The carnage in DeKalb; Update: Shooter identified
Update: The gunman has been id’d.
***
Six are dead in that awful massacre at N. Illinois University:
A gunman opened fire on a geology class at Northern Illinois University Thursday afternoon, killing five people before killing himself on-stage in front of panicked students.
NIU President John Peters a total of 22 people were shot, including the gunman. Four people, including the gunman, died at the scene; two others died later at area hospitals.
Officials said the gunman opened fire in a lecture hall shortly after 3 p.m. and the campus was immediately placed on lockdown.
The shooting happened at a geology lecture class in Cole Hall. Officials said the gunman emerged from behind a screen at the front of the lecture hall and opened fire with a shotgun.
Police said the gunman, armed with a shotgun and two handguns, shot the professor and several students before killing himself onstage in front of the class.
Witnesses described the shooting as “a very brief rapid-fire assault that ended with the gunman taking his own life,” Peters said.
Allah’s keeping updates. Apparently, witnesses are reporting that the gunman was deliberately picking his targets.
And yes, per Instapundit and Bill Quick, the campus was a “gun-free zone.”
The incident will certainly revive debate over campus gun ban bills in Kentucky, Washington state, and Idaho. The bill in Idaho is pending:
Main sponsor Rep. Thomas Brunner, R-Nisland, said most mass shootings have occurred in areas where guns are banned. If more people carried guns, they could stop mass murderers before they kill so many, he said.
“Should a person have less freedom and safety than anyone else simply because he or she attends college?” Brunner said.
Gov. Mike Rounds said he doesn’t object to the bill’s concept. He hasn’t read the bill, but understands the goal is to make it clear students can carry a gun on campus.
“In terms of putting restrictions on individuals carrying firearms, a criminal (or) someone with criminal intent isn’t going to listen to the law anyway,” he said. “The only individuals that are going to cause us problems are those who have evil intent to begin with, not individuals with good intent.”
A tragic truism borne out–again–today.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Dan Lee Report » Blog Archive » No Guns Allowed at Northern Illinois University (Unless You’re a Madman)
- Yet Another Gutless Coward Preys Upon Disarmed Citizens In “Gun-Free Zone” Of Northern Illinios University
- Conservative247
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Guns
Doug Ross @ Journal
» Barney Frank on the Rule of Law
Doug Ross @ Journal
» Stupak: the Sanctity of Life is Important to Us, Which is Why We Will Slash Care for Old People and Further Enslave Children to Massive DeficitsLegal Insurrection
» David Frum Says We're To BlameStop The ACLU
» Dan Benishek: the alternative to Bart Sell-out StupakSister Toldjah
» Latest ObamaCare House vote developments
I don’t give a damn if you libs like guns or not. I will carry everywhere and anywhere I choose to, you can take your gun laws. All of my family shoots and all of my family will carry, there are no sheep here.
I agree. Also, I wonder about the impact of non-stop anti-American, socialist propaganda on these liberal campuses (America is imperialistic, killed all Indians, had slaves, is racist, is warmongering, etc–all the normal BS that is constantly given to students). For someone unstable, like Cho Seung-hui and this gunman, it could incite violence against Americans.
I have an idea that should put and end to this debate forever.
Let’s make killing people illegal!
That should do it. Oh, wait…
Nevermiiiiiiind
Since the victims had little or no warning, it seems unrealistic to suggest students, even if armed, who’d never encountered violence, could draw fast enough to fire on the shooter in this case. John Wayne fantasy.
Seems like citizens of violent cities like Chicago who actually face a realistic risk of violent crime prefer security over freedom and the Bill of Rights, i.e., banning handguns (for starters), universal surveillance with neighborhood cameras, etc., much as the sissies who have an irrational view of the danger of terrorism support Bush’s illegal wiretapping and numerous other attacks on freedom. Are we being logical here? One need only add up the body count to see where real danger lies. I’m in favor of the second amendment myself, but if you favor Bush’s attacks on what he calls “just a piece of paper” you shouldn’t complain if Obama takes your guns away. Serves you right.
Caveat: Have not read all of above.
Am reading a book about 9/11 written 1 yr after which dovetails w/Richard Lamm’s article shared by M.M. At one time, for a brief moment in time, we were all Americans. After flights were resumed, one pilot is quoted as announcing: If you see a passenger acting in a threatening way, every passenger is to throw something at him/her to provide distraction until they can be overcome.
It’s an oversimplification to believe people paralyzed with fear would do that, but it sounds worth being trained as you are trained for fire drills.
We grew up in IL and are heartsick for families of victims living there. I am all for guns – we shoot copperheads.
Alphonse, it seems like you’re clueless about all of the topics you’re commenting on.
It seems like you might be wrong about what someone can and can’t realistically do if they are armed and trained.
It also seems like you might not understand what you’re talking about when you say things like “Bush’s illegal wiretapping”.
It seems like you think I’m a sissy for expecting the government to wiretap known foreign terrorists or terrorist associates that are having a conversation with someone inside the US.
Anyway, to answer your question, “Are we being logical here”, I’d say yes. We are. But perhaps not you, sir.
No – reality. There have been many situations where – unnanounce – gunmen appear and an armed citizen pulls a weapon and fires it.
There’s something called “instinct” that kicks in. Look at what the armed guard at the megachurch did – she stopped a potentially deadly rampage. Without advance notice.
Nice dig on national security and wiretaps. Too bad you have the relationship between the two completely wrong. Terrorists living in foreign lands have no Constitutional protection and the wiretaps are for the security of the nation – just as the 2nd Amendment protects individual security.
Real mature.
Neither Obama, Clinton, nor anyone else will never take away my firearm. They want to play politics with their safety, fine – I don’t.
All these comments about about the danger of tons of armed students and possible intoxication and probable mishaps betray a stunning lack of real world experience with guns and concealed carry.
It is an in depth process to become licensed to carry. Classwork, fingerprinting, range safety test. One who does so is very aware of the responsibilities one takes on if they choose to carry. ANY MISTAKE voids that special status and leaves one un armed.
The notion that all of a sudden every student will be packing is ridiculously naive. There will be a % of the population who choose to take on all the responsibilities entailed to carry.
I think there are many who live that John Wayne fantasy.
I would say it surprises me that people suggest arming students, but nothing really surprises me with the far right anymore.
The shooter (who stopped taking his medication) owned some of the guns legally – obviously there is a problem with the current gun control system that needs fixing fast.
This is actually a very valid point, without even considering extreme circumstances like VT, Columbine, NIU, etc. involving guns.
Children are taught from a very early age in school that you cannot fight back, if you are attacked, or you will suffer the same consequences by the administration as the aggressor.
My son in 1st grade came home twice last week and told me that a boy in his class hit him (first day) and kicked him (second day). I asked him if he hit him back. His response, “Dad, I would have to change a card, if I hit back.” I assured him that he has my permission to defend himself and, if he does have to change a card for doing it, he won’t be in trouble at home with us. Bully’s are not used to someone standing up to them. I found that out myself in school, years ago. I watched a guy bully and taunt a friend of mine one day after gym class, knocking him to the floor and humiliating him. He tried it with me the next day. He got cut short, when I introduced him to the cold, hard tile floor sitting on top of him with a fist drawn back. No more problems for me with him.
But, I see problems everyday in the high school where my daughter attends from my work in the justice system here. I’ve seen kids carted off the the emergency room and end up in ICU with swelling of the brain, where another kid has jumped them. The victims didn’t fight back, because they didn’t want to be suspended for 5 days for “fighting”. So, instead, they get put in ICU, so they don’t take a chance on endangering any college admissions and/or scholarships for which they may qualify. My daughter has been told the same thing as my son. “Don’t start any fights. But, if someone else starts it, you finish it. And, you won’t be in trouble at home.” Of course, she wants to know what she will have to do on the 5 days she would get suspended for fighting. I told her I might just take off work and spend some time with her to go eat, hang out, etc. I’m certainly not going to punish her, if she is only defending herself.
School administrators don’t want to have to deal with violent behaviors in their school. Their answer is to not cast judgements on anyone and just be fair by treating everyone alike. Goes right back to the lowering of the academic bar doing the same and not recognizing achievement by some, because it would be casting judgement that others don’t do as well in some areas as others.
Stupid P.C. crap.
Anyhow, my wife and I try to make sure our kids are ready to defend themselves in school mentally and physically. We have told them that they have our permission…no…an expectation from us to defend themselves, if attacked. And, we have given them the opportunity to learn self-defense. Our daughter earns her black belt in mixed martial arts next Friday and our son is graduating to his purple belt.
Is that extreme on our part? Have you had to contend with all the stuff going on in the schools today? I have and know exactly what students are up against.
As far as guns at a high school, I would disagree. But, I don’t have a problem training my children in gun safety and use, if they are allowed to carry concealed in college, when they are off away from home and left to fend for themselves. I have no intention of leaving my kids as a defenseless target, if it can be helped.
Okay. I will end my rant now that I have blustered for so long.
And, how would you quickly rectify the “problem with the current gun control system”, sausage?
Barry F.,
You are asking an id10t (who is still unhappy that guns and other weapons help free his ancestors from speaking German) to come up with a solution?
Oops. You’re right, Soap. What waaaaasss I thinking?
sausage – a little Latin lesson for you.
Abusus non tollit usum
Learn what it means. And repeat it as often as necessary until it sinks in.
Law-abiding citizens who carry weapons do not commit crimes with those firearms in any significant numbers that would warrant taking away the guns from everyone. As someone said above, legal gun owners are more responsible and concerned with proper use of the weapon than others – especially criminals.
There are millions of cars on the road, and when a select few choose to drive recklessly or drink and drive, the discussion does not delve into taking cars away from all people.
Why guns? Because it’s politically correct. Because guns represent a populace that takes responsibility for its own safety and a populace that will not be oppressed by an unjust or corrupt government.
Notice she didn’t say German?
Just something to ponder:
Written by To The Point News
Friday, 08 February 2008
Doctors:
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services.
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. (Yes, that’s 80 million..)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI.
So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Ban Doctors!!!
OOPS – sorry. Doctors don’t walk in schools and kill people, guns do. What WAAASSSS I thinking.
I do hope you are learning to speak Spanish On-my-soap-box, you will be needing it in a few years time
Apples and oranges comparison.
Guns are just used to threaten or kill – what kind of society promotes that as a right?
The shooter’s name is Kazmierczak. This sounds like an Eastern European name, probably from Poland. It doesn’t look like a terror related incident. Most likely another nut.
Interestingly, that radical left bomb thrower, Geraldo Rivera, said that he thinks people should be allowed to conceal carry on campus. Here is my proposal, if you intend to conceal carry on campus, you must pass some type of certification and be registered with the campus police as a member of a police auxiliary.
It is obvious that “gun free zone” means “easy target zone” for nuts and terrorists. Further, any lockdown can actually exacerbate the situation as the shooter has the leisure of reloading while students scramble away. The colleges need to teach the students to attack one of these nuts not duck and cover.
What bull. Guns are used to hunt and protect. They are tools that are abused by a minority of the population (see the stats above).
Guns have saved lives; armed citizens have saved lives when the “government” (read: police) could not.
How do you refute the stats that states/countries and areas with gun bans have more crime than areas with conceal-carry laws?
It’s also pertinent to note that many women have used guns to protect themselves against abusive spouses, boyfriends, or family members.
The notion that cooperating, hiding, or running away is ignorant. It gives the criminals power. Even *showing* a criminal that you’re armed deters crime.
I’d take an licensed, armed classmate over hiding behind a desk any day.
Creole. No need for spanish where we are going.
A police spokesman on TV said they had so far found 48 shell casings and 6 spent shotgun shells. There were about 150 people in the room.
I grieve for the dead and wounded, not counting the gunman. But does it not strike anyone as odd that one gunman could fire that many times at that many people, apprently without anyone fighting back? Wouldn’t you throw something, anything? If even 3 or 4 people did that while rushing the creep, wouldn’t you think 150 people could stop one gunman, who had only semi-automatic weapons?
Before any trolls start criticizing me for asking politically-incorrect questions, I know how I react in emergency situations including being fired upon. I know one thing – I’m not a sheep and I don’t react as one.
I just wish someone else had been armed – this could have been stopped.
Looks like a valid comparison to me. Comes down to similar culprits, lawbreakers, in both instances taking human life through their disregard/violation of established law. You want to take the weapon used by one (i.e. the guns) away law-abiding citizens but not the weapon (i.e. the one ton automobile) from the others. Double-standard? Both have the potential to be deadly weapons, when misused.
Try protect and defend. And, that would not be a society of victims.
EQ – LOL
I was just going to ask dum-dum which he would prefer: Cowering down hoping that the gunman would kill people in the other direction so he could run or be standing next to Soap as he puts 6 in a perp.
Not when they’ve been raised in a culture that doesn’t promote self-defense. I’m 25, so I’m guessing many (if not all) of the students in that lecture hall were taught the same thing I was in public school: lock doors, shut blinds, sit on the floor and hope the shooter doesn’t get you.
I was a sophomore when Columbine happened. My homeroom teacher had to walk us through a lockdown drill once. My high school was originally an “open concept” school, so some classrooms didn’t have doors and had shoddy walls – she (who was very pregnant at the time) had to lead us out into the hall to “distract” the shooter while we went to a room with a door. She also walked us through how to escape the cafeteria and library. Even at the age of 15, I thought something was seriously wrong with that situation.
We had *one* “police liason” on a part-time basis and a “security guard” who was really a retired man in a bright yellow coat. Real safe, right?
It was emphasized that we not fight back and not run away if we were in an area that could be locked down.
And the guy had a gun. When you have to engage a shooter in a face-to-face situation (rather than sneaking up behind him), it’s terrifying.
All it would have taken was a few seconds for an armed student to pull his weapon, aim, and end the carnage with a bullet.
Maybe we are wrong to focus on the guns. Apparently the shooter was off his medications. Now how much do we know about this medications? What are the lingering effects of them? Has the FDA spent an iota of time inspecting the drugs.
Schlafly has an interesting article on the drug industry. Apparently 80% of prescription drugs come from CHINA. The FDA does little or nothing to verify that the drugs are what the label reads. Maybe there is an explanation why a seemingly normal guy turns into a rampaging killer.
And people are still praising our medical system.
He had bought a couple of the weapons only six days prior to the shooting, and there was NOTHING in his past, in his background that would have prevented him from purchasing any weapons.
This just proves that these checks prove nothing. Anyone can purchase a weapon at anytime. just because you have a clean background today does not mean you aren’t going to flip your cookies at some later time, which means the Brady Bill pretty much is pointless, knee-jerk reactionary blather.
Sure, he used a gun. Yes, it was a horrible tragedy, but would it have been any less a tragedy had he used any other means of destruction to kill these students? Why should this be about the weapon used? He could have just as easily used an explosive device, attacked with a machette as they do in other countries, or any other method. The fact that he used guns is moot.
The thing is, had other students been carrying weapons…pistols and such, this would have been over before it even began, with maybe the only death being that of the freak-show that started it. It is a two way street. I am a perfectly law abiding citizen who owns several firearms both big and small. Why should I have my weapons revoked or limited due to some freak-show’s inability to deal with the world? If I were allowed to carry my pistol here in California, I would be better able to prevent any crime that I might be involved in, a bank robbery, a public shooting such as this, than just becoming another victim.
It is time that Liberals admit this to themselves. Until they do, the only ones they are fooling is themselves.
At the University where I teach I know of at least one Professor who has CCW and uses it on campus. I’ve co-taught classes with him several times. I always feel safer when in the classrom with him.
I was talking with same Professor one day about the VT shooting. We both agreed that the first time one is fired upon it can be terrifying, after that it just pisses one off.
People do freeze when they are shot at for whatever reason. I watched an excellent program put on by a Phoenix Police detective. He said one of the most dangerous things one could do in an office shooting is hide. He suggested at the first sound of gunfire run away. If in an office with a window on the first or second story break out the window with the chair and RUN. He had studied many school and office shootings and one thing was clear, staying and hiding meant certain death for a percent of the people hiding.
My first basic weapons training was when I was eight years old. Waiting until 8th grade is too long. By that time I had at least three separate weapons classes.
And sausage,
I am learning spanish for financial reasons, someone has to treat the illegals under the table for cash to get back their tax dollars
Oops forgot an important comment.
When a guy broke into my apartment he was met by a stark nekid me pointing a .44 mag blackhawk at his head. He almost fell off the third floor balcony trying to get away. Nothing says go away like a .44 pointed at ones head.
Let me see…a ticket for brandishing a weapon that is not licensed to be carried while shooting a criminal who is killing innocent people, or becoming a victim while cursing the fact that your own weapon is locked in a safe in your home while the criminal is shooting up the building you are in.
I will take the court costs of having a weapon that I am not supposed to carry and killing the bad guy over wishing I had the tool I needed but is at home any day.
It is a small price to pay for my and my fellow man’s lives. When the Government fails the people, it is the people’s right to take matters into their own hands to provide for their own safety.
My question is, could a ban on handguns or concealed carry be considered an equal protection violation?
Ummm, The United States of America, which thankfully has something known as the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.
Guns are used by a law-abiding free citizenry to protect themselves from criminals and government tyranny. Exactly the kind of society I want to live in.
Your assessment of the situation is ignorant and infantile, just the way our liberal overlords want us all to think. No thanks.
What kind of narrow-minded thinking is that? How proud your parents must be to have raised someone who can’t think rationally or sanely.
To think that those are the only things guns are good for shows a mond that is simplistic at best. It shows you to be someone who thinks if we were to just get rid of all our weapons and military, then there would be no more problems in the world.
See, the problem is, knucklehead…the rest of the world does not think as simplistically as you do. Why, the people on your street don’t even think as simplistically as you do. So what is better? Is a baseball bat better? How about a knife? What about a stick? A rock? A club?
In the REAL world, not in the Liberal utopia of your mind, there are things that we like to call BAD PEOPLE. Those bad people want to do things like hurt you, take your things, destroy this country, rape and kill your sister, your mom, your daughters. they want to invade your country, chop your head off, torture you in the name of their religion. they want to place you in death camps, burn you alive in ovens. The want to do all manner of horrible, unmentionable things…that don’t even require guns. It is something called HUMAN NATURE. No amount of Liberal Kumbaya hand-holding and singing will ever rid the world of it. Thus, the gun was invented to protect people from such creatures. It makes it possible to do away with them from a safe enough distance so that they do not get close enough to kill you with any number of other weapons.
My best friend was murdered just under a year ago with a knife. Not a gun. A knife. I do not see any of you Liberals out there jumping up and down trying to put waiting periods and bans on cutlery. What did he do? Nothing. He was asleep in his bed. He was in his own home, at night, asleep. bothering no one. He had no enemies, owed no one anything. A BAD PERSON came in, broke into his home and stabbed him in the back twice, killing him while he slept.
See, those are the bad people that guns are meant to remove from society. those are the people you fail to admit exist in this world. There are millions of them. All over the planet, right now, live millions and millions of bad people who want to do nothing more than to kill you, take your things and rape your women. however, you are just too stupid, too gosh darn stupid to even acknowledge that they need to be removed from the gene pool all together.
no amount of hugs, no amount of Bono lead “Concerts for Peace”, no telethons, no food drives, no record deals, no nothing else known to this planet will rid the world of them save for one thing. taking guns and shooting them as many times as possible until every last one of these millions of bad people no longer breathe the air of this planet and are put six feet into the ground.
So take your ignorant, stupid, uneducated, Liberal goody-goody peace and love nonsense from our make-believe Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood Wonderland Dreamworld and put it where it will do the most good…back into the hooka that it came from when you smoked it because the rest of us that live in reality will keep our weapons, will keep our guns and use them for what their original purpose was intended for…
To protect our families, our women, our homes, our countries and ourselves from those BAD PEOPLE by removing each and every one of them from the gene pool whenever and where ever we can and they need to be. And you, and all your little hooka smoking Liberal friends will thank whatever pagan whatever that there are those of us that live in reality that will save your stupid butts when the time comes and allow you to continue to preach your idiocy…and you won’t even realize that your butts were saved.
What has happened to our Freedom and Liberty in America? Here is my observations on the gun issue.
I am a dinosaur according the younger generation but let me tell you a story about a guy that grew up in the 1960’s, me.
I used to come home from jr high school and get my .22 rifle out of a locked gun cabinet and go target shooting after school all the time. I would walk down the street with my friends with the rifle slung over my shoulder and they with theirs, to go down the block to old avocado orchid.
We would setup some cans or other targets on old dirt ditch used for irrigation as a back stop and practice our shooting.
Guess what, this was in the suburbs of Los Angeles in the 1960’s and none of my neighbors called the police and nobody thought there was anything wrong with 4 kids target shooting after school.
Today, I would be willing to bet that the police would be called out with SWAT teams, a helicopter of course, and about 10 media trucks would show up to cover the deranged kids who had the audacity to take part in the second amendment, a constitutionally protected right by the way.
My point is that we are losing our Constitutionally protected Freedoms one by one.
The last time I checked, we have not abolished the 2nd Amendment but there are now over 20,000 regulations or laws on the books that are infringing our right to keep and bear arms.
Every single one of them are unconstitutional and the DC gun case proves that they are unconstitutional.
I fear the Supreme Court, like in so many other cases in the past, will rule with DC on the recent gun case and further erode the 2nd amendment.
The founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the 2nd amendment.The founding fathers were well aware that an armed society is a polite society.
It is a God given right, not some right that needs 20,000 rules and regulations to explain to us what it means.
It was about the right to defend one self and protect against any future tyranny of Government.
Do any of you older folks, say over 40, relate to what I am talking about?