Guns don't equal safety
By Andy Tupa
Mirror Wed Designer
I'm not sure when, but at some point society decided that students are always in grave danger.
After the shootings at Columbine the way to combat student violence was to give each student an I.D. and let them know that they are protected.
Instead of teaching ways of dealing with anger, we are teaching fear to our students.
After the tragedy at Virginia Tech, a new proposal in Texas is allowing students to carry guns on campus.
No offense to anybody, but I don't see how sticking guns in the hands of students will make any campus safer.
Instead of sticking guns in everyone's hands and pretending like we are back in the Wild West, maybe we should try properly educating anger management.
New precautions made to prevent school violence educate the student body that it's normal to react by pulling a gun out and shooting someone over a disagreement.
Instead we should give students the opportunity to talk about their feelings.
Let's teach them that anger is a part of life and that distributing their anger positively will help them in their future.
The main problem with the notion in Texas is that guns do not make anything safer.
Having a gun for the simple fact of protection is, quite frankly, a joke. I'm fine with hunters having guns in their home and taking them to shoot for the sport of hunting.
I understand that; I'm not anti-gun, I'm anti-idiotic. Guns should be legal, but having a gun on a college campus should not be.
Holding a gun for your protection is simply stating that you plan on shooting another human being if the circumstances arrive.
Some people are trained to handle guns, true, and not everyone is a cold-blooded killer. But Virginia Tech is a great example of a person not needing a law saying it is okay to have a gun on campus.
Education is the answer to the danger posed to students around the world.
Yes, shootings happen, and yes, they are tragic. People like Jared Loughner exist in the world, but having a gun on you at all times and acting paranoid that we are next to be shot creates a sense of fear that is unnecessary in an already stressful place.
Civil Rights
By Jeanette Rackl
Mirror Copy Editor
Texas recently passed a measure directing universities to allow concealed handguns on campus.
Opponents of the measure argue that placing guns in the hands of students and faculty will not make a college community safer, and even might have the opposite effect.
But I think this argument overlooks the prospect of deterrence.
Let's speculate for a moment.
A gunman has a choice: he can either open fire on a classroom in South Dakota or Texas.
In the Texas classroom, the gunman runs the risk of facing return fire from any number of students. No one in that room may be armed, or ten people may be. He just can't be sure.
In the South Dakota classroom; however, he's home free. Not one person in there can shoot back, guaranteed.
And criminals depend on assurance like this, the assurance that they'll be successful.
It's the criminal element that is the threat. Criminals assume only criminals have guns.
Self-preservation dates back to the Wild West. If a cowboy marches into the saloon he won't get trigger-happy without a cause, because all his fellow rough-riders have similar weapons at their hips.
That's why college campuses, like Virginia Tech in 2007 and Northern Illinois in 2008, are the targets of violent rampages.
You don't see a gunman parading into a police station nearly as often.
At Virginia Tech, student Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people before turning the gun on himself.
It doesn't take a lot of time to do a lot of damage when you're talking about an automatic weapon cranking out lethal metal projectiles at will.
As the old adage goes: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. And criminals always get the guns anyway.
In order to carry, people will still need to acquire a concealed handgun license. So maybe if the good guys are packing some heat, they might stand a chance.