TO THE EDITOR:
Editorial board member Taylor Holgate wrote in the Monday “Viewpoints” that “when criminals commit a crime, they want to reduce the risk to themselves.” The problem with applying this to gun control is that criminals don’t represent the biggest danger. The shootings in Tucson, Ariz., and Virginia Tech show worst-case scenarios as the result of individuals who have no concern for any risk to themselves.
Holgate also wrote “the mere possibility that a potential victim might be able to defend themselves with a gun makes everyone safer.”
The mere possibility of accidents or misuse of guns counteract any benefits of safety. Consider how many fatal automobile accidents we tolerate — more than 40,000 a year in the United States, roughly the same number caused by guns. And cars, unlike guns, were not designed with the express intent of causing harm.
If a weapons ban on campus is a “flashing red sign inviting criminals,” allowing guns would be a violent red sign that burns even brighter. Arming people with more guns promotes their use as being acceptable or necessary.
Chancellor Holden Thorp has challenged the campus community to embrace innovation. The issue of gun control demands some of this entrepreneurial spirit, and deserves radical and open-minded approaches rather than a binary “should-we-or-shouldn’t-we” categorization.
Andrew Harrell
Junior
Communication Studies
