The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the law @@Really? What they overturned is “THE law?” This is only an Appeals’ ruling.@@Oct. 5 when it determined that the policy implemented by the Oregon University System was, in fact, illegal. This ruling is not only a victory for concealed-carry or gun-rights activists but for the entire University population.
Criminals will now be faced with uncertainty as to who is a “good” target or not — a spillover benefit to having a segment of the population who do carry@@What about shootings that occur at schools that already allow concealed guns? Has this prevented these shootings and killings? Do guns really make campuses or society safer?@@. It is been demonstrated time and again that criminals, like predators in the animal kingdom, will attack the weakest perceived victim. It makes life difficult for those who wish to do harm to students or faculty members, which is why it is painful to see such support for the removal of others’ rights to defend themselves.
I, like many of you@@wouldn’t this be “all” if this is in a campus paper?@@, received an email from University President Richard Lariviere over the weekend that described the situation and possible plans to appeal the decision. In addition to this was a statement from OUS Chancellor George Pernsteiner: “We are disappointed in the ruling of the Court in this case and will consider our options. Our greatest concern is for the safety of our students and the entire campus community …”
My biggest question to both Lariviere and Pernsteiner is this: How does disarming those who wish to be in control of their own safety make them safe? Of course, opposition to the Court’s upholding of the preemption clause@@I don’t think this is describing what he thinks it’s describing.@@ regarding legislation on firearms doesn’t end with certain faculty members. ASUO President Ben Eckstein also expressed his beliefs, saying, “We believe that students have a right to learn in a safe environment.”
I, too, believe that students should learn in a safe environment, and thanks to the Court, everybody is closer to that goal@@Do guns around really make you safe? Norway’s police do not carry firearms on their persons at all, and I felt safer there than here.@@.
Sadly, even the editorial board for The Register-Guard seeks the removal of guns on campus. The paper said, “They are antithetical to the whole purpose of education, which involves exchanging ideas, opinions and information in a calm and peaceful setting … and their use would be a poor and sometimes tragic substitute for reasoned discourse.”
Again, I find myself agreeing @@with whom or what?@@that campus should be a place where students not only feel safe, but also are indeed safe. But I also find myself perplexed by the second part of the quote@@Eh? Second what? And where is the first?@@, and ask what scenario could be demonstrated — where if a gun is needed to be used for whatever reason — that reasoned discourse could resolve? Perhaps what makes The Register-Guard piece the most frustrating is their acknowledgment that any criminal will ignore the “no guns allowed” warnings — as they’ve always done — but the use of a weapon in defense of oneself or others is more “rooted in film and TV than in reality.” So because they cannot imagine somebody successfully using a weapon in defense, no one should even have the opportunity@@When in all the campus shootings has someone who had a concealed gun ever used it to make things safer or defend themselves? And if so, how often compared to not?@@? Despite the fact that many people across the nation have done just that both on and off campus?
It is worth acknowledging that campus, though with its risks, is generally pretty safe@@Er…so why would you then want to allow guns on campus?@@; I give credit to both the University and the Department of Public Safety for maintaining the security it has@@I wonder if he realizes here that his whole argument to support concealed handguns was undone by this sentence…@@. This sentiment is rightfully pointed out in The Register-Guard. But thousands of students commute to campus at all hours of the day. If 93 percent of violent crimes committed against college students occur off-campus, isn’t it reasonable for people who do make the commute to campus not be forced to rely solely on chance when making said commute@@What does this have to do with guns?@@?
This need was no more clearly demonstrated than by the recent Temple University student who successfully defended himself by using his legally concealed pistol@@carry pistol?@@ against a 15-year-old robber who shot him mere blocks away from campus@@If this occurred off-campus, then why would you want to bring guns onto campus? Especially if 93 percent of violent crimes occur off-campus?@@. The use and need of these tools is rooted in reality — a sad reality, but a reality nonetheless.
