I don't know what the solution is to prevent another Virginia Tech massacre from happening. I don't know how to keep students safe from a nut intent on killing people. I'm all for teachers/professors and students being allowed to carry, but it does raise some legitimate concerns. I also know that people would want to overregulate the whole dang idea, and that would result in increased costs for someone.
I just need some inspiration so I can write this essay.
This is a start:
http://ccwsaveslives.blogspot.com/
I vote yes.
Why don’t you start by trying to articulate precisely what “legitimate concerns” are raised by the State agreeing NOT to restrict law-abiding, adult, citizens from exercising their God-given right to self-defense simply because of their geographic location?
What legitimate concerns does it raise?
“If guns are banned why are there school shootings?”
People who follow the law follow it.
People who don’t follow the law don’t.
Amazing.
Bear in mind that one has to be 21 years old in order possess an handgun or to be considered for a concealed permit, so for the most part the undergraduate population isn’t eligible anyway. One might ask, as I did, why the law should be different between on-campus and in-town; in short, if the university really thinks it is accomplishing anything by “gun-free zone” policy other than affecting the law-abiding. Inasmuch as it is a civil right, the question isn’t really “why should it be permitted?” but “on what basis is it being denied?” IMHO, of course.
...page 31 and others
Utah does not ban CCW holders from carrying on campuses-you might look into that.
I think it’s very difficult to prevent random acts of violence.
You need to tie in that it is not a perfect world. In a perfect world, we would have peace and no bad guys. In this world, the good guys need to carry to stop the bad guys. It is a deterrent when they think others will be able to shoot back.
Unless the school is willing to concede that their alumni are not adequately prepared to become police officers, military officers, deputy sheriffs or federal law enforcement agents, they have no argument that their students of legal age are not mature enough to exercise the right to carry.
Give It To Them Straight, by John Ross. This writer has an extremely powerful ability to cut right to the moral center of the many angles of attack on our fundamental right to self-defense.
Nation of Cowards, by Jeff Snyder. Once you grasp the falsity of utilitarian arguments against weapons, you will never view the gun control issue in the same way again.
I used both of these works as the basis for various columns, speeches and debates I have participated in over the years. Here'a a tip: When your opponent starts to stammer, get red in the face, or, better yet, start tossing insults -- they have lost.
Check the Guncite website. “Schools and Gun Violence” is one of the sub-headings. Very informative.
It basically comes down to the balance of power and equality.
You should be able to possess enough power and influence to be able to thwart the worst of the typical threats you could encounter, in your life in society.
A gun equalizes the power between an armed thug and a law-abiding you. With good skills, it can be more than an equalizer.
Start with the morals of the individual’s CHOICE to be either:
1) a victim of violence and the cost to society / family
2) dependent on the College to provide protection and thus driving up the cost of tuition for others
3) prepared to defend their own and other’s lives
The move on to the moral obligation of an institution that restricts the 2nd Amendment rights. Since an individual is no longer permited to protect themselves, is the institution then obligated to provide protection? If so, how much? And what then is the obligation if the institution fails to meet that obligation and someone is beaten/raped/killed BECAUSE they were denied the God given right to defend themselves?
An analogy you could use could be the crime stats after Austrailia banned guns. Also, Switzerland’s open gun policies and low crime rate. (ie., when the populace is armed, crime decreases)
An analogy you could use could be the crime stats after Austrailia banned guns. Also, Switzerland’s open gun policies and low crime rate. (ie., when the populace is armed, crime decreases)