Don't know source of this but might be good news. - Page 2

Don't know source of this but might be good news.

This is a discussion on Don't know source of this but might be good news. within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by tokerblue I haven't followed the Virginia Tech tragedy, but did any CCW legislation come out of that? I remember that a person ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 45
  1. #16
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
    I haven't followed the Virginia Tech tragedy, but did any CCW legislation come out of that? I remember that a person vocally complained about not being able to carry on the campus and that he had to leave his gun at home.

    It doesn't seem like something always happens after a tragedy to prevent it from ever happening again.
    It isn't over until....

    From a VA-ALERT.

    VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

    [First person pronouns [I, my, mine, etc] reference Philip Van Cleave, President VCDL]

    I will be speaking at Virginia Tech this Monday, November 9th from 7 PM to 9 PM room 129 of McBryde Hall. I will be covering the issue of concealed carry at higher educational campuses by students, faculty and staff with CHPs.

    If you can come to show support for the whole issue, that would be fantastic!

    Here is the announcement by Ken Stanton of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, which includes the other events going on next week and directions to McBryde Hall:

    ----

    Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at Virginia Tech

    Defense Education Week 2009

    November 9th – 14th is Defense Education Week, hosted by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at colleges across the country. Virginia Tech is participating with week-long events, speakers, newspaper articles, and demos pertaining to the issue, conducted by Registered Student Organization Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at Virginia Tech.

    We strongly believe that the ban on Virginia campuses will be lifted in the 2010 legislative session, which will start in January. Support for the cause has continued to rise as more people see that there is no good reason to deny state-permitted individuals to carry concealed
    firearms while on campus, just like they do everywhere else.

    Monday

    What is the case for concealed carry on campus? Is it just about4/16?

    Concealed Carry Quiz, Petition to the President

    7-9pm, McBryde 129 – Philip Van Cleave (President of VCDL) and SCCC at VT representatives

    Philip Van Cleave is the President of the Virginia Citizen’s Defense League, a large and very active gun-rights group fighting for the citizens of Virginia. He will present a speech outlining the need and reason for concealed carry rights on Virginia’s public campuses.

    After Mr. Van Cleave’s speech, a Q&A forum will be held where supporters and dissenters can inquire about the topic further.


    Tuesday

    How does the Second Amendment affect concealed carry on campus?

    Concealed Carry Quiz, Petition to the President

    Invitation to attend Second Tuesday Constitution Group at the Roanoke County Library, 6:30pm

    There are no formal events on Tuesday, but the Second Tuesday Constitution Group is holding its monthly meeting at the Roanoke County Library, and they will be discussing some Second amendment issues and ways to protect our rights.


    Wednesday

    What is legal and illegal, and what would change? Would all students
    be armed?

    Concealed Carry Quiz, Petition to the President

    7-8pm, McBryde 129 – Leyla Myers (Second Amendment March) and SCCC at VT representatives

    Leyla Myers is the Virginia State Coordinator for the Second Amendment March, an event to be held in April of 2010 in Washington, D.C., to remind our lawmakers who their anti-gun legislation affects. She will be speaking briefly about the event and how the mission of SCCC is part of the bigger picture. Q&A will follow the event.


    Thursday

    Has anyone ever used his or her firearm in self-defense? Who actually carries a gun?

    Concealed Carry Quiz, Petition to the President

    7-9pm, McBryde 129 – Teresa McKensie (attack survivor) and SCCC at VT representatives

    Teresa McKensie is a resident of Southwest Virginia and has been featured on CNN after she used her firearm to defend herself from her ex-husband. Others will join Mrs. McKensie in sharing their stories of having used their firearms in self-defense and/or reasons why they decided to carry a firearm. Emphasis will be given to the ladies of firearm ownership, as their voices are often ignored and dismissed in this issue.


    Friday

    What kind of training is required when carrying a firearm?

    Concealed Carry Quiz, Petitions delivered to the President

    Related event is on Saturday


    Saturday

    What kind of training is required when carrying a firearm? (cont.)

    11am – 12:30pm, TBA – Jack Rumbaugh, Suarez Intl.

    Jack Rumbaugh is the Virginia Staff instructor for Suarez International, a training company that offers courses around the world to teach self-defense in close-combat and armed situations. A
    demonstration of self-defense techniques will follow a speech from Mr. Rumbaugh on the education and training that is necessary to be able to defend yourself in an attack situation. Note that the location of this event will be off-campus as airsoft/simulated weapons may be used for demonstration purposes.

    To get to McBryde Hall:

    • Google Maps: Google Maps
    • Campus map to McBryde (marked up map in PDF format): http://www.sccc.org.vt.edu/images/ca...ap-McBryde.pdf
    • Address for GPS use: Stanger St, Blacksburg, VA, 24061
    --


    If other VCDL members would like to speak at the Monday, Wednesday, or Thursday evening events, please emailsccc@vt.edu immediately. Some of our speakers were not able to attend and we would love to have more contributors. Also, contact us at emailsccc@vt.edu if you would like to make a contribution or be added to the email listserv for the VT group.We also are still looking for a location in Blacksburg to hold the Saturday event with Suarez International!

    Ken Stanton

    Vice President and Founder

    Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at Virginia Tech
    -------------------------------------------
    ************************************************** *************************
    VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
    (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

    VCDL web page: Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL) [http://www.vcdl.org/]
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro


  2. #17
    VIP Member
    Array Thumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,289
    The Military is goofy at best with regard to these things...

    I remember when I was on Stateside Armory Guard Duty in North Carolina during a time when Armory's on military bases had been attacked and robbed, I had 5 rounds issued to me and they were not for my personal protection but were to be used as warning/alarm shots only!

    I sure do hope things have improved since the early 70's!
    ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!

    "A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
    judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
    superior skills."

  3. #18
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    "This latest tragedy, at a heavily fortified Army base, ought to convince more Americans to reject the argument that the solution to gun violence is to arm more people with more guns in more places," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
    Never let a good tragedy go to waste, eh Paul? Jackass.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,014
    Soldiers generally carry weapons on base only when there is a reason, such as a training exercise or a trip to the firing range.
    Uh-huh. Well, there was one hell of a reason, the other day ... and they'd been disarmed, with an all-too predictable result. It's almost as though Congress wants people to be victimized and wholly incapable of defending themselves.

    "Heavily-fortified" base, my eye. Actually, nearly all of 'em were weapon-less.

    Reality is: there is always good reason to be able to defend oneself. Always, every hour of every day. What is that reason? THE GOAL OF THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE, a goal that never sleeps, forcibly disarmed by putzes in positions of power, or not.

    Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, a gun rights advocate, said that the policies at military bases should be up to military officials but that a review makes sense. "I'm not saying the policy should change ... but again we have an example of a shooter going to a target-rich environment where he knew that no one was there who could resist," he said.
    Of course he's not. He's a bloody politician who won't commit and say what he means, voting as he knows is right. He knows damned well that the citizen disarmament policies should change. The implication oozes from everything he's saying. And yet, he won't commit, won't simply say it. DISARMAMENT KILLS CITIZENS, pure and simple. Suzanna Gratia-Hupp knows this, first-hand, even if this putz won't admit what he knows to be true.

    Funny how all these laws don't seem to have much effect on the criminal element.
    Yup. Life on the street is truly a putz-free existence, where laws don't really apply. It's quite literally survival of the fittest. Life is very simple, on the street. You either do ... or, you get eliminated, irrespective of what naive, ineffectual laws are on the books this year.

    May this message get through, before more needless victims are created due to the preposterous policies of disarmament that are currently in place.

    R.I.P., the fallen few.

    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  5. #20
    Member Array diverdown247's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mo
    Posts
    245
    Good and bad news. Now Gen. Casey and the DOD are saying "plausible deniability" in that they claim to have not known anything was amiss...can you say cover up?

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array Daddy Warcrimes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    736
    Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, a gun rights advocate, said that the policies at military bases should be up to military officials but that a review makes sense.
    Left to military officials, nothing will change.

    If a commander authorizes a subordinate to carry a weapon, and the subordinate does something inappropriate, that commander will be faulted.

    If a commander does not authorize the subordinate, but the subordinate does something stupid with a weapon anyway, they probably won't fault the commander.

    If there is an immediately foreseeable threat, and the commander does not arm the troops, he may be faulted against that.

    In this situation, there was no enemy contact expected, so the commander will not be accountable for insisting the troops be unarmed.

    The commander has no incentive to arm the troops, and every incentive to disarm them.

    Without a dramatic change in military culture, the solution will need to be legislated.
    "and suddenly I can not hold back my sword hand's anger"

    DaddyWarcrimes.com

  7. #22
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,848
    According to the following commentary by John Lott, the policy against carrying of firearms on Army bases began in 1993 under Bill Clinton.

    Time to Put An End to Army Bases as Gun-Free Zones

    It is hard to believe that we don't trust soldiers with guns on an army base when we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan.


    Shouldn't an army base be the last place where a terrorist should be able to shoot at people uninterrupted for 10 minutes? After all, an army base is filled with soldiers who carry guns, right? Unfortunately, that is not the case. Beginning in March 1993, under the Clinton administration, the army forbids military personnel from carrying their own personal firearms and mandates that "a credible and specific threat against [Department of the Army] personnel [exist] in that region" before military personnel "may be authorized to carry firearms for personal protection." Indeed, most military bases have relatively few military police as they are in heavy demand to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The unarmed soldiers could do little more than cower as Major Nidal Malik Hasan stood on a desk and shot down into the cubicles in which his victims were trapped. Some behaved heroically, such as private first class Marquest Smith who repeatedly risked his life removing five soldiers and a civilian from the carnage. But, being unarmed, these soldiers were unable to stop Hasan's attack.

    The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Ft. Hood understood this all too well. Mandy Foster's husband had been shot but was fortunate enough not to be seriously injured. In an interview on CNN on Monday night, Mrs. Foster was asked by anchor John Roberts how she felt about her husband "still scheduled for deployment in January" to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: "At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?" -- It is hard to believe that we don't trust soldiers with guns on an army base when we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, most of CNN's listeners probably didn't understand the rules that Ms. Foster was referring to.

    The law-abiding, not the criminals, are the ones who obey the ban on guns. Instead of making areas safe for victims, the bans make it safe for the criminal. Hasan not only violated the army's ban on carrying a gun, he also apparently violated the rules that require soldiers to register privately owned guns at the post.

    Research shows that allowing individuals to defend themselves dramatically reduces the rates of multiple victim public shootings. Even if attacks still occur, having civilians with permitted concealed handguns limits the damage. A major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the amount of time that elapses between when the attack starts and someone is able to arrive on the scene with a gun. Ten minutes must have seemed like an eternity to those trapped in the attack at Ft. Hood. All the multiple victim public shootings in the U.S. -- in which more than three people have been killed -- have all occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned.

    For several days now, some in the media and various gun control groups have focused on a so-called "cop killer" gun that Hasan used. The five-seven is a conventional semi-automatic pistol. In fact, the bullets that it fires are relatively small, only being in the .22 caliber class. Unlike rifles, even higher caliber handguns don't fire publicly available ammunition at sufficient velocity to penetrate a police officer's vest. There is a special type of handgun ammunition that can penetrate some types of body armor, but under federal law it is not legal to manufacture or import that ammunition for sale to the public.

    For the safety of our soldiers and citizens, we hope that this simple fact about the Ft. Hood attack and the role that gun-free zones played in allowing yet another multiple victim public shooting becomes part of the news coverage itself. The political debate about guns would be quite different if even once in a while a news story clearly explained that there has been another multiple victim public shooting in a gun-free zone.

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,014
    The law-abiding, not the criminals, are the ones who obey the ban on guns.
    And the law-abiding, upstanding citizens are the ones who pay for the stupidity of policies that disarm them in advance of crimes against them.

    Utterly pathetic. Such crimes sit at the feet of the elected bureaucrats who put such policies into action as laws that criminalize the upstanding.

    Dislike that? FORCE YOUR CONGRESS-CRITTERS to change the ludicrous laws that criminalize us in such ways.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array searcher 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    4,152
    I believe I heard that in Israel all active duty military carry their service weapon 24/7 and at least one loaded mag. If they are armed with a M-4, M-16 or what ever they must carry it in uniform and in cilivians clothes.

    Does anyone have first hand account of this and do you think it would work for our military?

    If such policies were enacted would it change the attitude of those that are in the service?

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    I'm going to go against the grain here. Please believe me when I say I am all for 2a rights but the 2a is not a "fix everything" right.

    Military bases are NOT the same world as the general municipalities. There are stresses and whatnot that have no counterpart in civilian life. Frequently these things lead to severe emotional upset and trauma which has no outlet through normal channels.

    Further, military bases are drug havens even though it is a really bad offense if you're caught.

    Given these things, I can understand the reason for not allowing firearms to be in free circulation on a military base. I currently support those reasons and do not support any change in general policy. As I said in another thread, I DO support a change in "tactics" on where weapons are stored and who is authorized to carry a weapon while on duty.

    Comparisons to Israel and other countries are not the same. In the USA our military is NOT allowed to be involved in civilian matters. Hence our military has no legal basis to carry firearms while in the States other than general military security/policing duties.

  11. #26
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    ....
    Please believe me when I say I am all for 2a rights but the 2a is not a "fix everything" right.

    ....

    Hence our military has no legal basis to carry firearms while in the States other than general military security/policing duties.
    As I've said before, all the arguments for not carrying on base are exactly the same as those the hoplophobic use for restricting carry in the crazy patchwork quilt of no guns in/on/at "X" -- e.g., airport parking lots, airport terminals, any public building, any venue that charges admission, bars, buses, churches, colleges, concerts, funeral, gun shops, gun shows, libraries, parades, parks, protest, public gathering, public meetings (councils, boards, etc), road side rest areas, schools, sporting events, stadiums, trains, to name a few.

    However, there is no evidence that there is any higher rate of gun related problems in State "a", which allows legal carry in one of these places/events than there is in State "b", which denies legal carry in one of these places/events.

    In addition, those States which have the most of this "but not here" restrictions nonsense are the ones where the antis have lost the battle to ban out right or extremely restrict carry and now they are fighting a rear guard action to make it as logistically hard as they can for us to avoid run afoul of the law.

    IMHO, The legal basis for servicemen/women to carry firearms while in the States is the basic human right to self defense.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  12. #27
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    I'm going to go against the grain here. Please believe me when I say I am all for 2a rights but the 2a is not a "fix everything" right.

    Military bases are NOT the same world as the general municipalities. There are stresses and whatnot that have no counterpart in civilian life. Frequently these things lead to severe emotional upset and trauma which has no outlet through normal channels.

    Further, military bases are drug havens even though it is a really bad offense if you're caught.

    Given these things, I can understand the reason for not allowing firearms to be in free circulation on a military base. I currently support those reasons and do not support any change in general policy. As I said in another thread, I DO support a change in "tactics" on where weapons are stored and who is authorized to carry a weapon while on duty.

    Comparisons to Israel and other countries are not the same. In the USA our military is NOT allowed to be involved in civilian matters. Hence our military has no legal basis to carry firearms while in the States other than general military security/policing duties.
    So if a person is deemed to be under more stress than normal, and lives in a place where illegal drugs are available (ie everywhere) they have no right to self-defense?
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  13. #28
    Member Array beaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Germany for now
    Posts
    139
    you know it seems like to me, the people who think there should be stricter gun laws think more stricter gun laws will ultimately prevent events like this from ever happening. anyone else get this?? or is it perhaps that they think allowing good people to own guns, the ones that go insane will more likely go on a rampage since they have the means? it doesn't take a genius to know that events like this will always happen. even if the whole entire country becomes OC or CC. another will happen again eventually. there are always gonna be people predisposed to committing crime. so the point is to stop the event before the person kills to many people. you can never prevent stuff like this from happening. so instead of a criminal killing 10-20 people he maybe kills 2-3. and if they're thinking some upstanding citizen is gonna go insane and go on a rampage, he'll still only kill 2-3 people and not 10-20 people. its self regulating in that respect too. if an upstanding citizen suddenly goes on a rampage for what ever reason, he's not an upstanding citizen and ultimately wasn't fit enough to carry a gun. so now he's dead.

    you notice how massacres like this one only happen in gun free zones. for usually 3 reason. because 1. criminals know no one has the ability to fight back and 2. they pretty much have free reign for several minutes, if not hours. and 3. they have the means to. criminals are always gonna have a tool, a means, a weapon. you can't take them away with more gun control. criminals usually obtain weapons illegally. so making it more illegal to have one won't stop them. so take away what can be taken away, the other 2 reasons, opportunity.

    i can kinda see where rob is coming from, and in no way do i agree with him. many military people have resorted to crime in the past and will continue to do so; they get stressed just like everyone else. whats to stop them from going on a rampage on base? but my first 2 paragraphs still fix this issue, or at least make it better/easier to deal with. with that person knowing that everyone on base, or the great majority at least, carry guns should stop him from even starting that rampage. and second, if he does go on a rampage, he'll be stopped after the 2-3 people. not 10-20.

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array Guns and more's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    2,391
    The White House will not allow profiling in the military. So expect more shootings.
    I'm sure Hasan is treated as a hero in the Arab world.

  15. #30
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    I'm going to go against the grain here. Please believe me when I say I am all for 2a rights but the 2a is not a "fix everything" right.
    Correct.

    It's merely a be-able-to-defend-against-criminal-attack kind of thing, which applies everywhere that a police type person cannot instantly appear. Everywhere.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Good source for defensive ammo info
    By kentuckycarry in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: March 19th, 2008, 08:57 PM
  2. Good News / Bad News or Milking and Pushing...Help!
    By DizTbone in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 16th, 2006, 11:08 PM
  3. Bruce45, a good source of fun.
    By Miggy in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: April 9th, 2006, 11:11 PM
  4. Good source for shotgun parts?
    By Euclidean in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 12th, 2005, 06:31 AM
  5. Good Source of Information
    By CHPBill in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 10th, 2004, 05:21 PM

Search tags for this page

aliyah /carrollton ohio
,
carry concealed at naval air station fort worth
,
concealed carry fort worth tx
,
concealed carry shoot don't shoot
,
firearm quiz
,

ken stanton msgt.

,
military conceal carry ohio but in texas
,
one day concealed carry houston tx
,
security policy for concealed carry weapons
,
teresa mckensie
,
texas handgun laws on military base
,
texas military bases concealed carry
,

tinsley rampage forces review of security policies on army bases worldwide

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors