Unanswered [1] | Urgent [0]
  

Home / Writing Feedback   % width   Posts: 6


Should Guns be Allowed on College Campus? - my finals essay



maggierose1978 1 / -  
May 2, 2011   #1
Maggie Hutchinson
English 100
Amelia Snellgrove

Should Guns be Allowed on College Campus?

Due to the recent upheaval of violent crimes on campus, many pro-gun activist have suggested that both the students and teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. Those for this may claim that their rights have been violated because many college campuses refuse to allow weapons of any kind on campus. It is not the right to carry a gun which is in debate here, but rather it is whether or not guns should be allowed on a college campus. The Constitution of The United States of America already grants citizens the right to carry guns, and being in the south, I am by far no stranger to seeing a gun from time-to-time, but it is not appropriate for guns to be in a vulnerable area such as a college campus. There are already too many guns available to the public, and allowing them on an educational facility would greatly increase the likelihood of injury or death. Americans, as previously mentioned, have the right to bear arms, and this should be held sacred, and not infringed, taken away, or limited. However, stricter firearm control should be implemented for those who chose to carry a concealed weapon, and gun control should be done by having stricter certification processes before a firearm or gun permit is issued, intensive psychological evaluation for the person or persons applying for a gun permit or a gun,and greater educational requirements for gun owners and firearm safety.

It is frightening how easily it is to obtain certification to own a gun, and in many states it is easier to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon once a gun permit has been issued. In Georgia, according to a website called georgiapacking.com, a citizen does not have to obtain a permit to carry a weapon as long as they are not prohibited from owning a firearm. However, they must have a Georgia Weapons Carry License, that is issued under code 16-11-129 to carry a concealed weapon. The O.C.G.A. (The Official Code of Georgia Annotated) 16-11-129 gives the owner of a gun the license to carry a weapon for a period of five years. This permit only costs the gun owner thirty (30) dollars. The only exceptions to this are: possession of controlled substance, a felony conviction, no one under the age of 21, a fugitive from justice, or anyone who has had his weapons license revoked in the past. There are many more exceptions to the rules, but none mention anything about the person's mental capacity save for someone that has been hospitalized in a mental institute five years preceding the application. Other states, such as Arizona, does not require its citizens to have a concealed weapon's permit. The Arizona governer Jan Brewer, in 2010, signed a bill which repealed the state law requiring people to carry a concealed weapons permit. There was even a proposal that would allow teachers and students to carry weapons into classrooms. Should colleges ever allow guns to be carried on their campus, it is highly likely that crimes and violent crimes would increase on a college campus. Educational pursuits are stressful enough, and many students, at times are not in control of their emotions, and anything can set off a barrage of emotions. If a student, who has a gun on their possession, feels that an instructor was unfair in their grades may "take it out" on the instructor and other students. An associate professor, on the tenure track, may get turned down for their tenure, and because of high emotions, he or she may use the weapon to exact revenge or "justice" unto the tenure board. Agitated emotions and a deadly weapon are the primary cause of injury and death in gun related incidences. Just because someone is in college, or just because someone is a professor, it does not guarantee that they are emotionally ready to possess a firearm.

Should there be mandatory psychological evaluation for registered and potential gun owners? To answer that question as briefly as possible, yes. In recent years, colleges have become quite susceptible to violence involving guns and gun related incidences. Verna Gates and Matthew Briggs reported that on April 6, 2011, a domestic dispute at a community college left one woman dead and three additional people injured, including a four-year-old girl that was hit by flying glass and a 36-year-old college student. All four victims and the suspect were related. On February 14, 2011, the Middle Tennessee State University was locked down when two men got into an argument. One man shot the other in the hand and then ran off. CNN reports that authorities locked down the school and searched the nearly 25,000 student and faculty body for the assailant. It is not certain whether these shooters had mental and/or emotional problems, but it is proven that these individuals were not emotionally ready to possess a firearm. Mandatory psychological evaluation could easily have given the emotional maturity levels of the person or persons involved in the shootings, and it could have prevented the shootings. By evaluating the emotional maturity of the potential gun owner, the authorities are able to decide of the applicant is ready and able to possess a firearm. Sigmund Freud, ages ago, set the criteria for emotional maturity as the ability to love and work. The Psychology Center, an organization based in California, says that William C. Menninger, M.D., adds to Dr. Freud's criteria by stating that emotional maturity should also include those individuals who also have the ability to deal constructively with reality, adapt to changes in their environment, have the capability to find satisfaction in giving rather than receiving, and have the ability to direct any hostile energy into creative outlets. Those individuals who do not meet the minimum requirements for emotional maturity should not be allowed a gun.

Many people start out with the good intention of buying a gun for protection and protecting their families. However, most of the in-home gun related accidents happens because people are often untrained and under-educated in guns and firearm safety. The fact that a gun safety training course is only sixteen (16) hours is appalling when mounted against the numerous times that a child or loved one were injured or shot by a gun going off accidentally. Now compare this to a twenty-one (21) year old college student getting a gun for the first time. Many people, when they get a new toy, want to show it off, and a gun is one of the more dangerous toys around. This college student, with the good intention of just showing the gun, is not thinking about the possible consequences, and he is (even though he has passed all of the state requirements) unprepared for the repercussions involved if the gun is accidentally fired by him or a friend. A comprehensive gun training and safety course lasting several weeks, may be what is needed to fully prepare the college student for many possible scenarios and the repercussions involved in owning and operating a firearm. Jim Sutherland, a blogger on the website "The Truth About Guns" feels that manditory gun training and education would benefit, not only gun owners, but also those who do not own guns. He believes that with manditory gun training a convenince store clerk might have a fighting chance at defending himself or herself against an armed robber. Sutherland states that a "well-trained gun owner would have a racer's edge in a situation where bullets are flying with reckless abandonment." Only after going through a comprehensive training course, and not an overview, would it then be remotely safe for guns to be permitted on a college campus, and then guns would only be limited to specific areas of a college campus, and then only under strict supervision.

Owning a gun is as American as apple pie, and we have been granted this right by our forefathers in the Constitution of The United States of America. It is not the right to own a gun that is in question, but rather it is the ability to own a firearm that should be looked at. The certification process to own a gun should be more than a background check and a firearm safety course, it should involve psychological and emotional testing, and an all inclusive gun training course that lasts longer than sixteen (16) hours. After the standards for firearm training and gun ownership have been raised, and only after a person is proven mentally sound to own a gun; only then would it be acceptable for colleges to allow firearms on campus. Raising the standards of gun training and firearm ownership would not be for the owners and operators of the owners, but it would be for those who choose not to own a firearm.

Cited References

GeorgiaPacking.com (2010, August), Georgia Gun Laws: In Plain English, Retrieved from georgiapacking.org/law.php

Gates, Vera (2011, April 6), One Dead, Three Injured in Alabama College Shooting, Retrieved from reuters.com/article/2011/04/06/us-alabama-shooting-idUSTRE7 357ZG20110406

CNN Wire Staff (2011, February 14), Shooting suspect on Tennessee University campus caputured, Retrieved from cnn.com/2011/CRIME/02/14/tennessee.school.shooting/index.ht ml

GPB News, (2011, January 10), Arizona Gun Laws Among Most Lenient in U.S. Retrieved from gpb.org/news/2011/01/10/arizona-gun-laws-among-most-lenient -in-u-s

The Psychology Center (2011) The Criteria of Emotional Maturity, Retrieved from thepsychologycenter.com/

Sutherland, Jim (2011, March 22), Why Americans Need Manditory Firearm Training, Retrieved from, thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/03/jim-sutherland/why-americans-need -mandatory-firearms-training/

EF_Kevin 8 / 13053  
May 4, 2011   #2
You have a little typo here:
It is frightening how easily easy it is to obtain...

To answer that question as briefly as possible, yes. ----Ha ha, well said! I think I agree.

Owning a gun is as American as apple pie---nice use of the literary device SIMILE...

Run on sentence:
The certification process to own a gun should be more than a background check and a firearm safety course, it should involve ----You should turn that comma into a period or semi-colon.

You did this very well! I think it will be even stronger if you cite more solid evidence, i.e. statistics, case studies, etc., to support your argument. You did give some great examples, but with a brief search of google you can find about 10 more great facts to pack into the essay.

:-)
Papa T - / 2  
May 14, 2011   #3
While you wrote a good essay, I do not agree with your personal opinions nor do I believe you got all you information correct.

"The Constitution of The United States of America already grants citizens the right to carry guns, and being in the south, I am by far no stranger to seeing a gun from time-to-time, but it is not appropriate for guns to be in a vulnerable area such as a college campus."

Why is it not appropriate to carry a gun on a college campus? Are lives not important on campus? Is there some kind of force field around campuses that protects the faculty and students?

"In Georgia, according to a website called georgiapacking.com, a citizen does not have to obtain a permit to carry a weapon as long as they are not prohibited from owning a firearm."

This is not entirely correct. A person can NOT carry a weapon as long as they are not prohibited from owning a firearm. You make a very broad statement here. Citizens are allowed to have a gun in their home, vehicle and place of business (assuming they own the business) only without a license and aren't prohibited from having one. They can not carry anywhere they wish.

"This permit only costs the gun owner thirty (30) dollars."

Again, this is not correct. I'm not aware of one county that charges only $30 for a license. Most counties are around $80. Which includes background checks to ensure no one who shouldn't own a gun based on history, is able to obtain one legally.

"Should colleges ever allow guns to be carried on their campus, it is highly likely that crimes and violent crimes would increase on a college campus."

Another personal opinion based on not one single fact. If fact, when guns are allowed, the atmosphere is usually milder and more friendly. Those against guns have argued that little myth many times and it's been proven to be just that a myth. When the rights have been given back to the people, blood didn't run down the streets like the anti-gun folks swore it would.

"Mandatory psychological evaluation could easily have given the emotional maturity levels of the person or persons involved in the shootings, and it could have prevented the shootings."

Another opinion. But for arguments sake, let's run with this one. Let's say a mandatory evaluation would be done. You can not say for a fact these individuals would not pass the test. So in order to maybe prevent a small percentage of applicants from getting a license, you want to burden the taxpayer with another tax to exercise his/her right to protection?

"The fact that a gun safety training course is only sixteen (16) hours is appalling when mounted against the numerous times that a child or loved one were injured or shot by a gun going off accidentally. Now compare this to a twenty-one (21) year old college student getting a gun for the first time. Many people, when they get a new toy, want to show it off, and a gun is one of the more dangerous toys around. This college student, with the good intention of just showing the gun, is not thinking about the possible consequences, and he is (even though he has passed all of the state requirements) unprepared for the repercussions involved if the gun is accidentally fired by him or a friend. A comprehensive gun training and safety course lasting several weeks, may be what is needed to fully prepare the college student for many possible scenarios and the repercussions involved in owning and operating a firearm."

I totally agree, 16 hours of training is ridiculous. It should be a life long training course, taught at home or at the range, from parents. If it weren't so hard to legally get a gun, the safety rules would be known for many years before the person were even of age to get a gun. The rules have all but disappeared in the homes of those who don't hunt. You can't train stupid people to not be stupid. Idiots will be idiots no matter what. Yet you again want to burden the taxpayer with more taxes in order to exercise their right. How many hours does a 15 year old have to have before getting his/her drivers license? And yet, when they get the car for the first time alone, they show it off like a toy. That's a 3,000 lb loaded gun.

"Owning a gun is as American as apple pie, and we have been granted this right by our forefathers in the Constitution of The United States of America."

Do you think our forefathers really meant that we have to pay taxes and go through some long, drawn out training course in order to keep and bear arms? People have become so scared of guns that it's become a taboo in most peoples mind. Therefore, safety is never taught. But there are really on 4 basic gun safety rules and they are very simple.

1) All guns are always loaded!
2) Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy!
3) Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target!
4) Always be sure of your target and what's behind it!

Can't get much simpler than that. Follow those rules and safety is achieved.
EF_Kevin 8 / 13053  
May 16, 2011   #4
Why is it not appropriate to carry a gun on a college campus? Are lives not important on campus? Is there some kind of force field around campuses that protects the faculty and students?

Yes, it's called campus security. Have you ever been to college? People use funnels to drink beer. I spent quite a lot of time in college, enough time to know that people do very stupid things. I would want my kids to go to a college where students will be immediately expelled for carrying a gun. That way, no stupid drunk moron will shoot my kid.

On the other hand, if my kid had a gun to defend herself, she could get drunk and shoot someone, too. We could reenact the Civil War, right there on campus. :-)

So in order to maybe prevent a small percentage of applicants from getting a license, you want to burden the taxpayer with another tax to exercise his/her right to protection?

No, it's better to burden only the people who want to carry guns. Any yes, I think they should have to pass a psych eval. Do you disagree?!

Do you think our forefathers really meant that we have to pay taxes and go through some long, drawn out training course in order to keep and bear arms? People have become so scared of guns that it's become a taboo in most peoples mind.

Yes, I am scared of guns!! And remember, the forefathers lived in a very different world. The Founding Fathers had just rebelled against their government, so they felt strongly that citizens should be able to rebel against a corrupt government. In modern times, you can bear arms every day if you want to, but if you try to fight against the American military you will not get very far! So... it is a whole new ballgame.

Anyway, I am just arguing for sport. I do understand your reasoning. A law banning guns will be followed by the lawful and ignored by the unlawful, so a law like that surely does not benefit me if I obey it and encounter someone who does not. Nevertheless, if you make a situation where everyone carries guns for self-protection, I think we will have a whole lot more homicides and accidents! Based on absolute ethics, I agree with you, but based on utilitarian ethics I disagree.
Papa T - / 2  
May 19, 2011   #5
To EF_Kevin

I have the utmost respect for the law enforcement officers, but let's face it, they can not be everywhere all the time. What is the percentage of 911 calls that actually stop someone from getting murdered compared to cleaning up the mess? I bet that percentage is small. That's why I believe a person has the responsibility to protect themselves.

More people are killed by cars than guns every year. You can drive a car at 16, in Ga, you have to be 21 to get a weapons license. Students on campuses now are not all in the 18 - 22 year old bracket. There are a lot of mature, sensible headed adults going back and they should be able to carry for protection. They typically do not go out and get drunk every night, so that argument really doesn't hold water any longer.

My wife attends a university and she some times gets out of class late. Why do you think it would be wrong for her to protect herself? I don't want her to depend on someone else for protection, why should she. Police can't be everywhere all the time.

It has been shown that all the fear that anti-gun people have never materialize when a law is passed that allows those who choose to carry are allowed to do so. The streets do not run red, it just doesn't happen.

I'm curious though, why are you scared of guns? I bet it's a lack of knowledge and/or experience with them.

And yes, I did go to college. So I know all about the late night beer drinking. Guess what, I had guns then and lived with guys who had guns. Not one time did those guns jump up and kill someone. Not all people are totally ignorant of what a gun can do and they respect that. Remember the four basic rules of gun safety? It really is simple.

If a person doesn't want to own a gun, that's fine. I have no problem with that. But that shouldn't cause those of us who do to have to bear such a huge price in order to do so.

(Posted late and I'm tired, forgive me for any grammatical and spelling errors.)
EF_Kevin 8 / 13053  
May 21, 2011   #6
I have the utmost respect for the law enforcement officers, but let's face it, they can not be everywhere all the time.

I have the utmost respect for the average, gun-wielding citizen, but let's face it: they a certain percentage of them are sociopaths, people who have drunken blackouts, and people with bad aim who might shoot me instead of their assailant.

About the comparison with car accident deaths... I've got no argument there. Driving cars is definitely more dangerous than having a gun around.

You made a really strong argument when you talked about whether your wife should be allowed to carry a gun for self-defense. Of course she should! And if guns are not allowed on campus, the only people who will have guns are those who don't care about the rules. So... that is not cool.

At the end of the day, I agree with you. I guess I was just arguing for sport. If your wife is a level-headed person, she should be able to have a gun. I am a level headed person, too. It sucks if level-headed, good people have no gun and they are attacked by someone with a gun!

So, I should be able to be in favor of letting your wife carry, but not in favor of the average moron who likes to carry guns.

So, I agree with you, except, I think for a gun license or a driver's license people should need to undergo EXTENSIVE screening and training. Anyone who is serious about self-protection should be willing to go through a little course and a psych eval.

Thanks for the great discussion. BTW, it's not guns I'm scared of, it's stupid people with guns. For every responsible gun owner you know, I can show you a gun owner who really should not be allowed to own a gun!


Home / Writing Feedback / Should Guns be Allowed on College Campus? - my finals essay
Do You Need
Academic Writing
or Editing Help?
Fill out one of these forms:

Graduate Writing / Editing:
GraduateWriter form ◳

Best Essay Service:
CustomPapers form ◳

Excellence in Editing:
Rose Editing ◳

AI-Paper Rewriting:
Robot Rewrite ◳

Academic AI Writer:
Custom AI Writer ◳