Guns Increase the Risk of Violence in Schools
The primary threat posed by the gun lobby’s campaign is to colleges and universities where students are old enough to be legally entitled to purchase or possess all manner of firearms. As everyone that has lived through adolescence and young-adulthood knows, the college age years – 18 to 24 – are among the most volatile periods in a person’s life. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has consistently found that criminal gun possession is highest for youths 18 to 24, with the ages 19-21 providing an even higher peak within this range. These also happen to be the peak years for persons to commit violent gun crimes, including homicides.
Also, no one should forget that Seung Hui Cho was a 23-year-old student who the Commonwealth of Virginia thought was a lawful firearms purchaser. Moreover, having missed the fact that he had been adjudicated mentally defective in December 2005, Virginia would have issued a CCW license to Cho had he applied. How many other individuals that have carried out school shootings were legally entitled to purchase or possess firearms at the time of the shootings? We are not aware of anyone having made a count, though a review of the school shootings indicates many of those shooters were so qualified. Thus, the policy solution advocated by the gun lobby to arm all students may well make it easier for those bent on carrying out destruction to bring guns onto campus.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Your use of Seung Hui Cho as an example of why handguns shouldn't be allowed on campus directly contradicts the point you are trying to make. The fact is, Cho's possession of a weapon on campus was illegal , but he did it anyway. Laws are only followed by the law -abiding.
The ban on handguns at Virginia Tech only prevented the carry of handguns by those who had no intention of causing harm to others. Had just one student in one of the classrooms that Cho attacked been armed, Cho could have been stopped. Instead, he was free to keep shooting people for as long as he desired.
One other point. No one is advocating arming all students , as you imply in your argument. We simply advocate that those who are legally allowed to be armed everywhere but college campuses, be legally able to carry on campus as well. Statistically, this group is far less inclined to commit crimes than the average person.
You have to be fist-raping me. You are lumping a large section of the population at any given time in with college students (your primary focus) and saying they are all equally likely to commit violent crimes. As a sociology student I find that to be a flawed statement. High school is a particularly volatile time (the most if you ask any American), and the same people who are lumped in with the populous that will be tried for more atrocious crimes later are committing them during those 4 years and getting off with relative ease.
Underprivilaged poor youths are the group you are referring to when you are attempting to make a claim about college students. And its not even just the students who are at risk, either. Within the last month, Amy Bishop slew 3 of 6 random faculty targets, and she's a TEACHER! now, if just one faculty member was allowed to carry a weapon that day, happened to be in that room, and wasn't the first to get laid out, her potential victims could have decreased drastically.
Fight for gun control in high schools , not against generally law -abiding citizens who have had enough time to mature after a particularly volatile time in American secondary education
hundreds of drunk post- teens , showing off for their peers and trying to impress members of the opposite sex.
I can see it now....
20 year old boys shooting beer cans off each other's heads, not paying attention to everything that is BEHIND the target.
Girls fighting over hot boys. Boys fighting over hot girls.
Students will shoot strangers that they THINK MIGHT be the person that stole their cellphones and laptops.
People will shoot each other for dumb reasons like gropings, car accidents, not helping someone cheat, gossiping, pranks, namecalling, and fights.
Students would use their guns to intimidate each other, bully each other, and commit crimes, like rapes, robberies, assualts, kidnappings, and murders.
Let's not forget about all of the bullet holes everywhere.
Who will pay for the damage to cars, buildings, windows, furniture, and other private property?
Having a bunch of guns legally on campus would just mean that when a psycho DOES start shooting, EVERYONE will start to shoot EVERYONE ELSE, because they think that THAT person, and THAT person, and THAT person are the shooters since THEY HAVE A GUN!!!
Someone is going to take their new gun out to show it to their friends, and they'll get shot, because they're waving a gun around.
People will accidentally shoot each other, because when they pull the trigger, they will believe that the gun is empty or that the safety is on. Guns in backpacks will go off because the safety is not on.
If students have guns then they are going to want to practice their aiming skills. That means building a gun shooting range, or allowing students to make their own targets and practice in an unsafe environment , which some will unfortunately do regardless of whether a safe facility is provided for them.
Having hundreds of guns on campus, means listening to gunshots at all hours of the day and night. In addition to the annoyance of hearing gunshots, people would become desensitized to the presence of guns and sound of gunshots. Becoming desensitized to the sound of gunshots means that people would ignore them, and thus when a psycho started firing, people would under-react. (In my highschool, the fire alarm would go off at least five times a month because of faulty wiring. In the four years that I attended, I learned to ignore the fire alarm since there was NEVER a real fire. When fire drills were performed, a staff member would have to go on the speaker, and say that "this is a practice drill , please evacuate," because otherwise people wouldn't get out of their desks. If there ever was a real fire, no one would respond promptly and there would be a delay of several minutes before people started to evacuate the building.)
If teachers, parents , and students, feel that guns MUST me present at schools in order to ensure the peace, safety, and securtiy of their staff and students, then the TEACHERS should carry guns.
I WOULD NEVER GO TO A COLLEGE THAT ALLOWED ITS STUDENTS TO HAVE GUNS, because I wouldn't feel SAFE.
I reccommend that people watch this YouTube video. It is a fan-made video that uses scenes from the show "Trigun", about and set to the song "Let There Be Guns", which is also known as "Wouldn't It Be Great If Everybody Had A Gun?" The song is by Arrogant Worms.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCtD3OJ-_Es
Episode#3 of Trigun is suppossed to show both sides of the gun argument - that murderous gangs would develop and that people would use guns to defend themselves.
Including all of your text made the comment too long. As such I have truncated your original claims.
"hundreds of drunk post- teens , showing off ...."
There are already restrictions on CWP and alcohol consumption. You cannot legally carry a firearm while drinking, even if you have a permit. It doesn't happen off campus, and there's no reason to believe it would happen on campus. Furthermore, drinking and carrying a weapon is usually grounds to revoke a CWP. Those who are serious about personal protection wouldn't take that risk.
"I can see it now....
20 year old boys shooting beer cans off each other's heads...."
You must be 21 in most states to obtain a CWP.
"Girls fighting over hot boys. Boys fighting over hot girls."
When CWP was first introduced, law enforcement thought it would cause shootouts over parking spots. Their fears were just as unfounded then as yours are now.
"Students will shoot strangers that they THINK MIGHT be the person that stole their cellphones and laptops."
A CWP is not a license to kill. The CWP holder must be endanger of death or serious bodily harm in order to use deadly force. Again, people don't shoot random people off campus because they think they're criminals, there is no evidence CWP holders would act differently on campus.
"People will shoot each other for dumb reasons ...."
See the previous two responses.
"Students would use their guns to intimidate each other...."
Statistically, CWP holders commit far fewer crimes than the general population.
"Let's not forget about all of the bullet holes everywhere.
...?"
A CWP is not a license to kill. It's also not a license to shoot whatever you want.
"... EVERYONE will start to shoot EVERYONE ELSE, ...!!!"
The average "gun fight" lasts less than 8 seconds. Furthermore, many potential crimes are stopped by the mere display of "will and means" to defend. More often than not, the conflict can be resolved without shots fired . They would not start randomly shooting at other CWP holders, because on the off chance that another permit holder was around, he would not present a threat.
"... because they're waving a gun around."
This paranoid statement doesn't even deserve a response.
"People will accidentally shoot each other,...."
The first theory is an example of gun owner stupidity, and would be the fault of the shooter, not the gun. Furthermore, it's highly unlikely a CWP holder would do something so stupid as it they would lack a complete understanding of firearms and basic safety. The second is virtually impossible regardless of whether or not the safety is on (if the handgun even has one) as guns include a built in block that would prevent the firing pin from reaching the primer even if the trigger were somehow knocked.
".... That means building a gun shooting range, or allowing students to make their own targets ...."
There is no reason the school would have to provide a shooting range for its students. As for the unsafe target practice: once again, a CWP is not a license to shoot anything, anywhere.
"Having hundreds of guns on campus , means listening to gunshots at all hours ...."
First off, based on the average carry rate of 1%, and the number of eligible students approx 30%, to have "hundreds" of concealed weapons would require over 66,000 undergraduates. That is a large school. You wouldn't hear gunshots everywhere because a CWP still isn't a license to shoot whatever you want whenever you want.
"..., then the TEACHERS should carry guns."
Teachers, and anyone else with a permit should be allowed to carry weapons on campus.
"I WOULD NEVER GO TO A COLLEGE THAT ALLOWED ITS STUDENTS TO HAVE GUNS, because I wouldn't feel SAFE."
Feeling safe is not the same as being safe. You can feel safe all you want, I rather have the opportunity for legal self defense.
"I reccommend that people watch this YouTube video . ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCtD3OJ-_Es
...."
Mildly amusing at best. You claim that if everyone had a gun, everyone would end up shooting each other. Have you ever been to a shooting range? When I go, everyone has a gun, and nobody gets shot. Imagine that.
Please Please Please go do some research before you post such things that are so incorrect and full of fallacies and misconceptions. I am going to attempt to answer your assumptions one at a time. First you have to be 21 to obtain a Concealed Weapons Permit(CWP) so having 20 year-olds isn't going to happen. As for the next 7 or so small paragraphs, I am sorry you feel like you would do this if you owned or carried a gun but as history shows us none of the scenarios you listed have happened ever. CWP holders carry everywhere off campus so why does the imaginary line of crossing on campus suddenly make everyone irresponsible and basically stupid? This stuff doesn't happen off campus so why would it mysteriously happen on campus. As for the drinking how many times have you gone drunk to class? I know I never have and nor as anyone I know.
I obviously don't know the number of CWP holders in the US to assume there are enough to have multiple CWP holders at one place during one shooting and them take each other out(again never happened anywhere off campus so why will it happen on campus). In the US there are about 1 CWP holder out of every 100 citizens. For the 21-30 age group that is much lower in the range of 1 in 300. So in your largest lecture class of 300+ students you statistically might have 1 CWP holder carrying a weapon for self defense.
In your next section you state instances several times of guns just going off. I have been working with firearms for a long time and I also am an instructor and I can tell you will all certainty there is no presently built firearm that just goes off. Companies go out of their way to make sure a firearm cant just go off, almost all new firearms also have drop safeties so you could throw it out a car at 100mph and it still wouldn't go off(it would ruin a perfectly good handgun tho). I am seeing in your writing that you have a genuine fear of firearms and I am sorry for that, I really suggest you go to a local range and go talk to the people there about possibly taking a class so you can better understand firearms and their use because you really don't understand them now.
As for the becoming desensitized to gunshots, first all of your other scenarios are completely baseless so you wouldn't have this massive increase of gunfire anyways, but even if you did(never would happen) most people don't know what sound a firearm really makes anyways. They assume it is a car backfiring or a firecracker.
As for allowing teachers to carry and not students what is the difference between a first year teacher and a 26 year old Iraq veteran going back to school? Why or how is the teacher better qualified than the student?
Ok so after watching your so called video evidence it makes sense that you have a distorted view of reality please visit http://www.concealedcampus.org/common_arguments.php to get a dose of reality. You obviously don't understand firearms or their owners so I am not going to spend any more time on you. Please just do some research before you post any other fantasy scenario that has/would never happen.
Brady,
How many times do you need to hear this and from how many law abiding citizens. A GUN DID NOT KILL THOSE KIDS AT VIGINIA TECH!! CHO DID!! And it was made easy for him.
If Virginia Tech allowed CWC how many parents would have been spared the agony of empty beds. My heart goes out to them and they can thank your contributing agenda for being forced to be defenseless sitting ducks.
I'm not hearing any gun shots coming out of the Utah campus '. I am in Minnesota so it is a bit far for the gunshots to be heard. What? No gun battles using a keg as a shield? No enraged gun battles over a parking space? No professors being shot for handing out a bad grade? What you also will not hear from the Utah campus is gunshots of random killers. They will be much safer at malls and churches unless I am there. Yes. I know. Your misguided agenda would make me a criminal for protecting myself and others. Just as you did these students.
The statistics presented may be very true; college aged people may be more irrational or inmature. College students may be more likely to be influenced by alcohol, drugs, or stress as well. Personally, those characteristics depend on the person. However, the more people that have guns, the more people there are that have the means to do damage whether it be accidental or intentional.
Guns can misfire. Someone can accidentally pull the trigger. Someone may think the gun is not loaded. A gun could fall into the hands of someone irresponsible. A person influenced by alcohol or drugs may pick up a gun and react to a situation that they would normally ignore. One way to commit suicide would be easily accessible to those depressed individuals who feel they no longer have a purpose in this world. These are just some of the scenarios that could occur.
One could argue that if all the students who were held hostage in that lecture hall on the campus of VT had had guns, someone could have taken down the shooter, but what about all the potential misfired bullets? What about all the negative situations that could have occurred leading up to that instant and taking place after it? Creating more risk in order to attempt to solve one unfortunate situation is illogical.
StriveforYourDreams-
Your argument is based alot on the potential for things to happen, rather than what th reality of a situation may be. Yes, guns "can" misfire and someone "can" accidentally pull the triggen, but can you also consider the fact that a gun also has the potential to never misfire at all, or that a person handling a firearm has the repsonsibility and the expertise to never accidentally pull the trigger. In your response, I see doubt in society and the potential good of everyday people. As with anything, there is bad aspects, but you are failing to see what is good. There are plenty of law abiding citizens that have the responsbility and the ability to carry a concealed firearm. Also, you are placing blame on controlled substances, rather on firearms themselves. Ultimately it is the fault of an individual, not the firearm that they carry or the drugs that they take. When you talk about the potential for misfire. I have been a hunter for 7 years, and all my time spent around firearms, I have never had a gun misfire or hangfire on me.
what if just one student had the means and prevented these tragedies?
Anyone who wants to brin a gun on campus can do so now despite the law. Someone intent on shooting someone cannot be prevented from doing so unless someone else (either the victom or someone nearby) is similarly armed and equiped to shoot the potential murderer.
All the anti-gun laws in the world do not disarm criminals or others with evil intent... gun laws do disarm honest, law-abinding people who if allowed to carry weapons could potentially pervent the mayham that is all too common in our schools.
Just knowing that some of his classmates couls be armed, may have diisuaded some of the killers and savedd lives. Many of these nut-cases are basically cowards and the possibility that they may be shot as a result of their actions may change their plans.
Concealed carry is currently allowed at 11 colleges. None of these schools have had a single incident of gun violence, gun theft, or gun related accidents. This same argument (that more guns will cause more violence) was made whenever people were pushing for general concealed carry. Unfortunately for the Brady Campaign, violent crime decreased dramatically in states that allowed law abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons.
Wait Brady...
Arent these students advocating the right to carry on campus, since they ALREADY carry virtuallyy everywhere else ??
Why would opening the campus to Concealed Carry change any of these factors/variables ???
We dont hear about alcohol being a problem with these folks that are carry "concealed" in their everyday life, what makes you think allowing these LICENSED students to carry in class would change anything that happens outside of class (the drinking and parties) ???