A Scenario: You are in a classroom where the only door leads to a hallway that has a number of other classrooms in it. You hear the unmistakable sound of gunshots and you know they are in your building. You draw your pistol and go to the door where you see a half dozen shocked people and someone steps out of another classroom holding a pistol. There are people between you and this person and one behind them. Now what do you do, Ranger? (This is what the instructors would ask us at uncomfortable moments in Ranger school.) Are you trained to deal with this situation? If the other person is a good guy is he/she trained to deal with it?
Very simple: You hold your room and hope that guy is holding his room. When you hear more gunshots and they don't come from either of your rooms, you now know you potentially have an ally.
Re: The "target-rich backstop" theory:
How is a university any different than a mall, movie theater or farmer's market... when analyzed in context of an active shooter and a responding armed population?
Aside from the raw elitism that oozes from the ivory towers?
The whole flaw in your logic, lwestatbus, is the idea of running towards gunfire. Let me spell it out for you: Don't.
Those that choose to be gun-less can either run for their lives or get slaughtered. Those that choose to be armed can defend themselves and those in immediate proximity, or choose
to run for their lives or get slaughtered.
Your premise adds a degree of complexity to an audience with very little opportunity to become CCW certified in time to graduate anyways. The vast bulk of a theoretical armed student body would be Seniors and grad students. They only have 1-2 years to accomplish such a task in addition to their educational goals.
Why introduce ADDITIONAL certification? Other than to simulate protection for those ivory towers in a cloak of befuddled self deceit?