Excuse me, but I have been shot at, shot up, and shot down, and amateurs with guns have never made the situation better. Do you have any idea how many innocent people have been shot by people who thought they were defending their home? How about the number of innocent people lynched by mobs who thought they were doing the right thing?

One project has exonerated over 200 people who were on death row for crimes they didn’t commit, because there was DNA evidence. People selected for death by a slow and reasoned process.

At Ruby Ridge a trained FBI sniper shot the wrong person. The trained military in Iraq and Afghanistan are shooting innocent people every week. A trained New York State trooper shot and killed another officer during a gun fight this week. Pat Tillman was shot and killed by members in his own platoon. Whether you call them “collateral damage” or “friendly fire” it amounts to innocent people dying, killed by trained people.

You all that in mind, I would be interested in the facts behind your claim “were almost certain to have been better.” I didn’t see that in any of the “hostage situation” papers that came across my desk, or the firearms incident reports, or in the reports from grand juries.

In my experience people panic when gunfire breaks out, even a lot of people who have been through basic training in the military and police.

That reply simply doesn’t work, Bryan.

*Of course* things *might* have been worse if the victims had been armed–no one would deny that. The point, however, is that they were almost certain to have been better. We can’t live life nor make policy on the basis of distant possibilities rather than probabilities.

And, *of course*, there are other things in a classroom you could use to kill an assailant, but none of them is even remotely as effective as a gun. That’s why we give the Marines M-4s instead of erasers.

Seriously, making arguments like those is just going to confuse the argument. Run a VA Tech-style simulation a million times…I’d be surprised if you’d get more than one or two results in which things are made worse if you arm some of the victims.

My late father disarmed students on two occasions in his career:

* once, in the classroom, a student grew angry and pulled a knife. Dad positioned himself between the student and his intended victim, quietly spoke the attacker’s name, said “give me the knife,” and put out his hand. After a few moments, the attacker gave him the knife, handle first.

* another time, a girl interrupted Dad’s meeting with the principal. Dad recognized the image of a gun in the girl’s coat pocket. Using his Navy training, he seized her in a way that pinned her arms, and relieved her of the gun. The girl, known to have been seriously troubled, was sent to professionals for psychological help.

In both cases, the student with a weapon intended to do harm, not to defend himself or herself. In both cases, it was fortunate that my father was trained to deal with people wielding weapons in close quarters… and with people not quite “right in the head.” Had Dad faced the VT gunman, Dad would have died; no amount of training would have helped. Outside of that unusual circumstance, and probably even in that circumstance, I see students bearing weapons as increasing, not decreasing, the likelihood that someone will be seriously injured or killed.

It has got to be something that allows people on the inside unlock it as it’s a fire exit, while at least delaying entry.

In general, doors don’t open outward into corridors, but open outward to the exterior, for safety reasons. The University of West Florida got around that by building entry alcoves, so the doors could all open outward, but not intrude into the hall.

But then you have the killer who goes to class and blocks the doors so people can’t get out….

We just need to pass a law demanding that each person live in a very large bullet-proof hamster ball from birth. It would take care of a host of problems..

As for hardware, how about an inside bolt or one of those rubber footed things that holds doors open. Again, involve the students, let the solutions come from them.

OT: I’m really sorry to hear about Smudge, Annti, but Blogger hates me at the moment and I can’t comment at your place.

Hipparchia, he chained the outside doors shut and the entire incident took under ten minutes according to the Virginia State Police, actually they said he fired 170 rounds in 9 minutes. Nothing is fool-proof but the doors and locks are quick and doable. It will also give people a visible sign of security, and let them know the university is doing something.

I suppose the drawback is that a gunman could lock himself in a classroom with his chosen victims-to-be and outside help couldn’t break in in time to stop the fish-in-a-barrel massacre.

I had always admired Jack, ’cause he seemed like the last journalist standing in this talking-heads-and-bimbos-and-all-of-’em-think-that-they’re FUCKING *RAMBO* world, but after V-Tech’s massacre, he was the first one to start all of that “ARM THE STUDENTS AND THE TEACHERS AND THEY’LL STOP THIS SHIT RIGHT AT THE GET-GO!!!” rabid NRA bullshit. Virginia has some of the most lax gun laws this side of Poyner, Texas, and he’s bitching because the COLLEGE was a WEAPON-FREE ZONE?!?!?!??! They do that ’cause they’re trying to keep DRUG DEALERS, GANGS, AND MOBSTERS OUT OF THE DORMS AND OFF OF THE CAMPUS, dumbass, it’s not to INFRINGE on anybody’s SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

Please, Bryan, please send this insightful and interesting post and all of the comments to Cafferty. Maybe you can bring him back to reality.

And if we all tried to be the matinee western idols of the ’50s, then my “mother” (aka “The Fallen Uterus”) really WOULD be running around with a 6-foot bullwhip, trying to be LASH LARUE!!!

(Again, not a great concept for the world at large.)