It seems not a day goes by this fall where there isn't an article published about this or that State wanting to allow or refuse firearms on college grounds. While I usually do not dabble into politics I'm going to make an exception and try to walk a thin line explaining what's happening.
For years people with mental health issues have been attempting to take out their anger on others. Some were unfortunately successful and many others were stopped before they could harm anyone. For the purposes of this article I am not going to review mental health, but know that my intended meaning is a person who, for a variety of possible reasons, isn't acting or thinking as a sane person would be. While many of you probably don't hear about the twarted attempts of these people trying to hurt family, coworkers, or classmates, you do hear about it when something terrible unfolds. Due to these tragic events many States have started taking a look at new legislation either for or against allowing people in traditionally "gun-free" education zones to carry a legally concealed firearm if they quality.
What does this mean?
Well for starters lets look at the norm. Today almost all colleges and universities do not allow firearms on their property and for the most part they are policed and were traditionally safe. In recent years these safety and protection norms are becoming dated. Police are increasingly having to react more than prevent. We don't see more police because budgets are tight, so these men and women are asked to do more with less and simply can not be everywhere at the same time. Our students are facing growing threats from simple assaults, to rapes and shootings. Our society is constantly changing and so too are the people in it. For good or for bad change is inevitable, I think we can all agree its a part of life. So what we are seeing now is a need to change our approach to safety at colleges and universities.
The two ideas on the table are to 1) Outlaw all weapons once and for all or 2) To allow students, faculty, etc... to carry a concealed handun. Lets take a look at both sides.
One side says that we have too many guns already out there and we need stricter legislation against guns to prevent more of these shootings. We should outlaw guns at these places to keep our childern and society safe. While this has some sensible arguments like some students may be uncomfortable with a classmate having a gun, most of the other arguments are ignorant to criminal behavior and thinking. Yes I said ignorant and probably fell off my thin line but its important to remember that legisation is just words to criminals. You can tell someone all day long they can't do something, but ultimately they are going to do what they want. Think about when you were a child, did you do everything your parents said? Probably not, so what is the logical thinking behind more laws will result in less crime? The resounding statement I am hearing here is that "we don't want to be surrounded by people carrying guns". Well I'm here to tell you that's an ignorant argument because you already are surrounded by people carrying guns. Whether its a concealed carry holder (you dont know who we are), or security, police, homeowners, etc... both sides can agree there's plenty of guns out there. The arguments to create more laws against carrying firearms are emotionally driven, not sensible, and are lacking evidence or statistics to say that they would prevent crime, in fact I'd put my money on the fact that it would attract crime. Criminals or mentally ill people aren't living under rocks, they watch the news like you and I, they know that places banning guns will be easy targets, and probably most notably they generally avoid targeting places with too many variables, like concealed carry holders and police presence. So what about creating a target makes sense?
The other side, which by now you've easily determined I support, says that we need to give people choice, we need to understand that the world changes and what used to make sense no longer applies, criminals evolve and so should we. Our citizens shouldn't be corralled like cattle in a pen on the way to the slaughter house. Everyone of our lawmakers and legislators benefit from personal protection services, yet the rest of us have to rely on one another and the police. We know that police response times vary, but what you probably didn't know is that most deadly confrontations last seconds to only a few minutes at most. By the time our men and women in uniform arrive its usually become a tragedy already, they can prevent further violence and end the situation but because they are restricted by their own rules, budgets, and personell, they can only do so much. This means that while at times they may be able to twart an attack or arrive in time, most often we are left to defend ourselves or in some cases we are trying to hide like the cattle, defenseless.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions and we are fortunate to live in a country that allows free speech. This is my opinion and my free speech, you have your own feelings and opinions about this, so why should anyone tell you whether or not you can protect yourself?
Feel free to leave your own comments but lets treat eachother respectfully. Thank you!