VA Tech officials are being criticized for not ordering a lockdown after the first shooting. What does ?lockdown? mean if the classrooms had no immediately available locking device? Suggested Ideas for increased campus security: Each classroom should have one escape route either directly to the outdoors or to a different part of the building. Each door should be hardened and should have a deadbolt on the interior. Each building should have a central office facility with access to video feeds and audio communication from multiple locations in the building. This central facility would coordinate responses and give information on the shooters' location to police, faculty and staff. Having been raised in Europe, until now I have always felt that the answers to gun violence in the U.S. are early intervention and tougher gun-control laws. However, given the reality of the Second Amendment, we need to seriously consider the additional solution of recruiting University faculty and staff members to carry handguns. Candidates would be subjected to a rigorous screening process, would agree to extensive training, and would participate in regular drills simulating these shooting events. In addition to their handguns they could store other weapons and equipment in their offices under suitably secure conditions. They could quickly don easily-identifiable Kevlar vests that would simultaneously protect them and prevent accidental shooting by police.

Changing the structure of classrooms nationwide, and adding video surveillance, would cost billions of dollars. You would have to do it for every single place of education in the U.S. And the money to train these folks, buy their guns, provide ammunition, specialized vests, security lockers and so on? Billions! The first time some school shooting was NOT thrwarted by these measures, the parents would demand millions or billions more in lawsuits because the measures failed. No, the solution is much simpler. Allow those who have concealed weapon permits to carry their arms --- unseen --- on campus. Their money purchased the firearm, ammo and training class. This solution would be absolutely FREE to the taxpayer. Gun control laws? They're a joke. The Sullivan Law of New York City was enacted in 1911. It barred citizens from owning handguns. Boy, that law sure worked, didn't it? New York City is a bastion of peace, harmony and brotherly love, isn't it? The 1968 Gun Control Act, at one time, required the registration of all handgun ammunition sold, including .22 ammo! That requirement was abandoned after a few years when it was realized it did absolutely no good. A few years ago, Canada passed a major gun control law. It requires all firearms to be registered, even grandpa's old .22 rifle that's been sitting in a closet for 30 years, unused. Canadian citizens are incensed about their gun laws, because the new restrictions burned up $1 billion Canadian dollars in administration without any effect on crime. Allowing legally registered concealed weapon holders on campuses and in schools would do much to thwart these shootings. Publicize the hell out of the fact that some adults in our schools are surreptitously armed. Would you attack a school if you knew you'd receive return fire? It's doubtful. But if you did, you'd be stopped before the rampage continued unabated. Don't turn our schools into fortresses with surveillance cameras. Instead, when the Barbarians are at the gate, allow a few Citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment right as it was intended.

I agree that retrofitting campus buildings with the solutions I suggest would be expensive. However, designing these solutions into new buildings would add just a small amount to the total cost. Also, some of my suggestions would be relatively inexpensive even for existing buildings. I believe this is true of adding deadbolts to the interior of classroom doors. This would have been quite effective in this shooting incident. Replacing doors in a building with hardened doors with deadbolts would cost perhaps $100 per door. If this were done just for the larger classrooms it would be a bargain.

Ahhhhh .. but the trouble is that when it comes to "solutions" like this, the governments (local, state and federal) step in and the cost escalates obscenely. First, they'd form a Congressional Committee to look into the use of security doors or deadbolts. Then that committee would need subcommittees. Then the state and local schools districts would want their two million cents worth. They too would have committees and endless studies. It isn't just a matter of dropping by the Home Depot and buying doors at $100 apiece. Standards would HAVE to be met. Schools in say, Taos, New Mexico would want doors sand-colored to match their school's decor, while a school in New York City wants a red door to match their school's brick construction. Even if somehow you could just purchase doors at $100 apiece, who would administer the contracts of the business that installed them? Perhaps the solution is more local. Concerned citizens could raise money to buy doors, and ask local contractors to install them at a discounted rate. But I doubt that any contractor would agree. The first time a door failed, whether through battering or bullets, he'd be facing innumerable lawsuits. If we MUST buy doors, let's buy doors for our laws schools. Let's lock up our law schools for 20 years or so. No students. No teaching. Nothing. We have enough attorneys to last us for the next 20 years, without a doubt. Why do we need more? Attorneys are like bricks. Having a few around is always a good idea. They come in handy for various tasks. But too many buries you to death. Actually, your idea has merits. Why not require every classroom to have at least one chair that can be used to bar the door? Seems to me that many classrooms would already meet this criteria. A chair under the knob is ages-old, but still works rather well. And inside every classroom is at least one adult with a concealed weapon. They bought it, they paid for the training and ammo, and it's FREE to the taxpayer.

I like your chair under the handle idea! I certainly agree that this, in addition to one faculty or student with a gun, would have stopped Cho from entering the classroom.

Re: "And the money to train these folks, buy their guns, provide ammunition, specialized vests, security lockers and so on? Billions!" Yes, this would be expensive. But think of it as an alternative to expanding the campus security force! It would be quite effective and yet be a fraction of the cost. It would also have the additional advantage that these armed faculty/staff would be instantly available all the time.

Any other ideas out there for increased campus security measures? I would like to avoid the psychological prediction issues. These are adequately addressed elsewhere. Please focus on ideas that would limit the killings, once they have started.

The University of Arkansas is considering a campus wide mass text messaging to each student that has a cell phone, and will vote on it real soon, in response to what happened at Virginia Tech. The University of Arkansas has a mass email messages if something bad does happen on campus. They have increased security patrols on campus in light of other stuff that has happened, like a rape of a 19 year old female student last year, as well as a way of students to note light outages on campus and notify campus maintenance. There was also the brutal murder of April Love, a University of Arkansas student that happened on Sept. 11, 2005. She was murdered by someone pretending to be her friend. In the wake of this, there has been a call for increased security patrols before what happened at Virginia Tech. I am curious to know what other schools and colleges are doing across the state to combat these senseless acts of violence.

My suggestion would be a Federal (meaning country wide, not state to state) concealed carry law, where the only places one cannot carry are in buildings where the only entrances are manned by armed security forces (police, military, whatever) and checks are performed to ensure all persons entering that building are unarmed (metal detectors, etc). Make the background checks stringent, and reviewed every couple of years. This way, no criminal knows of a "safe haven" where it is a guarentee there are no hidden guns to prevent them from their violent behavior.

Wow... that makes sense! I'll sit back and wait now for those who will claim that you want to turn America back into Dodge City.

One objection I have heard raised to the above suggestion re arming faculty/staff is that the police have extensive training to deal with shooters and that this training is too extensive for faculty/staff. I agree with this to some extent. However, my response is that we only need to train faculty/staff in DEFENSIVE armed techniques designed to protect their students and themselves. The training required for this is much less extensive.

Note that the poster only suggested a nationwide concealed carry law. This would likely require somewhat extensive training, as is required in most states with such laws. Also, the poster did not suggest that anyone be forced to obtain suhc a permit.

That's exactly what the gun ban people want to say. It'll be another wild west. But consider this quote from Glenn White, president of the Dallas Police Association concerning concealed carry: "All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn't happen...I think it's worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I'm a convert."

He is by far not the first, although he's perhaps one of the more honest. Law enforcement officials in Florida and Georgia made similar predictions, only to be proven wrong by the facts.

Hey why don't we deal with the real issue. Stop the mistreatment of others. We punish only those who committ henious crimes. The rich have always demeaned the poor without consequence. Anyone who is poor has had a urge to cause some rich a hole some pain.

Don't be mad at the rich. If you want to be jealous that's fine, but not mad. This is America, you are the only person stopping yourself from persueing better means. Ask yourself if you are doing what you can to obtain an edjucation? Are you investing your money wisely, or spending every dime on Friday night? I'm not mad, jealous maybe, but not mad. Don't forget there is usually a substaintial price for wealth. I know wealthy people who have lost the love of their lives in their persute of riches. Many would trade everything for one good freind. It's not all it's cracked up to be. Of course I would really like to have a Ferrari parked in my garage, but I'm not mad.

How many instances do you know of where someone has pulled a pistol and started shooting when he was in a NON "Gun Free Zone" amongst a bunch of people with their shirts hanging out?

Gun laws help killed those 32 students. The VT campus was a gun free zone but that of course didn't stop a determined psyco from shooting up the place but had a professor or student had CCL and armed, lives may have been saved. If the gun control nut don't like weapons, that's their choice and rights, but they should not step on the legal gun owners rights too. I'm sure if one of them were to find themselves in a darken ally with a mugger or their homes broken into, they would wish they had a pistol to defend themselves.

What if we instituted a Campus CCW License? Allow students to carry IF they complete a handgun safety course and receive a Campus License. This will aid in stopping other attackers AND licensing fees can help with the cost of the schools handgun classes. No need to retrofit existing schools with expensive safes, no need to arm unwilling faculty with sidearms they refuse to use. Allow the willing to carry and they will pay the fees to do so. Even an added bonus, all requests should go through the schools counselors. Any red flags in their files may not show up in a National database and the application could be denied at a lower level. I think this could work. How about the rest of you?