Samantha Michael’s article, “New Research Confirms Guns on College Campuses are Dangerous” (2016), argues that concealed carry on campus does not get rid of campus shooters, and may lead to other violence. Michael’s backs up this claim by including many facts, one being that only 13 percent of mass shootings from 2009 to 2015 occurred in gun-free or gun-restricted zones. Michael’s purpose is to point out that even though campuses have gun free zones, this still doesn’t stop shootings from happening, and having other people carry can cause even more harm. Given the language of this article, Michael is writing to an educated audience, most likely college students, and anybody that is interested in the topic.
I found this article to be very interesting. Throughout my research on this topic, I’ve read a lot of anti-conceal carry articles. This one was like most others, but Michael’s actually had evidence to back up her claim. I can completely respect that, and I now have some facts to go off of. I appreciated that this was the last article I read for this project, and that this article was very well written even though I still have other views on the conversation. After my research on this topic, I am still pro-conceal carry, but this article did give facts to back up her claim, and I can respect that. Now I wonder how other people are feeling about people conceal carry on campuses, and if they are against it, why?
Michaels, Samantha. “New research confirms that letting college kids carry guns on campus is a terrible idea.” Mother Jones. N.p., 2 Nov. 2016. Web. 19 Feb. 2017.
The Times Editorial Board article, “Allowing concealed weapons on college campuses is a silly, and dangerous idea” (2017), asserts that college campuses are full of irrational, “alcohol-fueled teenagers”, and guns should be kept out. The Times Editorial Board backs up this claim with many different statistics, one being there were more than 50,000 firearm incidents last year, in which more than 15,000 people were killed and 31,000 more were wounded — and that doesn’t include some 22,000 suicides by gun. The article’s purpose is to point out the dangers of having students carry guns on campus in order to make a bold statement, and tell people that support conceal carry to think otherwise. By the way this article is written, the audience is mainly for current students on college campuses, and the lawmakers because the author wants to make sure conceal carry on campuses is not allowed.
I chose this article because I knew I would have very different opinions than the author. I would consider myself to be extremely open minded, but the first few sentences accused college students of being “alcohol fueled”, and almost incapable of making decisions. I took offense to this because I am a college student that works at CSUPD, and the Larimer County District Attorney’s office, and I am more than capable of making “adult decisions”. I think this author could have been more thoughtful when they were writing, and could have been more open minded to the fact that not every college student will fit the “party-animal” stereotype. In all honesty, this article was more attacking individuals instead of being informative. I have read articles that are anti-conceal carry, and I am more than willing to hear those arguments. This was just one of those articles that was extremely accusatory, and quite frankly, offensive.
– Ella Anderson
“Allowing concealed weapons on college campuses is a silly, and dangerous idea.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 17 Jan. 2017. Web. 10 Feb. 2017.
Tim Farley’s article, “Lawmaker takes aim at allowing guns on college campuses” (2017), asserts that college campuses are a dangerous place to begin with, so allowing individuals to protect themselves only makes sense. Farley backs up this statement by including many interviews with the lawmaker, one quote standing out and stating, “You can’t have enough firepower out there ‘cause they (criminals) have more guns than we do.” Farley’s purpose is to point out the positive ways conceal carry laws can benefit individuals in order to strengthen his argument, and convince the opposite audience. Given the professional nature of this article, Farley’s audience is anybody that is interested in the political side of conceal carry on campuses, and law enforcement.
I found this article to be really informative, but also understanding of other opinions. I liked how the author included interviews of the main stakeholder, and one of the interviews stated how law enforcement would want to be proactive, and know who is carrying on their college campuses. I agreed with this article in the fact that college campuses are going to be dangerous no matter what, so having trained individuals that go through a thorough background check, and are able to protect themselves and the community at large would be extremely beneficial. I loved the quotes that this author brought in. They are very pro law enforcement, and sound like they have personal experience with law. I wonder how the community reacts to this article, since it is very pro law enforcement, and pro conceal carry. I also question how the department would do the background checks. Where would they draw the line of an individual not being able to carry? How are they going to maintain being proactive, and keeping an eye out on the individual’s that do carry?
– Ella Anderson
Farley, Tim. “Lawmaker takes aim at allowing guns on college campuses.” Red Dirt Report. N.p., 09 Feb. 2017. Web. 10 Feb. 2017.
Guns on Campus: Overview
In Suzanne Hultin’s article titled, “Guns on Campus: Overview”, she asserts that since one of the most deadly shootings on a college campus in 2007, more states are passing laws that are allowing students to conceal carry on campus. Hultin supports her claim by stating that 24 states passed a legislation that allows for students to conceal carry on public, college campuses. Hultin also talks about Colorado, and how the state argued for student’s rights to conceal carry. Her purpose is to inform her audience about the different legislations in order to educate individuals that are interested in the topic of conceal carry. She is not arguing for one way or another, but she does give strong evidence that would suggest she is pro-conceal carry. As one finishes the article, it becomes clear that Hultin is writing to an extremely broad audience– mainly being college students across the United States of America. The article can also be interpreted to be aimed at any individual that is interested in the controversial topic of students carrying weapons on campus.
I found this article to be tremendously informative. I appreciated how she did not take a clear side, but rather Hultin wanted to inform her audience with statistics on states that have passed the conceal carry legislation. Her first sentence in her article grabs the audience’s attention, stating that the shooting at Virginia Tech University in 2007 sparked this entire conversation. I am looking forward to the different conversations that this debatable topic has to offer.
~ Ella Anderson
Hultin, Suzanne. “Guns on Campus: Overview.” NCSL. NCSL, 24 Jan. 2017. Web. 2 Feb. 2017.