Walking around Grounds from day to day there are an infinite number of things you do not know about the students who surround you. Some are brilliant, many are talented at music, still others are inwardly insecure or neurotic. A million secrets and perversions abound, and yet we can be reasonably certain that students are not carrying a firearm while they are on Grounds. Some Second Amendment fanatics want to change that.
The Virginia Tech shooting ignited a new interest in how to best protect law abiding citizens from the threat of unpredictable violence In his talk last week at the University, Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell addressed how Virginia is dealing with new security implementations. The questions are endless. Should the University administration employ metal detectors? Should at-risk students be subject to invasive mental evaluations? How far is the University willing to pry into the private lives of its students? At the heart of these questions rests a more fundamental question about the appropriate balance between freedom and safety.
Almost immediately the University community came to the general agreement that excessively restrictive measures have no place in a community that prides itself on the freedom of the comprised individuals. Not only are such measures intrusive, but they are also unfeasible given the size of our community. Instead, the University administration has looked at sensible policies aimed at protecting students.
Fanatical Second Amendment supporters turn the question of freedom and safety on its head and apply it to their own purposes. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, a national student group, suggests that the majority of collegiate priorities and policies unjustly restrict a student's freedom to protect himself by making campuses gun-free zones. They further assert that to protect themselves, students over 21 should be able to posses concealed firearms while on campus if they go through the appropriate legal procedures.
Fortunately, we are students at one such "unjust" school. The University's Board of Visitor's may set broad laws dictating student's conduct. As Attorney General McDonnell said, "The Board of Visitors do have authority to regulate your ability to have weapons on campus." And, incidently, there is a reason that colleges, in general, have low incidences of gun violence: guns are not permitted.
Obviously "gun free zones" are not going to stop the deadly intentions of murderers, but making gun ownership an acceptable norm for students over 21 creates more problems than it prevents. The dangers of concealed carry permits abound; college is generally an emotionally volatile period for young students who are, for the first time, considered adults. But we can take a quick look at our own university and surmise that many students do not behave like adults. Entrusting concealed weapons to students while on Grounds places way too much faith in the responsibility of the average undergraduate. I've been to a party where a 22 year old fanatic Second Amendment supporter drunkenly waved around his supposedly unloaded gun in celebration of his manhood and his rights. When I told him that the presence of a firearm at 2 a.m. in the context of a nonviolent situation made me uncomfortable, I was subject to a lecture about why it is his "God d*** right to posses a concealed weapon."
Granted we were not on University property, and using a concealed weapon while intoxicated is considered a felony in Virginia so my fellow partygoer was acting illegally. All the same though, it is easy to imagine a dangerous scene in a place where many students live on Grounds, behave irresponsibly, and even brag about going to class drunk or hung over.
Of course there are those who assert that an all out ban on concealed carry permits simply empowers those among us who seek to harm others with firearms. Between these two extremes, there may be a compromise. In the aftermath of September 11, airline pilots are now allowed to carry concealed weapons while flying. For the sake of analogy, if you follow the logic of the permissive concealed carry argument, then airline passengers, private citizens, should have the right to protect themselves against harm by carrying a concealed weapon on board their flight. But in fact, most reasonable people recognize the absurdity of such a permissive policy.
Instead, people in positions of authority, namely pilots are permitted to carry concealed weapons. It is logically consistent then to allow administrators and staff to carry concealed weapons on Grounds given the unpredictable threat of mass violence.
This would disband the gun free policy currently in place on the University campus, but given the repeated violence at high schools and colleges it might be the most appropriate solution to uphold the tenuous balance between freedom and safety.
Christa Byker is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at cbyker@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 4 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
