are prescribing things without a clear idea of what they do or how they work.

Chris,
Thanks for the "black males" reference, I had meant to toss that in also. The tone of that post seemed to imply that black males are scary and threatening. Did it matter what color the man was?

On the other hand, I dont understand the nail clippers on eBay reference. ??

I agree with samhain.

I also think that if there was a student at VA Tech who was of the age (21 to legally carry in VA) and mindset (protect and defend only) to carry a gun, he or she would probably have already done so, quietly and discreetly, despite any campus rules.

My own father encouraged me to be equipped to protect myself in secret when I was in college, because it was better to break a few campus rules than wind up getting raped (this isn't meant to undermine the non-equipped tactics used to stay safe, of course). But I was pretty much alone in this mindset, I didn't know anyone who shared my interest in preparedness at all.

I currently don't carry a gun (but my hubby and I are looking into training courses), but I don't consider myself defenseless at all. As I've explained in earlier posts, I don't consider guns to be the be-all, end-all of personal defense, nor would I ever assume that those who carry a gun would be successful, or even willing, to deploy their weapon against an assailant.

"...violating federal law..."

What federal law is violated?

Just a very minor correction. You are not violating Federal law by carrying in a bank unless that bank is a Federal Reserve bank (i.e.: government controlled.) Most banks are private businesses and as such are subject to state law when it comes to CCW.

As far as that scenario goes I'd likewise probably wait and see, but it would really depend upon the layout of the place, etc. Just too many variables to say for sure.

I wouldn't call you a coward, because I don't know you. I actually am a pacifist- I would much rather just be left alone. I would consider you, like a great many people, someone who seems to ignore that what we wish and what is are very different.

And I do appologize for mistyping- I'd been taken crap all day from a now former coworker who was antagonizing the guys in the shop who are gun owners. Including the boss. Not the first time it's happened from this individual, is the last. My "you" in that staement was a general statement to those who feel as you stated you do about private citizens carrying a concealed firearm.

But you seemed to be attacking those of us here who do legally carry a concealed handgun when you said you didn't trust us. THAT is why you hear resentment. I don't mind that you don't carry a sidearm, that is your choice. I respect your choice. What I, and undoubtedly a others, do resent that you implied that since I am neither military nor law enforcement that we could not be trusted to carry a firearm.

I have known several cops, and many of my friends went not only into the military but also the special operations community. A competitive shooter shoots a lot more than anyone outside of Delta, SEAL 6, the Presidential Detail or the FBI's HRT. If you hunt, you know what bullets do. You're average cop fires less than 500 rounds a year, and if they've never hunted, the only thing that they believe (practical knowledge vs book knowledge) is that bullets punch holes in paper and just disappear when . You're average infantryman fires more than that in peace time, but is just as unfamiliar with the terminal effects of small arms ammunition, maybe even less becuase you don't always see the person you hit in a firefight. Most of the people I know who EDC or semi-EDC a handgun fire at least 500 rounds a year, and since a great many of us hunt, we know what bullets do. We know they leave the body in most cases, so there is always the danger part the target, but still we accept the risk. We know that in a situation where there might be multiple shooters in a group setting that we just became a target for the shooters we don't see, and that we don't have the option of praying to the radio gods for back up or air support. And we know that if that bullet hits someone after it exits the perpetrator, that we don't have a larger organization behind us with lawyers and handlers and access to the press and either insurance or buckets of money. And we accept that, as an armed citizen.

As I said, you don't have to trust me or any of the others. And even though we resent your attitude towards us, we'll stick our necks on the line while waiting for the guys with badges, armour and radios to show up, rather than let others die.

Uhm... two point.

In VT and NH it isn't illegal unless you intend to make a hasty withdrawal. I can't comment on other jurisdictions, as those are the only ones I'm cleared to carry in.

Second, if hostages are taken, SOP is you will be frisked when released through negotiation or more active intervention. If they find it, there will the assumption that you were a back up shooter and held as an accomplice until the charges are dropped or you make bail (good luck). I'd rather get the slap on the wrist (if any) and a cleaning bill from the bank than go through the repercussions of the plan you just described.