Virginia Tech Survivor

judicator · May 4, 2011

There's an event coming up this week that some of you might wanna know about:

<broken link removed>

Evidently, one of the survivors of the VT massacre, Colin Goddard, will be at the event for "discussion" of gun violence. From what this article says, this guy has actually posed as a buyer at gun shows to show how easy it is to buy a gun without ID.

I'm seriously considering dropping by either Friday or Saturday and chatting with him, see exactly where he stands, maybe try and budge him one way or another....

What are some thoughts from the rest of you?

drew · May 4, 2011

If that's the same guy I remember he volunteered to be a poster boy for the Brady campaign and was adamant about having a background checks for FTF transfers.

MountainBear · May 4, 2011

He is now employed by one of the anti-2nd amendment foundations. Like it was said above, he's a poster boy. I'm sympathetic for what he had to endure, but not of how he has chosen to act now...

boxer13 · May 4, 2011

I might check out the one @ Bijou because I want to see just where it exactly falls on the slant scale. Saw his bit on Oprah (don't judge) and while I feel sorry that such a terrible thing had to happen to him and his classmates he'd rather disarm us students vs. arming us.

VT shooting happened during my Freshman year @ college, and now that I'm able to legally carry I do every chance I get. Its a damn shame that Oregon campuses refuse to let us protect ourselves in the event an incident such as that were to occur. Our DPS "officers" don't even carry guns nor tasers, so we'd be especially screwed.

Redcap · May 4, 2011

Sounds like a serious tool to me.

Jamie6.5 · May 5, 2011

boxer13 said:
<snip>I feel sorry that such a terrible thing had to happen to him and his classmates he'd rather disarm us students vs. arming us.

It didn't work last time,... But some people think if they do it THEIR way it will THIS TIME,...
Doing the same thing and expecting different results.
In college no less.
Oh well.

2ANewbie · May 5, 2011

I think that you would be hard-pressed to change his opinions about firearms. He is on staff of the Brady Campaign and is noted in many articles at the Brady Bunch website: <broken link removed> . That page has several articles involving his advocacy for gun control.

Abiqua · May 5, 2011

boxer13 said:
Its a damn shame that Oregon campuses refuse to let us protect ourselves in the event an incident such as that were to occur.

The public colleges don't have the legal authority to regulate firearm possession.

ORS 166.170 State preemption. (1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.

(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void

boxer13 · May 6, 2011

Abiqua said:
The public colleges don't have the legal authority to regulate firearm possession.

ORS 166.170 State preemption. (1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.

(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void

I know that I can legally carry on campus, its just as a student I would be expelled if anyone ever saw me doing so. While I wouldn't face any legal issues, the school can still suspend me regardless.

DoubleTapDrew · May 6, 2011

Well good thing VA Tech was a gun free campus and therefore a shooting never happened there...oh wait...
These are the same type of people who welcome nanny state things like facial recognition cameras and metal detectors with open arms.

Abiqua · May 6, 2011

And since they would be violating Oregon state law you would have legal recourse.

Abiqua · May 6, 2011

boxer13 said:
I know that I can legally carry on campus, its just as a student I would be expelled if anyone ever saw me doing so. While I wouldn't face any legal issues, the school can still suspend me regardless.

And since they would be violating Oregon state law you would have legal recourse.

I don't understand (and I'm not picking on you, I've seen/heard it from a lot of other people) knowing that you have the legal right to carry, knowing they have no legal authority to restrict that right. As long as you are following the law, if they do anything they are violating Oregon law. They have admitted publicly that they don't have legal authority but will continue to create policy in violation of the law until they are forced not to. By following their unlawful policy you are ceding your rights.

drew · May 6, 2011

DoubleTapDrew said:
Well good thing VA Tech was a gun free campus and therefore a shooting never happened there...oh wait...
These are the same type of people who welcome nanny state things like facial recognition cameras and metal detectors with open arms.

And tell us we shouldn't mind these intrusions unless we have something to hide.

boxer13 · May 7, 2011

Abiqua said:
And since they would be violating Oregon state law you would have legal recourse.

I don't understand (and I'm not picking on you, I've seen/heard it from a lot of other people) knowing that you have the legal right to carry, knowing they have no legal authority to restrict that right. As long as you are following the law, if they do anything they are violating Oregon law. They have admitted publicly that they don't have legal authority but will continue to create policy in violation of the law until they are forced not to. By following their unlawful policy you are ceding your rights.

Pragmatic approach, I know currently a lawsuit is being heard regarding the WOU student who was wrongfully arrested and expelled from WOU. Do I need to add myself to that mess of a case? I consider it a free-rider issue, in that hopefully the courts will rightfully side with the student and all will be well. I'd rather donate to his cause than have others donate to mine.

salmonriverjohn · May 7, 2011

This man contends that he is an avid shooter, was in the military and isn't against owning guns,, just closing what HE considers loopholes. HE is the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. He was on OPB yesterday, "yes I heard it on OPB, shoot me later" and admits to working with the antis to change the laws nationwide. He intends to go state to state to preach HIS version of the 2ND amendment. If he had been armed at VA Tech, I flat guarantee he would be singing a very different tune right now. He would be saying how one armed student saved countless lives, but since he was the coward that he is,, he is left with this decision to go on a personal (paid) crusade and make sure that this will happen again. To those that choose to carry on Oregon campuses, concealed means just that. To be judged by twelve is far better than to be carried by six. He is just another of Sara Brady's tools that believes that he can use a tragedy which could have been abbreviated by one armed citizen firing one well placed shot to further their agenda to assure that only the criminals should be armed.:bsflag:

Abiqua · May 7, 2011

boxer13 said:
Pragmatic approach, I know currently a lawsuit is being heard regarding the WOU student who was wrongfully arrested and expelled from WOU. Do I need to add myself to that mess of a case? I consider it a free-rider issue, in that hopefully the courts will rightfully side with the student and all will be well. I'd rather donate to his cause than have others donate to mine.

I certainly respect that position. The people that I don't understand are the ones who can get past "Because the school says it's against the rules", or don't care that the school is violating the law since they don't have interest in the gun issue or are themselves anti-gun. The school should follow the law no matter what the issue.

billdeserthills · May 7, 2011

salmonriverjohn said:
This man contends that he is an avid shooter, was in the military and isn't against owning guns,, just closing what HE considers loopholes. HE is the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. He was on OPB yesterday, "yes I heard it on OPB, shoot me later" and admits to working with the antis to change the laws nationwide. He intends to go state to state to preach HIS version of the 2ND amendment. If he had been armed at VA Tech, I flat guarantee he would be singing a very different tune right now. He would be saying how one armed student saved countless lives, but since he was the coward that he is,, he is left with this decision to go on a personal (paid) crusade and make sure that this will happen again. To those that choose to carry on Oregon campuses, concealed means just that. To be judged by twelve is far better than to be carried by six. He is just another of Sara Brady's tools that believes that he can use a tragedy which could have been abbreviated by one armed citizen firing one well placed shot to further their agenda to assure that only the criminals should be armed.:bsflag:

The best evidence that you are correct recently occurred with representative Giffords in Tucson. The event lasted just seconds, but had no gun-toting citizens been onsite it could have lasted for hours & would have become much worse.

BroncoFan · May 7, 2011

He was one of the "stars" of the HBO special Gunfight. I can't fault him for the traumatic experience at VT but his logic is just nonsensical. Brady is totally using him or he is a user. Watch the Gunfight special. It's touted as a documentary showing both sides of the gun debate but as usual the pro-gun folks are protrayed as nuts and the Brady folks are well-reasoned, caring people only interested in "common sense" gun control. It also has the "study" where they took clueless kids, armed them with paintball guns and "ambushed" them in a class room. Anyone with a couple hours of SD training could have taken out the shooters or at least evened the odds.

judicator · May 7, 2011

My suspicion is that there is a pretty good amount of cash involved, flowing towards Mr. Goddard, and that may be one of his primary motivations in sticking with this agenda. Nationwide tour, touting his documentary and actual combat experience, he's no doubt getting a healthy percentage of the donations received during his campaigning.