Shooting at Umpqua Community College, Oregon

Criminals For Gun Free Schools Campus Carry
Criminals For Gun Free Schools Campus Carry
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Roseburg, Ore. – -( A shooting has been confirmed at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore.

More than 20 people are injured after a shooting at a community college in Oregon Thursday morning, officials told the Daily News.

Preliminary information indicates 10 people were killed and more than 20 others injured in a shooting at Oregon’s Umpqua Community College on Thursday morning, Oregon State Police spokesman Bill Fugate told CNN.

The shooter was reported as “down,” with no further details immediately available, said Douglass County commissioner Chris Boice.

One female was shot in the chest on the Roseburg campus, and 20 people were reported as “injured,” he said.

Umpqua Community College is a posted Gun Free Zone but allows concealed carry under Oregon law. The college security page states the following:

“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.

Possession of knives with a blade longer than 4” is prohibited.

Brandishing weapons is prohibited.

Misuse of personal defensive weapons – e.g., pepper spray, etc. is prohibited. The owner is responsible and accountable for any misuse of these devices.”

The college is located on the North Umpqua River and serves Roseburg and the greater Douglas County area. The college was established in 1964 and educates close to 20,000 full and part-time students

This story is breaking and will be updated as more information becomes available.

See Related: Every Mass Shooting Shares One Thing In Common & It’s NOT Weapons

Umpqua Community College
Umpqua Community College
  • 82 thoughts on “Shooting at Umpqua Community College, Oregon

    1. I’m convinced this is the government staging/implementing these shootings to get us to support anti-gun legislation – so that the government can more easily disarm us completely. The 2nd amendment is there to allow us to protect ourselves, not harm each other. Oregon provides necessary lessons and training for those wanting to weild firearms. Even the Oregon Sheriffs’ Association provides online training courses for concealed handgun licenses at their website

    2. I”ve owned and shot guns all my life. I’ve been shot by a gun. I’ve never once felt like anything that President Obama would ever ask for would threaten me changing the way I own or operate my firearms. I live in Oregon, and am humored by those who say about the folks with concealed weapons on the campus “they were stopped from helping,” bullshit. They knew their rights, and were stopped by a schoolteacher? I understand that if someone were directly confronted and were carrying, of course they should shoot a murderer. I also understand that a with a school full of “active shooters” that it would be hard for cops to determine who’s the “good guy with a gun” and who’s not. But the massive amount of angry ignorance displayed here is atrocious. It’s not like it’s difficult to determine the state of carrying legally on school campuses in Oregon. I have no answers for handling a situation like the Umpqua shootings, but am angered intensely to hear that the NRA has been blocking attempts by the US government to start looking at possible solutions to madmen getting and using guns. I despise ignorant angry knee jerk responses to very complicated problems, on both “sides of the argument.” Tired of knee jerk responses by people in government to mass shooting situations? Put it on the government to spend some of our tax money on researching “common sense” (yeah, I know how many hate that expression; come up with something better) and stop letting the NRA spend millions and millions of dollars controlling how the conversations go.

    3. I see a lot of people saying that Oregon permits carrying of guns on campus, and even one that says that a report asserted that several students were carrying on campus at the time of the shooting.

      Lets assume for argument’s sake that’s all true.

      The point is, nobody who could actually face the gunman to stop him was armed. And because of this, the gunman had free reign to take down whomever he pleased.

      Just because there are fools who actually think they’re safer by depending upon others to save them from a lunatic doesn’t somehow magically defy common sense.

      If the gunman had been challenged by someone armed who was willing to risk his or her life in order to either stop him or distract him till the police could get there, several people would be alive today that are dead.

      Same thing in California, same thing in Newtown.

      2 people in Newtown gave their lives for nothing. Instead of running away and protecting themselves, they risked and gave their lives trying to stop a lunatic with only their hands and feet.

      They brought their fists to a gun-fight, and they died . . . for nothing. They didn’t even slow down the lunatic. They died for nothing.

      Now, imagine that those, or even just one of those two who were willing to risk death, even die for sake of protecting those kids was able to obtain a firearm before facing the lunatic. How many children would be alive right now? Probably all of them that were still alive when they gave their lives for nothing.

      Look, this is how it is. When a lunatic gunman is being fired at, he has one of two choices.
      Either die or take cover. The gunman is probably going to take cover, which means he’s not going to be killing people anymore, and in that time that he’s protecting himself from oncoming fire, the police will arrive and either convince him to come peacefully or they will kill him.

      That will only happen though, if someone is armed and not only armed, but also is willing to risk their lives to protect those around them.

      And considering that we have a hefty number of dead bodies in the cemetery who attempted to use their hands and feet to stop a lunatic gunman, that tells me that there are a considerable number of everyday people like you and me, that if they had access to a gun, even without proper training, they’d effectively stop a lunatic gunman from carrying out his rampage.

      Now, of course, we are all going to agree to require that people with access to guns in school have some kind of official training on how to use that firearm and take a proficiency test to ensure that their aim is adequate to be regarded as self-defense rather than a danger.

    4. What responsibility did his mother have? Her adult child was clearly mentally unstable and yet she (according to the news this morning) was an avid “collector” of weapons (although he was never deemed mentally unfit to purchase on his own). Despite this, apparently she had 13 -15 guns of various types in the home and her son obviously had access to them. Should we prohibit or limit the rights of otherwise eligible people from owning/keeping weapons when someone in their home is mentally unstable?

    5. The real question is what prescribed drugs was he on.?? Or had he discontinued use of said drugs ?? In every case involving these shootings there has been some sort or other drug prescribed by a quack headshrinker. Drugs for depression have been involved in every mass shooting case so far. The media has tried very hard to hide this fact because they stand to lose Billions in revenue from drug companies.Ban behavior altering drugs not guns.
      Just listen closely to drug ads for antidepressants.on TV . Increased risk of suicide, Fits of rage etc.
      Don’t let the school officials force you to destroy your children just because they are overactive, or they don’t want to deal with an intelligent child who is acting out.

    6. College students typically do not carry on campus regardless of the laws.. most feel safe on the campus and let’s face it that this segment of the population is antigun. The police were thankfully 8 minutes away with guns so it could have been much worse if they had the typical 15 min response time. In this day of terrorism every public place where people gather in close proximity, like schools, church and movie theaters should have armed guards.

      1. ‘Armed guards’? You mean the rent-a-cop types that will do the boogaloo after the first shot is fired? Would YOU risk your life for a minimum wage job? No thanks, I will handle my own ‘security arrangements’, thank you very much.

    7. Some will want to blame the firearms, to them I can say as a victim of a drunk driver , an off duty cop hit me and nearly killed me as I was walking , he went off the road a 55 mph zone . Many broken bones to legs ribs head and still suffer today , I don’t blame General motors (the car maker) , the bars , the alcohol manufacturers , the oil companies that make cars go , the bottle makers , the state that gave him a drivers license , NOPE , I blame him , the guy who did it.

    8. One of the problem in this country is the constant anti self-defense propaganda being pushed by the bed-wetting liberals. Kids are being told from a very early age, especially in public schools where liberals have total control of the agenda, that guns are bad and if a bad guy with a gun shows up you must hide and wait for the police. What ever happened with actually confronting the criminal or fighting back? Now, I agree, you must have the means to do it. This is why I strongly encourage everyone to become proficient in firearms. Exercise you right to arm and defend yourself. Most of you are not a Hollywood limousine liberal who can afford ARMED security. Now, if you are already too scared to handle a gun (like most bed-wetting liberals are), that is fine, that is your business. Just don’t start telling me when, where, what kind, or whether I should own a gun or not. MOLON LABE!!!

    9. Man, the childish arguing gets annoying. How about some intelligent discourse on this topic for a change? A) I identify as “liberal” and I fully support and vocally defend the 2nd amendment. Funny that I’ve not heard of the Liberal Party. Den, Rep, Libertarian… Those I’ve heard of. B) The shooter, in this situation (age, permit status, etc…) was carrying illegally! C) Might a legally armed individual have limited the carnage? Absolutely! The “gun debate” will not be won by outrage and insults. Our 2nd Amendment rights can only be saved/upheld by rational discourse and knowledgeable arguments that blow the “gun grabbers” out of the water.

    10. Guy on CNN just reported there were students there with concealed weapons. So how did that work for them? They didn’t save anyone

      1. Pretty well it seems. They are not dead. And because you carry does not mean you have to go looking for trouble, just be prepared when it directly confronts you.

      2. At least one student was in the veteran center, trained military veteran, was armed concealed by permit.

        He and others wanted to help but were told to stop and go on lockdown.

    11. A sign or no sign is irrelevant. UCC policy, as was posted above, prohibits weapons “without written authorization” AND it must be locked in your car, unloaded.

      For the person who thinks laws would not have prevented this, you are correct. But the laws currently in place makes it easier for things like this to happen. A law that allows for those who choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights could have limited the carnage.

      Blaming guns for incidents like this is like blaming forks for obesity. I do not always agree with the rhetoric that flows from the NRA president, but he was 100% correct when he said, ” The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.”

      My heart, prayers and thoughts are with anyone that has been personally affected by this haneous crime. Let’s get real with defensive solutions to prevent or reduce the amount of damage that an idiot like this could possibly do in the future.

    12. Can anyone tell me for certain that the policy in this story is the actual policy from UCC and also..can anyone familiar with the Campus verify that there is a sign posting GUN FREE ZONE?


    13. To the racist that posted “I bet it was black or muslum. Shame On You!!! I am sure you are shocked , he is white.You wait to see before you accuse. There was a time that you almost always found out it was a white person who did it. Recently it has gotten to the place that you have to wait and see. This is horrible situation, I pray for all the families that are affected. It’s shameful that you cannot go places with out worrying if you will get shot. God help us!!!

    14. Liberals create this mess… with stricter gun laws that only affect law abiding people and has the same effect as more guns in the hands of criminals because less people can protect themselves. The liberals claim it’s the remaining guns and push for more laws and the cycle continues. The difference being politicians have armed guards and bullet resistant vehicles.

    15. Them liberal douches are realizing that no one gives a hoot in hell what they think or say ! Totally irrelevant,total pussies !

    16. Are gun laws and campus rules all you can talk about? Yes it’s a problem but no solution exists, not now and certainly not in your near future. What was the gunmans question!!! Stand up and state your religion, this is another brainwashed religious zealot with a gun, laws wouldn’t saved these people.

    17. From the UCC student Code of Conduct, Under “Student Misconduct”:

      Possession or use, without written authorization, of firearms, explosives, dangerous chemicals, substances, or any other weapons or destructive devices that are designed to or readily capable of causing physical injury, on College premises, at College-sponsored or supervised functions or at functions sponsored or participated in by the College.

      Sounds like they are banned to me. What the hell is written authorization? From whom? The College, the Mayor, the Governor, my mother?

    18. Once again, a gun-free zone makes it easy for a lunatic to do unbelievable harm.

      For those that think a CHL holder can carry on a school property, someone is not reading Oregon law correctly! Under section 166.370, (3) (g) (A) & (B) it states that a person is not subject to a violation and a class C felony if:

      (g) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:
      (A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing the firearm; and
      (B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.

      What the hell good is a gun (and a CHL for that matter), if I must keep the gun UNLOADED and locked in my vehicle, which is a 5 – 10 minute walk away?

      Lib-tards…. I will never understand them.

      1. Hi! You are reading the correct section (and subsection) of Oregon law. But you missed something extremely important:3. (d) a person is licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

        It is legal for a permit holder to carry a weapon on the UCC campus. If you have the permit, it doesn’t have to be unloaded or locked in a car.

        Facts are facts. But if you think the messenger matters, I don’t have any strong feeling for or against gun free zones or concealed carry permits. But I honestly can’t figure out why so many pro-gun people call those who want to make it harder to get a gun “gun-grabbers”. It’s incredibly insulting and it makes me think these passionate defenders of the second amendment are not thinking as rationally as they think they are.

        1. David, Why does Obama call the TEA Party, Teabaggers ? I would say that is Increadibly Insulting or would you disagree?

      2. Hi, you’re reading the right section and sub-section of Oregon law, but you missed something big. 3. (d) a person with a concealed handgun permit.

        It is absolutely legal to carry a gun on campus if you have the permit. It doesn’t have to be unloaded or locked in a car.

    19. Whether Oregon law allows licensed concealed carry on campus is largely irrelevant at community colleges where the vast majority of students are under the age of 21 and not legally able to be licensed. That being said, to post the school with signage and electronically as a “GUN FREE ZONE”, you have advertised that it is an area where the probability of armed resistance to an armed attack is low. The likeliness of a legally armed citizen being present would have been greater at a four year university and would be more likely in more pro-second amendment states. Personally, I don’t travel to the west coast or the northeastern states where I can not legally carry.

    20. When all is said and done, and the media has had their anti gun rant, we find that this is an Islamic issue…………again! Take our weapons of protection away and then start putting us away in their FEMA camps, because we are the dangerous ones. GUN FREE ZONES DON’T WORK!!!!!! Who else would go round asking what religion you are? Wake up, America, your president is a commie loving mohamedingdong terrorist.

    21. For those against guns, you can always count on the police to save you…For those against guns, you can post signs of no gun allowed. How’s that working for you?.

      1. Licensed concealed carry is only eligible for over 21 and a community college is a two year college where the vast majority of students are under 21 and the majority of the faculty are anti-gun liberals. Then to post the area as a gun free zone is a invitation to a wack-a-doodle to go there to inflict the maximum carnage.

        1. Well said. When Kennesaw Georgia passed a mandatory gun ownership law 20 years ago all the local criminals moved to Dekalb County.
          Think about it; if you are a criminal do you want to prey upon a gun free location or upon a place with an NRA sticker in the window. Even the security officers at Umpqua were unarmed; which Obama minion made that decision?

        1. Nope Randy you are wrong I looked it up it is illegal to carry on any school campus unless you have a legal Oregon CCl then you are entitled to carry there.

    22. Your headline is totally wrong. You can carry a weapon in Oregon. Please edit accordingly to adhere to facts:

      “Umpqua Community College, however, was not a gun free zone. A 2011, state court decision prohibited public colleges from banning guns on campus. The decision stemmed from a suit filed by the Oregon Firearm Education Foundation, a gun rights group. There was an effort to pass a new law to reinstate the ability of public colleges to ban guns. That measure was defeated by gun rights advocates.”

    23. Now is not the time for this people. The first thing the gun grabbers do is start shouting for new common sense gun laws or in some cases outright bans when there is a tragic shooting. It’s not right when they do it and it’s not right when we do it. Let it play out. give those involved a descent amount of time to get through the shock and have a chance to mourn before you use an ugly situation as a constitutional argument.

    24. You are spreading factually in accurate information PLEASE STOP! the campus is not a gun free zone Legal concealed carry is allowed on all public schools from K through college in Oregon, Please do your research before you post, a lot of people don’t think they can carry on campus so they don’t and reports like this don’t help

        1. Aren’t you a special kind of genius. Yes that’s exactly what’s being implied, the shooter had a permit therefore his murder spree was legal, not the fact that people were allowed to conceal carry on campus and yet not one shot the gun man

      1. “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.

        Possession of knives with a blade longer than 4” is prohibited.

        Brandishing weapons is prohibited.

        Misuse of personal defensive weapons – e.g., pepper spray, etc. is prohibited. The owner is responsible and accountable for any misuse of these devices.” eric, maybe you missed this, or didn’t even read the article..

      1. Hi Ken, You are so right. Everyone should be able to carry their gun at any time. I could carry a gun legally where I work. I work at a public high school. I am also a retired cop so I have had a lot of training and have a CCW license. I guess the kids at my school have rights too. They are covered by the 2nd Amendment. Yea, 9th graders with 9 mil autos. I don’t see a problem. Do you?

        1. fed law says kids unger the age of 18 may not own a hand gun. under 21 may not buy a hand gun. a 9th grader with a 9mm clearly has an adult criminal suppling them

        2. Good for you; well said. They are the first to say that it is people who kill, not the guns. Wow, really? Correct! Which is why we need background checks on people for all gun sales.

          1. Background checks ARE required for all purchases, including “gun show” purchases. All knee jerk bleating to the contrary is misinformation. Even a casual transfer must be done through an FFL licence holder. Gun theft, however, is another story. Gun thieves undergo no background check.

        3. No, grandpa jimmy, ninth graders with guns is likely not a good idea but since very rarely is there someone in that ninth grade demographic that is over 21 and legally able to have a CCWL. But, if you are legally licensed, experienced and lawfully permitted to carry as an educator who could protect those same students, DO YOU?

          1. Lots of people say they are former cops ! I guess they think it gives them extra cred,…not ! This Kojak fool was never a cop !

    25. When will these people learn that it is not the lawful people that carry guns that who hurt people. It is people disturbed that hurt people. They have done it by guns, knives, swords, etc. A number of liberal people; yes I am talking about liberals and democrats who are always trying to ban guns and claim conservatives are the issue when it comes to these multiple shooting incidents. I saw a segment that illustrated a number of persons who have done these types of crimes voted democrat. If this is true, maybe the liberal party is just trying to protect themselves from their crazy friends! I am almost positive if a person or persons would have had their concealed weapon at this school lives would have been saved.

      1. In all fairness, it is … unusual … to see one guy with a knife kill over a dozen people before being subdued. Injure one or two, sure. Kill one, less often but it happens (its a lot harder for someone to actually lethally wound someone with a knife than it is to pull the trigger from 20 feet away and ignore what happened).

        1. It not uncommon for a fast moving vehicle. Maybe we should do a background check before someone buys anything larger than a motorcycle.

        1. And you are incredibly rude! But you are right…that all important grammar, makes him an idiot. Much like F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemmingway, Winston Churchill, and Albert Einstein, who were all well documented as having been quite hopeless in grammar. But I think we can all forgive Einstein, as when it came to math, grammar didn’t much bother him. Next time you decide to judge someone, better take a good look at yourself. You may not be nearly as intelligent or perfect as you think you are…..

          1. Oh Judy….let’s not overlook the fact that guns are exactly what resolved this tragedy! But your wright…wee should fokus on the gramer and noth’n else. Priceless comment!

            1. Doh!! Now the letter nazis are here!
              “I notice you have an overage of one M in your Hemingway. Papers, please. NOW!”

        2. Likewise, it’s easy to “spot you” as a liberal shill and a dullard. You couldn’t confront the substance of his argument, so you attacked it’s delivery. Weakling.

    26. I just don’t see how this could have happened. The Umpqua CC campus is a gun-free zone. That should have prevented this terrible crime because everyone knows that criminals, terrorists, and mentally unstable killers are among our most law abiding citizens. They would never, ever carry firearms into a gun-free zone where they would be the only ones with a gun.

      1. As news reports indicate, several students were carrying concealed weapons on campus at the time of the attack. Roseburg is in rural Oregon. Average student age is 28, well above the age requirement (21) for an Oregon concealed weapon permit, which overrides any campus rules.

      2. Uh, wrong. Concealed carry is allowed on the campus.
        Problem is, gun-totin’, shoot-em-up RWNJs avoid schools and colleges and institutions of higher learning like the plague.

        1. The college security page states the following:

          “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.”

      3. I agree 100% ! It just don’t make any sense that a nut with a gun would go to a ‘gun free’ school zone and murder a bunch of kids in their classrooms. Maybe,just maybe,the nut with a gun don’t give a damn about the ‘gun free’ signs around the campus. Do you think he might prefer a ‘gun free’ school so he can slaughter these kids without any resistance ?

    27. “except as expressly authorized by law “…….. Oregon Sate law expressly exempts conceal carry permit holders from rules prohibiting carrying guns in schools K thru college. But one source says lots of schools openly violate that provision and ban guns anyway. Does UCC ban guns in violation of Oregon law?

      1. No they aren’t in violation of state law, state law permits licensed concealed carry they are banning everything else

      2. It sounds like this is the same situation that exists in Minnesota. While it isn’t illegal for a permit holder to carry on campus, its against school rules. So a student would be subject to school discipline and could be expelled. A school employee would be violating their employer’s rules and could be fired.
        Its my understanding that the shooter is 20 years old and you need to be 21 to get a carry permit, so he was carrying illegally. Don’t know if he was a student or not, though school discipline is moot since he’s dead.
        I found it pretty ironic that once I registered for classes, I couldn’t be trusted to carry, but before and after I attended, it was just fine.

    Leave a Comment 82 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *