Collegiate Times

Maybe the editorial board should examine facts and logic rather than simply making ignorant statements. The fact of the matter is that most people don't have a clue when it comes to firearms, and that ignorance transforms into unfounded fear.

You guys are citing facebook as a source of 'statistical data'?? Hahahahaha. Thanks, i did enjoy that article, it was suppose to be satire right? You guys weren't serious, right?

This editorial is rife with fallacies. First, the authors argue that the group doesn't have a particularly large following, so it should be ignored. Then the authors argue that, based on the dubious measurement of facebook group membership size, more VT students oppose the group than support it (notably, without considering that there are many students with no opinion). Then the authors conclude by saying, effectively, 'if those reasons weren't good enough, remember that guns can be used for ill purposes' and, consequently, the group should disband because it isn't doing anyone any good. I'm not normally one to rail against authors of editorials, but this one stinks of reactionism without a hint of analysis and assessment. Should guns be allowed on campus? The Bill of Rights (both of the US and Virginia Constitutions) say yes. The Board of Visitors says no. The rationale behind the policy has been (and continues to be) unclear, as does the efficacy of VT's prevention policy. SCCC may not take a side that everyone agrees with, but the fact of the matter is that the issue is far more complicated than checking 'yes' or 'no' regarding guns on campus. Please try not to trivialize the issue. . . .

As always, right on target, Kyle. What's more, many people that I've spoken with who oppose concealed carry on campus are simply against concealed carry in general, i.e., there is no specific reason that they believe carry on campus is any worse than other public places. But the fact remains that the VT policy clashes with applicable VA laws, so regardless of which side you're on, you should seek to have this inconsistency rectified.

As always, right on target, Kyle. What's more, many people that I've spoken with who oppose concealed carry on campus are simply against concealed carry in general, i.e., there is no specific reason that they believe carry on campus is any worse than other public places. But the fact remains that the VT policy clashes with applicable VA laws, so regardless of which side you're on, you should seek to have this inconsistency rectified.

From the latest Supreme Court decision upholding the right to bear arms but adding: "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill," Justice Scalia wrote, "or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Peter, you can pick and chose your quotes all you want. However, i am familar with that decision. The Courts were refering to K-12 schools. You can tell the difference since some of these problem schools have metal dectors at the entrances. There is no such place on our campus where this type of security can be enforced. There are no laws forbidding the carrying of firearms on our campus, only the VT board saying we can't. What if the school started to restrict our freedom of speech, kick us out if we say anything negative about the school?

"Permit or no permit; training or no training, guns in the end are used to kill." Well, I don't see the editorial board or other like minded people calling for the dismantling of our armed forces. Seems to me that if you are saying guns are used to kill, then that must be the only use for our military as well. But alas, we all know better, the military like firearms can be used defensively as well. So here is where we stand. If all the good students/staff/professors at VT abide by Tech's rule we will still end up with guns on campus, except only the bad peoople will be carrying them. And of course the good people will be virtually defenseless, other than maybe being able to throw desks and books at any perpetrator. Our current policy and its execution does not guarantee us anything since there aren't any metal detectors or police presence searching everyone coming onto campus. I wonder how the anti-gun/anti-concealed carry folks feel about this. People can be concealing guns and bringing them onto campus everyday, yet the anti-gun folks are running around having a panic attack worrying about that. That is weird.

Steger said it best at the Town Hall style meeting to discuss 4/16 security changes. VT's policy has always been, and remains, that guns do not belong on a college campus. The SCCC is a loud minority and nothing more. Citing facebook is not professional by any standards, but it's hard to argue that cumulatively there are more students opposed to concealed carry than for it.

That is all well and good. Lets look at the Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention policy approved by the BOV in 2005, found here http://www.hr.vt.edu/employeescorner/workplaceviolence/ Let us leave our security in the hands of administrators, who are worried about one thing and that is the glorification of VT. When these administrators fail to act on their own policies resulting in the death of many don't be surprised. The fact is that nobody is cares about the individual safety of any student, faculty, or staff member. People need to worry about themselves first because Tech sure isn't going to worry about your safety. Excuse me, they will worry about he illusion of safety since they want to keep drawing in record freshman classes but that is about as far as it goes.

If you are scared, immediately take cover under the nearest "gun free zone" signs or blue lamppost and wait for further instructions from a text warning on your cell phone. The order will come from someone sitting in an office somewhere else, and the police will be there in a few minutes. They know best for you.

To George S.: Steger is right. However, in the absence of a feasible strategy to prevent people from bringing guns to campus, the next most reasonable thing is to allow those to carry who are allowed to BY STATE LAW on campus. Remember that at the moment, visitors can carry guns on campus with impunity; it is only VT-affiliated people who can't.

That's been my point all along, Jason. I don't really care that much one way or the other on this topic - my issue is that the policy as it stands right now is fairly ambiguous in terms of its underpinning, and wholly impractical in terms of its application. Suppose for a second that someone had actually had a gun, and had disposed of Cho on April 16th. Should that person have been expelled from campus, despite his heroism? It's a tricky issue - and that's why it needs to be debated and discussed. What the editorial board (and many others) has tried to do here is stifle debate by calling a group 'irrelevant-' which really only lends more credibility to SCCC's case.

Guns are not allowed in my classroom or my office. If I find a student with a weapon, I will call the VT Police. There is no ambiguity on this matter.

The problem, GL, is that the police aren't an instantaneous response organization. They take time to mobilize, plan, and execute a counter-criminal action. I understand where you're coming from, but the ambiguity comes in where we discuss what the gun holder is doing. Is he pointing the gun in your face? If so, calling the police isn't going to accomplish much (if you even have time to get to a phone). The ambiguity in the policy has more to do with underpinning than popular support, anyway - the fact that you so steadfastly believe in the policy is great, but it doesn't lend any credibility to the policy in the first place. It's like me saying that Vanilla is the only flavor of ice cream I will ever allow my children to eat - if that's my policy, then it's fine, but it doesn't explain WHY it is the correct policy to have. That 'why' is the real reason why SCCC exists and is active.

GL, that's well and good, but the point is twofold: chances are that you wouldn't be aware of the weapon's presence unless it is drawn, and even if you did have the opportunity to call the police, they would send the issue to judicial affairs, not to the court system, because this is a campus policy violation, not a breakage of any law. In contrast, as an alumnus of VT, I can openly carry a pistol across the public property of the drillfield (or concealed carry with a permit) without fear of legal repercussions. Of course, if I show up in your classroom or office and I'm not invited or a paying student, then I can be charged with trespassing, but this can happen regardless of whether or not I have a gun. The overarching problem is that the policy and the law do not jibe.

GL, You can call the police, and they will likely come, but if the student is legally carrying that gun, no law has been broken. Don't you mean you'd call the administration and have the student expelled? However, this does bring up a point. If I were still a student at VT and chose to carry my concealed handgun into your class, you would never know. There was a great article in May of last year, IIRC, about concealed carry on universities in Utah. A student who legally carried agreed to be interviewed and followed around campus. His professors were shocked to learn that he had been carrying a gun to class *every day*, for the entire semester. They had no idea. He was an attentive student, got good grades, and was well liked. Never caused any problems - just like "law abiding citizen" implies. You'll never know who carries, because we take our responsibility seriously. We don't show off, we don't swagger, and we avoid trouble and confrontation. We don't go looking for trouble. We only carry as an absolute last resort. We take responsibility for our own personal safety. Do you?

"If you have to carry a concealed weapon on you around campus to feel safe, why attend that institution in the first place?" Are you serious with this statement? Look at the news. There is absolutely no place thats truly safe in this world. If you have to call the police over an issue then they'll probably be there in time to tag toes and fill out paperwork. Don't push your own insecurities about firearms onto good people who want to take charge of their own defense.

Very true, Jeremy. Many choose to feel safe implicitly, without taking any specific action to ensure their safety (aside from living in a relatively safe area like Blacksburg). Others require additional measures to protect against the unthinkable. I know many people who carry mace or a stun gun, and many others who choose a firearm. In the end, though, the point is that carrying any of these things in the state of Virginia is a personal decision that a law-abiding citizen has the right to choose. What's more, it is a decision that has been statistically proven to not cause any undue risk to those who choose instead to rely solely on the relative safety of Blacksburg for their peace of mind.

I'd like to address the editorial board and their letter directly. Did you consider researching your subject beyond a quick visit to a Facebook page? I encourage you to dig a little deeper into the concealed carry movement, or at least into firearms in general. Have you visited a gun range, or even a gun shop, and spoken with the proprietor? Have you met with any members of the SCCC? If not, PLEASE take your journalistic duty more seriously and investigate the other side of your story. This piece is full of emotion and feelings, but is light on objective facts. If you will have an open mind and approach someone in the SCCC, I'm sure they will be happy to take you to the range and let you experience shooting. This may sound scary, but you will find these folks to be extremely courteous and respectful. You will also find them to be very responsible - safety with firearms is literally a life and death matter, and they treat it as such. You will learn about the Four Rules of firearms safety, and will get a first-hand appreciation for what the gun culture is all about. You might even enjoy yourself. My point is this - learn about these people, and you may come away with a better understanding of why carry permit holders are upset when they are labeled as irresponsible, paranoid or trigger happy.

The comment "guns in the end are used to kill" is pure rhetoric. If this is true, then police shouldn't have them either, unless you wish them to have the power of the executioner. This is simply failed logic. A gun used by a woman to protect herself from a violent rapist is quite different from the gun used to hold up a liquor store. Will you condemn the woman to rape? Will you condemn the weak to life at the mercy of the strong? Guns are the final equalizer. They make civilized society function. Without the ultimate threat of resistance with lethal force, the strong could do as they please. Some thug wants your wallet? What are you going to do about it? Call the police? But if there are no guns, what will they do? The gun is a tool, a weapon surely, to be used for good or ill. It is the holder of the gun who acts. Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens are not a threat.

some situations are kill or be killed. The odds of that situation happening to you is very low, but the consequences are very high. Buying the gun to defend against that requires a very high level or responsibility and accountability. This is why it is and should remain and individual choice and right.