Can Guns on the Campus Be a Lifesaving Tool?

Guns on the campus have been a subject of the heated debates for a long time.

Guns on the campus have been a subject of the heated debates for a long time. Its proponents claim that allowing guns on the campus will help students and teachers to stop a shooter and feel safer. The opponents say that guns are too dangerous and they do no good on the campus. The law does not help to solve this problem because there are different regulations regarding this question in different states. The states are divided into those that allow guns on the campus, those that prohibit weapon, and those that let the colleges decide on this question. I agree with Timothy Wheelers point of view. In his article "There Is a Reason They Choose Schools", he claims that permitting guns in the colleges and schools may help to save thousands of lives. I find his arguments more convincing because he presents the examples from the real life when guns at campus actually stopped the shooter and saved lives.

David Scorton and Glenn Altschuler are the authors of the article "Do We Need More Guns on the Campus?" In the article, they argue that guns should be prohibited in the universities and colleges. The thesis of the article states that if legislation on guns is adopted, colleges and universities will not be allowed to set their own gun policies, which will consequently make students and staff feel less safe. The authors purpose is to prove that educational institutions are some of the safest places and allowing guns on the campus may do more harm than good. They claim that the campus homicide rate is about 1 death per 1 million people, compared to 57 deaths per million in the general population. However, some crime still happens on the campus, and allowing people carry guns will only worsen the situation. They argue that it is not proven that a victim or spectator of the crime could stop it if he had a gun. Such a situation has never occurred, according to authors. Moreover, if an incident of active shooting happens and students or staff have guns, this will do more harm. First, the campus police that comes to a crime scene may not be able to decide who is the shooter; in all the rush and screaming, if more than one person is carrying the gun, there will a problem to decide whos the bad guy. Moreover, the authors say that college students are too emotional and may abuse drugs and alcohol. As a result, they may use the gun for suicide, which is the second reason of death in colleges, after the accidents. Therefore, allowing them carry weapon is too risky not only for other people, but for their life and safety as well. At the end of their article, the authors suggest conducting more research on such a serious topic before adopting laws at federal level, and while these researches are being conducted, the colleges should set their own policies regarding this issue.

On the contrary to Scorton and Altschuler, Timothy Wheeler is the proponent of concealed carry laws. In the article There Is a Reason They Choose Schools, he presents the idea that allowing students and staff to carry guns on the campus is a lifesaving policy. The main idea of the article is that the attackers usually choose schools and colleges only because of the lack of security at these places. The purpose of the article is to prove that despite being dangerous, guns can actually do more good than harm. Wheelers main argument is that guns in the arms of the potential victims can help them save their lives. He uses the events at the Appalachian School of Law and The Pearl High School where both shooters were stopped from shooting more people when some of the victims pointed a gun at them. In addition, Wheeler says that the only reason why legislators do not implement guns law is the fear that this may lead to massacres on the campus. They do not take into consideration the fact that students themselves stand for permitting guns on the campus. They even made a demonstration known as Students For Concealed Carry On Campus with a nationwide "empty holster" demonstration (peaceful, of course) in support of their cause. Wheeler believes that the massacre that bureaucrats fear might happen if students carry guns on the campus is not as dangerous as the one that has already happened in many schools and colleges. Moreover, Wheeler claims that no research will help to decide whether to allow guns on campus. When people are in the dark place surrounded by terror, nothing can help, neither police, nor federal law. The only thing that can actually help is the gun.

Personally I find the article by Timothy Wheeler more convincing because he provides the examples when permission to carry guns did save lives of innocent students. Moreover, I agree with him that the main reason why legislators still have not implemented concealed carry law is the fear of possible massacres. In my opinion, the massacres that scare them so much may never happen, and the ones that have already happened in the schools are real and dangerous. In addition, they do not see the fact that despite the prohibition of carrying guns on the campus, the shooters somehow are able to bring the weapon and kill people. Consequently, allowing guns on campuses may raise the victims chances to fight a shooter and save their lives.

Scorton and Altschulers argument are also convincing. I agree that in case of a shooting incident, it may be difficult for police to decide who the bad person trying to kill people is. However, there are chances that they will not have to do that because the shooter may be stopped before they arrive. Their argument that college students may use gun to kill themselves is not very convincing in my opinion. I think if a person wants to kill himself, he will do this and it does not matter if he has a gun.

Concealing carry laws are some of the most discussed in our country. Both proponents and opponent have logical opinions and evidence to support them. Guns indeed are dangerous and cause deaths of many people. However, it will be a hypocrisy to allow them everywhere, as the Constitution does, but to prohibit them on the campus, where they are probably needed the most and where they can save lives.

The article was written by Kelly Rise, a writer at