Dartblog
Special Feature: Give a Rouse
Whither the College on the Hill? Dartblog brings you news and commentary from Hanover and the world at large, including deep coverage of the maturing tenure of Dr. Kim.
Archived post
This is an archived post. Please click here to see the latest entries.
« Wm. F. Buckley Jr. Passes Away at 82 | Home | Delegate Math »
Deadly Gun Policies
The Dartmouth reported today on new measures taken in the wake of a recent campus shooting at Northern Illinois University that left 5 dead. I have no doubt that the “Light Emitting Diodes cruise lights and warning lights” for S&S vehicles and a modernized PA system are strong steps in the way of protection.
It was later in the article that I started feeling unsafe:
Stephen Kazmierczak of NIU and Seung Hui Cho of Virginia Tech, perpetrators of the recent shootings at these universities, both ordered their weapons online a few days before the respective massacres….Safety and Security and the Office of Residential Life enforce the College’s firearms policy in an effort to prevent possible violence on campus, according to [director of Safety and Security and College proctor Harry] Kinne and [Dean of Residential Life Martin] Redman.
Although weapons are generally prohibited on campus, ORL and Safety and Security allow certified hunters and Reserve Officers’ Training Corps cadets to store their weapons in a special storage area supervised by Safety and Security, according to Kinne.
Looking at the facts of these two cases, school gun policies did not help and indeed they may have killed. These two campus killers did not follow gun policy. They did not register their weapons with the college, keep them in an approved locker, and my gut tells me that they must have violated a rule or two in shooting people. If someone has a mind to commit mass murder, I somehow do not think they will mind breaking college firearm policy. Where college gun policy does come in is preventing the students that might act, in rational self-defense to disarm and disable campus shooters, from having this capability. If we can’t stop potential killers from getting guns, we should at least give others the opportunity to fight back when killers start shooting.
This is not to say that we should mandate guns in frat basements but if we are serious about protecting students let us take a rational look at our campus gun policy. People who want to kill will always get weapons, let’s ensure that the people who want to stop them do too.
Summing up most colleges’ gun policies and the results they have seen is the bumper sticker slogan that goes, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”
Featured posts
-
October 18, 2009
When Love Beckoned in 52nd Street
We were at San Francisco’s BIX last evening, enjoying prosecco, cheese, and a bit of music. A full year of inhabitation in Northern California has unraveled to me no decent venue for proper lounging, but… -
October 9, 2009
D Afraid of a Little Competish
So our colleague and Dartblog writer Joe Asch informed me that the D has rejected our cunning advertising campaign. Uh-oh. The Dartmouth is widely known as a breeding ground for instant New York Times successes,… -
September 4, 2009
How Regents Should Reign
As Dartmouth alumni proceed through the legal hoops necessary to defuse a Board-packing plan—which put in unhappy desuetude an historic 1891 Agreement between alumni and the College guaranteeing a half-democratically-elected Board of Trustees—it strikes one… -
August 29, 2009
Election Reform Study Committee
If you are an alum of the College on the Hill, you may have received a number of e-mails of late beseeching your input for a new arm of the College’s Alumni Control Apparatus called… -
August 23, 2009
Fare Thee Well, Tom Crady
And now Dean Tom Crady has precipitously announced his departure from the College after only 20 months on the job. How to read this? By way of background, prior to coming to Dartmouth, Crady had… -
May 31, 2009
Kangaroo Court, Indeed
In an interview with The Dartmouth, alumni-elected trustee T.J. Rodgers ‘70 explained his reasons for declining to participate in future evaluations of trustees up for “re-election,” namely the “kangaroo court” nature of such discussion in…