Share
Virginia Tech has the right to choose whether people are allowed to carry concealed weapons on its campus. Nearly five years after the April 16, 2007, campus shootings, there is still disagreement over which choice is more likely to prevent future campus violence.
The Virginia Citizens Defense League, sponsored by the Libertarians at Virginia Tech, will visit Tech today and demonstrate in front of Squires Student Center to advocate the concealed carry of weapons, which Tech currently prohibits along with all but one Virginia college — Blue Ridge Community College.
Students for Gun Free Schools will host a counter-movement called “School Walk-Out: Keep Guns off VT Campus,” according to the event’s Facebook page, in response to VCDL’s visit to Tech, making Thursday a key date for the debate surrounding concealed carry on campus in Virginia.
Related: Polar politics columns on concealed carry
The protests come only one day after Liberty University announced a change in its firearms policy. The private univerity in Lynchburg, Va. now allows guests with concealed handgun permits to carry guns in their cars and on the grounds, but not in buildings. Faculty and students can also do so if they get permission for the Liberty University Police Department.
Concealed carry advocates argue that letting permit holders bring their guns on campus is not a safety hazard, and may actually create a safer environment.
“It’s important that we recognize the fact that these laws and regulations aren’t going to stop criminals,” said Eric Smith, president of the Libertarian Club and a junior chemical engineering major.
But despite the argument for concealed carry on campus, the university maintains that concealed carry of guns on campus should not be allowed.
“The university believes that guns don’t belong on campus, in our classes, or in our dormitories,” said Larry Hincker, university spokesman.
And for Colin Goddard, making sure that guns remain off campus is of utmost importance. Goddard was injured in the April 16 shootings. Goddard was sitting in French class when he was shot four times by Seung-Hui Cho that day.
He made a recovery and now promotes gun-free schools.
“It’s changed my life,” Goddard said. “I’ve devoted all my time and effort to helping educate Americans about what we do in this country with guns, what we don’t do, and what we should be doing.”
Although he said gun issues are important, Goddard said mental health issues should be a priority.
“We need to do background checks on people,” Goddard said. “This is bigger than a gun issue. Mental health issues should be at the center of this debate about what we’re doing about campus violence, but it’s not, and it’s a shame.”
And some students like Maggie McVicar, a sophomore communication major, agree with the university and those associated with April 16 that guns could disrupt the educational environment.
“Guns make me feel uncomfortable and uneasy,” McVicar said. She will be attending the Students for Gun Free Schools protest.
A version of this article appeared in the Nov 17 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 30 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.
This debate is interesting and I'm not sure what I think about actually allowing the guns on campus, but I totally disagree with those cited in the article wanting less regulations for gun permits. We should ABSOLUTELY have mental health be part of requirements to get a gun. I think this would make a huge difference with gun violence.
I totally believe in 2nd amendment rights for many reasons, but we need to make it strict for those who have deeply disturbing psychological issues. I propose that a firearm seeking individual should have to get a recommendation from a licensed psychologist. Every case of gun violence that has touched my life (4/16 included) was due to a formally diagnosed, mentally ill individual.
Reply to this Top
Josh, thank you for a well-balanced, well-written article :) You would think that would be the normal here, but we appreciate the fact that both sides of the argument were actually heard; whereas it is often that our side is left out.
Reply to this Top
Argumentum ad misericordiam.
Reply to this Top
Virginia Supreme Court: Justice S. Bernard Goodwyn noted that previous Supreme Court opinions do not “[cast] doubt on laws or regulations restricting the carrying of firearms in sensitive places, such as schools and government buildings. Indeed, such restrictions are presumptively legal.”
US Supreme Court: District of Columbia v. Heller
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, 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..."
Reply to this Top
The Virginia Citizens Defense League would have much more of my respect if they didn't push for keeping the gun show loop hole open. That and I totally agree with the poster on the psychological aspect of the whole thing. The question is, why would any responsible gun owner NOT want to close the loop hole and to require stricter back ground tests. Anyone can pick up a local classified paper and buy a weapon legally as a third party private sale. That means ANYONE. From Virginia, Arizona, California, Pakistan O.o you name it. It's ridiculous and it must stop. I believe in the 2nd Amendment strictly as it was written. Firearm ownership for a well regulated militia. The Virginia Citizens Defense League is NOT a well regulated militia.
Reply to this Top
The militia is the people, every able bodied man in fact. And "well regulated" as used in the 2A, did not mean controled by the government, but well trained, practiced, and in good order, as in a well regulated clock. VCDL meets both those criteria.
Reply to this Top
What about the right NOT to have a gun in your vicinity? I do not want guns, concealed or otherwise in my classroom or anywhere near me, for that matter.
Top
What about the right NOT to have a gun in your vicinity? I do not want guns, concealed or otherwise in my classroom or anywhere near me, for that matter.
Top
You don't have the right to not feel uncomfortable. If you are truly scared of an inanimate object, a tool, perhaps you should get a grip.
Top
That's right tack...be condescending.
Remember, you are advocating for the rights of 21 year old CC holders which is not exactly a majority of students.
Top
It was the government that wrote the document so to suggest that it is not to be controlled by the government is a stretch. Well regulated is about as clear and concise as can possible be. Well regulation means an established course of training, a uniform code something in the order of the Military. Our National Guard for example is well regulated. A 6 hour class to get a CCP is ridiculous, it's a joke.
Top
Are we talking about the same document, because I'm talking about the Bill of Rights. A document what's sole purpose is to protect the rights of the people from government interference. Even grade school history books make that point clear. Not one of the amendments in the BoR gives power to the government to do anything, least of all put limitations on the people's rights to either bare arms or speak freely, etc. "Well regulated" is clear and concise, when interpreted in the dialect used 200 years ago, and it meant then "in good order". But you don't have to believe me, just go read the Federalist Papers in which the authors of the constitution explained their intentions. Take for example, Federalist Paper #29, in which Hamilton is discussing the composition of the militia and says, "To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire_the_degree_of_perfection which would entitle_them_to_the_character_of_a_well-regulated_militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss." Here again, well-regulated is used by the Founding Father's to mean "degree of perfection" or basically "in good working order."
Top
Hey VTteacher, you do realize that you live in the United States of America and in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Neither has a constitution stating that you have "the right to NOT have a gun in you vicinity." However, both have a constitution that precisely spells out your right to bear arms. Your discomfort with the idea of your neighbor exercising his/her right should never be construed to deny said right. Some people were not comfortable with the idea of blacks or women having the right to vote. That doesn't mean it was correct to deny them that right for so long.
Top
A well read citizenry, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read literature, shall not be infringed.
Reply to this Top
Can this loophole be closed without outlawing all 3rd party transfers? Consider, my friend could legally purchase a gun, and then simply give it to me (legally). At what level of organization can you consider a gathering of gun-owners a 'show'? (not trying to be condescending)
Reply to this Top
You buying a gun and then giving it to a friend is already illegal. It's called a "straw purchase."
Top
It is perfectly legal in the vast majority of states to give a gift of a firearm to anyone you believe is not barred from owning one legally. A straw purchase is when you use someone else's money to buy a firearm for them.
There is no gun show loophole. Licensed dealers at gun shows must use the background check system. The only people who do not have to are private citizens who are selling personally owned firearms and are not regularly engaged in the business. Doesn't matter whether they are at a gun show or not.
Top
SS, the flow of guns to determined criminals is already by direct cash-and-carry, or what you would call a "loop hole." Regardless of what the law requires, they do not go through "proper" channels. Therefore, they do not undergo background checks and they do not undergo mandatory concealed carry training. So, to suggest that everyone must go through more stringent procedures in that regard would only increase the difficulty of the law abiding to obtain the guns they need to protect themselves. This would increase the proportion of armed criminals to armed good guys in the population, and I do not believe any reasonable person would want that.
Reply to this Top
Statistics can be used for either side of this debate to prove that the presence of guns on campus will either make it safer, or make it more dangerous. I think the core issue is based on how safe people feel. Guns are tools of killing, with no other purpose -- it makes sense that most people DONT want them around, as they feel less safe. However, many supporters of campus concealed carry feel safer and more secure knowing that there will be more guns around to be wielded on their side of a fight. In reality, the number of undergraduate students over 21, AND in possession of a concealed carry permit, AND actually carry their gun, are too few to make much of a difference. In the case of a possible shooting, the odds of one of the victims being armed is minute. This is a debate not of public safety, but of general sentiment towards guns in general.
Reply to this Top
Most states with major research universities do not allow guns on campus. However, this is Virginia Tech, where they have the cadets and all the military crap. Plus, Virginia might as well be considered the south with their majority view of pro guns, poor English, and more churches than people. The thing that surprises me the most is after all the horrible publicity with regard to the worst school shooting ever at VT, they still haven't made a strong stance against no guns on campus. This takes me back to my point on Virginia being Hillbilly :) I wish I would have went to Michigan.
Reply to this Top
interesting you should say that. you do realize that at Michigan, on the first day of hunting season, much of that school shuts down.
Reply to this Top
I too wish you went to Michigan, perhaps you and your xenophobia would be better suited some other place far far away from the rest of us "hillbillies."
Reply to this Top
We wish you went to Michigan too. Your ignorance is astounding. "Virginia might as well be considered the south". ??? Virginia IS in the south. Richmond was a capital of the Confederacy. Poor English? Perhaps the punctuation police ought to visit you.
VT indeed had a tragedy due to ONE whack job being able to hide behind mental health privacy laws. Firearms laws would have prevented him from obtaining any firearms had the mental health history actually been shared as it should have been.
Please, by all means, leave this "Hillbilly" state and go to Michigan or even further.
Reply to this Top
We don't like you either, don't worry.
Reply to this Top
I'm actually a student in Virginia and though I cannot carry a concealed weapon, i am under age. i think the school doesn't have the right to disarm their students who do have a desire to carry. i guarantee with 100% certainty that you walk or drive by someone every single day carrying a concealed weapon and does that make you feel uncomfortable? no because you don't know about it. if we were allowed to carry on campus NO ONE WOULD KNOW BECAUSE ITS CONCEALED. statistics will always show that armed citizenry reduce crime. its just the way it is. just because firearms make some people uncomfortable does not give those people the right to determine the extent to which i, students, should be able to defend ourselves should we so choose. no one is cramming guns down your throat but if they are concealed away then you will never know. thus ignorance is bliss.
Reply to this Top
Hey Goddard, disarming students as a way to prevent violence didn't exactly work in 2007 now did it? So, what you're saying is that you want to keep and maintain a failed policy? Despite what you or anyone else "feels", facts are facts. No guns allowed = psycho shoots up the place unabated. Guns allowed = psycho shoots up the place, but at least his targets have a fighting chance to survive. You need to replace your emotional thinking with logical thinking. All these clichés about how guns don't belong in schools, yet call the cops when a school shooting occurs, what do you think they will bring to the situation? That's right, guns! So, if guns don't belong in schools, don't call the cops next time you spot an armed criminal on campus. LOGIC.
Reply to this Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
Hey dude. what kind of wordpress theme are you using? i want it to use on my blog too.
chloe http://www.chloesaleonjp.com
Reply to this Top
nfnuzotxmh <a href="http://www.timberlandschuhede.eu/26-womens-timberland-sandalen-stiefel/" title="Frauen Timberland Sandalen Stiefel">Frauen Timberland Sandalen Stiefel</a>
Reply to this Top