More guns are not the answer
By Editorial
Last week we saw the deadliest school massacre in U.S. history. It shook the nation and particularly hit home with those of us who spend the majority of our lives on a college campus. As we move forward, the discussion on how to prevent this kind of tragedy has continued to spin off in various, sometimes terrifying directions.
The suggestion that armed Virginia Tech students could have cut Cho Seung-Hui's shooting rampage short is not only irresponsible, but troubling.
Our nation has a habit of answering complicated social problems with muscle, rather than brain.
Rather than identifying the root problems and working on structural ways to ameliorate a serious issue, the impulsive desire to arm our flight stewards, bus drivers, teachers and now students seems too easy to resist.
The result: In the name of greater security, we have created our own domestic arms race.
Imagine a gunman walking into a room with 30-plus students who are all "packing." He opens fire, using a semi-automatic weapon. Those who haven't yet been shot by the killer take aim with their own weapons, shooting him, if they are lucky, but possibly missing and striking a fellow student accidentally. Perhaps their weapons make them more obvious targets for the practiced gunman. Even if the shoot-out results in a fortunate shot finding the gunman and taking him down, a bloodbath will have ensued.
Now imagine an individual with a history of mental illness who has been forced by his state into treatment attempting to purchase a semi-automatic gun at his local gun shop. After running this person's identification information through a computer, the clerk learns this person is not allowed to purchase the gun. The individual is denied access to any guns the store may offer. Even if that person is later able to obtain a gun through illegal means, at least we wouldn't willingly be handing a potentially dangerous person a semi-automatic weapon.
More guns are not the solution. Stronger means of gun control, combined with better campus security and a focus on the psychological needs of students is.
Much of our reservations to coming down hard on gun policies is rooted in our reverence for the second amendment. And, after all, it's hard to ignore the large and well-organized group of Americans who justify gun ownership as a recreational hobby. But let's be honest, do we really need an AK-47 to kill a moose?
Many Virginia Tech students are upset that their university's campus security was delayed in warning the school community about the shooter. Virginia Tech's security admits there was a mistake in judgment concerning the nature of the first shooting, but the fact remains that better communication would have made a difference.
A campus-wide text message could warn students, faculty and staff alike to stay where they are or even give them the opportunity to barricade themselves in classrooms, dorm rooms or offices.
Another solution lies in giving attention to the psychological triggers that led to Cho's rampage. There were warnings from classmates, professors and even the special justice who ordered him to seek medical care for his mental illness.
The gun control discussion that must take place cannot be dominated by fear, ideology or powerful corporate lobbies. Instead, it must be brought forth by reasonable people on both sides of the issue who have only one goal in mind: preventing tragedies like the one the community at Virginia Tech experienced last week from ever happening again.