The issue of guns on college campuses has been debated periodically since the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting massacre. Recently, it has re-entered the public consciousness because of the University's enactment of a regulation prohibiting concealed carry permit holders from bringing firearms to University facilities and events.
It should come as no surprise, then, that with additional attention focused on the status of gun owners' rights at Virginia colleges and universities, there has been a buzz surrounding legislation introduced earlier this month by Del. Bob Marshall, R-Prince William, which would allow university faculty with concealed carry permits to possess firearms on campus. Although this is the fifth consecutive year Marshall has proposed this legislation and it stands little chance of becoming law, it is worth pointing out the flaws in the bill and the faulty logic which has been used to justify its enactment.
The most prominent problem with the legislation is the arbitrary distinction it draws between faculty members and other individuals who populate college campuses. The bill only grants full-time university faculty the right to carry concealed weapons on campus, leaving out other concealed carry permit holders who may be students, staff or visitors. These individuals might challenge the legislation's validity since it would, in essence, make the concealed carry permits of university faculty worth more than those of other citizens, who would still be barred from bringing firearms into facilities and events at colleges with gun regulations.
Marshall has defended his privileging of faculty members by noting that they are the same people to whom parents grant the responsibility of teaching their children. The fact that professors are capable of delivering lectures and grading papers, however, is not an adequate justification for their being granted a special exemption from university gun regulations. Therefore, it would be hard to prevent the legislation, if enacted, from being expanded to allow anyone with a concealed carry permit to bring a gun to a university facility or event.
On its face, that might not seem concerning since the commonwealth requires residents seeking concealed carry permits to undergo background checks and competency tests. The commonwealth also has agreed to recognize permits from a number of states, however, which do not exercise the same scrutiny when granting citizens concealed carry rights. A 2007 South Florida Sun-Sentinel investigation, for example, turned up 1,700 Florida concealed carry permit holders with criminal histories which included incidents ranging from "minor offenses, such as shoplifting" to "assault, battery, arson, drug possession and firing a gun in public." Because of Virginia's reciprocity agreement with Florida, any of those individuals would be just as free to carry a concealed weapon as those who went through the commonwealth's somewhat more rigorous application and renewal process.
Therefore, it is rather tenuous to claim that all concealed carry permit holders have demonstrated a particular level of conduct or expertise which justifies their carrying firearms at high-density gatherings and in high-traffic facilities where any sort of weapons mishap could prove fatal. More important, however, is the fact that Marshall's legislation is entirely unnecessary. The University has prohibited firearms in its facilities and events since at least 2009, and there have been no significant gun-related crimes on-Grounds during that time. In addition, mass shootings have happened in a variety of places throughout the United States and not merely in areas with firearms restrictions.
Hence, it would be wise for the General Assembly to ignore Marshall's effort to get more guns on college campuses and instead focus on much more important issues facing the commonwealth. Public safety may, indeed, be among those, but there are many smarter ways to address it than liberalizing concealed carry laws.
Read More
EDITORIAL: U.Va. Health lets fear trump its mission to do no harm
By Editorial Board | 4 hours agoIt is high time to resist these authoritative and dangerous actions before there are no federal avenues left for resistance.
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
