Again, how would a sheepdog deter an insane dude from stabbing this girl?
.
I'm not sure why you're not getting what Ethereal and I are saying. We're not talking about deterrence.
Deterrence is causing a person to not initiate something for fear of the consequences.
We're talking about the "sheepdog" (which does not mean an actual dog, but rather a human being with the mindset to protect others) actually
stopping the perp in the act.
As in, shoot him, bash in his brainpan, knock him out, beat his ass. I assure you these actions, carried out successfully, would stop him cold.
To other matters...
For those excusing the lack of response on behalf of the students and staff, I will say that when I was a 21 yo, I would have acted and attacked the perp, armed or unarmed. I'm not your average Joe, I've been a cop and even at 21 was intrested in either the military or LE fields, yes, but I'm hardly unique.
I conceded early on that if there were a total lack of testicular fortitude among the bystanders then the presence of any weapons would make little difference...though many people would be more willing to take down a knife-wielding maniac if they had a pistol than if they had nothing.
Again, we're talking about people over 21...older students, grad students, students just out of the military, teachers, staffers, maintenance men, etc...who have gone through the training, background checks and bother of getting a carry permit. This is a subset of the college population, we're not advocating letting every booze-swilling 19yo walk around strapped.
(STILL, I keep coming to the issue of if 21yo college students are supposedly that irresponsible, why do we let them buy booze anyway? Why let them drive cars? Annual auto deaths are about 40,000, compared to annual gun deaths from all causes including police shootings of about 30,000. Inconsistent.)
Campus security, btw, is largely a joke. They're mostly there for liability purposes; they lack the numbers to be everywhere all the time...just like cops.
Ask yourself why most of these horrific incident occur in places where law abiding permit holders are barred from bringing guns? Because those places are safer for the perp.
The most conservative, gov't-sponsored studies put defensive gun use between 60-200,000 a year. Other studies suggest the number may be from half a million to as much as 2.5 million annually, with most cases not reported because no shots were fired. Taking a middle/average postion of say half a million such defensive uses, guns prevent crime thousands of times more often than they are used in any sort of homicide. This is so significant that it clearly argues that allowing permit holders to carry would reduce these heinous crimes and mass murders taking place in "citizen disarmament zones".
G.