As Decision 2008 is approaching in our nation, we have heard plenty at the Democratic and Republican party’s respective conventions from Senators McCain and Obama regarding healthcare, civil rights, the war in Iraq, education, and foreign policy. What is surprising is the lack of emphasis on perhaps one of America’s crucial domestic issues: campus gun violence.
Classifying this issue as “new” is not technically correct. We all watched on CNN in 1999 when Columbine High School became victimized. This was not the first issue, and would not become the last. Numerous campuses across America have been victimized in the past five decades. We read the stories, watched the coverage, and eventually dismissed them from our memory without lasting thought or concern. The numbers, although significant, were not gruesome enough to bring about change.
I, along with the rest of the majority of American citizens, began their week on Monday, April 16, 2007 like it was any other. I woke up, ate breakfast, took a shower, and went to my 9:05 am class. Eight hours southwest of me, in Blacksburg Virginia, 32 other individuals did the same exact thing. As I watched that horrifying CNN news coverage, it hit me that every college and institution in America should be hit personally by this. Who is really safe? Who is to say that this will not happen again? On a random morning, at a random hour, on a beloved American university, the unthinkable occurred. The fact is, this can happen anywhere, anytime.
Since the tragedy at Virginia Tech, there have been a total of thirty two school-related acts of gun violence since that April 2007 day, according to statistics by protesteasyguns.com. This is an obvious outcry for a solution. As the pieces of April 16th began to be put together one by one, the problem stemmed to the access Cho had to buying weapons, and the fact he clearly was not in a state of mind to be buying such firearms. If proper background checks were in place, this massacre could have been prevented. What is done is done; we cannot turn back time. The next step is to acknowledge the violent events of Virginia Tech, Northern Illinois, and several other high school and college campuses that have taken place throughout America, and use it as the fuel to start the fire.
A group promoting students to be permitted to carry guns on campuses, namely “Students For Concealed Carry On Campus,” is arguing that the best defense against this is a stronger offense. By strong offense, they believe if students are armed they would be able to protect themselves against a student on rampage. What they do not realize is that allowing students to carry weapons would be counter-active toward solving the problem. As an RA on my college campus, I have been involved countless times with violent students that lose control of themselves after a night of drinking. Now, throw a gun in the equation. That same student who has had too much to drink could very easily pull out his or her weapon, leading to unimaginable consequences.
Accidents will also be a major problem. A student could easily accidentally pull the trigger while showing off his or her weapon to his buddies. Granted, they have voiced the need for background checks in this situation. Although that could potentially weed out “unfit” possessors, it is irrelevant to the big picture. A student could very easily pass a background check and have limited or no history that would prevent him from obtaining such a weapon. The fact is, with high school and college serving as places that breeds emotional growth and developmental change, they are not the appropriate place to allow the possession of firearms.
The leaders of “Students For Concealed Carry On Campus” have even taken their campaign beyond presumed moral boundaries, inviting the very man who sold the Virginia Tech shooter his weapons to speak at a presentation (benefitting their organization) in Blacksburg. If that was not bad enough, this took place in the days following the first anniversary of the attacks, where many of the families of those affected were already re-burdened by the pain of what is now simply being referred to as 4/16.
In reaction, the family and friends of Virginia Tech victim Reema Samaha, along with Lily Habtu (wounded Virginia Tech shooting victim who was struck by bullets in the face) have formed a group known as Students for Gun Free Schools, or SGFS. This group is dedicated to keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of students. It works closely with the organization ProtestEasyGuns.com, also known as PEG. PEG is a social movement founded by activist Abby Spangler (also involved with the mobilization of SGFS) of Virginia who has been promoting sensible gun laws in response to Virginia Tech through ways of lie-in protests across America.
The SGFS/PEG arguments focus heavily on closing mental health and gun-show loopholes, and are against dangerous individuals and criminals having easy access to guns. PEG protests lax U.S. gun laws to secure a safer America for our children, our police and all Americans. Simply, their philosophies are mainly based on federal and state legislatures and how easy it is for unfit citizens to purchase firearms (a majority of these purchases take place at gun shows where almost half of dealers are unlicensed and therefore are not required to background check customers). Good, law abiding, upstanding citizens should be allowed to purchase carry guns for their own recreational use, but keeping them out of the hands of dangerous individuals is the main priority. Along with private, more personal ways to tribute Reema’s life, her family and friends involved with SGFS have decided the best way to keep her memory alive is to mobilize change.
The organization runs on five simple principles which govern its position:
-
Concealed handguns would detract from a healthy learning environment.
-
More guns on campus would create additional risk for students.
-
Shooters will not be deterred by concealed carry permit holders.
-
Concealed carry permit holders are not always “law-abiding” citizens.
-
Concealed carry permit holders are not required to have any law enforcement training.
The fact is, students should not have to worry about their classmates being armed. This would create an unnecessary sense of alarm and anxiety in schools. As the dust from Virginia Tech continues to clear, the response to the violence should not reflect the very reason that caused it. Tightening mental health laws, stricter gun control, and focusing on keeping weapons out of the hands of unfit persons will help combat the problem. There is no way to ensure a future act will not happen, but giving students permission to carry handguns is not going to make America’s school safer. Reema’s sister, Randa Samaha stated during a ProtestEasyGuns protest at the University of Virginia where she attends:
“We are asking for stricter gun laws. Not for me or my family, or those affected or their families, but for you…so you will never have to walk in our shoes. So you will never have to experience the pain we feel right now. I wish before April 16th, that my family and I knew how to prevent such a tragedy, but now we do, we all do, and we need to act now.”
Reema’s family has also been in the public light since the tragedy, advocating the various organizations benefitting the cause, including those listed. As citizens, we owe it to all victims of these deadly tragedies to make changes in legislation, changes that will benefit the safety of students and citizens. If more sensible gun laws are passed that will aid the closure of these deadly “loopholes,” we can minimize campus threats in the future.
Written by Patrick Dorfer, Mount Saint Mary College, Class of 2009
About Contributing Writers
Comments