Lets review the argument for allowing people to carry concealed firearms on college campuses.
A Cronkite/Eight poll released by ASU professor Bruce Merrill showed that 73 percent of registered Arizona voters objected to the idea of concealed-weapons carriers bringing guns on campus. At the Judiciary Committee hearing, the ASU, UA and NAU police chiefs testified in opposition to the bill. Allowing concealed carry on campus would add confusion to an active shooter situation and make it difficult for police to do their job, the police chiefs said.
Though Students for Concealed Carry on Campus supports concealed carry on the campuses of both public and private colleges, we strongly support the rights of private property owners; therefore, we believe that the issue of concealed carry at private colleges must be handled through negotiations with school administrators, rather than through state legislation. However, SCCC supports state laws that grant private schools and other businesses immunity from liability for the actions of concealed handgun license holders.
SCCC supports the legalization of CONCEALED carry by LICENSED individuals on COLLEGE campuses. SCCC has no official position on open carry, unlicensed concealed carry, or concealed carry on the campuses of primary or secondary schools.
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is not affiliated with the NRA, a political party, or any other organization.
Argument: "The last thing we need is a bunch of vigilantes getting into a shootout with a madman, particularly since it's been proven that trained police officers have an accuracy rate of only about 15%, in the field."
Answer: "Citizens with concealed handgun licenses are not vigilantes. They carry their concealed handguns as a means of getting themselves out of harm's way, not as an excuse to go chasing after bad guys. Whereas police shooting statistics involve scenarios such as pursuits down dark alleys and armed standoffs with assailants barricaded inside buildings, most civilian shootings happen at pointblank range. In the Luby's Cafeteria massacre, the Columbine High School massacre, and the Virginia Tech massacre, the assailants moved slowly and methodically, shooting their victims from pointblank range. A person doesn't have to be a deadeye shot to defend himself or herself against an assailant standing only a few feet away. It is highly unlikely that an exchange of gunfire between an armed citizen and a deranged killer would lead to more lives lost than would simply allowing an onslaught of execution-style murders to continue unchecked. Contrary to what the movies might have us believe, most real-world shootouts last less than ten seconds*. Even the real Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, a shootout involving nine armed participants, lasted only about thirty seconds and ended with only three of the participants being killed. It is unlikely that an exchange of gunfire between an armed assailant and an armed citizen would last more than a couple of seconds before one or both parties were disabled. And if the assailant were disabled, he would be unable to do any more harm."
"I think our job is difficult enough," ASU Police Chief John Pickens told the committee last Monday. "I don't believe that more weapons on campus is the solution."
I personally feel that having more weapons increases the potential for violence and that it would result in a greater loss of life. I should hope that an incident involving firearms does not happen again.
It just so happens that the grand old party is supporting this under the presumption of preserving state's rights. Those dastardly devils.