Editor:
The same old arguments are being made in support of the U gun ban policy, this time by President Bernie Machen before the Utah state Legislature.
Does Bernie’s rhetoric actually make any logical sense? He makes three claims as a basis for his gun ban argument, but never backs them up with any sort of evidence.
First, Bernie says that “classrooms, libraries, dormitories and cafeterias” are no place for guns. Is this true? Following this logic, couldn’t we also say that “workplaces, supermarkets, gas stations and golf courses” are no place for guns?
People with concealed carry permits have them for one reason: They refuse to be made a victim. Criminals will strike in any location?especially when they know there will be no resistance. Look at violence on school campuses, workplaces and even churches. Until you can argue that “classrooms, libraries, dormitories and cafeterias” are much safer than the rest of the world, you cannot say that the need for self protection does not exist there.
The dangers someone would face walking across campus at night are the same as those they would face walking through their own neighborhood. How can Bernie say that they have the right to protect themselves in one instance but not in the other? Is he guaranteeing that no one will be victimized on campus? He says “college campuses are different.” I say that they’re the same as any other public area.
Bernie’s second claim is that the free expression of ideas and the vigorous debate that accompanies it would be “diminished by concern over who has a gun in his backpack.” Again, is this true? Is there any statistic that justifies this statement from the universities that have no gun ban policy? Are those schools not having classroom debates? My own experience tells me that this is a groundless statement.
Last semester, I never missed a single day of Dr. Martinez’s Ethnic Studies class. The majority of every class period was devoted to students sharing their opinions and personal experiences. There was plenty of controversy and debate, even name calling on one occasion. I am a concealed carry permit holder. Did anyone in the class know about it? I’m certain that not a single person in that class held in their opinion for fear of me. I may have exercised my right to carry every day in that class, and I doubt that it affected anybody’s “free expression of ideas.”
Did I carry everyday?
I’ll just say there’s a 99 percent chance that I never did, but no one knows?nobody even thought about it. That is the point.
Lastly, Bernie says that the majority agree with him. This is yet another piece of rhetoric that he has pulled out of the air. I don’t remember Bernie asking me or anyone else whether or not we agree with him. Put the facts out there about how this ban changes no one’s behavior, about how this ban is illegal and about how it is completely unenforceable, and then see what people’s opinion really is.
If the majority really is in agreement, then fine, but don’t go before the Legislature and pretend that we are all on same side.
Finally, why lock horns with the legislature over this? Is this going to help us in our quest for funding? Several legislators have already made it clear that it could have a huge impact. Don’t you dare waste my taxes or tuition in a court battle that you are going to lose. I refuse to be anybody’s victim. I certainly refuse to be the victim of this administration’s petty power struggle against the law.
James Bergstrom, Graduate Student, Electrical Engineering