Should universities allow students to carry concealed handguns on campus?

Of course not. It's silly that they should feel a need to be armed that way. If students really think they need to be armed with guns, it's obviously a sick campus to be on, and the solution isn't to arm all the students with weapons... it's to find out why they feel a need to and attack the problem at the source.

A lot of people from the US don't really understand what the roots of their right-to-bear-arms amendment came from. Back in the 1600's, when personal firearms had spread wild throughout Europe, the murder rate was sky-rocketing, such that, starting in the 1700's, the governments of Europe started disarming their populations, telling them that if they were going to have bad tempers and get into fights, then they were just going to have to settle in with swords. That made sense in most parts of Europe, including England, but the US was a British colony, such that laws being passed for British purposes were being applied to the colonies, and so the British authorities tried to enforce the if-you're-going-to-fight-use-swords law on the colonialists.

The problem was... a lot of Americans depended on hunting to eat, and so it didn't make sense for the same reason it made sense in Europe to be disarming the citizens. And... because the US had space back then (as long as they shot the natives already on the land they went moving into) the Europeans settling in the US could spread out when they were getting on each others nerves, and so they had a way to ease the population pressure that made concentrated holdings of firearms a problem... that space and room-to-roam meant they didn't see firearms as the same kind of problem with random violence that firearms are in compressed-population situations. Studies have been done on the psychological attitude of populations armed to the teeth versus those which are not, and the simple observations are that as long as the societies are well policed, people in fact are a lot less stressed when they don't have to fret about packing guns.

Americans like to think that their right-to-bear-arms is some sort of guarantee against tyranny from the state, but in the first place, if it's a real democracy, then what's the issue? Japanese, Taiwanese and most western Europeans aren't armed to the teeth, and the only effect is that they live in less stress, with less fear of strangers, and with much lower murder rates... and if they don't like the government, they just wait for the next election. Besides, Americans who think their right-to-bear-arms is going to protect them from government tyranny obviously don't know about the cruise-missile base built in North Dakota, with 250 long-range cruise missiles tipped with neutron bombs, with ranges that cannot hit targets outside of the continental USA.

You know, there's an old saying (from Korea I think) that goes, "The measure of a civilization is how little the citizens need to fret about self-defense.

Of course not. It's silly that they should feel a need to be armed that way. If students really think they need to be armed with guns, it's obviously a sick campus to be on, and the solution isn't to arm all the students with weapons... it's to find out why they feel a need to and attack the problem at the source.

A lot of people from the US don't really understand what the roots of their right-to-bear-arms amendment came from. Back in the 1600's, when personal firearms had spread wild throughout Europe, the murder rate was sky-rocketing, such that, starting in the 1700's, the governments of Europe started disarming their populations, telling them that if they were going to have bad tempers and get into fights, then they were just going to have to settle in with swords. That made sense in most parts of Europe, including England, but the US was a British colony, such that laws being passed for British purposes were being applied to the colonies, and so the British authorities tried to enforce the if-you're-going-to-fight-use-swords law on the colonialists.

The problem was... a lot of Americans depended on hunting to eat, and so it didn't make sense for the same reason it made sense in Europe to be disarming the citizens. And... because the US had space back then (as long as they shot the natives already on the land they went moving into) the Europeans settling in the US could spread out when they were getting on each others nerves, and so they had a way to ease the population pressure that made concentrated holdings of firearms a problem... that space and room-to-roam meant they didn't see firearms as the same kind of problem with random violence that firearms are in compressed-population situations. Studies have been done on the psychological attitude of populations armed to the teeth versus those which are not, and the simple observations are that as long as the societies are well policed, people in fact are a lot less stressed when they don't have to fret about packing guns.

Americans like to think that their right-to-bear-arms is some sort of guarantee against tyranny from the state, but in the first place, if it's a real democracy, then what's the issue? Japanese, Taiwanese and most western Europeans aren't armed to the teeth, and the only effect is that they live in less stress, with less fear of strangers, and with much lower murder rates... and if they don't like the government, they just wait for the next election. Besides, Americans who think their right-to-bear-arms is going to protect them from government tyranny obviously don't know about the cruise-missile base built in North Dakota, with 250 long-range cruise missiles tipped with neutron bombs, with ranges that cannot hit targets outside of the continental USA.

You know, there's an old saying (from Korea I think) that goes, "The measure of a civilization is how little the citizens need to fret about self-defense".

While I don't think students should be allowed to carried concealed handguns on campus, I also think that is someone is determined enough it won't matter, they could still do a school shooting.

Students can be armed only after taking very intense training on self defense from a legal, psychological, and personal safety issue. Documents releasing the school totally from responsibility should also be signed and notarized and must be made to legally stand up in court. If a person still wishes to be armed for the purpose of self defense only, he has made a commitment that will protect many unarmed students at the risk of losing his life.

Very unselfish act.

This is not a questions college studnets, and educators should have to decide. If this question is being brought forth, there is a clear signal on campus security is lacking. College administrators should be looking for ways to build, and improvement campus security.

Allowing someone to carry a weapon, other then a security or police officer is just plain asking for trouble. Too many college aged adutls are stressed, and do not need the additonal burden of worry of their security.

I can see how carrying a weapon would seem reasonable after countless school massacres, unfortunately, it would not help at all. How would people know what hands these weapons would be going into? I know in my school there are several people that I would never trust to carry a weapon.

I could forsee many people showing of the guns, and students may even resort to using them against eachother. I don't think any college would allow students to carry weapons on school grounds, EVER!

Yes of course. Why should their constitutional rights be denied them? Surely there is a reason gunmen pick schools to shoot up so often?

They know the students are unarmed and can't fire back. If they can't be in charge of who dies when, they don't want to play.

University should not be permitted to carry concealed handguns on campus because based on recent events having weapons in schools have only contributed to the culture of violence that has overshadowed American campuses. It is just like adding fuel to the fire, the right thing for the government to do is completely take out the right to carry guns. Based on my observation, here in the Philippines, students are not allowed to carry guns on schools, and as far as I can recall, there have been no single case or incident with regards to killings on campuses.

When students carry guns, this will only add to further their pride and contribute in encouraging them to act in favor of violence. There is no way that carrying guns can possibly thwart or mitigate the possibility of a school shooting. All I can suggest is that, concealed weapons should be banned in schools, and universities should improve campus securities and make ways to prevent weapons from entering the campus.

No, I don't think concealed handguns belong on a campus. And in light of the recent sleight of hand in which a law allowing the carrying of firearms in National Parks was attached to the regulations regarding how banks manage credit cards, I think that is poor idea also. It's difficult enough for law enforcement officers to "get it right" when handling firearms.

You simply can not equate the background check and minimal training for a fire arm permit that a private individual goes through to carry a weapon as a good enough reason to let these armed citizens walk around campus, and, as one answer characterized, to "put themselves in harms way" for the rest of us. I think they are putting the rest of us at risk.

Not to sound too much like the NRA, but criminals don't follow the rules. You can put up as many 'no crime allowed' signs, but some just won't follow them. I don't think you can find an incident where a person with a concealed carry permit went into a school and shot people, rather it's more likely you'll find someone who may not even own a gun legally, regardless of a concealed carry, who commits these type of crimes.

Arguably, a person with a concealed carry weapon could have prevented some of the deaths at VT.

Many who answer here, reflect the lack of knowledge between "carrying a gun" and a "Concealed Carry Permit" for a handgun. Permit holders must pass a criminal background check, must be 21 yrs of age, must register the weapon to be carried & be finger-printed by local law enforcement. In addition to taking a lengthy written test, and qualifying with the weapon you will be carrying.

You have to retest(qualify) every 2 yrs. Yes, CCP holders should be allowed to carry their weapons on campus. And those who don't carry firearms should be glad there are responsible adults on campus willing to put themselves in harms way to save someone elses life.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.