Should "Gun Free Zones" be removed from schools/Universities? Should students have the right to carry conceal handguns at their University?

Asked by: Trig314
  • Mass shootings have occurred at 'gun free' zones. It doesn't work.

    We didn't "allow" guns in the theater in Aurora, or at the school in Sandy Hook. The Navy yard doesn't allow concealed carry by legally armed permit holders and neither does Ft. Hood. A gun free zone is just a false sense of security for the anti-gun rights crowd. Why should people that can legally carry a concealed firearm have to disarm in certain places, turning the whole area into a "Helpless Victim" zone?

  • Gun control is stupid

    I've been in situations where there has been gunshot. And in some cases, gun-wielding citizens have actually gotten attackers to drop their weapons by aiming their own weapon at the would-be murderer. Disarming the people of the nation will only leave us defenseless. Also, there's an old saying that goes something like this: "i'ts like shooting kids in a gun-free zone!" this phrase is used most often when someone has done something they find extremely easy to do.

  • It should be the schools choice to remove gun free zones

    Gun free zones do not work. Gun free zones can't stop anyone from carrying a gun they just warn you not to and you could face arrest or a fine. Schools throughout the United States are gun free zones and that didn't stop Columbine, Virginia Tech or the Sandy Hook school shooting's. All in all I believe that gun free zones do absolutely nothing in preventing criminals from bringing guns on a school or college campus.

  • Yes, it is completely irrational to think criminals will obey the sign.

    Anybody wishing to commit a crime or do harm to school probably doesn't care if it is legal or not to carry a firearm to campus. It is also illegal to murder, but that does not stop murderers from killing. Laws/rules don't dictate our morality, because we have what's called free will. Some students may be carrying right now and you aren't even aware because it is concealed and they are not looking for trouble. All statistical evidence used by Educational boards in support of the Gun-Free Zone, has been misinterpreted. Correlation does not equal causation, for example, one of the statistics was that 93% of crimes against students happen outside of campus. It is completely absurd to think that the "gun-free zone" must be the only reason for this. Their are so many other factors that could be causing it. Perhaps most college students tend to not be criminals as much as those outside of campus. And some students spend more time outside of campus then inside. It is completely irrational to think that the gun-free zone is the reason why the statistical evidence is what it is. With all the different factors in play, you cannot pinpoint a causation but you can use some common sense to think what could be the cause of it. Crime rates go up in correlation with ice cream sales, but anybody with a hint of common sense knows that ice cream sales have absolutely nothing to do with crime rates, just like gun-free zones have nothing to do with gun violence rates in schools. All school shootings took place at schools that had the gun-free zone, and so it did not stop the shooter. Whether gun-free zones remain or not, shootings WILL still happen. And the argument that cops may not be able to tell who the shooter is is absurd. It takes cops a couple of minutes to arrive there by which time either a citizen already took care of the shooter, or there was not armed student there and so the shooter can rack up a higher body-count. The largest school shooting in Virginia where 32 people were killed, it took the police 8 minutes to get there after the shooting started. And citizens with permits to carry are actually just as trained as police officers are. Cops seldom shoot(they are required to do some shooting about once a year), where's citizens shoot as a hobby. All in all there's just absolutely nothing about gun-free zones that would make a situation any better than it would be if it wasn't a gun-free zone. No one in their right mind could think that it is a good idea to disarm every good citizen there, and advertise their disarming to the entire country filled with sociopaths. Any statistical evidence you try to use against me, you had better make sure that their could not be any other variable affecting it. Again, correlation does NOT equal causation. Criminals do not follow laws.

  • No change zone

    Gun free zone means no chance zone. It is a humiliating situation for a man to stand against armed attacker with just bare hands, waiting to get shot to death. If there is not available technology that would prevent crazy killers to bring in a weapon, we need to make sure that he will get killed as soon as possible

  • Gun free zones make people vulnerable by inviting criminals into no-risk environments.

    If someone wants to do harm they will do harm. They won't be like "oh i can't go there is a gun-free zone" They'll be like "F--K yea that's an easy target" No one can know what'll exactly happen, but I believe if there's a weapon we can use for defense then there might be a chance for there to be less injuries and deaths in the long run.

  • We need protection in schools,cops are not helpful.

    Guns are really useful when needed like the military,hunting,and the police have guns but nit the schools in america.Teachers should have guns,not the students.Schools in america should let teachers carry guns for protection.Like lock in place drills,if it was real what weapons we can use?,books,pencils,desks,or computers to throw at the intruders. That's all i'm debating.

  • Whatever the education permits.

    If you don't like your schooling to have "Gun Free Zone" signs or class mates to have guns you don't have to be there. I don't think it has to be cut and dry to include a law for all institutions and schools to follow. A free-market can give what the individual wants in an education. Freedom of choice is the best compromise in this case. Personally, I wouldn't like the signs even in a gun free building because they just show the criminals whom to victimize. Regardless, not my decision, let the individual decide.

  • If armed men stop shootings then explain Fort Hood

    No, arming more people is counter-productive. There are plenty of cases that prove that even in a damn military base, armed people can't stop shootings from happening... In fact, you could easily make a case that armed men are the ones who do the shooting in the first place.

    It's all propaganda anyways. Look up school shootings in America and you'll find that BB guns, gang activity and other crime related shootings, which were once called homicide, are now labeled as school shootings. Reason? Fearmongering

  • Place of Learning

    Its a place of learning, not a place where tensions should be high by the presence of Firearms. Fire arms are designed to do one thing : Kill, end the life of, etc.

    Places of learning should stay as places of learning. Not places with nervous students, especially college students who regularly get Drunk that have Firearms, that can only end badly.

  • Schools should be a safe place for education,

    I hate the idea of guns in schools. Even seeing police officers with them scares me. To think that someone has that kind of power over you is horrible. Why carry a gun if there's no real prepose in the first place? It just encourages irrational mistakes, threats, and accidents, not to mention it showcases and promotes violence. The right to bear arms comes from a desire to have defense if ever a corrupt government arises, and yes I agree we should be entitled to that right. However if you chose to participate and learn in a school setting you have to accept the rules they have in place.
    The only argument to the credit of allowing students to have weapons, is that in a shooting they may be able to defend themselves, but even that doesn't work in a logical sense. It's unlikely they would be trained with larger weapons, and as far as concealed weapons go, while they may know a thing or two, they're not qualified to take the law into their own hands, and there would follow some sort of lawsuit and potentially a criminal case to asses the facts and the moral necessity, it would be a big and ugly mess, and that's before the added risk of civilian casualties. Not to mention the shooting event is relatively rare given the frequency weighed against the amount of schools in our country.
    To put it simply, violence shouldn't be encouraged, students should not be given that kind of power, it isn't necessary, and it's simply frightening and unwise.

  • No. This is a terrible idea.

    I'm in favor of trained security guards and police at schools and universities carrying handguns, but not students. There just too much that can go wrong by allowing students to carry weapons on a school campus. Students are under a lot of stress and they can be handed bad grades; I can see the opportunity would a student might take out aggression on his teacher or student for receiving a grade he doesn't approve of. Should the student have a gun when he's alerted of a bad grade, that can add to trouble. Also, guns on campus would lead to accidents, not to mention it might effect the grades a teacher will give to students if he/she's alerted to the fact that they carry weapons in the classroom.

    We don't need the added stress of students carrying guns on school campuses. Leave the guns to trained security officers and policemen and women!

  • 4 4 4

    4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 44 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 edhut i yf uj tru utr du usr ha h hz ysyust us uytz u zjyr suy tugxk uyx utu jyf jj j gutyz yt z6rxux tuyy ts tyyt y tsy tty

  • Oh heck no!

    Allowing people to have guns on campus is like going to Syria and saying go ahead and use chemical weapons. Its asking for more trouble than necessary. There would not just be one kid who brings a gun, starts shooting, and gets killed by one of the guys who brought a concealed weapon because it is now allowed. No, this would turn into full on gang wars between people with more shootouts than ever seen in history. Yes, there may be schools exempt but that IS the analogy for asking for bad things. "Lets put a bunch of people in a certain area and allow all of them to carry concealed weapons." That just SOUNDS bad let alone when it actually happens and half of the school just got killed because no one knew who the one actually trying to kill them is and just start shooting. A bunch of panicking people with guns, one who wants to kill them ad no one knows for sure who it is. Sounds like the mafia game gone real life situation. Now while, yes, it would be nice if people would not panic and not just shoot who they think it might be. The sad reality is that people DO panic and they are human. We can't change that. I consider myself optimistic but you also have to be realistic. This is one of those things where it would be nice if we could but it shouldn't while humans are still imperfect. A good compromise would be to have increased security training, staff, and maybe even build the police stations closer to the schools

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.