When it comes to allowing handguns on Kansas’ campuses, I really
see no reason to deny individuals this right. Second Amendment rights are also
being infringed upon by denying individuals their rights to bear arms. No state
or university has the right to overrule the Constitution, the law of our
country. It is our constitutional right as citizens to be armed if we so
choose. To restrict our rights as citizens would be to deny us our pursuit of
liberty.
Having individuals who are readily armed and willing to act in
the event of a shooting is an invaluable asset. A large amount of lives could
be saved in the time it takes first responders to arrive. Putting the public
safety first is at the heart of this supposed conflict, and when individuals
are properly equipped to act the public is safer than without a form of
defense. In addition, there is nothing that is going to stop a shooter from
acting if he or she really wants to. Just because a law says that handguns
can’t be present in an area does not guarantee deterrence. Signs that say “no
weapons allowed” are just as efficient as speed limit signs in stopping rule
breakers. A sign poses no tangible opposition, and is easily ignored. A human
being is far more effective in this regard than a sign. Frankly, it surprises
me it has taken so long for Kansas to allow concealed carry on the premises of
public buildings.
Question: Where and how might
someone who is against the concealed carry law poke holes in this argument?
No comments:
Post a Comment