When someone passed me an article titled, “Texas may soon allow guns on college campuses,” I didn’t know what to make of it.
Initial reaction: “Guns” and “campus” are two words put together that will forever haunt my freshman year of college and this school. Plus, I don’t trust most people, so why would I trust people with guns? Rational reaction: Most people don’t have concealed weapon permits, and the ones that do have proven their responsibility. Dilemma: While having a permit holder in one of those classrooms on April 16, 2007 could have saved lives, I still don’t feel safe with the possibility of someone sitting behind me with a gun.
But I wanted to form an opinion around more than just the typical shallow banter of illogical emotions that I usually hear, an opinion grounded in facts and reason. So, like any analytical mind, I expected to have a firm and unshakeable position on the issue after some research.
Should colleges let concealed handgun license holders carry guns on campus and in classes? Let’s look at the bill specifically in Texas. First, the bill has not been submitted yet, but a similar proposition has already been signed by half of the state senate, and is expected to pass.
It would force Texas universities to allow concealed handguns on college campuses. Utah is the only state that has a similar law already in place. The count of concealed handgun licenses in Texas is about 450,000 people. In 2010, of those between the ages of 18-25 that applied for a permit, 98.8 percent were awarded one. And in 2009, there were 101 convictions of people with CHLs, 0.15 percent of the total amount of convictions.
To get a concealed handgun license in Virginia, a person must be at least 21 years old, complete multiple education and safety courses, pass a background check and pay at least $10, but no more than $50. There are about 250,000 active license holders in Virginia.
Since April 16, 2007, 23 states have rejected bills to allow guns on college campus. Virginia Tech does not allow concealed weapons on campus. With all this data and more, my opinion is about as solid as one of those red star shaped Jell-O’s I always eat too many of.
Regardless of how many viewports, arguments or statistics I encounter, “the answer” doesn’t reveal itself. There are equal facts and reasonable points supporting both sides.
The pro-gun side argues that gun-free zones like campuses leave students defenseless. Criminals with guns have easy victims in students. Allowing concealed handguns on campus has the potential to both protect students in case of an incident, and may even deter one altogether.
The strongest, and most reiterated point in this argument, is that a CHL holder can save students’ lives in the case of a shooting.
The gun control lobby’s argument is pretty simple. Guns won’t make campuses safer. They will make them more dangerous. Statistics don’t indefinitely show more security when concealed handguns are allowed other places, why would they work on college campuses? Even CHL owners are humans who get emotional and make rash decisions. Why let those rash decisions turn into deadly ones, which is more likely to happen if they are students.
First, against the pro-gun side (but not necessarily for the gun control side), I don’t carry a gun, and don’t ever plan to. Therefore I am defenseless all the time. The only way to make sure no one is ever defenseless is to require everyone to carry a gun, or to require everyone to always be around someone who is carrying a gun. Either way, that would be absurd.
A version of this article appeared in the Mar 3 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 11 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.
I as am not a student anymore at VT, I can now carry on campus. I think most people do not realize there is no law against this just university rules. That is one thing i noticed missing from the article.
Reply to this Top
Mr. English, you say you don't trust people with guns, but you do admit that this is more emotional than rational. Consider that every time you cross the drillfield, you trust that the cars will stop as you cross the road. When driving, you trust the other drivers not to cross the yellow line and hit you head on. We trust people with deadly tools every day, and don't give it a second thought. Why? Because we are comfortable and familiar with those tools.
I recommend you take advantage of your friends who are concealed license holders and go with them to the range. Have them teach you gun safety and how to shoot. You may find that it takes the mystique out of the equation. In my experience, those who are familiar with firearms tend to be comfortable with the idea of others having them, while those who are not familiar tend to be uncomfortable.
Reply to this Top
I really hate the car argument. I understand the purpose to show a deadlier "weapon" but it is flawed and makes for poor debate.
The main reasons for this, you can see and hear cars. Unless you are totally oblivious to the world, at which point it is partially your fault, you can decide early on whether that car will stop or not. If you fear the car then you can let it by or run across and generally will have a good bit of time to get the eff out of the way if you notice someone driving suspiciously.
Now with guns, there are many scenarios where you don't have those capabilities. If it is concealed (Legally or illegally) then you are oblivious to potential danger, from the illegal holders of course. If you notice suspicious gun activity, there is also a lot less time to get the eff out of the way if someone decides to pull the trigger. There are also scenarios where you can be shot from behind without knowing it, though those are more reserved for war like snipers and Navy Seals.
And now for the kicker that will rock your world, and hopefully you made it here before flailing angrily at your keyboard, I'm all for guns! I'm just against silly arguments that hold no merit. Let me make an exaggerative example to prove how silly the car argument is.
House fires kill a lot of people, but we let people own those everyday!
Reply to this Top
we should throw out all 'wanna-be' analogies in the gun-rights discussion starting with "guns don't kill people, stupid people with guns kill people"
~guns do kill people
Top
Here's the problem in Texas:
Motor Vehicle burglary crimes have steadily increased on all campuses.
Current policy requires that Licensees can carry their gun all over Campus, but must store it in their car while in a class or Library or building.
Sec. 46.035 TEXAS Penal Code
f) In this section:
(3) “Premises” means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.
Guns are allowed on Campuses already and always have been. It’s only inside the buildings that they are prohibited.
It is 100% more likely that my car would be broken into and my gun stolen, than someone reaching into my pants inside a classroom to steal a concealed gun they didn’t even know was there which is safely holstered and retained by a reinforced belt. (Sadly, I can’t even remember the last time anyone in a classroom reached into my pants to try to grab anything concealed in there)
Current policy gives criminals easier access to guns.
Reply to this Top
Texas Campus Police officer point of view:
Licensees can be armed in city libraries, but on campus we prefer to create a situation of giving easy access to guns to criminals? That doesn’t make sense.
If you were a campus police officer on a call to a burglary of a vehicle in progress, would you prefer to walk up to a burglar holding a bunch of CDs and an I-Pad, or holding a gun a Licensee had to store in his car while he runs into the library?
Let the Licensee who carries daily in a secured concealed holster keep his or her weapon secured and concealed, not in a car for a criminal to take.
Passing the campus carry bills will aid in keeping guns out of the wrong (criminals’) hands.
Now, licensees can carry their concealed gun all over campus except into the library or classrooms, so they have to store them in cars which get burglarized when they are going into a building.
As I said, I can’t even recall the last time anyone reached into my pants in a classroom. However I have had my car broken into and contents stolen,
Vehicle burglaries are on the rise at all campuses, this is where you currently have to store your gun, allowing easier access to criminals. Criminals who will use your gun to commit other crimes. 70% of gun crimes are committed with stolen guns.
The Texas bill needs to pass, it’s just common sense.
Reply to this Top
Ray Hunt, the 2nd vice-president of the Houston Police Officers' Union, the largest police union in the state of Texas, spoke out in favor of legalizing licensed concealed carry (of handguns) on Texas college campuses and dismissed the notion that the presence of armed citizens would somehow cause chaos or confusion during or following a campus shooting.
He also mentioned that the union had been originally fairly anti-CHL, fearing shootings of CHL-holders by police amongst other things. Upon seeing that that hadn't occurred at all, they were happy to throw their support behind the concept of CHL in general, and they now specifically support concealed-carry on campus.
It isn't hard to tell a person walking desk to desk executing people from a CHL hiding under a desk waiting his turn so he can shoot upwards at the shooter and any bullet passing through the shooter hits the ceiling instead of other students on the floor. Police are trained for shoot-no shoot situations.
If I were a Police Officer, I'd rather respond to a car burglary and find someone holding a bunch of CDs, than a gun someone had to store there.
If the largest group of Police in Texas who encounter licensees on almost a daily basis during very stressful traffic stops etc. support it, it must be a good idea. It's just common sense.
Alternatively, we can keep the "status quo" of providing free guns to criminals on campus property, to be used in other crimes.
Reply to this Top
April 16, 2007
I still don’t feel safe with the possibility of someone sitting behind me with a gun.
--------------------------
Let's go back further:
FRIDAY THE 13th, everyone FELT safe
Monday the 16th, they realized they weren't.
A wise man once said "If you want to FEEL safe, carry a lucky rabbit foot, if you want to BE safe, carry a .45"
Moral: There's a difference in feeling safe and being safe.
Reply to this Top
Note: In Texas, 70% of gun crimes are committed with stolen guns. (We figure the rest are in Mexico.)
We want to stop providing easy access to guns through vehicular burglaries to criminals, and the Brady Campaign and their followers are inhibiting that goal of stopping easy access to guns for criminals by spreading false fears to campus leaders and students.
Reply to this Top
When you are armed for protection you can nullify the threat. I refuse to be a victim. VT shootings happened because he knew NO ONE was shooting back! Think of the lives that could have been saved. Schools are fish in a barrel as long as we cannot arm ourselves.
Reply to this Top
Image manipulation is as old as photography itself, contrary to the idea of a photo having inherent verisimilitude. Though not obviously visible to human eyes, image manipulation can be detected by some sophisticated tools, like <a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped Image Killer</a>. Which tells you whether your image has been Photoshopped given the image or the image's URL.
Reply to this Top