Should colleges allow bearing arms?

[5010]

In light of news from Virginia Tech, do you think allowing students to bear arms on campus would result in more or less violence?

I think allowing arms on campus would have allowed the students in the recent shooting an option other than beg for life. But the rareness of the event makes it an anomally. Are there schools that allow student arms and are they more or less violent? What are your thoughts?

[brien]

If one has a permit to carry concealed weapons, who would know if that person were armed on campus? And if anyone of those people in Va were armed, and had a chance to defend themsleves, I suppose a few less dead would be in the death count.

[Osborn F Enready]

Bad wording in the poll question.

Why not:

If more adults who had the right to carry arms, had been carrying legally when the VT shooting took place, do you think there would be more or fewer casualties?

or

Could legal arms in the hands of innocent, responsible, students, teachers and staff, have prevented the number of lives taken by the 1 or 2shooters that perpetrated the VT shootings?



Didn't like the answer choices either.


I think if more people to their right to bear arms, and defend themselves individually, seriously, events like this would be rarer, less damaging in each or most occassions, and overall a more alert, concientious society.

[Slevin57]

If each of those students was trained in close quarters urban combat, sure.

However, I don't think adding more weapons to a situation like that would help in the least bit. In such a confined space, with so many people you would be talking about many accidental injuries in the course of one's own defense.

[Duke1985]

No, I'm not so sure having college kids running about with guns is the best idea I've ever heard.
I'm all for the right to bear arms, I just know I don't want everyone in the classroom to be packing a gun.

[shawmutt]

The ones who argue for arming everyone are ignoring two important considerations.

1. Not everyone wants to carry a gun. Forcing a population to carry a gun is essentially drafting them into service, because to carry a gun carries the responsibility of using it. Which leads to

2. Not everyone has the ability to take another's life. What use is a gun against a determined killer when the armed citizen is unable to take decisive action in the moment of truth?

The answer, I believe, is to move away from pride and our poisonous individualism.

[Keith Hamburger]

I don't remember the specific incident but a recent (within the past 10 years) similar incident was stopped by an armed student. Well, he wasn't immediately armed but he went out to his vehicle, acquired a gun, and returned to kill the assailant. This was made very quiet in the news but that's what happened.

In the previously greatest single "mass murder" in the US, one of the people in the Lubys Cafeteria, who watched her mother and father be gunned down, had a firearm in her vehicle that she normally carried with her. Because of the policies of that particular restaraunt and the laws of the state at the time she did not carry that gun into the restaraunt that day. She has been continually haunted by that failure. You can bet that she no longer leaves her gun behind when she goes anywhere.

In another instance of a school shooting a teacher or administrator, I don't recall which, retrieved a firearm from his vehicle and stopped the assault. A few students were shot before that could occur, but it wasn't nearly as bad as it could have been. Things would have been much better if that firearm had been on that teacher's person.

In many cases, just a couple of armed citizens could have quickly stopped a lot of deaths. In several cases, just one armed citizen has been able to reduce the number of deaths, even if they have to go to the parking lot to retrieve their firearms from their vehicles. We have no way of knowing how many deaths have actually been averted by quick intervention by an armed citizen. Perhaps just one citizen showing a gun to a potential assailaint has many times prevented similar occurences. That's something that's impossible to tell.

One thing is for certain, highly restrictive gun laws do not stop criminals or madmen. Highly restrictive gun laws often do stop honest citizens from being prepared to defend themselves.

In the direction Os was heading in his previous post, even one person carrying a firearm on that campus, other than the campus police (who were completely ineffective) and the gunman, could have significantly reduced the numbers of deaths and injuries.

Keith

[Osborn F Enready]

shawmutt said: The answer, I believe, is to move away from pride and our poisonous individualism.

That is as much the answer as donuts are the answer.

Keith said: In the direction Os was heading in his previous post, even one person carrying a firearm on that campus, other than the campus police (who were completely ineffective) and the gunman, could have significantly reduced the numbers of deaths and injuries.

Exactly, thank you.

[shawmutt]

Here we go again. For one thing "This was made very quiet in the news but that's what happened" does not happen. Every time some hero pulls out a gun and saves the day it's blathered all over the news, especially with the 24 hour news-starved networks out there. Even if they didn't get the story right, every single right-wing, pro-gun, pro-ccw website out there repeats the story over and over.

Less told are the stories of someone getting shot for pulling out a gun and the stories of people rising to the occasion without the benefit of a gun.

One cannot predict the future. Someone can't say, "if only there was a., b. could have been prevented". There is one guarantee though, the more concealed weapon carriers there are, the more likely one of them will commit a crime (this is an answer to the inevitable "only .00009% of carriers commit a crime").

Just out of curiousity, how many school shootings have occurred in the UK over the last ten years or so? Perhaps it's time to look beyond "more guns" and try to figure out what "donuts" means

[tennisdr99]

Sure - maybe everyone should be armed.
Iraq is a place that demonstrates how keeping everyone armed will decrease violence.

Seriously, mentally unstable persons or social misfits will always be able to find means to be violent. Access to more powerful weapons only allows the ability to create greater degrees of violence.

[Osborn F Enready]

There is no excuse for not having a competent defense, if your and adult.

That requires ability (the right to own arms) and the right to use arms in defense (the right to bear arms). It also entails a responsibility for the use of those arms.

The use of the arms by the shooter was wrong, and illegal.

The use of the arms by police to stop him, had they, would have been right, and legal. It would be the same if a rights respecting citizen did the same.

Blame the guns all you want, you are still way off base.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: shawmutt Just out of curiousity, how many school shootings have occurred in the UK over the last ten years or so? Perhaps it's time to look beyond "more guns" and try to figure out what "donuts" means

How many school shootings were there in the 10 years before the Dunblaine massacre and following handgun ban? How many school shootings ever before then? Umm...none that I know of. The difference between the US and UK is a different culture of violence, not the availability of weapons.

[tman_ndsu08]

Furthermore, no amount of laws will ever stop illegal gun trade.

The VT guns had the serial numbers filed off which leads me to believe they were traded illegally.

[brien]

with so many people you would be talking about many accidental injuries in the course of one's own defense.

Mere speculation.

[ladyphoenix]

Quote by: G. Adams How many school shootings were there in the 10 years before the Dunblaine massacre and following handgun ban? How many school shootings ever before then? Umm...none that I know of. The difference between the US and UK is a different culture of violence, not the availability of weapons.

I can't tell you how many times I've had that very conversation. Except, I'd rather compare us to Canada. They have a smaller population, but they have just a small percentage fewer guns per capita than the US does, and they have a whopping 350 gun deaths a year, the majority of which are accidents, not murder. If a civilized society, especially in a country which borders our own, can have guns and not have the gun deaths we do, how could anyone think that guns are the problem?

And to the person who said our individualism was toxic, I totally disagree. You can have respect for your neighbors and their property and human (and animal, since we saw the guy in CA sentenced to 25-life for killing a dog) life without losing individuality. I don't think making us all a bunch of drones in a hive is a good idea. We've seen what happens when governments try to do that to their people. It's not pretty.

[brien]

In the direction Os was heading in his previous post, even one person carrying a firearm on that campus, other than the campus police (who were completely ineffective) and the gunman, could have significantly reduced the numbers of deaths and injuries.

It is being reported that there was a recent diciplinary action AGAINST a student who was licensed to carry for possessing a firearm on campus. This could have discouraged other licensed students from carrying on the campus.

[brien]

Quote by: G. Adams How many school shootings were there in the 10 years before the Dunblaine massacre and following handgun ban? How many school shootings ever before then? Umm...none that I know of. The difference between the US and UK is a different culture of violence, not the availability of weapons.

Here are some truthful statistics witth regard to "gun control" in Great Britian. Not merely speculation.


Britain's Gun-Control Folly

[Between 1997 and 2003] crimes with [banned firearms] have more than doubled.... In 2002, for the fourth consecutive year, gun crime in England and Wales rose — by 35 percent for all firearms, and by a whopping 46 percent for the banned handguns. Nearly 10,000 firearms offenses were committed.... Clearly since the ban criminals have not found it difficult to get guns and the balance has not shifted in the interest of public safety.... In the four years from 1997 to 2001 the rate of violent crime more than doubled. The UK murder rate for 2002 was the highest for a century.... A recent study of all the countries of western Europe has found that in 2001 Britain had the worst record for killings, violence and burglary, and its citizens had one of the highest risks in the industrialized world of becoming victims of crime

....

“[A] United Nations study of eighteen industrialized countries, including the United States, published in 2002 ... found England and Wales at the top of the Western world’s crime league, with the worst record for ‘very serious’ offenses.”

“Nevertheless,” observed Derek Phillips, legislative advisor for the UK’s Office of Legislative Affairs, “‘tough’ legislative regulation, so evidently ineffective in achieving the purpose claimed for it, continues as a policy.” The UK’s ban on private firearms ownership has left the people there completely defenseless in the wake of rising crime.

[Praxius]

Gee, more kids under youth laws, who in some locations are in gangs, who hate the jocks, who hate the nerds, who hate the goths, who all listen to the gangsta rap, and understand that the gun in the hand brings respect.... yeah..... less violence and deaths alright.....

"Gee.... a whole bunch of kids got shot up by some freak.... let's load them up like soldiers so they can shoot back..... yeah, that'll work.... so when one kid comes in with a semi-auto and dressed in plain school clothing and starts shooting, all the other kids pull their guns who are also dressed in plain clothing, and they start shooting..... then you got all kinds of kids freaking out, not know who's shooting who.... and before you know it, you got a war zone of kids in a school re-playing the alamo shooting the guy beside them with the gun because they're shooting them because they have a gun......."

"Yeah man.... that'd be cool.... then the police arrive and then they gotta sort out all the kids who are shooting one another with panic and the will of survival, and now the cops have to protect themselves, so they either stay outside until the shooting stops, or they go in shooting killing more kids."

Absolutly Brilliant! Let's solve the gun problem by unloading more guns onto the problem, and stick them in the hands of our children so now they have their cell phones we can reach them all the time, and their gun to allow them to soldier on down the streets.

What a great country that'd be to see.

[tinybear]

I think it's a sad sad day when college students don't feel safe unless they carry guns to school.

[5010]

Digging around...

Guns allowed on Utah campus (9/15/06)

Last week, the Utah Supreme Court ruled firearms can be carried on the University of Utah campus.

Utah Governor Signs Legislation Ending Campus-Gun Dispute

Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. of Utah has signed compromise legislation that will allow students in the state’s college dormitories to choose not to room with gun owners, but will not permit colleges to ban concealed weapons on their campuses.

This one is particularly chilling...
Gun bill gets shot down by panel (1/31/06)

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

...

The legislation was designed to prohibit public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit ... from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun."