Guns Don't Belong - Chronicle of Higher Education

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZeSpectre

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
5,502
Location
Deep in the valley
Guns Don't Belong in the Hands of Administrators, Professors, or Students

Chronicle of Higher Education
From the issue dated April 18, 2008

Guns Don't Belong in the Hands of Administrators, Professors, or Students
By JESUS M. VILLAHERMOSA JR.

In the wake of the shootings at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University, a number of state legislatures are considering bills that would allow people to carry concealed weapons on college campuses. I recently spoke at a conference on higher-education law, sponsored by Stetson University and the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, at which campus officials discussed the need to exempt colleges from laws that let private citizens carry firearms, and to protect such exemptions where they exist. I agree that allowing guns on campuses will create problems, not solve them.

I have been a deputy sheriff for more than 26 years and was the first certified master defensive-tactics instructor for law-enforcement personnel in the state of Washington. In addition, I have been a firearms instructor and for several decades have served on my county sheriff's SWAT team, where I am now point man on the entry team. Given my extensive experience dealing with violence in the workplace and at schools and colleges, I do not think professors and administrators, let alone students, should carry guns.

Some faculty and staff members may be capable of learning to be good shots in stressful situations, but most of them probably wouldn't practice their firearms skills enough to become confident during an actual shooting. Unless they practiced those skills constantly, there would be a high risk that when a shooting situation actually occurred, they would miss the assailant. That would leave great potential for a bullet to strike a student or another innocent bystander. Such professors and administrators could be imprisoned for manslaughter for recklessly endangering the lives of others during a crisis.

Although some of the legislative bills have been defeated, they may be reintroduced, or other states may introduce similar measures. Thus, colleges should at least contemplate the possibility of having armed faculty and staff members on their campuses, and ask themselves the following questions:


Is our institution prepared to assume the liability that accompanies the lethal threat of carrying or using weapons? Are we financially able and willing to drastically increase our liability-insurance premium to cover all of the legal ramifications involved with allowing faculty and staff members to carry firearms?

How much time will each faculty and staff member be given each year to spend on a firing range to practice shooting skills? Will we pay them for that time?

Will their training include exposing them to a great amount of stress in order to simulate a real-life shooting situation, like the training that police officers go through?

Will the firearm that each one carries be on his or her person during the day? If so, will faculty and staff members be given extensive defensive-tactics training, so that they can retain their firearm if someone tries to disarm them?

The fact that a college allows people to have firearms could be publicized and, under public-disclosure laws, the institution could be required to notify the general public which faculty or staff members are carrying them. Will those individuals accept the risk of being targeted by a violent student or adult who wants to neutralize the threat and possibly obtain their weapons?

If the firearms are not carried by faculty and staff members every day, where and how will those weapons be secured, so that they do not fall into the wrong hands?

If the firearms are locked up, how will faculty and staff members gain access to them in time to be effective if a shooting actually occurs?

Will faculty and staff members who carry firearms be required to be in excellent physical shape, and stay that way, in case they need to fight someone for their gun?

Will weapons-carrying faculty and staff members accept that they may be shot by law-enforcement officers who mistake them for the shooter? (All the responding officers see is a person with a gun. If you are even close to matching the suspect's description, the risk is high that they may shoot you.)

Will faculty and staff members be prepared to kill another person, someone who may be as young as a teenager?

Will faculty and staff members be prepared for the possibility that they may miss their target (which has occurred even in police shootings) and wound or kill an innocent bystander?

Will faculty and staff members be ready to face imprisonment for manslaughter, depending on their states' criminal statutes, if one of their bullets does, in fact, strike an innocent person?

Even if not criminally charged, would such faculty and staff members be prepared to be the focus of a civil lawsuit, both as a professional working for the institution and as an individual, thereby exposing their personal assets?

If any of us in the law-enforcement field were asked these questions, we could answer them all with absolute confidence. We have made a commitment to train relentlessly and to die, if we have to, in order to protect others. Experienced officers have typically fired tens of thousands of rounds practicing for the time when they might need those skills to save themselves or someone else during a lethal situation. We take that commitment seriously. Before legislators and college leaders make the decision to put a gun in the hands of a professor or administrator, they should be certain they take it seriously, too.

Jesus M. Villahermosa Jr. is founder of Crisis Reality Training, a consulting firm that specializes in issues of college, school, and workplace violence, and a former director of campus safety at Pacific Lutheran University.

Now am I the only one who notices that most of his "warnings" against allowing folks to carry are concerned with how much money it -could- cost a school/college/university?

Interesting in a "money vs. safety" kinda way and doubly interesting given the recent settlement for Virginia Tech (a school that did it Villahermosa's way) is costing the Virginia taxpayers about 11 MILLION dollars!
 
Well, here is at least one small college that is taking a small step in the right direction.

GRAND RAPIDS (NEWSCHANNEL 3) - A new campus safety effort at Calvin College will put guns in the hands of some staff members.

It's part of the school's new Use of Force policy.

The director of campus safety says arming his staff will make everyone on campus safer.

When the policy takes hold this fall only select supervisors will be authorized to carry a weapon.

They'll go through regular testing and background checks.
http://www.wwmt.com/news/campus_1348508___article.html/members_staff.html
 
How much time will each faculty and staff member be given each year to spend on a firing range to practice shooting skills? Will we pay them for that time?

Will their training include exposing them to a great amount of stress in order to simulate a real-life shooting situation, like the training that police officers go through?

Will the firearm that each one carries be on his or her person during the day? If so, will faculty and staff members be given extensive defensive-tactics training, so that they can retain their firearm if someone tries to disarm them?

Hmm... How much time did your officers spend on the range each week?

How often did they have "stressful situations" training?

How often did they have to wrestle for their CONCEALED GUNS?


How often do campus police have any of this training?

How soon do officers get to the scene?


So, in cost/benefit analysis: It's better to have the shooter shooting away, murdering as many as he can without worry about someone shooting back RATHER THAN have someone shooting back that MIGHT hit another innocent.



So, my last question: HOW STUPID ARE THESE PEOPLE? HOW DO WE LET SUCH STUPID PEOPLE INTO LAW ENFORCEMENT?
 
Seems to be the same old elitist BS backed up by nothing but fallacious arguments(ad verecundiam, ad baculum, and of course the various straw mans).



Is our institution prepared to assume the liability that accompanies the lethal threat of carrying or using weapons? Are we financially able and willing to drastically increase our liability-insurance premium to cover all of the legal ramifications involved with allowing faculty and staff members to carry firearms?

You're getting sued if a shooting happens no matter what your policy is (VT got sued).

How much time will each faculty and staff member be given each year to spend on a firing range to practice shooting skills? Will we pay them for that time?


While special and regular training is preferable, having an armed defender with no such training there if a shooting should occur is preferable to leaving everyone defenseless. *

Will their training include exposing them to a great amount of stress in order to simulate a real-life shooting situation, like the training that police officers go through?

* See above

Will the firearm that each one carries be on his or her person during the day? If so, will faculty and staff members be given extensive defensive-tactics training, so that they can retain their firearm if someone tries to disarm them?

* See above.

The fact that a college allows people to have firearms could be publicized and, under public-disclosure laws, the institution could be required to notify the general public which faculty or staff members are carrying them. Will those individuals accept the risk of being targeted by a violent student or adult who wants to neutralize the threat and possibly obtain their weapons?


Not in every state, and I'm not aware of any cases in any of the states where it would be possible where a CCW permit holder faced such a nightmare scenario.

If the firearms are not carried by faculty and staff members every day, where and how will those weapons be secured, so that they do not fall into the wrong hands?


Uh... at home/locked in the car?

Will faculty and staff members who carry firearms be required to be in excellent physical shape, and stay that way, in case they need to fight someone for their gun?

Statistics? I'm willing to bet the mortgage that far more cops(per capita per year) have had their duty weapon taken in such a fashion than people carrying CONCEALED.

Will weapons-carrying faculty and staff members accept that they may be shot by law-enforcement officers who mistake them for the shooter? (All the responding officers see is a person with a gun. If you are even close to matching the suspect's description, the risk is high that they may shoot you.)

But I thought cops are all seeing all knowing super heroes?!?! :confused:

Sarcasm aside, the shooting would be over before the cops even got there/went into the building.

Will faculty and staff members be prepared to kill another person, someone who may be as young as a teenager?

and in the process save the lives of God knows how many other students and their own lives? Hell yes.

Will faculty and staff members be prepared for the possibility that they may miss their target (which has occurred even in police shootings) and wound or kill an innocent bystander?


Better than letting them get lined up against a wall to wait for the firing pin to hit the primer.

Will faculty and staff members be ready to face imprisonment for manslaughter, depending on their states' criminal statutes, if one of their bullets does, in fact, strike an innocent person?

Better than being dead, and letting the shooter take out God knows how many other students.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I couldn't resist on this one... I could care less of his opinion of my letter to him.


My letter to Jesus:
OH, another elite expert know it all that knows what is best for everybody else...

The definitive master class gun handler point man that is tactically qualified to tell us ordinary mortals that we have no right to self-defense.

That we will be better off pretending we are invisible while a madman would wander from room to room exterminating all that he passes by.

No Thanks Mr expert! keep your opinions to yourself please!
 
I would suggest we write informed, polite letters to the poster about how illogical, immoral and dangerous his position is:

[email protected]
Phone: 253.381.0505
Fax: 253.853.6499

PO Box 64381
University Place, WA 98464
 
I like his opinion that because I don't have the training he does I can't possibly defend myself. If he can't drive a stock car as fast as a professional he should take the bus.
 
Well...if Mr. Villerahermosa can absolutely GUARANTEE my safety or the safety of my children, then I guess I can go along with him. Since he CAN'T, then I guess his opinion is just a load of crap.

Amazing how he steps right up to disarm citizens and stir the pot about security issues when he has a side business "consulting" on such issues.
 
i don't understand why it's some sort of formalism, some legally binding, bureaucratic institution that must be instated to have *some* guns on a campus.

the whole point is THOSE WHO WISH TO, MAY or WILL.

that solves the problems of people who want/need training, those who need to be in shape (yeah, cuz all cops are in shape). it covers the "fear" of killing someone else to save others etc. if there is ever a situation where a carrier doesn't or can't shoot the assailant, they're still free to abstain no? WHY IS IT OBLIGATORY, why are they trying to make it such that the faculty then MUST protect and MUST meet some "standard." that's called a secuirty officer.

anyone know what a good samaritan law is? it's if you stop to aid someone in danger you can DO NO LEGAL WRONG (unless you actually do something illegal). if they die in your arms while you were TRYING, you won't go to jail.

if anyone wants to abstain from carrying, they may and DO.

if someone wants to take the own security into their own hands, WHY ARE YOU OBSTRUCTING THEM?
 
I always enjoy how they skip over the fact that none of their rediculous hypothetical scenarios come to pass other places people can carry concealed. They also try to create the impression that someone is just going to show up with a big box of guns and start handing them out at the nearest frat party.
 
Knowing the liberal bent of most administrators and professors at liberal arts universities I have to agree that most of them do not need a gun. However, each indidvidual should be able to make that decision for himself not have it chosen for them. Students would be more likely to be the ones that would carry and practise.
 
All the arguments against concealed carry on campus are the same arguments that were used against concealed carry generally.
 
We have made a commitment to train relentlessly and to die, if we have to, in order to protect others.

i thought they were not obligated to put themselves (cops) in danger to save us???
 
Sent my comments to him

some of the hi-points

Your ascertation that normal people would be highly likely to strike another innocent, while possible is certainly not as bad as the actual risks of having an armed assailant loose amoung an un-armed groups of potential victims. 32 dead at Va Tech, when a single armed individual brought a gun into a gun free zone! A second armed individual certainly could have stopped or at the very least lessoned the impact of that first crazed attacker. Your "entry team's" track record is that you do NOT save anyone at these school shootings, you merely arrive and clean up the mess after the fact! The problem with these "gun free zones" is that they only work for individuals who plan to obey the law to start with!

You see a problem with allowing people to defend themselves, but sir, the problem is NOT with putting guns in the hands of responsible honest citizens, and teachers, the problem is with taking them OUT of the hands of those same individuals!

Can you guarantee that you will be there to STOP the individual before he strikes? If not then you and those responsible for disarming any who might otherwise be armed are also complicit in thier injuries and deaths.
 
Will weapons-carrying faculty and staff members accept that they may be shot by law-enforcement officers who mistake them for the shooter? (All the responding officers see is a person with a gun. If you are even close to matching the suspect's description, the risk is high that they may shoot you.)

Risk I'm willing to take. In fact...every single argument he poses is a risk I'm willing to take, if it means we can make the choices we see fit to protect ourselves.
 
Now am I the only one who notices that most of his "warnings" against allowing folks to carry are concerned with how much money it -could- cost a school/college/university?
Which is why we should encourage the victims and survivors of victims to sue -- taking away the rights and means of self-defense left the victims helpless, and the university must pay.
 
I am convinced that university policies re: an active shooter are all about managing the outcome of litigation, not the outcome of the shooting incident. The press release that NIU had in which they stated how well their "plan" worked is a perfect example. The spokesperson went on and on about how well the "plan" was implemented, but the reality is that it didn't accomplish a damn thing to limit casualties.
 
Apparently Mr. Villahermosa is the only person in the room professional enough to handle a firearm...?

College students with ample free time won't go to the range and become proficient, no way... They won't get excited about possibly taking a tactical course over spring break, noooo... Certainly they won't research the subject, train, and make an informed decision.

As for faculty, the culture in academia is generally so anti-gun that very few will take up a weapon anyway.

This is why we can't rest...


gp911
 
That's why the victims or their survivors should sue the university for denying their civil rights, denying them the means of self defense, and failing to protect them. Make them pay.
 
College students won't take the time? That's funny -- when I was in college I spent about 10 hours per week practicing with my handguns, much of it on the school's firing range. While it wasn't tactical/force-on-force practice, I have no doubts that I would have been better off having access to a firearm than being unarmed.

I agree with the poster who noted that these arguments are the same ones that were trotted out in opposition to "shall issue" concealed carry. I have yet to see blood running in the streets.
 
Interesting, Mr. Villahermosa's opinion is the dominant one in the "security community" these days. I hope y'all have noticed that in the last decade and especially since 9-11, private security firms and consultants have been growing like weeds in the springtime. Lot of money to be made there. They often have the shared opinion that security should be left to "professionals". They often paint a picture of potential threats, so grave and immediate, that their services are absolutely required.

Why should a college have any policy on this at all? Now I can see the wisdom in elementary school and high school of having a no guns policy. The children and youth are minors with no legal right to carry.

A college is attended by adults (mostly that is), why is it the business of the school what a person has in their bag or under their shirt? They have no more liability than does a restaurant owner, a parking lot in the mall, or a theatre. The individual with the legal right to carry has the liability and should accept it. They are liable for their actions. A university needs no policy on this matter anymore than the local Denny's does.

tipoc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top