My goal with this argument has been to show that violent crimes occur on college campuses and that allowing permit holding students to carry firearms while on campus, just like they do elsewhere, can help prevent those crimes from happening. Throughout this argument, my opponent has twisted facts in an attempt to win this argument, and to take his words at face value may prove to be a dangerous mistake.
In Point 3 of Round 1, my opponent gives this statistic:
"Compared to criminal homicides using guns, the VPC data shows justifiable homicide with a gun in 2010 was a tiny fraction: 230 of them compared to 8,275 criminal gun-related homicides."
He tries to twist these words to say that the 8,275 criminal homicides were committed by concealed carry permit holders when the statistic says no such thing. In 2010, there were 8275 criminal murders that involved a gun. In that same year, 230 people defended themselves with a gun. This statistic says absolutely nothing about concealed carry.
CON claims that I believe the consequence of sexual assault should be death. I simply believe that if a woman is being attacked, she should be able to defend herself with a gun. That does not mean that she has to shoot anyone. In fact, simply seeing a gun will scare away many criminals as seen from my statistic in Round 2. If it comes down to the woman having to shoot her attacker, I believe that she has the right to do so in defense of herself and the law would agree with me.
"To be legally justified in killing an attacker, a rape victim must reasonably believe that the rapist intends to kill or grievously injure her. In many rape situations, the threat of severe physical harm is clear; the rapist is armed or threatens death or grievous injury. Situations where a rapist does not explicitly or implicitly threaten physical harm beyond forcible intercourse are less clear regarding the victim's right to use deadly force against the rapist. Current law does not clearly articulate a basis for the right to use deadly self-defense when a person reasonably believes that harm will be limited to forcible intercourse. One factor which can justify the use of deadly force against a rapist who does not threaten the victim with death or grievous physical harm is the high frequency of murder and serious injury incident to rape. This could properly lead any rape victim to assume that her life and health are in serious danger. A second factor that could justify the use of deadly force is the high rate of physical injury and psychological trauma attending rape. The threat of venereal disease, an unwanted pregnancy, and psychological debilitation can be taken together as a threat of serious harm. Overall, rape can be viewed as a grievous physical and psychological attack that may be resisted by any and all means"
While the citation for CON's argument against the validity of rape statistics leads nowhere, I would still like to address his idea that one woman being able to defend herself against a rapist should be prohibited due to his fear of guns. My 25% statistic was a completely different statistic than the one he tried to disprove. My statistic said nothing about 1 in 4 women being raped throughout her lifetime and did not come from a feminist. My source was the US Department of Education and it said that if there are 100 crimes on a college campus, it is likely that 25 of them will be rapes. He is trying to discredit a statistic that I did not provide.
Now let's look at violent crimes on college campuses. College campuses are not immune to crime. Just last year, Florida State University was attacked by an armed man. Here are some numbers provided by the FBI about crimes in schools (not just colleges). Between 2000 and 2005, there were 67,597 violent "crimes against persons" to include assault, rape, and murder.  According to collegeparents.org, "Students aged 18 to 24 report about 526,000 violent crimes each year, according to the Violent Victimization of College Students report. Of those, 128,000 'involved a weapon or serious injury to the victim.'" The same site provides that 5.8% of female students had reported being raped between 2003 and 2004.
It is clear that violent crimes do occur on college campuses, but can concealed carry stop them? "Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home." "States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%."  Here are some instances of concealed carry permit holders defending themselves:
"Arizona, October 16, 2008
A University of Arizona student shoots two intruders in self-defense.
South Carolina, August 9, 2008
A Citadel military school student successfully scares off a bat-wielding road rage driver by brandishing a handgun in self-defense.
Michigan, January 20, 2008
A University of Michigan student shoots and kills two intruders in self-defense.
Utah, September 18, 2007
A Utah Valley State College licensed to carry a concealed weapon shot a pit bull that was attacking him. The animal survived the shooting, and at the student"s request, no charges were filed against the dog"s owner.
California, April 25, 2007
University of Southern California students overpowered a man, taking away his firearm and holding him at gunpoint for police. The man had become violent and threatening towards a female at a student party and refused to leave.
Ohio, April 24, 2007
After a man demanded entry to a University of Akron student"s apartment and threatened him with a gun, the student returned fire with a roommate"s gun. The suspect then fled the scene.
Texas, January 25, 2007
A Texas Tech student with a concealed carry permit grabbed his gun and hid when he heard someone trying to break in to his house. When the perpetrators successfully gained entry, the student took aim at the intruders. One fled, the other was detained for police.
Texas, January 24, 2007
A Texas Tech student with a concealed carry permit returned home to find his car and home broken into, with the perpetrators still inside the house. The student fired two warning shots, causing the would-be thieves to flee.
Florida, September 8, 2006
Two South Florida Community College students were attacked outside their apartment, but one used a .45 handgun to shoot one of the attackers in the chest. The other fled.
Virginia, December 10, 2005
A Virginia Commonwealth University student was initially charged with murder after shooting an armed gang member in a confrontation outside a coin laundry business, but was cleared by authorities two months later when it was learned he acted in self-defense.
Georgia, September 19, 2005
After dialing 911, a Mercer University School of Law student shot and killed a man that had broken into his home.
Kentucky, May 2, 2005
A University of Kentucky student was cleared of wrongdoing after shooting a Louisville man who was robbing him outside a Lexington apartment complex." 
If any doubt still exists, examine this article from Students for Concealed Carry http://concealedcampus.org...
I hope that I have been able to accurately present the need to allow students to carry concealed weapons while on campus. This is truly an important concept to consider. Will concealed carry allow students to defend themselves in the face of a violent criminal?
My opponent's beliefs
PRO: "If it comes down to the woman having to shoot her attacker, I believe that she has the right to do so in defense of herself and the law would agree with me."
I ask my opponent: in what kind of scenario does a man or woman 'have to'
shoot his/her attacker? Ultimately, it comes down to individual subjective judgment. Let's take a look at the spiel on rape I presented in round 1. Most cases of confessed rape were not actually cases of rape, but the women who made the claims supporting the 1 in 4 statistics claim otherwise. Consider this: you're making out with a woman and you're getting it on quite nicely. You decide that it's time to hit home base. However, the moment you make your move, the woman pulls out a gun, calls you a rapist, and makes you leave. You decide not to leave, and she shoots you in the head. She had to right? Otherwise he wouldn't leave? Later she can claim that he tried to rape her as is conducive to the false rape statistic. Isn't that just ridiculous?
Crimes on college campuses:
My opponent declares that his goal with the college campus statistic is to show that violent crimes do happen on college campuses. However, he neglects that the statistic also covers the fact that violent crimes happen everywhere and that they occur less often
on college campuses. It is this lessened frequency which shows that prohibitions on concealed carry works.
My opponent's argument is this: crimes exist on college campuses and permitting concealed carry will solve that problem. That's quite an assertion. How does my opponent know that permitting concealed carry won't actually increase
the rate of crime? Don't college campuses' low
crime rate actually prove that not having concealed carry actually decreases
the rate of crime? Less guns around means less guns being shot, and statistics clearly corroborate this. College campuses are some of the safest
places in the world and is a clear case in which a community with no conealed carry laws have lower crime rates.The under 9000:
Let us revisit this statistic of homicide versus justified homicide. Of the about 8300 gun-related homicides in the year 2010, only 200 were considered justified homicides with the other 8000 are considered criminal. My opponent counters by saying that the 230 cases of justified self-defense fire negates the 8000 criminal homicides and justifies concealed gun carry. My opponent then goes on to say that the 8000 criminal homicides were not committed by concealed gun permit owners.
Let me this around and ask: how does my opponent know that the 8000 weren't concealed gun permit owners. In 2012, James Eagan Holmes shot and killed 12 people at a theater in Colorado. The firearms he used were legally purchased and possessed.
An even better question: how does my opponent know that the 230 justified killers were concealed gun permit owners? If these 230 aren't concealed permit owners, how does my opponent justify using these 230 to justify concealed carry laws? 230 bad guys were put under the dirt, but 8045 innocent people lie with them.
The statistic shows that 97.2%
(8045/8275) of self defense homicide, permit or not, are going to be criminal
.Statistics on Crimes in college:
Again, 93% of crimes on college students occur off
Most of the cases cited in my opponent's case are cases of offcampus defense, and only a few of them mention concealed carry permit holders.
I would like to point out this case in particular:
"University of Southern California students overpowered a man, taking away his firearm and holding him at gunpoint for police. The man had become violent and threatening towards a female at a student party and refused to leave."
Consider this: What if this case were reversed? What if the students were the ones threatening the female and refusing to leave and the man was the one with the firearm trying to deter such behavior? In this case, the students' overpowering the man would be a terrible thing. The likelihood of such a thing occurring increases with each gun owner added to the pool of gun owners.
I would like to point out the distinction between a student having prevented a crime and a student having prevented a crime on college campuses.
Recall that this debate is about concealed carry on college campuses
, not off
college campuses. I posit that the statistics on violent crime provided by my opponent in this last round would be reduced if guns were banned and not
the other way around as my opponent seems to be saying. My opponent has provided no evidence whatsoever
that the total
rate of crime would be reduced with concealed carry laws. Again, college campuses' being statistically more crime free than almost any other environment in the world clearly
shows that not
having concealed carry laws is correlated with reduced crime. Again, less guns overall means less gun-related crime. PRO:"While college campuses usually have lower crime rates, they are not crime free."
Nowhere in the world is crime free. My opponent seems to be claiming that concealed carry laws would make college campuses completely free of crime. Again, there is no evidence whatsoever that having concealed gun laws would magically remove the existence of all crime. There's no such thing as crime-free. In fact, I posit that concealed guns are the cause
of a number of crimes and that not
having concealed gun laws lowers crime and not vice verse as evident of the relatively low crime rate on college campuses.Summary
I hope that I have shown that college campuses do not need conceal carry laws and do not need to carry weapons while on campus. While a few cases of gun use may be justified, we have to remember that most are not. I must also point to the fact that this debate pertains specifically to concealed carry on college campuses. I have succinctly shown that college campuses have lower crime rates without concealed carry laws. I believe that is sufficient in negating the resolution.
"the U.S. has the best-armed civilian population in the world, with an estimated 270 million total guns."
The real question is, what portion of the concealed carry population will commit a violent crime?