Last semester began with the tragedy of the theater shooting in Colorado, and ended with another in Newtown, Conn. Obama and Biden have now promised to take action against the recent outburst of gun violence across the country. While the debate has been politically charged, looking at the issue through the eyes of a student rather than a politician offers a different perspective.
There has been talk of placing an armed guard at the front of many elementary schools and high schools. Even locally, the city of Birmingham, Ala., has discussed implementing this idea in 11 of its schools in the Shelby County area. But what does this policy look like for colleges and universities? Given the number of buildings on a university campus, it would be impossible, both physically and financially, to place an officer at every building.
College campuses have been targets in the past for gun violence, most notably the shooting at Virginia Tech in 2007. Since then, some schools have taken steps to ensure that a situation of that caliber does not happen at their location and that the students feel safe to carry on with their own campus life.
Of the 50 states, 49 have concealed weapons laws. Twenty-one states specifically ban carrying concealed weapons on college campuses, while only five states allow concealed weapons on public college campuses. Alabama does not fall under either of these categories, but instead allows each college or university to decide its own gun policies.
The University of Alabama’s student handbook states, “Possession of firearms, ammunition and weapons by students is not allowed on campus. The University of Alabama Police Department will register and store guns for students.” The “gun-free” campus policy’s focus is to keep the violence out, but it also keeps responsible citizens from arming themselves for self-defense, since someone with a violent intent will ignore this rule.
Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., was undoubtedly a gun-free school, but that did not stop the gun violence from happening. Since the shooting, school administrators have discussed the possibility of closing the school building. Some feel the tragedy that occurred there would be too much to return to, with the school acting as a current reminder of the fears and insecurities that remain at the loss of their fellow students and teachers.
Yet, others propose to follow in the footsteps of Columbine High School and Virginia Tech by renovating the school to turn the specific area of violence within the building into a type of memorial, allowing students to remain together in the school while also honoring those lost.
While the loss is great, the comeback must be greater. Schools and universities everywhere must not be willing to let the memory and threat of violence and tragedy control their futures. Those committing violent crimes must not have the satisfaction of causing people to live in fear and shutting down the institutions that have suffered. Instead, affected people and institutions should come back strong and resilient. Only in this way will the lives lost be appropriately honored and remembered.
Perhaps the debate about “gun control” should be replaced with a discussion of teaching “gun responsibility.” While background checks and mental health assessments may help increase the safety of others, it is also important to educate those who do own guns about the importance of gun safety and responsibility.
The country cannot simply solve the problem of violence by attempting to take away the means of violence. We must not forget that that “mean” is also often the tool used for self-defense and protection. The solution is therefore two fold: We must decrease the ability to obtain and use guns recklessly and violently while also increasing the knowledge of responsible gun owners defend and protect themselves properly.
Hannah Waid is a junior majoring in English. Her column runs biweekly on Thursdays.
