Campus shootings have been in the news a lot recently. Virginia Tech happened almost a year ago, and a couple of weeks ago there was a shooting at NIU. These events are tragic, but fortunately they are very rare.
What I find interesting, though, is that despite the strict no-firearms policy that most universities (including Ball State) employ, shootings such as those named above still happen. Theoretically, banning guns on campus makes gun violence on campus go away. In reality, it doesn't. Besides the official rules and state law, there are no mechanisms in place to keep firearms off campus. (This is a good thing, by the way. Searching every students' bags at every building entrance would be an abhorrent invasion of privacy and a waste of resources.) This means that anybody could have a firearm on campus at any time, albeit illegally. However, this isn't really much of a problem. I'd wager that most students don't care about guns, and thus would never think to even purchase one, let alone bring it to school. That leaves two groups of people who the gun ban would apply to: law-abiding students who own guns, and non-law-abiding students who own guns.
Those students who abide by the law won't, by definition, have guns on campus. They will, though, have a CCW (Carrying Concealed Weapon license) if they choose to carry their guns other places.
That leaves the students who respect neither the rules nor the law, and who have guns. Since they don't do what they are supposed to, it's trivial for these people to get a weapon on campus. I imagine that anyone caught with a weapon at a school will lose his or her right to own and/or carry a firearm. The madmen on the news fall into this category, but I am NOT saying that everyone in this category is a madman. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there are people who carry illegally on campus. Women could conceal a small handgun in their purses, and large men could easily have a concealed shoulder or waistband holster, especially in the winter, and nobody would ever guess. And though they are breaking the rules and the law, these people aren't causing anybody any harm. In fact, such people are proof that it is possible for college students to responsibly carry a gun on campus. Carrying illegally is hardly a good idea, though. If use of the gun was ever required, the owner would be in a world of trouble. (Though I think it's better to be in trouble than to be dead.)
The only group of people mentioned so far that are a problem are the madmen. As evidenced by their murder-suicides, they have no respect for the rules, the law, or their lives. What consequences are there for murder, not to mention having a gun on campus, when your plan is to kill yourself anyway?
So where does this leave us? We have students who don't have guns because they follow the rules, we have students who do have guns who don't follow the rules (but who risk getting in serious trouble), and we have potential madmen with guns who have no regard for anything. When the shit hits the fan and there is a deranged student shooting his classmates, what's better? Having a population of defenseless victims, or a group of students who are prepared to protect their own lives and the lives of their peers?
Some would argue that protecting the students is the job of the police. That's true, the police are there to protect and to serve. But how long does it take the cops to show up? Calling the cops is no problem these days, because pretty much everybody has a cell phone. But what is the response time? Two minutes? Three? Five? Semi-automatic pistols fire as fast as the gunman can pull the trigger, and reloading takes no more than ten seconds with a spare magazine. You can fire twelve rounds, change the magazine, and fire 12 more rounds in 30 seconds. That's 24 shots and, with 10% accuracy, about 2 casualties. At this point, the cops are still at least ninety seconds away. Even more if the phone call hasn't been made.
Unarmed students in the above situation are sitting ducks. Attempting hand-to-hand self defense would be a death sentence; the gunman could put down any resistance at a distance. Students who illegally have guns would have to make a choice in such a situation: try to save lives and risk almost certain legal action, or lay low and hope the cops show up. Neither action is desirable.
Allowing students to arm themselves won't end school shootings, but it will make schools safer. A student with a firearm may not be capable of stopping a gunman, either physically or psychologically, but having some firepower gives both the student and his or her peers a chance; it puts them on equal ground with the gunman. There is an old saying: "God created men. Samuel Colt made them equal." I think it says a lot about such a situation. While disgruntled students may do stupid and senseless things, they are not completely foolish. They know that, since campuses are gun-free zones, they will meet with little resistance. After all, when was the last time a gunman opened fire at a gun show? Or a range? If there is a chance that other students will have guns, a gunman might think twice before opening fire in class. That deterrent alone might make school shootings decrease appreciably.
Am I advocating the arming of all students? Not at all. I doubt most students would be interested in even owning a gun. But we are all adults. Adults are allowed to own and carry weapons. Indiana issues CCW licenses to anyone who requests one, provided they pay the fees, have not been convicted of a felony, and are over 18 years of age. (IC 35-47-2-3) Some students might (read: would) complain about letting others carry. Unfortunately, this is the real world now. People carry guns in the real world, and those who aren't comfortable with guns need to get used to that. Besides, guns wouldn't be seen any more on campus than they are at the mall, or the gas station, or at restaurants. People who carry don't typically want to draw attention to themselves, though there are some who choose to "open carry."
So what should be done? First, states need to clearly define "school" in the legislation relevant to locations that people are allowed to have firearms, and exclude universities. In Arizona, for instance, "school" is defined as a K-12 institution (source), which technically makes it okay to carry a weapon on a college campus. Indiana's laws do not define "school," so any institution, from a primary school to a college to a "beauty college" could be interpreted as a "school" by the law, making it illegal to carry in any of these places. Second, universities should simply remove all regulations regarding firearms. State laws should be sufficient to govern who can and who cannot carry a gun. There is one notable exception to this: private universities. Private schools have every right to prohibit weapons on their property. However, there should be no criminal penalty for infraction of such rules. The private school would simply issue their own punishment, whether it be a fine or expulsion or something else. Public universities, such as Ball State, should simply have no say in what devices their students carry with them.