Just one day after a lone shooter went on a rampage at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, OR, details are emerging about a fateful decision the college made within the last year.
The gunman, widely reported as Chris Harper Mercer, killed nine people and wounded ten at the Western Oregon college yesterday before dying after a shootout with police.
Mercer was reportedly able to move around classrooms and buildings targeting victims, leading some to wonder why nobody was able to stop him.
Joe Olson, who retired as president of UCC just three months ago, told the Associated Press that there was a major debate just last year about whether the school should hire armed security guards.
But the proposal was ultimately scrapped for fear it would affect the ‘campus culture’. There was just one unarmed security worker on campus when Mercer began to shoot.
While President Obama and liberals in Congress sought to politicize the shooting and argue for gun control, a lack of guns on campus may have been a contributing factor to the tragedy.
Some media outlets have reported that UCC was not technically a “gun-free zone” where students and staff are not allowed to carry firearms. But they’re not telling the whole truth. While the UCC website has mostly been down since the shooting, an archived version of its student safety handbook reads:
Possession, use, or threatened use of firearms (including but not limited to BB guns, air guns, water pistols, and paint guns) ammunition, explosives, dangerous chemicals, or any other objects as weapons on college property, except as expressly authorized by law or college regulations, is prohibited.
There’s been a major left-wing push over the past several years to encourage colleges to draft regulations forbidding guns on campuses.
They are regulations that students are expected to follow – but not criminals.
The key words are “except as expressly authorized by law”.
While both Oregon and Federal law forbid people from being on school property with firearms, concealed handgun license holders are exempt from both laws. Oregon statute 166.370 forbids firearms in “public buildings” which schools are, but subsection B says“this section does not apply to:… (d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.”
Schools do NOT have the authority to override this statute so, insofar as CCL holders are concerned, this section of the student handbook can and should be ignored.
If you’re going to attend schools in Oregon that have been declared “Gun-Free” zones, get a CCL and be prepared to protect yourself, and your fellow classmates and teachers, accordingly.
According to the laws even CCP holders are banned from carrying any weapon in these zones, making your CCP rather useless wouldn’t you say ?
How’s that “campus culture” working for you?
Gun free zones are safe havens for thugs. Plano, Texas is a city with more guns than any other and their crime rate is nearly zero, because the thugs know that the’ll meet opposition if they mess with the people there. Bill Whittle has a great clip about that entitled “Gun nuts in Plano” and it will shock you at the extremely low rate of shootings there – Honduras is the world’s worst and America is way down on the list of countries with numerous shootings. Responsible gun owners won’t draw a gun unless it’s to save a life – especially his own – of which I’m one and I had two days of classes with tests and instruction in proper firearm handing in Oklahoma to get my CCP. The president is full of beans! The most severe killing places are the very places with the strictest gun laws and less guns in the hands of responsible people would not help reduce the massive shootings in Chicago, Cleveland, New Orleans, and other places! Much of the gun crime is with guns which are stolen.
DO THE WORDS: “GUN FREE ZONE” MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU IDIOTS! It is Liberal policies that left those people as lambs to the slaughter! And our POTUS just got on TV and FLAT OUT LIED WHEN HE SAID WHERE THERE ARE MORE GUNS, THERE IS MORE CRIME WHEN JUST EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE! I will post it again, hopefully, it will sink in this time:
.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things WORSE FOR THE ASSAULTED AND BETTER FOR THE ASSAILANTS;, they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed Man.”
.
THOMAS JEFFERSON, FORMER PRESIDENT & CO-AUTHOR OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT
One armed guard could have saved 9 lives, but the liberal gun grabbers insist on no guns, except when its their families that are being protected. Just look at Osama boma and how many guns protect him. Let those guns be taken first and see how he likes that while he is shot at by every crazy that gets close to him!!!!!
“Gun Free Zones” have been brought to you by Liberal maniacs….Don’t leave home without one, (gun that is)…..For everything else, there’s Mastercard !
Shooters keep targeting gun free zones. I think we should consider furnishing weapons and training to teachers and school officials that are willing. We spend millions of dollars on guns and training to protect politicians. but nothing on our children and other students.Guns will always be available to those who wish to harm us regardless of how many gun laws you pass.The gun free zone with nothing to enforce it is only a invitation to those who want to harm our children.You can’t fight fire with a fan. Many schools in western states have armed staff. instead of a entry sign proclaiming a gun free zone it reads( Caution we will protect our students some members of our staff are armed) Which school would rather your child attend
Even though not said yet, is how this young man obtained the weapons he was using, legally or illegaly? As the investigation is proceeding, we will be, at some point, informed of that. What is apparent is that he was having some mental issues evidenced by his communications, warnings if you will, that he was about to commit some evil acts with those weapons. It was also apparent that there are some who support his actions based on so-called “Religious Freedom”, or maybe he just recently opted “Muslim”, in opposition to “Christianity”. Some so-called Christians would discriminate and postulate against his choices, or maybe he was just “Atheist”. Any of these would lead to his issues prompting his actions. At this point, too many “Maybees”.
Concerning how he obtained those weapons, most of us know there is a “Black Market” for that, where anyone with the cash in hand can get almost any type desired on a street corner or back alley. This is not what is being addressed completely enough, but yet certain people say we need “Gun Control” to stop mass shootings meaning that responsible law-abiding gun owners are in some way at fault. The real fault is that there is little to no funding concerning illegal weapons while law enforcement officials continue to receive “Military” type weapons from the gov’t for free while lamenting the fact there is no funding for illegal weapons. “Gun Control” should be about removing the illegal weapons, more so than forcing responsible law-abiding citizens to jump through hoops to self-protect.
The campus fathers are idiots. Regardless of your position on guns the truth is–they do exist. Thus, you need to have armed people to defend against armed assailants. Also, the “peace” culture in America is wrong. Not to detract from this tragedy, you wouldn’t see this happening in countries like “Israel” where people haven’t been desensitized to crime and violence. These folks stood and waited to be executed instead of rushing the shooter. Then only some might have died, instead of being led to slaughter like sheep.
“BB guns, air guns, water pistols, and paint guns” are not, by definition, “firearms.” A “firearm,” by definition, relies on a chemical explosion to launch a projectile in a chosen direction. A water piston is nothing more than a pump, and I would be very afraid to be in a facility that regards it as dangerous, because I don’t know what kind of innocuous item might be on my person and treated as dangerous. If they’re saying “firearms” include but are not limited to those, then ANYTHING they feel like calling a weapon is.
This is what happens when you disarm law abiding citizens–only the criminals have guns. The murderer knew he could go about his killing spree with little opposition since the victims would be unarmed. My local college said that if there was an active shooter on campus the campus police would go in making noise and fully armed. I’m going to guess that philosophy will have a big deterrent effect.