Several gun violence-related incidences have tainted higher learning institutions' reputations. Gun violence in colleges and learning campuses not only affects students, but also parents, teachers and staff as well. One would expect that in light of this revelation that there would be effective corrective and administrative state and federal law to curb the violence. Additionally, information available in the public domain about gun violence in campuses is unsettled CITATION Mat02 \l 1033 (Miller, Hemenway and Wechsler). Minimal or no data is accessible to the part that guns play in anticipating or worsening the savagery. Subsequently, this paper seeks to explore controversy on gun violence on college campuses.
The lion's share of approximately 4,400 schools and colleges in the United States preclude the conveying of guns on their grounds. These weapon free approaches were instituted in a bid to make these campuses safe. Conventionally, allowing the carrying of guns would be viewed as a lack of confidence in the states and federal security systems. The status quo, however, portrays a contrasting image. Colleges are no longer safe hubs. In 2007, 32 students in Virginia Tech lost their lives to a massacre orchestrated and carried out by an inflamed gunman. The massacre stirred a heated debate on guns policy. On the hand, a greater majority argued that more guns in campuses would reduce the occurrence of similar fatalities in future. On the other hand, another group asserted that more guns would be more salt to an injury. Brian Siebel expressed his shock on the fact that after the Virginia Tech massacre, the gun proponents were so quick to push their ideologies even before identification or a funeral of any of the students was held CITATION Bri08 \l 1033 (Siebel).
The statistics depict the achievement of these firearm free strategies. Be as it may, fatal gun related incidences in colleges have given rise to an undeniably great movement in the country elevating enactment and suit to drive schools and colleges to permit disguised firearms on grounds. Thus, schools in Arkansas, Kansas, Mississippi, Utah, Texas, among others have now been constrained in distinctive approaches to permit the conveying of guns on their premises such as classrooms or parking areas.
History has shown that terror, crime, and evil will always be part of us. It is our responsibility, therefore, to put in place laws and regulations that mitigate these vices and protect all citizens, young and old rich and poor. Enactment of policies that will reduce the death toll in post-secondary learning institutions should be top of the state and federal priorities. Statistics plausibly indicate that states that allowed their constituents to possess guns brought down gun related crimes and fatalities to 60% CITATION Cou07 \l 1033 (Coulter). Ann Coulter argued that schools were being targeted because students are unarmed therefore defenseless. They are an easy target. Contrary to the belief that students feel safe without guns on campuses, the majority disagrees and would prefer to have concealed firearms with them. For instance, were it not for the stringent gun free zone policy at Virginia Tech, the massacre could have come to a stop sooner and would not have been as catastrophic. Criminals will always target the less secure locations, and as long as schools ban guns in their premises, campuses will never be secure. Concealed-carry laws will with no doubt reduce multiple shooting attacks on campuses.
An article dubbed Another Gun-Free Zone Tragedy focused on gun control policy in Colorado, which is a concealed-carry state, the incidence in Virginia among other shootout massacres CITATION Inv12 \l 1033 (Daily). Later on in 2007, two church members lost their lives and three other injured following a shoot-out by a gunman at a church. The gunman was however shot dead by a security officer before he could harm more people. The police found him dead by the time they arrived. A similar incidence on April that year was when a felon went to a church and killed one member but was immediately shot by a church member who happened to have a concealed firearm. Despite Colorado being a concealed carry state, movie theaters in the state have a strict gun free policy so when a movie critic opened fire at a cinema, several people were killed and injured. None of those presents was in a position to exercise their right to self-defense. From these incidents, it is evident that the rogue shooters were quickly terminated by persons allowed to carry guns, therefore, mitigating the fatalities. It is conclusive that gun-free zones are a mistake. Criminals and gunmen thrive in these gun free zones. The policy risks the lives and safety of the very people it is intended to protect and help feel safe. The author brings to light rational views and incidents to support them. Thus, I strongly concur that there must be some form of the counter strike force in place in case of such violent events.
In an article in The New American CITATION Pat12 \l 1033 (Krey), the author defends the second amendment and provides true stories from diverse states that show conveying a weapon by a rational citizen can spare lives, once in a while even without discharging the firearm. The writer completes his article with an account of a brutality counteractive action utilizing a concealed firearm as a part of a weapon free zone and poses a challenge to determine who had made the best decision. In this paper, the given actualities as genuine stories are exceptionally persuading. I think this short article makes the faultfinders and rivals to reevaluate about such circumstances and reshape their conclusions.
In conclusion, from the backdrop above it is evident that concealed firearms help to reduce violence in public and on campuses. It also helps individuals to practice their right to self-defense. Post-secondary institutions should, therefore, abolish the gun free zones policy and implement rational strategies that incorporate concealed carry. Concealed carry firearms are not, however, a sufficient strategy as there is a need to have in place followed through measures that will ensure responsible use of these firearms. Gun training is also necessary as it would be useless to possess firearms and not be in a position to use them effectively. It would be more dangerous to the users and their colleagues. Perfect mix of concealed carry, adequate training and effective laws and regulations is the solution to extenuating violence on campuses.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Baum, Katrina and Patsy Klaus. Violent Victimization of College Students, 1995-2002. Special Report. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005. Web.
Coulter, Ann. "Let's Make America a 'Sad-Free Zone." Human Events 63.14 (2007): 6. Web.Daily, Investor's Business. "Another Gun-Free-Zone Tragedy." Investor's Business Daily, Inc (2012). Print.
Krey, Patrick. "Buckeye defends his family." The New American (2012): 40. Print.
Miller, Matthew, David Hemenway and Henry Wechsler. "Guns and Gun Threats at College." American College Health (2002): 1. Print.
Riley, Richard W. and A. Lee Fritschler. The Incidence of Crime on the Campuses of U.S. Postsecondary Education Institutions. Formal Report. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, 2001. Web.
Siebel, Brian J. "The Case Against Guns On Campus." HeinOnline (2008): 319. Web.
Cite this page
Gun Violence on College Campuses. (2019, Jun 26). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/gun-violence-on-college-campuses
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: