Research universities pride themselves on making arguments and decisions based on logic, reason and facts. However, some members of our University Governance here at Virginia Tech seem to think they are above that.
First, I pose a question: If you were asked by friends to go on a cruise, would you say yes before you knew how much it would cost, where you were going, and when it was? Of course not.
Since this is true, last night’s vote by the Commission on Student Affairs should concern you. With a serious issue due for a vote, one member asked to table the resolution until some confusion could be resolved and sufficient information made available to make an informed vote. About 10 members agreed, but more voted to continue discussion. A few more members made comments, admitting along the way that they were unsure about some things. Then, the irreprehensible action – they called the question, bringing the resolution to a vote.
For those who’ve assumed our leadership has been making informed and objective decisions, this should be a wake-up call. Not that this is a surprise to most who have been engaged in recent national news, but as long as we sit aside, our leaders both near and far will take their accountability lightly.
The topic of discussion Thursday night was a proposed ban on individuals storing their ammunition, including paintball and airsoft, on campus. With safety in question, concern was warranted. I will refrain from getting into the specific arguments here in favor of saying there was disagreement on three issues: research about ammunition being a fire hazard, the Tech Police Department being able to store people’s ammunition in addition to the firearms they already store, and some people having fears of ammunition on campus.
Instead of delaying the vote to gather the necessary information, they moved forward without the requested information. Assume they will do it again, unless we express concern.
Ken Stanton,
Vice President of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
Leave a comment 10 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
About time someone make this known. Of course, we didn't learn from 4/16 and the failures then, so why bother now?
Reply to this Top
I guess this also bans the use of Powder-Actuated Tools, such as those made by Hilti and RamSet. These are commonly used to drive anchors into concrete on construction projects. Typically they use a .22 or .17 charge. We should check every construction site to see that they're not in use and demand that the administration force their removal from campus.
Reply to this Top
Why should this be a surprise? Look no further than Washington DC. It's all the rage to vote on serious issues without having any rationality. Everybody's doing it. Join the club!
Reply to this Top
So frustrating. As the article states many, many people who live on campus store weapons at the VTPD where there is no room for ammunition nor would it be reasonable to have them store large amounts of it. Ammunition is not a fire hazard or general hazard unless intentionally set off in some way. Only very high sustained temperatures (such as directly in a fire for several minutes) will cause ammunition to combust and even then it will simply split open in nearly every case, not go flying around as if fired from a gun (no thanks to film for giving people that idea). A rule on proper storage would be far more sensible, but the decision here had far more to do with appearances and fear than safety and reason.
Reply to this Top
John, are you saying that when gradually heated up, rather than nearly-instantaneously combusted via the exploding primer, cordite pressure rises too slowly to cause the cartridge to "fire?" What manner of heresy is this!
Reply to this Top
Ken, you are arguing with something that nobody said except for you. John wasn't saying they dont fire. he's saying they dont fire like they would from a gun. rounds cooking off in open space don't cause the same kind of projectile velocity as when they are shooting out of an enclosed barrel where gas has only way to escape. it makes sense and seems reasonable yes?
Top
He was being sarcastic, toward people who don't understand what John said.
Top
Is this the final decision or does the university president have some form of veto power?
Reply to this Top
Even if he does, don't hold your breath.
Reply to this Top
The author signs his letter with a reference of support for guns on campus. That is a bigger issue than his letter. As a Hokie, the last thing we need on campus are guns. What is the world coming to with this type of crap?
Reply to this Top