The right to carry guns on campuses — what happens if it goes wrong?
Violent crimes on college campuses have motivated pro-gun activists and many well-meaning citizens to compel campus administrators and state legislatures to allow properly licensed students and teachers the right to carry concealed guns on public campuses. Supporters of guns on campus argue their rights are being violated because many college campuses refuse to allow weapons of any kind on campus.
As the debate continues, Texas recently announced it would allow licensed gun owners to carry a firearm at all state 4-year college and university campuses. Effective August 2016, carrying handguns by licensed owners will be allowed in all classes, dorms and likely most all faculty offices in the University of Texas System.
The University of Texas System joins a cadre of institutions that are allowing the carrying of guns on campus. However, the University of Texas System is one of the largest public university systems in the United States, with nine academic universities, six health institutions and an enrollment of more than 214,000.
According to a Time Magazine article, discussions of preparing for this change are “suggesting instructors remove controversial content from their lessons to avoid riling up armed students.”
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms and articulates the spirit of the amendment which states in pertinent part that “a well-regulated militia, being [sic] necessary to the security of a free state.” There are plenty discussions and writings opining on whether allowing guns on campus makes campuses more or less safe.
WeeSee the partnerships among local, state, campus, federal law enforcement, and other first responders as vital to the success of the Education Facilities Subsector (EFS) and the safety of American College Campuses. Arming educators and students introduces another layer of complexity to an already complex problem involving guns in our democracy.
Preventing and responding to terrorism and gun violence are two of the challenges of our time. Whether self-radicalized Americans committing acts of terror in Boston Massachusetts or a senseless act of cold blooded murder on the campus of Virginia Tech, both are vexing to our society and undermine our sense of safety. Engaging the best and brightest minds to ponder both requires active engagement and discourse on campuses of our institutions of higher learning. Innovation and interaction on college campuses is vital to the success of the American educational system.
The 2016 campaign season for our national election shined a light on the ugliness that exists in America and the propensity of some to act on their impulses in the midst of supposed civil discourse. Various media and political pundits have expressed concern over the multiple violent encounters that have and continue to occur at Donald Trump campaign events. Images and video of assaults at Trump gatherings have played out on major news outlets and in social media.
Will these attitudes and behaviors transcend the political rallies and play out on our campuses?
Healthy debate is an essential tool for developing and maintaining democracy and open societies. Debate embodies the ideals of reasoned argument, tolerance for divergent points of view and self-examination. What can campus community members expect when a heated debate among one or more legally armed colleagues on one of these campuses escalates beyond the norm? Will armed classmates or colleagues have an impact on the level of discourse in the classroom or in other social settings? Are campuses taking into account the long-term impact of the chilling effect on speech this may have over time?
Reaching the legal drinking age on a college campus doesn’t guarantee the behavior, maturity and the mental aptitude of an individual when they consume alcohol. Conversely, meeting the minimum standard to possess a gun doesn’t account for the licensee’s mental aptitude or temperament in a campus setting with a gun. Mental aptitude broken down describes the person’s ability to think, learn, and interpret information in a practical manner. Some employers or potential employers use a mental aptitude test to determine suitability of candidates best able to perform certain job duties. Most police departments require candidates undergo a psychological examination among several other testing components prior to being offered a position with the department to determine their suitability to serve as a police officer. Stressed emotions and deadly weapons are the primary cause of injury and death in gun related incidences.
How will campuses measure their climate of discourse prior to and once guns are allowed on campuses? One measurement should count the number of campus shootings prior to the allowance of guns on these campuses and the number of shootings since the laws were enacted. The results of these two data sets could be compared to those who don’t allow guns on campus.
The impact of allowing guns on campuses will only be realized over time.
