Say ‘no’ to concealed carry on college campuses: Overview.

Faith Alford’s article, “Say ‘no’ to concealed carry on college campuses” (2015), claims that the cons of allowing guns on campuses definitely outweigh the pros. The author supports this claim by stating how much concealed carry would cost universities, by increasing police officers, gun stores, and campus security, this would take away from other thing such as research. Alford’s purpose is to point out how costly concealed carry is for college campuses and to change the audience view to go against concealed carry. Given the technical language used in this article, Alford is writing to an audience that is well informed about the current argument surrounding concealed carry and especially to people that are pro-concealed carry.

I found this article to be very interesting. I have read some articles that have been against concealed carry, but none of them have ever brought up cost before. I did not even think that cost was apart of this argument. This authors states how college campuses would need to increase security, police officers, and gun stores if they allow concealed carry. I can see that all of these would definitely cost the university a lot of money and could potentially take it out of areas, such as research. However, I do not think that these things are a necessity if a campus allows concealed carry. I do not see the need for the extra police officers and campus security. I feel like thats where this article really lacked is that they did not state or show why campuses would need all of these extra things that they would need to spend a lot of money on. I also do not agree that more gun stores would need to be built and why the university would pay for something like that. It is hard for me to see this authors argument that concealed carry permit would cost universities too much money, because I do not agree that these things are needed. Although I did like that it was a different perspective from the anti-concealed carry that I have not heard before. Unfortunately, the costs that this authors states that are needed for concealed carry on campuses I have a really hard time believing those are necessities.

-Bre Jessen

Alford, Faith. “Say ‘no’ to concealed carry on college campuses.” The Daily Cougar. The Cougar, 05 Mar. 2015. Web. 17 Feb. 2017.

Concealed Carry Permits Are Life Savers: Overview.

Cliff Stearns’s article, “Concealed Carry Permits Are Life Savers” (2009), argues that everyone should have a concealed carry permit because they are life savers. Stearns backs up this claim by stating quotes and facts that show how concealed carry has saved lives from violent crimes using various resources including a criminologist, the FBI’s Uniformed Crime Report, and from different laws. Stearns’s purpose is to point out different ways that concealed carry has saved lives in order to change the audience views to see that everyone should have a concealed carry. Given the technical language used in this article, Stearns is writing to a well-educated audience with knowledge on this topic and especially an audience who is against concealed carry.

This was one of the best articles that I have read so far. I really liked this article because it stated quotes, facts, and statistics as it’s support for it’s claim. This is the first article I have read that has done this. I find that this author was very persuasive because of the way they backed up the claim. At the beginning of this project I started out very neutral, I had heard arguments from both sides. The arguments that I heard I did not find very convincing, which is why I was neutral. This is the first article that I found that is convincing to persuade me to be pro conceal carry. This article used at least one fact, statistic, or quote in every paragraph whenever he talked about something that supported his argument. I learned so many interesting facts while reading this article. I cannot say that about any of the other articles that I have read. I do not think there is anything that I could suggest to improve this article or anything that I wish I could change with this article. I thought the author did a good job on trying to persuade the audience to change their views on concealed carry. Although I do have some questions after reading this article, how does his facts and statistic related to conceal carry on college campuses? What are the counter facts and statistic to his claim?

-Bre Jessen

Stearns, Cliff. “Concealed Carry Permits Are Life Savers.” Human Events. The Human Events Group, 26 Jan. 2009. Web. 09 Feb. 2017.






Allowing guns won’t make campuses safer: Overview.

John A. Fry’s article, “Allowing guns won’t make campuses safer” (2015), claims that having concealed carry on campuses will not do anything to reduce mass shootings and could even increase shooting deaths. Fry backs up this claim by stating that mass school shooting have not decreased although people with concealed carry on campuses have increased, stating that experts from Harvard found places with more guns have more murders, and that colleges are already trying to stop suicides, sexual assault, and binge drinking without adding guns into the mix. Fry’s purpose is to point out that people with concealed carry on campuses is not helping to fix any issues on campus in order to change the readers opinion on concealed carry to show them how it is not working. Given the general language used in this article, Fry is writing to anyone in the general public who cares about this topic and especially the people who are pro concealed carry.

I have been trying to find a good article that was against pro concealed carry on campuses. Most articles I found just stated “what if” situations, however this article did not use that approach at all. This article I found really interesting because he makes his claim very persuasive at first. After reading it a couple of times I realized that he did not state any facts that could be proven or any statistics. Since I am a psychology major I have learned through many of my teachers that facts and statistics are very important in order to prove something. John Fry is trying to prove that concealed carry on campuses is not improving anything and in fact is only making things worse, but he does not have anything to prove what he is saying is true. His support for his claim does not show actual statistics or actual quotes from the experts at Harvard, it’s just what he is saying. At first I found this author very persuasive and had me stumped on what my opinion is about concealed carry. After thinking about what John Fry was actually stating I realized that I need more support in order to consider his claim. Facts, statistics, and research are very important to me in order to believe something. If this author would have added more of those things in the article it would have been more persuasive in changing my views.

-Bre Jessen

Fry, John A. “Allowing guns won’t make campuses safer.” The Inquirer Daily News, 19 Oct. 2015. Web. 09 Feb. 2017.

Overview of Concealed Carry: The Only Way to Discourage Mass School Shootings.

Nadia Nedzel’s article, “Concealed Carry: The Only Way to Discourage Mass School Shootings” (2014), suggests that there needs to be more people that have concealed carry in order to stop mass school shootings from happening. Nedzel backs up this claim with descriptions of the law, how gun-free zones have increased shootings, and how gun laws are ineffective. Nedzel’s purpose is to point out how the current system is not working to prevent mass school shootings in order to change the mind of the readers to consider concealed carry. Given the academic language used in this article, Nedzel is writing to a well-educated audience who have a good sense of the conversation around gun control and concealed carry.

This article really got me thinking about the pros of concealed carry. The article talked about how the current law needs be changed in her opinion. There is a law that prohibits guns on a school zone, although there are many exceptions to this law Nedzel still thinks it needs to be changed. This article also stated how mass shootings have actually increased since gun-free school zones where implemented. This is a point that I have never heard before I read this article. Nedzel also stated that current gun laws have been proven ineffective. She goes into detail about how she thinks that they are ineffective and only cause harm rather good. This article was really helpful to see this side of the argument for concealed carry. Nedzel stated several good points that I have not heard before. I hear a lot about cons of concealed carry and how we need more gun control, but I have not heard about the good things with gun control. I wish the author of this article included the counter arguments to her claim and why they are inaccurate. I feel that this would have made the article even more persuasive towards someone like me who had mixed feelings at first.

-Bre Jessen

Nedzel, Nadia. “Concealed Carry: The Only Way To Discourage Mass School Shootings.” Academic Questions 27.4 (2014): 429-435. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Feb. 2017.