Without question, if some murder-focused assailant opened fire on a college campus and I was a member of the faculty or staff nearby, at that moment I would want a gun to give me and those around me the best chance for survival.
Would a gun protect me? Not absolutely, but it would sure give me more of a chance to survive, to fight. It would arm me with more than a textbook and a few chairs stacked against the door, although I would be the first in line to start stacking those chairs. Every barrier a killer has to go through slows him down and gives people precious moments to seek a way out or for the killer's rampage to be brought to an end.
Last week, the on-campus faculty and staff concealed carry bill pushed by Fayetteville Republican state Rep. Charlie Collins met some last-second resistance in the form of amendment proposals in the Senate. The House had already approved it. The Senate approved it, too, but only after adopting Sen. Jeremy Hutchinson's amendment to require 16-hours of active shooter response training of any faculty and staff who want to carry on campus. The measure now goes back to the House to see if representatives there will support the Senate's changes.
Let anyone think otherwise, the powers that be on Arkansas campuses still want none of Collins' bill. They rely heavily on their belief -- backed up by history -- that most people on a college campus will not face a shooter. These folks are comfortable playing the odds. As I understand their concerns, it is far preferable to keep a college campus free of legally carried guns every day than to let those employees who want to carry a firearm be prepared in the unlikely event a shooter opens fire.
Of course, Virginia Tech was an unlikely event. Columbine was an unlikely event. Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., suffered an unlikely event. The last thing University of Arkansas Professor John Locke imagined when he went to work on the first day of classes in 2000 was that an angry student would kill him. Otherwise, why would he have ever shown up that day?
I said earlier opponents want to keep campuses free of "legally carried guns." No law prevents those who are lawbreakers from toting guns on campus. It's naive to believe a law keeps all guns off campus. Laws keep law-abiders from carrying guns on campus. They are not typically the ones people have to fear.
Collins' House Bill 1249 doesn't force anyone to obtain a permit or to carry their gun even if they do have a concealed carry permit.
Collins appeared to view the late-breaking changes in the Senate as an attempt to derail his bill. I'm not so sure. It seems to me Gov. Asa Hutchinson wasn't entirely comfortable with Collins' bill and didn't want it arriving on his desk without some extra requirement. Jeremy Hutchinson is the governor's nephew. State Sen. Jim Hendren, who is also the governor's nephew, backed the amendment to better prepare faculty and staff for an active shooter situation.
Perhaps Gov. Hutchinson, who has a history as an ally of the National Rifle Association, wants to sign the bill but only with some measure that helps ease campus officials' concerns about opening the doors to any faculty and staff member who holds a concealed carry permit.
Sen. Hutchinson's amendment would require a faculty or staff member to notify campus police in writing of their intent to carry on campus. Is that a way to ensure campus police can be fully aware of a situation should a shooter attack, or did university administrators who dislike Collins' bill manage to find a way to still discourage faculty and staff from carrying even if they're legally authorized to do it? Campus administrators have almost universally opposed on-campus concealed handguns, so is it plausible that this requirement could have a chilling effect on those who prefer to carry but don't necessarily want to invite retribution from campus administrators?
The requirement will force someone who wants to protect themselves to notify people who vehemently opposed their ability to carry a concealed handgun on campus. Will doing so become a mark against a faculty or staff member within the institution?
The training requirement doesn't bother me. The bill creates a new class of concealed carry permit holders who have an extra privilege beyond that authorized for the rest of Arkansas' permit holders. It's for a specialized situation, so training is a good idea.
But will this law create an on-campus system that allows campus administrators who lost the legislative battle to shut Collins' bill down to instead create an atmosphere of intimidation designed to discourage individuals from availing themselves of the gun-carrying authority newly provided by lawmakers?
Surely that kind of behavior never happens on a college campus, right?
Commentary on 02/20/2017