I used to be strongly opposed to all kinds of guns. I wanted them banned everywhere - public places, schools and homes. Then one of my friends presented me with the following scenario: You are sitting in a large lecture hall where you don't get any cell phone reception (ie. the Chemistry Building), when someone walks through the door and starts shooting at you and more than 400 of your classmates. Then he asked me, "Would you rather have a gun or would you rather not have a gun? At the very least, would you be praying that one of your classmates or your professor had violated the University's ban on guns that day?" Initially, allowing guns on college campuses might seem counter-intuitive, but if the unthinkable ever happened and my friends and I were ever in such a situation, I would want us to have the ability to at least attempt to defend ourselves rather than simply have to hope and pray we get lucky.
If this scenario were to happen here at the University, it would be an absolute tragedy. And though this situation is unlikely, it would not be that difficult for an individual to commit such as act. The University is a very open place. Anyone can walk into our classroom buildings and our libraries. It would be impossible and probably not 100 percent effective to search everyone entering dorms and classrooms. Many people feel safe simply knowing that the University is a gun-free zone; only police officers can possess guns on Grounds. Gun free-zones are very good at preventing law-abiding individuals from possessing guns. Those zones, however, do very little to deter criminals. No matter how much you try to ban guns or make them illegal, criminals will be able to obtain firearms. They will resort to procuring weaponry from the black market. Banning guns certainly doesn't make the people who abide by the bans any safer. Even Thomas Jefferson understood that point. In his Commonplace Book, he quoted Cesare, Marquis of Beccaria who said "laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants ... for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Gun-free zones provide the opportunity for people with malicious intentions to harm a large number of unarmed people.
Allowing students to defend themselves could help prevent future campus shootings - or at least decrease their magnitude. There are plenty of examples. In 2002, students at Appalachian School of Law used their firearms to subdue a student, who opened fire on campus, killing three people and wounding another three. This is not to say that we should start handing out guns at Orientation or that repealing gun bans on campus would eliminate gun violence completely. We should simply allow students or faculty, who have lawfully obtained concealed-carry permits, the chance to defend themselves should the need arise. It is fine if the University wants to require its own specific training for a permit, but forbidding citizens from defending themselves is not the right answer. Students should be able to defend themselves like everyone else and in the sometimes violent world in which we live, we must acknowledge that banning guns is not the same as actually eliminating them.\nOne common argument against allowing guns on college campuses is that college students are too hormonal and too frequently around alcohol to responsibly own a gun. In the state of Virginia, the minimum age for acquiring a concealed carry permit is 21. College students are adults and shouldn't be treated differently than the rest of society. College students are old enough to vote, get married, and serve in the military. They are old enough to make choices and be held accountable for their actions. They should be old enough to defend themselves. People who intend to commit acts of violence will always be able to get guns and they certainly won't follow rules creating gun-free zones. Students and professors have a right to defend themselves against those awful individuals. When we take away that right, we as are doing nothing more than setting them up to become helpless victims.
Megan Stiles is a weekly columnist for the Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at m.stiles@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 5 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | April 25, 2024Instead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
