Very good work
Very nice papers. Your second paper is particularly good, and I think the addition of your own experiences really drives your point home.
On the first paper, however, I had acouple points. Please don't take these as criticism, I mean them more as dialogue, and I look forward to your response.
First, you didn't do a good job removing your name from the paper. The citations reveal your full name. If you're trying to avoid revealing identities, you should remove the name of the professor you interviewed, as well, unless he agreed for you to release his name with his opinion on the Internet at large. I think everyone would be most unhappy if it somehow came back to haunt him, or someone managed to use it against him. I know academic circles can be more political than Washington, DC at times.
Second, I caught the use of the word "illicit" when you meant "elicit". Illicit means illegal, immoral, or to be avoided. We know that guns are none of these things. Elicit means to bring to light or bring out.
Third and most importantly, I strongly disagree with your suggestion that it is a "reasonable restriction" to remove a student's right to carry on campus for violations of school policy or poor grades. Consider that some schools, especially religious schools, have requirements like attendance at religious services and absolute respect for campus authority figures as a religious duty, with broad discretionary powers given to these authority figures. So a student could lose the right to carry for failure to go to chapel, or for speaking disrespectfully toward a Resident Assistant or administrator. Or, for that matter, doing anything that such an authority figure disapproves of, be it chewing gum or crossing one's legs, even if these things are permitted to others. School rules can prohibit or require nearly anything save violations of basic human rights, so pegging a basic human right to those school rules makes the exercise of the right arbitrary and capricious. It would be equivalent to giving up your right to choose sexual partners or speak as you wish or move about as a free person merely because you violate any school rule. The right to keep and bear arms is a right equivalent to any of these, and as inalienable as any of these.
Furthermore, to link that right to a student's grades is likewise unacceptable. I personally know a college graduate who had a very bad semester. His roomate threatened him with physical harm and every kind of harassment for the entire semester, finishing off just before finals by actually beating him. In that State with poor self-defense laws, and because of a few unwise words, he himself was arrested for his own beating, and furthermore prohibited from accessing the school for a time. The school took a poor view of self-defense, which didn't help one bit. Naturally, his grades were quite poor that semester, though he had managed to keep them up during the bulk of the term he missed many of his final exams and neglected to finish his final papers. The charges were thrown out of court, even in that legally backward State, and he was admitted back to the school for the next semester, provided that he stay away from his former roomate, which he didn't consider a problem. He made the smart choice to switch schools, but had he continued to attend the first school, he would have been left without the means to defend himself at school because his grades and behavior in defending himself rather than simply kowtowing to the bully would disenfranchise him of those rights, just like a felon, though he actually committed no crime.
Do you see the potential problems which stem from allowing a right to be conditionally infringed upon? This is, of course, all presuming that students first be permitted to exercise their right to carry on campus in the first place. Hopefully this will happen soon, and hopefully your paper will sway a few minds toward that goal, perhaps your professor if he or she is not already inclined toward allowing it.
