This is my researched position paper, the final draft.
In the past ten to twenty years, we have seen a dramatic increase in violence that has taken places on or near college campuses. Perhaps the most memorable is that of Virginia Tech in 2006, when a crazed gunman, who legally obtained his weapons, walked onto campus and ruthlessly murdered over thirty people before turning the gun on himself. Theories around this particular incident are many, and they range from the cause and how this could have been prevented, to the actually shooting and how the situation could have been dealt with.
In every state except Utah, and Georgia, there are rules against students carrying weapons, concealed or otherwise, even with a legal permit issued by the state. In twenty-four states, there are statutes expressly prohibiting this practice. Texas allows the school to “opt out”, and permit it if they feel necessary. Fifteen other states allow the decision to be made by the school itself; thus, the school is able to legally expel a student or fire an employee for “campus carry” as it is sometimes called, but the student or employee cannot be held criminally liable carrying his or her weapon to school if they hold a concealed weapons permit. (ConcealedCampus.org, 2008, State-By-State, para. 4-5)
I believe that of all these states, only Utah, Georgia, and perhaps Texas have the right idea. In Utah, the law dictates that state colleges do not have the right to restrict the right to carry a concealed weapon, and Utah Valley University even allows a student to carry his or her weapon openly. With this in mind, I find it interesting that there have been no instances of any kind of school shootings on a Utah college campus. This proves my point that college students should be allowed to carry their weapons on campus if they go through the proper steps that state law dictates, such as acquiring a permit.
Most college students are over eighteen years of age, and many are over twenty-one, the legal age in most states for an individual to be allowed to hold a concealed weapons permit. It is, by definition, unconstitutional to restrict this right, because that document, which serves as the supreme law of the land, stated that our right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed upon.” Those who make laws prohibiting carry of weapons stand in direct violation of this law, as well as their oaths of office. Those who are for restricting this right clearly do not understand the constitution, which it is the ultimate authority in any legislative decision; or these individuals simply disregard this great document for their own personal agendas. We are bound by this law, in all its aspects, and just because a place has been designated such by people who hold the special interests of lobbyists at heart, does not mean that these laws are constitutional. Nowhere in the document does it state that we can pick and choose where it is valid; on the contrary, it is the ultimate factor (or should be) in making and restricting the rights of the people.
Colleges are just like any other place; putting up a sign and telling criminals to stay out will and has had the opposite effect as intended. To think otherwise is illogical; all we’re doing when we declare a place “gun-free” is inviting criminals to walk in and shoot defenseless people. From OpposingViews.com we can read an opinion similar to the one already stated:
“If gun control worked, schools would be the safest places in the country. But gun free school zones have proven to be a dangerous delusion that has resulted in people being forced to be victims.
“The only people guaranteed to be safe in gun free zones are criminals. They can count on the law-abiding being disarmed. In reality, gun free zones are nothing more than criminal safe zones. (“School Zone Gun Bans Do Not Deter Killers”, para. 1-3)
In the same article, it states numerous incidents where we see that people with guns protected people from being killed. One that stands out happened in 2002, when two law students held a killer at gun point- with their own guns- at the Appalachian School of Law until police arrived. (see OpposingViews.com, “Guns Have Already Saved Lives at School, para.4)
Those who are for restricting the right to carry guns on college campuses claim that the risks of allowing the students to carry outweighs the benefits, if they agree that there are any benefits at all. In a statement written by directors of three college-related national organizations, they make the following claims as to why it is dangerous for college students to carry or even possess weapons on college campuses (see “Statement Against Concealed Carry in University Residences) :
· It increases the risk of suicide.
· Student drinking habits are out of hand, and could cause accidental or purposeful shootings.
· A second gun in the middle of a shooting could injure innocent bystanders.
· Students could accidentally injure themselves with a gun, by either a misfire in the holster or pocket, or by playing with the gun, not realizing that there is a round in the chamber and pulling the trigger with the intent of dry-fire.
In an interview with President G.P. Petersen of Georgia Tech, he states that he is personally opposed to weapons on campus, specifically concealed weapons. At that college, Kristofer Carta, president of the College Democrats at Georgia Tech, states that “With all respect toward the Second Amendment”, he does not believe it to be correct, because “handguns… are only made for the purpose of ending another’s life.”
Another group, called the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, also presses these issues. One victim of Virginia Tech, Colin Goddard, has worked tirelessly to ensure that college students are not allowed to bring weapons of any kind on to campus.
People and groups such as Carta, Goddard, and the Brady Campaign demonstrate their clear and direct disregard for the constitution, putting their own personal interests above the law, as well as the safety of the people who they are supposedly concerned about.
These people believe that by restricting the rights of students to carry and possess weapons, they are protecting the students from criminals. However, there is no evidence of this; the many shooting incidents in “gun-free” zones demonstrate just the opposite. The individuals who wrote the statement against concealed carry also mentioned that they do not want to see laws such as the one that has been enacted in Utah, restricting the universities’ rights to ban concealed weapons. It seems from such a statement that they do not care about rights that are guaranteed by the constitution, nor the logical presentation of only their personal agendas to eliminate handguns altogether.
Many of these claims that these people make are speculative; while I was able to find on several websites that over fifty percent of gun related deaths are suicides, I was not able to find any specifics on how it has made them increase, because administrations have not never before experimented with these kinds of policies. They do present good logic in wanting to keep them safe; however, while still failing to line up with the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, it also is based solely on speculation. They have decent stats that over 90% of gun related suicide attempts are fatal, but it still does not show that suicide rates will increase (keepgunsoffcampus.org). From OpposingViews.com, we see that even they have to admit that it is not a proven fact: “Needless to say, increasing firearms availability for college students could lead to a significant increase in the number of fatalities among the 24,000 suicide attempts survived by students each year. After all, the presence of a gun in the home increases the risk of suicide fivefold.” (Brady Campaign, para 1)
I contend, however, that if a student wants a gun, he will get one. It has been proven time and again that who wants guns will use whatever means necessary to get them, whether legally or otherwise. In twelve schools that allow posession and carry of weapons, over a combined time of one hundred semesters, however, no guns have been used in any violent crimes, including suicides, threats, and none have ever been reported stolen. (ConcealedCampus.org, “Common Arguments”.)
An interesting anecdote comes from Atlanta to prove my next point, that student drinking habits will not necessarily increase the risk of gun misuse. Quite the contrary, some students in Atlanta who were partying last year and almost fell victim to two would-be murderers, were able to stop them. The criminals, Calvin Lavant and an unnamed accomplice, burst in to the apartment with the intent of killing everyone inside after raping all the women. One of the students grabbed a gun out of a backpack, began shooting and killed one of the criminals and injured the other. One innocent person was hurt in the crossfire.
Looking at this situation, it shows that even when crossfire was indeed a problem, the students gun still prevented nine other untimely deaths. Certainly this shows that lives can indeed be saved by legal possession and use of a gun. It also shows that even though the students were having fun and alcohol was probably in the equation, they were being responsible regarding the gun use. Granted, not every party will be responsible, but again, there are no proven facts that allowing students to have guns will cause misuse of weapons: it’s pure speculation.
One of the most bizarre and outlandish claims is that of misfire and accidental shootings:
“In addition to the risk factors above, allowing more guns on college campuses and into schools is likely to increase the risk of students being shot accidentally. Guns in the home are four times as likely to be used in unintentional shootings than in self-defense. Plus, a 1991 report by the General Accounting Office that surveyed unintentional firearm fatalities found that 23% of those deaths occurred because the person firing the gun was unaware whether the gun was loaded. The report explains several ways in which this happens. “For example, one might empty a firearm but not notice that a round remains in the chamber, one might typically leave a weapon unloaded and so assume that it is always unloaded, or one might pull the trigger several times without discharge (dry-firing) and so assume the chamber is empty even though it is not.” These mistakes are not limited to children. Even trained gun users have made them.
“If there are no guns on campus, these types of accidents cannot occur.” (Brady Campaign)
Concealed Campus.org offers their rebuttal to this once-again speculative logic:
“Accidental discharges are very rare—particularly because modern firearms feature multiple safety features and because a handgun’s trigger is typically not exposed when it is concealed—and only a small fraction of accidental discharges result in injury. SCCC feels that it is wrong to deny citizens a right simply because that right is accompanied by a negligible risk.
“… Only about 2% of all firearm-related deaths in the U.S. are accidental, and most of those are hunting accidents and accidents involving firearms being openly handled in an unsafe manner. A person is five times more likely to accidentally drown, five times more likely to accidentally die in a fire, 29 times more likely to die in an accidental fall, and 32 times more likely to die from accidental poisoning than to die from an accidental gunshot wound.” (“Common Arguments”)
To offer a final point of why concealed weapons carry should be allowed on college campuses, I will present a few statistics and final argument. In states where concealed carry is allowed, crime is showed to have a 30% lower rate than those states that do not allow it. In the city of Chicago, where handguns are banned altogether, in the first five months of 2008 alone, there was a dramatic increase of violent crime by 13%! Do the math: that’s a 43% difference!!
Logic would dictate that concealed carry be allowed on campuses, because the criminals in the surrounding areas will be made aware of this after a few incidents of would-be victims brandishing their guns, as I experienced personally one night coming off the Trax in South Salt Lake,I was able to a man who was pursuing me with the intent of robbing me, by simply showing him my 9mm handgun that I keep concealed under my shirt.
If an individual doesn’t like handguns, fine. That’s their business. But it is immoral to restrict this right of for others. I would personally prefer my constitutional rights not be infringed upon, and I would like to be able to effectively to protect myself and those around me with equal or greater force, because in my experience and according to my research, that is the only thing criminals understand.
I would propose that college administrations and law-makers allow students to carry guns if they go through the proper channels and sign a waiver, making them solely responsible for their actions with any weapon, and if they own the weapon, if it falls into the hands of another and is used to commit a crime. This would cause students to be responsible in the safekeeping and handling of their guns.
They should understand that the police, even if they get there in two minutes such as they did at the Northern Illinois University incident in 2008, cannot stop the immediate murders; mind you, the man who opened fire in the crowded auditorium there was able to kill fifteen people before being gunned down by the police.
College Administrations and Law-Makers should take these arguments into serious consideration, rather than listening to the special-interest groups, such as the Brady Campaign Against Gun violence and their emotional arguments, and instead consider the logical and most effective way for a student to be allowed to protect himself: for qualified, licensed students, who otherwise carry guns and are stable, law-abiding citizens, to be allowed to carry concealed handguns on campus.
Sources:
http://www.opposingviews.com/questions/would-allowing-students-to-carry-weapons-make-college-campuses-safer, (n.d.) retrieved March 27, 2010
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2440759/posts
http://www.keepgunsoffcampus.org/moreguns.html, retrieved April 12, 2010
Jones, T., www. Wsbtv.com, May 7, 2009, retrieved April 12, 2010 from http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html
Lott, J. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (1998), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Potts, B.; Traxler, S.; Blumenthal, K,. Statement against Concealed Weapon Carry in University Residence (2009, June 19), The Association for Student Conduct Administration (ASCA).
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, Concealedcampus.org/ (n.d.), retrieved March 25, 2010
