Given the recent shootings in Connecticut and Colorado, it is no wonder that gun control has become such a debated topic.
The federal and state governments are contemplating how best to proceed with legislation. According to a Jan. 4 Austin American-Statesman article, Texas Senate officials confirmed they would consider a proposal to provide school employees with state-sponsored handgun licenses and special training so they can protect students in case of potential active shooters.
Guns are not at the root of the shootings — a gun cannot fire itself. Moreover, guns are not the solution to violence. They create more problems.
Were money not a problem, the state could experiment with a number of crime prevention options. But as the American-Statesman reported Jan. 7, the chief financial officer of the Texas Education Agency petitioned a district judge for $1 billion, which indicates more pressing needs in the education budget and a lack of better options.
Instead of training educators, who are likely to have little or no experience with guns, the state should hire police officers, whose sole purpose is to protect and serve. Educators have too much on their minds to have to worry about entering into armed conflicts as well.
One other thing to think about: Although the shootings thus far have been committed mostly by students, that does not mean teachers cannot become perpetrators.
It is nice to think educators chose their profession because they love students and love giving them a fine education. However, educators are people.
An over-stressed teacher could have a psychotic breakdown, take his state-issued gun from his desk and commit horrendous acts. Arming educators may be a preventative measure, but it spreads paranoia, which can lead to irrational thoughts, itchy trigger fingers and terrible accidents.
The proposal does not take into account that by removing the gun-free status from schools, the proposition essentially allows anyone to take a gun to campus.
According to the National Rifle Association’s website, Texas residents do not need a permit to own a gun, nor do they need to register it. A license is not needed to carry a shotgun or rifle — only bearing handguns necessitates a Concealed Handgun License.
Anyone with a state ID who is at least 21 years old can obtain a CHL, buy a gun and bring the gun on campus, unless the proposed law allowing teachers to bear arms explicitly prohibits students from doing so.
If teachers have handguns, would-be shooters will bring more powerful guns. Scott Oliver, who owns Creekwood Shooting Sports in Conroe with his wife,
“The most powerful weapon a civilian can own is a .50-caliber rifle,” said Scott Oliver, who owns Creekwood Shooting Sports in Conroe with his wife. “The fact that a civilian over the age of 18 can own such a powerful weapon is frightening.”
Though the intentions behind the possible legislation may be noble, there is too much that could go wrong. More weapons on the streets is not the solution.
Rather than spend time and funds training educators, government officials should look at the underlying reasons for the shootings. State gun laws are not restrictive enough.
Potential murderers will not likely follow the law anyway.
Mónica Rojas is a journalism freshman and may be reached at [email protected].
Arming teachers may not be the answer but certainly it makes sense to have at least an armed security person on each campus.
Listen, I understand that this is an opinion article, but I feel like even opinion articles need to be factually based. First and foremost, the calibre of ammunition used has little to do with the potential stopping power of the gun. For instance, a smaller bullet size such as a .380 or 9mm will kill someone just as dead as a .50 calibre in the same amount of time. The difference is that the smaller ammunition handguns are easier to to conceal and use in tight spaces (like schools, for instance). If you’re going to make an issue out of gun control, at least take a stance that makes a remote bit of sense. Rifles aren’t the (potential) problem; handguns are. Don’t believe me? Check the facts:
2007-2011 Total Homicides by Weapon Used:
Handguns: 33,034
Knives or cutting instruments: 8,922
Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.): 4,058
Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.): 2,918
Shotguns: 2,044
Rifles: 1,874
(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8)
—-
Also, as you will see from the data below, as firearm sales increase, gun homicides decrease.
Total Number of Firearm Homicides in the US:
2007: 10,129
2008: 9,528 (down 5.93% from the previous year)
2009: 9,199 (down 3.45% from the previous year)
2010: 8,874 (down 3.53% from the previous year)
2011: 8,583 (down 3.27% from the previous year)
Number of NICS Background Checks (a good indicator of whether firearm sales are increasing or decreasing nationally from year to year):
2007: 11,177,335
2008: 12,709,023 (up 13.70% from the previous year)
2009: 14,033,824 (up 10.42% from the previous year)
2010: 14,409,616 (up 2.67% from the previous year)
2011: 16,454,951 (up 14.19% from the previous year)
(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130102_1998_2012_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf)
—-
In Virginia:
“The total number of firearms purchased in Virginia increased 73 percent from 2006 to 2011. When state population increases are factored in, gun purchases per 100,000 Virginians rose 63 percent.
But the total number of gun-related violent crimes fell 24 percent over that period, and when adjusted for population, gun-related offenses dropped more than 27 percent, from 79 crimes per 100,000 in 2006 to 57 crimes in 2011.
…
The estimated number of gun purchases based on requested background checks rose from 243,251 in 2006 to a record-breaking 420,829 sales last year, according to gun-dealer transaction data compiled by state police through background checks. Over that same period, the total number of violent crimes in Virginia dropped from 23,431 offenses in 2006 to 18,196 in 2011.”
(http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/local/central-virginia/gun-related-violent-crimes-drop-as-gun-sales-soar-in/article_54cca13a-35ee-11e2-83f0-0019bb30f31a.html)
—-
In California:
Number of Firearm Homicides:
2005: 1,845
2006: 1,821 (down 1.30% from the previous year)
2007: 1,610 (down 11.58% from the previous year)
2008: 1,487 (down 7.63% from the previous year)
2009: 1,359 (down 8.60% from the previous year)
2010: 1,255 (down 7.65% from the previous year)
2011: 1,220 (down 2.78% from the previous year)
Gun Sales:
2005: 344,847
2006: 375,573 (up 8.91% from the previous year)
2007: 370,628 (down 1.31% from the previous year)
2008: 425,244 (up 14.73% from the previous year)
2009: 483,872 (up 13.78% from the previous year)
2010: 498,945 (up 3.11% from the previous year)
2011: 601,243 (up 20.50% from the previous year)
(http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/dros_chart.pdf?
http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/cjsc/publications/homicide/hm10/preface.pdf
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20)
—-
As you can probably now see, the statistics tend to show that gun control is actually NOT the answer. Criminals, generally speaking, don’t like it when their would-be victims shoot back, as evidenced in Kennesaw, Georgia. In Kennesaw, there is a city ordinance requiring the ownership of a firearm in every household. Since its inception in 1982, the city crime rate has gone from slightly above the national average to one of the lowest crime rates in the nation, with most of that change happening in the first few years following the ordinance.
(http://www.wnd.com/2007/04/41196/)
—-
So, now that we’re working with real life data (over the course of many years, both internationally and specifically) instead of theoretical speculation, we can see that increased gun ownership actually decreases the violent crime rate, across the board.
I think sports commentators would say…..BOOM!!!!
Starting with the title this opinion piece is lacking logic and reason. So, allowing teachers (who have a CHL) to carry on campus, to protect themselves and others, is a “license to kill”??? No, what meets that definition is an unarmed group of victims (students and faculty) up against some armed crazy nut-job who doesn’t give a dang about breaking some silly “gun free zone” law, or any other law, including murder. Actually, I’d call that scenario a “legislated slaughter of defenseless innocents.”
“Arming teachers will lead to paranoia” What kind of logic is that? There are hundreds of thousands, sane, law abiding CHL citizens walking amongst you everyday in the state of Texas (except at “gun free zones” like UH). I Haven’t noticed any wide spread paranoia, or CHL’s “committing horrendous acts”, have you?
Um, you make it sound like it’s no problem to walk down the street with a loaded rifle in the state of Texas, and “anyone” can obtain a CHL, which both are untrue. Carrying a loaded rifle in Houston would most likely get you arrested for disorderly conduct at a minimum and possibly even accidentally killed by some over zealous cop responding to the call. With regards to CHL, while it’s not overly difficult for LAW ABIDING citizens, who can prove proficiency in the states firearms laws, and firearm use, (via a written and shooting exam) to obtain a CHL, there is a list of disqualifiers, including having ever been arrested (incl DUI), mentally unstable, having ever been chemically dependent (alcohol,drugs, Rx) not paying child support, etc. You also have to pass a full FBI/state/local background check w/ fingerprinting, etc. Many citizens are not eligible to obtain a CHL in Texas, especially if they have ANY record of having been arrested. Basically, you need to be a law abiding good citizen, which sadly, many today can’t meet that definition. Criminals, thugs, gang members, wacko nut-jobs etc, don’t follow these laws and carry illegally.
I’d like to reiterate my comment above….BOOM!
I would like to see Mónica weigh in on this, in light of the comments…
Doubt that’ll happen. Like many of the opinion and editorial pieces in the Daily Coog, she got her platform (print version) to spread her ill-informed opinion as fact. They’re not interested in facts, logic, or reason, otherwise they would’ve done some research beforehand, which is sad since this is a University paper.
I eagerly awaiting for the further demise of the printed page if niave people like Monica call for an all powerful government in charge of unarmed citizens.