by David Shane

Created on: May 09, 2008   Last Updated: July 02, 2008

Two salient facts should guide our discussion. First, it is easy for most Americans to obtain a gun. It is legal for most, and we have many examples that show that for the sufficiently determined, even those who cannot obtain a gun legally can probably find a way. Second, college campuses are open environments. Anyone can enter one, and from there, find their way to a classroom.

Our goal, at least the one considered here, is to prevent shootings on college campuses, and minimize the harm to innocent students when they occur. These events take only seconds or minutes - too short a time for any but the most fortunately positioned security officer to respond. So how can we stop them? We know our gun-free zone signs don't stop the shooters, so let's take them down so the law-abiding and good can take a stand against the evil.

Allowing students (and others) to carry guns will have two effects. The first, if it's successful, is never noticed. That is the deterrent effect. Right now a criminal can read "gun-free zone" as "no opposition." Eliminate that zone and they may just change their mind. It is true that many campus shooters have killed themselves as their final act. But the deterrent effect may still stop some.

The second is allowing students to stop a shooting in progress. Consider the recent incident at Northern Illinois University. The shooter fired 50 shots in just a few seconds, wounding or killing 21 students. What could we have done? Glenn Beck, on his March 12, 2008 television show, said "...the guy took the time to reload. All you have to do is get down on one knee, get behind a chair and shoot the guy and stop him." Those few seconds it takes to reload probably won't give police time to arrive, but they are enough time for a prepared student to respond. And even if the shooter doesn't stop to reload, armed students might still be able to stop him.

Would this actually work? Well, history is our best guide, and we know it has before. In 2002 there was a shooting at the Appalachian School of Law. Upon hearing gunfire, Tracy Bridges & Mikael Gross ran to their cars to retrieve their weapons. They returned and confronted the gunman, who then laid down his gun. Perhaps if they had already been armed they could have helped sooner.

So what are the objections to this plan? When I have raised this issue before I have been told that arming students on campus just increases the chance of an accident, or the use of a gun in a sudden rage. I concur that these are valid issues. In answer, I suggest that we do not just let anyone on campus carry a gun. Many states already require classes for individuals wishing to have concealed carry permits. I think students who would like to carry a gun would be happy to pay a similar price. Hopefully this would help insure that the armed students were also responsible and competent. Of course, the only way to know for sure would be to try it at a few schools.

Most students won't want a gun - so be it. A lecture hall could be filled with 50 or 100 students. It only takes one, prepared, to stop an incident. Let's give them that chance.

Learn more about this author, David Shane.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.