We-the-People
Regular Member
My "Business Ethics" course paper on "gun free" zones (post Aurora, format edited)
Summary:
In the wake of the July 20 shooting rampage in Aurora Colorado security is being increased at similar locations. The Wall Street Journal article, published July 22, discusses the security procedures being taken by movie theaters in the wake of the Aurora tragedy. In general, security has been heightened at theaters across the country in the wake of the Aurora shootings. Some jurisdictions are posting, or posting more, police officers at movie theaters. Some theaters, including the nation’s largest chain, have “barred patrons from wearing masks or costumes” which may affect sci-fi movie fans who often dress up for movies they attend. Other locations are searching “moviegoers' bags and purses” (Katz, Sullivan, Nuckols, Walters, Suhr, & Welsh-Huggins, 2012).
According to New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, discussing the posting of officers at New York theaters showing the Batman movie, “we're doing this to raise the comfort level” (Katz, et al., 2012). While closing the gate behind the horse may prevent a possible “copycat” incident, it does nothing to increase security and does not address the long-term financial costs of that security.
The solution to this problem is not increasing police and private security measures but rather, increasing the responsibility and ability of individuals to provide for their own security by recognizing their basic human right to do so.
Under consequentialist moral theories, “the moral rightness of an action is determined solely by its results” (Shaw & Barry, p. 52). When the theater in Aurora banned its customers from possessing an effective means of self-defense while on the theater’s premises, they effectively created what is often referred to as a “gun free” zone. Unfortunately, an attacker can be fairly certain they will meet no, or at worst minimal, resistance in such locations. The business making such a decision has placed itself morally responsible for the safety and security of their customers. Yet the theater, and to be fair most businesses, that declare themselves to be “gun free” zones are “playing the odds” that there won’t be a serious incident rather than providing the level of security morally required by their decision to strip customers of any means of self-defense or resistance to violence. This business decision is unethical and immoral as it deprives citizens of their basic human right to life and defending that life.
The solution is simple. Businesses must embrace the basic human right of their customers, to be able to defend themselves, by ending the practice of banning firearms in their facilities. Such “bans” only affect the law-abiding citizen. Any person intent on wreaking havoc will obviously ignore such “bans” just as they ignore existing laws against assault, murder, and the like. This is abundantly clear when one reviews the location of mass shootings in the U.S. Of fifteen mass shootings documented by WTMJ and KYTX news stations, at least eleven were “gun free” zones by act of law or private business policy (Reed J, 2009 & 19 KYTX, 2012).
• Oct 16, 1991: Luby’s café, Killeen TX, 23 dead plus shooter (TX law prohibited firearms in the café)
• March 24, 1998: Jonesboro Middle School, AK 5 dead, 10 wounded (gun free zone)
• Apr 20, 1999 : Columbine HS, Littleton CO, 13 dead plus 2 shooters, 23 wounded (gun free zone)
• July 29, 1999: Atlanta GA, 9 dead plus shooter
• Mar 12, 2005: Brookfield Sheraton, Brookfield WI, 7 dead plus shooter, 4 wounded
• Mar 21, 2005: Red Lake HS, MN, 7 dead + shooter, 7 wounded (+2 others off school) (gun free zone)
• Oct 2, 2006: West Nickel Mines School, PA, 5 dead plus shooter (gun free zone)
• Feb 12, 2007: Tolley Square Mall, Salt Lake City UT, 5 dead +shooter, 4 wounded
(malls typically prohibit firearms)
• Apr 16, 2007: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA, 32 dead plus shooter (college was a gun free zone)
• Dec 5, 2007: Westroads Mall, Omaha NE, 8 dead +shooter, 5 wounded
(malls typically prohibit firearms)
• Feb 14, 2008: Northern IL University, 5 dead plus shooter, 18 wounded
(Illinois does not allow citizen carry of firearms)
• March 10, 2009: Kinston AL, 10 plus shooter dead
• Apr 3, 2009: Binghamton NY, 13 plus shooter dead, 4 injured
• Nov 5, 2009: Fort Hood TX, 13 dead, 32 injured
(military bases prohibit being armed except Military Police)
• July 20, 2012: Aurora CO, 12 dead, 50 plus injured (theater is “gun free” zone)
Conclusion:
For businesses, the issue of customer security is a difficult one. In a declining economy where sales are down and minimal profits are a welcome alternative to the red ink so many face, providing security is a delicate balancing act. On one hand, theaters must at least appear to be concerned about the safety of their patrons. On the other hand, they cannot afford to make that security so intrusive that it turns customers away to the myriad options for movie viewing available in today’s technologically dominated culture. Nor can they afford to incur new long-term costs without raising ticket prices. Finding the appropriate balance of security to protect customers, while remaining unobtrusive is a difficult problem at best. However, businesses that rely upon the concept of “gun free zones”, such as the one at the theater in Aurora, have a moral obligation to provide that expensive security.
Considering the increased costs associated with hiring additional security, it is unlikely that the theater industry could survive the additional costs in the long term. Raising ticket prices in order to absorb the cost of increased security will, under the basic theory of supply and demand, result in a further drop in attendance (an increase in the price point of “optional goods” results in a drop in demand). This reduction will then facilitate further decline of the industry and its ability to afford security measures.
The economic inability of the industry to support higher costs for security, combined with consequentialist theory that morally requires businesses to take responsibility for their actions, and the known failure of “gun free” zones to prevent violent incidents, all indicate that business must recognize and embrace the right of their customers to defend themselves. Rather than implementing “gun free” zones, more appropriately called “self-defense free” zones; businesses need to allow law-abiding customers the ability to defend themselves. By banning law abiding customers from carrying firearms on their premises, the theater in Aurora enabled the shooter to kill twelve and wound more than fifty defenseless citizens.
19 KYTX News. (2012, July 27). Timeline: Worst mass shootings in U.S. In 19 KYTX News. Retrieved July 28, 2012, from http://www.cbs19.tv/story/19135211/timeline-worst-mass-shootings-in-us
Katz, A., Sullivan, E., Nuckols, B., Walters, P., Suhr, J., & Welsh-Huggins, A. (2012, July 22). Security increased at movies following shootings . In The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved July 26, 2012, from http://online.wsj.com/article/APeb230c30ef0b4989a01ad274c0c3f97a.html?KEYWORDS=aurora
Reed, J. (2009). Worst U.S. mass shootings in recent years. In 620 WTMJ NewsRadio. Retrieved July 28, 2012, from http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/69327462.html?action=quotecomment&cid=97057796&page=2
Shaw, H., & Barry, V. (2007). Moral issues in business (10th ed., p. 52). Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.
Security increased at movies following shootings
Summary:
In the wake of the July 20 shooting rampage in Aurora Colorado security is being increased at similar locations. The Wall Street Journal article, published July 22, discusses the security procedures being taken by movie theaters in the wake of the Aurora tragedy. In general, security has been heightened at theaters across the country in the wake of the Aurora shootings. Some jurisdictions are posting, or posting more, police officers at movie theaters. Some theaters, including the nation’s largest chain, have “barred patrons from wearing masks or costumes” which may affect sci-fi movie fans who often dress up for movies they attend. Other locations are searching “moviegoers' bags and purses” (Katz, Sullivan, Nuckols, Walters, Suhr, & Welsh-Huggins, 2012).
According to New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, discussing the posting of officers at New York theaters showing the Batman movie, “we're doing this to raise the comfort level” (Katz, et al., 2012). While closing the gate behind the horse may prevent a possible “copycat” incident, it does nothing to increase security and does not address the long-term financial costs of that security.
The solution to this problem is not increasing police and private security measures but rather, increasing the responsibility and ability of individuals to provide for their own security by recognizing their basic human right to do so.
Under consequentialist moral theories, “the moral rightness of an action is determined solely by its results” (Shaw & Barry, p. 52). When the theater in Aurora banned its customers from possessing an effective means of self-defense while on the theater’s premises, they effectively created what is often referred to as a “gun free” zone. Unfortunately, an attacker can be fairly certain they will meet no, or at worst minimal, resistance in such locations. The business making such a decision has placed itself morally responsible for the safety and security of their customers. Yet the theater, and to be fair most businesses, that declare themselves to be “gun free” zones are “playing the odds” that there won’t be a serious incident rather than providing the level of security morally required by their decision to strip customers of any means of self-defense or resistance to violence. This business decision is unethical and immoral as it deprives citizens of their basic human right to life and defending that life.
The solution is simple. Businesses must embrace the basic human right of their customers, to be able to defend themselves, by ending the practice of banning firearms in their facilities. Such “bans” only affect the law-abiding citizen. Any person intent on wreaking havoc will obviously ignore such “bans” just as they ignore existing laws against assault, murder, and the like. This is abundantly clear when one reviews the location of mass shootings in the U.S. Of fifteen mass shootings documented by WTMJ and KYTX news stations, at least eleven were “gun free” zones by act of law or private business policy (Reed J, 2009 & 19 KYTX, 2012).
• Oct 16, 1991: Luby’s café, Killeen TX, 23 dead plus shooter (TX law prohibited firearms in the café)
• March 24, 1998: Jonesboro Middle School, AK 5 dead, 10 wounded (gun free zone)
• Apr 20, 1999 : Columbine HS, Littleton CO, 13 dead plus 2 shooters, 23 wounded (gun free zone)
• July 29, 1999: Atlanta GA, 9 dead plus shooter
• Mar 12, 2005: Brookfield Sheraton, Brookfield WI, 7 dead plus shooter, 4 wounded
• Mar 21, 2005: Red Lake HS, MN, 7 dead + shooter, 7 wounded (+2 others off school) (gun free zone)
• Oct 2, 2006: West Nickel Mines School, PA, 5 dead plus shooter (gun free zone)
• Feb 12, 2007: Tolley Square Mall, Salt Lake City UT, 5 dead +shooter, 4 wounded
(malls typically prohibit firearms)
• Apr 16, 2007: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA, 32 dead plus shooter (college was a gun free zone)
• Dec 5, 2007: Westroads Mall, Omaha NE, 8 dead +shooter, 5 wounded
(malls typically prohibit firearms)
• Feb 14, 2008: Northern IL University, 5 dead plus shooter, 18 wounded
(Illinois does not allow citizen carry of firearms)
• March 10, 2009: Kinston AL, 10 plus shooter dead
• Apr 3, 2009: Binghamton NY, 13 plus shooter dead, 4 injured
• Nov 5, 2009: Fort Hood TX, 13 dead, 32 injured
(military bases prohibit being armed except Military Police)
• July 20, 2012: Aurora CO, 12 dead, 50 plus injured (theater is “gun free” zone)
Conclusion:
For businesses, the issue of customer security is a difficult one. In a declining economy where sales are down and minimal profits are a welcome alternative to the red ink so many face, providing security is a delicate balancing act. On one hand, theaters must at least appear to be concerned about the safety of their patrons. On the other hand, they cannot afford to make that security so intrusive that it turns customers away to the myriad options for movie viewing available in today’s technologically dominated culture. Nor can they afford to incur new long-term costs without raising ticket prices. Finding the appropriate balance of security to protect customers, while remaining unobtrusive is a difficult problem at best. However, businesses that rely upon the concept of “gun free zones”, such as the one at the theater in Aurora, have a moral obligation to provide that expensive security.
Considering the increased costs associated with hiring additional security, it is unlikely that the theater industry could survive the additional costs in the long term. Raising ticket prices in order to absorb the cost of increased security will, under the basic theory of supply and demand, result in a further drop in attendance (an increase in the price point of “optional goods” results in a drop in demand). This reduction will then facilitate further decline of the industry and its ability to afford security measures.
The economic inability of the industry to support higher costs for security, combined with consequentialist theory that morally requires businesses to take responsibility for their actions, and the known failure of “gun free” zones to prevent violent incidents, all indicate that business must recognize and embrace the right of their customers to defend themselves. Rather than implementing “gun free” zones, more appropriately called “self-defense free” zones; businesses need to allow law-abiding customers the ability to defend themselves. By banning law abiding customers from carrying firearms on their premises, the theater in Aurora enabled the shooter to kill twelve and wound more than fifty defenseless citizens.
References
19 KYTX News. (2012, July 27). Timeline: Worst mass shootings in U.S. In 19 KYTX News. Retrieved July 28, 2012, from http://www.cbs19.tv/story/19135211/timeline-worst-mass-shootings-in-us
Katz, A., Sullivan, E., Nuckols, B., Walters, P., Suhr, J., & Welsh-Huggins, A. (2012, July 22). Security increased at movies following shootings . In The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved July 26, 2012, from http://online.wsj.com/article/APeb230c30ef0b4989a01ad274c0c3f97a.html?KEYWORDS=aurora
Reed, J. (2009). Worst U.S. mass shootings in recent years. In 620 WTMJ NewsRadio. Retrieved July 28, 2012, from http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/69327462.html?action=quotecomment&cid=97057796&page=2
Shaw, H., & Barry, V. (2007). Moral issues in business (10th ed., p. 52). Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.