Repeater
Regular Member
imported post
By Barbie Spitz, member of JMU Students for a Democratic Society
It would be foolish to think that JMU students would silently consent to allow the carrying of concealed weapons on campus. I do not foresee such a policy change in the near future, but I will not wait until it is too late to make a statement. While I predict that the students here will not stand for any kind of policy change pushed by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), I do not fully trust the administration of JMU to listen to students on this issue.
Two years ago, 81 percent of students voted to include a $9 fee in tuition to fund clean energy initiatives. The higher powers at JMU not only refused to create the “green fund,” but raised our fees by more than $300 anyway. This goes without mentioning the atrocious and inexplicable changes in our beloved campus hangout, Taylor Down Under, which few students seem to approve of.
The answer to gun violence is not more guns. The victims of Columbine and Virginia Tech were not killed because they were unarmed. They were killed because a few troubled young men slipped through the cracks of society and were driven to violence. Allowing students on campus to carry firearms would not make such troubled individuals less violent.
SCCC claims that guns belong in the hands of potential victims who have the right to defend themselves and that current gun laws serve the purpose of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people. But the fact is that even the current restrictions on obtaining a firearm are insufficient. Let us remember that Seung-Hui Cho obtained his gun legally, and the Columbine shooters’ shotguns were bought at a gun show.
Even if people were given a greater opportunity to defend themselves with guns, it would not stop people from being killed. Think about it: If someone kills another person in defense of their own life, their attacker is dead. A life would be saved, but one would be lost, too. It is not our job to determine whose life is more valuable.
This is not to disrespect the family members and friends of gun victims. My aunt was murdered with a handgun 10 years ago and, after years of wishing her killer dead, I have only recently learned to view him as another human being. I am only asking that we remember that those who use guns for violence are people, too, and their families suffer as well.
I also know for a fact that even if my aunt were armed that fateful day, she would not have used a gun to defend herself.
Allowing guns on campus will only breed more opportunities for violence. The answer is not defense, but acknowledgement of the root causes of gun violence. We need to provide more help for troubled teens, question the values and activities of our society that cause so many to turn to violence and make more room for those who might not fit into the conventional culture of today’s society.
Defending yourself from guns by using a gun? Talk about a band-aid solution to a bullet wound.
Barbie Spitz is a senior sociology major and africana studies minor. For more information, visit studentsforgunfreeschools.org.
=============
Concealed carry combats an unlikely but dangerous threat
Daniel Dales, campus leader, Students for Concealed Carry on Campus The Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois shootings were two instances that received heavy media attention. While these events are relatively infrequent, widespread attention on the issue should not be overlooked. There are many other instances that have not received such attention. In fact, there have been seven campus shootings since the incident at Virginia Tech last April. Regardless of the number of shootings, any incident that causes students on a public campus to fear for their safety absolutely warrants widespread attention.
SCCC advocates concealed carry on campus for personal protection by licensed adults over the age of 21. We have never stated that we do not intend to use our weapons, as the reason we carry them is in the extreme event that we would need to use them.
We argue that incidents involving guns will not increase on campus, because permit-holders are trained to pull their firearms only in the event that the lives of them and their peers are in immediate danger. We affirm that the increase in firearms on campus will never be known unless a shooting were to occur. Concealed means exactly that: concealed. In a perfect world, we hope to never need to pull our weapons, but we welcome the security of knowing we have them if we need them.
A recent editorial published in The Breeze stated “If concealed carry were allowed on JMU’s campus, any student, faculty or staff member might very well be within firing range at any given point.” This comment insinuates that students need to fear permit-holders.
SCCC would like to ask the author of this editorial if they are scared to go to Wal-Mart because of all the permit-holders that carry their guns there daily? The writer may be surprised to know the number of permit-holders that carry in stores every day around them. There are plenty stories across the nation of permit-holders using their weapons for personal protection both in the home and in public.
However, stories of permit-holders abusing their right to carry by using their weapons offensively are few and far between; surely not as frequent as opponents of concealed carry would like us to believe. Again, concealed means concealed; no one will ever know we are carrying a weapon unless the day comes that a shooter comes on campus and we need to pull our weapon.
On that day, those in opposition may be happy we are there.
Daniel Dales is a senior biology major and criminal justice minor. For more information, visit concealedcampus.org.
By Barbie Spitz, member of JMU Students for a Democratic Society
It would be foolish to think that JMU students would silently consent to allow the carrying of concealed weapons on campus. I do not foresee such a policy change in the near future, but I will not wait until it is too late to make a statement. While I predict that the students here will not stand for any kind of policy change pushed by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), I do not fully trust the administration of JMU to listen to students on this issue.
Two years ago, 81 percent of students voted to include a $9 fee in tuition to fund clean energy initiatives. The higher powers at JMU not only refused to create the “green fund,” but raised our fees by more than $300 anyway. This goes without mentioning the atrocious and inexplicable changes in our beloved campus hangout, Taylor Down Under, which few students seem to approve of.
The answer to gun violence is not more guns. The victims of Columbine and Virginia Tech were not killed because they were unarmed. They were killed because a few troubled young men slipped through the cracks of society and were driven to violence. Allowing students on campus to carry firearms would not make such troubled individuals less violent.
SCCC claims that guns belong in the hands of potential victims who have the right to defend themselves and that current gun laws serve the purpose of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people. But the fact is that even the current restrictions on obtaining a firearm are insufficient. Let us remember that Seung-Hui Cho obtained his gun legally, and the Columbine shooters’ shotguns were bought at a gun show.
Even if people were given a greater opportunity to defend themselves with guns, it would not stop people from being killed. Think about it: If someone kills another person in defense of their own life, their attacker is dead. A life would be saved, but one would be lost, too. It is not our job to determine whose life is more valuable.
This is not to disrespect the family members and friends of gun victims. My aunt was murdered with a handgun 10 years ago and, after years of wishing her killer dead, I have only recently learned to view him as another human being. I am only asking that we remember that those who use guns for violence are people, too, and their families suffer as well.
I also know for a fact that even if my aunt were armed that fateful day, she would not have used a gun to defend herself.
Allowing guns on campus will only breed more opportunities for violence. The answer is not defense, but acknowledgement of the root causes of gun violence. We need to provide more help for troubled teens, question the values and activities of our society that cause so many to turn to violence and make more room for those who might not fit into the conventional culture of today’s society.
Defending yourself from guns by using a gun? Talk about a band-aid solution to a bullet wound.
Barbie Spitz is a senior sociology major and africana studies minor. For more information, visit studentsforgunfreeschools.org.
=============
Concealed carry combats an unlikely but dangerous threat
Daniel Dales, campus leader, Students for Concealed Carry on Campus The Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois shootings were two instances that received heavy media attention. While these events are relatively infrequent, widespread attention on the issue should not be overlooked. There are many other instances that have not received such attention. In fact, there have been seven campus shootings since the incident at Virginia Tech last April. Regardless of the number of shootings, any incident that causes students on a public campus to fear for their safety absolutely warrants widespread attention.
SCCC advocates concealed carry on campus for personal protection by licensed adults over the age of 21. We have never stated that we do not intend to use our weapons, as the reason we carry them is in the extreme event that we would need to use them.
We argue that incidents involving guns will not increase on campus, because permit-holders are trained to pull their firearms only in the event that the lives of them and their peers are in immediate danger. We affirm that the increase in firearms on campus will never be known unless a shooting were to occur. Concealed means exactly that: concealed. In a perfect world, we hope to never need to pull our weapons, but we welcome the security of knowing we have them if we need them.
A recent editorial published in The Breeze stated “If concealed carry were allowed on JMU’s campus, any student, faculty or staff member might very well be within firing range at any given point.” This comment insinuates that students need to fear permit-holders.
SCCC would like to ask the author of this editorial if they are scared to go to Wal-Mart because of all the permit-holders that carry their guns there daily? The writer may be surprised to know the number of permit-holders that carry in stores every day around them. There are plenty stories across the nation of permit-holders using their weapons for personal protection both in the home and in public.
However, stories of permit-holders abusing their right to carry by using their weapons offensively are few and far between; surely not as frequent as opponents of concealed carry would like us to believe. Again, concealed means concealed; no one will ever know we are carrying a weapon unless the day comes that a shooter comes on campus and we need to pull our weapon.
On that day, those in opposition may be happy we are there.
Daniel Dales is a senior biology major and criminal justice minor. For more information, visit concealedcampus.org.
