Carrying of guns by students in campuses has raised many ethical debates on the security of students from an outsider and their relation in school. Texas is among the eight states that have permitted carrying of weapons in campuses and college (Blair and Martaindale, 2013) . Others states that have also allowed carrying of arms include Idaho, Mississippi, Kansas, Utah, Colorado, and Wisconsin. 50 years ago there was a mass shooting at the University of Texas that resulted in the shooting of 45 students leaving 14 dead (Blair and Martaindale, 2013) . The occurrence and severity of such incidences in increasing and in response the campuses in Texas are becoming carry zones. At UT Austin, campus student’s can carry weapons in their classrooms but not in their residential areas. In their classrooms, students must keep the guns holstered and shoot not keep the bullet in the chamber with a semi-automatic gun.
Supporters of the gun free law among students argue that there is a need for safety on college campuses due to the mass shooting all over the country. They argue that permitting guns on campus will increase campus security. One supporter in Texas concealed that weapon ban left the students defenseless as a gunman killed 32 students over a duration of two and a half hours (Blair and Martaindale, 2013) . The arguments go as by allowing every student to have a gun they will have the ability to protect themselves in case of an attack.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Carrying of guns by students has raised ethical questions as many argue that presence of guns on campus is not ethical to the university mission of fostering a healthy learning environment. Libraries, classrooms, dormitories, cafeterias are not places for lethal weapons, and their presence would interfere with crucial functions of the university (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway, 2002). Gun free zones would provoke an atmosphere of intimidation among the students and their instructors. In contrast, students feel more secure from outsiders.It is also argued that guns are an absolute threat to the campus safety and visiting campus premise can be a stressful experience and are concerned that if guns are in some of the areas, there can be accidental discharges. People could be killed or injured in that kind of environment.
Harvard School of Public Health scientists found out that college students owning guns are more likely to indulge in behaviors like drunk driving, binge drinking, having unprotected sex, and increased likelihood of violence (Luthra and Gidycz, 2006) . There is a close relationship between alcohol use and violence. 60% of 18-22year-old campus students reported drinking, 37% reported binge drinking (Luthra and Gidycz, 2006) . On campus, it is normal belief that abusive conduct is frequent and less abusive when alcohol is involved. The drinking cultures and fierce behavior explains the high frequency of alcohol-related violence in campuses. Armed students do not necessarily make campuses safer place, and that law enforcement should be left to trained professionals if the leaders are concerned about reducing the possibility of violence in schools.
Mental illness affects the majority of students because most of them are vulnerable to mental health issues in the campus which can result in the inappropriate use of guns among students. The stress is associated with exploring new social identities, managing thought-provoking coursework, and establishing new peer groups place students at risk of situations like anxiety and depression (Eisenberg et al., 2011). Research revealed that 14% of undergraduate students and 11% of graduate students tested positive for depression. Allowing the students to carry firearms on campus results to the risk of suicide that results from depression and mental illness
Opponents also argue that there are in fact very few instances of gun violence in campuses, but when they occur, they are fetal. Reports have established that of the 18,536 homicides that occurred in Texas between 2001 and 2013 only five occurred near college campuses (Webster et al., 2004). Currently, suicide is the second leading causes of death among students. Suicide attempts by use of overdose or poisoning consequence in a fatality of about 2 percent. In contrast, guns increase the risks of fruitful suicide attempts suicide attempts that result in a fatality of 85 that result from pressures of college life (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway, 2002). Additionally, some argue that allowed concealed carry of the gun will increase the probability of a professor to be shot by a dissatisfied-students.
Students are likely to draw their gun on professors who fail them or students firing another student in a heated class debate. If a professor suspects that the students are armed the professors may be less inclined to involve in an open and frank discussion on potentially challenging and uncomfortable topics (Miller, 2011). Gun speaks arguments such as “be careful,” “don’t mess with me,” “I know how to use my weapon” may pose intimidation between the professor and the students. Guns in classroom result to the intolerable threat to freedom of speech. Campuses classrooms should not tolerate such threats and if a student attempt to threat another one then legal measures should be called upon. I suggest that topics such as suicide and gun rights be understood properly and deeply by the students.
Guns free among the students pose the danger of accidental discharge which can lead to harm to other students. It was advice regarding the risk of accidental discharge, the students that it would be better to have students wear their guns in the study room than to have them in the lockers (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway, 2002). Students should be advised on how to carry the guns and to always keep the guns holstered and they should not keep the bullet in the chamber with semi-automatic guns.
Another consideration is that police cannot be able to differentiate the student or a faculty member with a gun from the criminal during the response in an active shooting situation. This may result in the police killing the students unknowingly. There are many examples of this occurring, leading to confusion and in some instances, civilians being unintentionally shot by law enforcers. To remove the confusion, the law enforcers should deploy the men in strategic positions such as entry areas and not giving license to students on guns possession.
Questions have been raised about whether the students can shoot accurately. Police officers are considered to have experience in threat situations such as intrusion alarms, armed robberies, and suspicious situations. Like police officers students of staff attempting to use a gun to in an active shooting encounter are expected to access the situation first, confirm the clear line of fire, shoot well, limit loss and bring the situation to an end. This can be limited to the fact that students don’t have the training and experience like the police officers (Nieuwenhuys and Qudejans, 2010). Despite their training and recurrent exposure to threatening and high-risk events, evidence shows that police officers do not shoot precisely in a crisis encounter. The idea that students could shoot as well as police officers who are highly trained in an active shooting encounter is questionable given that we know the officer's performance in their stressful situation.
Brain development and cognitive development in adolescence and emerging adulthood pose a risk on the presence of firearms among teenagers. Adolescence and developing adulthood is a time of tremendous change in an individual biological system that upholds behavioral regulation, decision making, motivation, and emotions. The brain’s higher relation area such as prefrontal cortex (PFC) supports impulse control, self-control, and inhibition, long-range planning, and judgment (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway, 2002). These skills are important for benign firearm storage, use and for avoiding circumstances in which firearms use is likely to cause tragedy. The risk in decision making in early childhood is due to changes in frontal/limbic balance in brain development and changes in connections between PFC and limbic structures that support behavioral and emotional regulation.
As compared to children and adults, adolescents make a decision that is, in particular, sensitive to emotional and social cues in the environment and are more sensitive to stress both physiologically and psychologically (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway, 2002). Adolescents are more likely to react thoughtlessly to threat cues. In summary, ideal developmental process among adolescence is connected with more risk-taking and poor self-control in the transition to childhood. Guns can be withdrawn from students at this stage of development because they are vulnerable due to high emotional arousal in situations that require complex social information processing.
Critiques argue that Texas laws are an abhorrence to the standards of higher education which includes intellectual debate and academic freedom. There are worries that presence of a gun on campuses would transform the nature of interaction through the introduction of firearms which alter authority structures (Blair and Martaindale, 2013) . When the students carry guns on campus, they alter the quality of the learning environment. These laws raise significant questions about public safety and the nature of academic space.
New research on fatal mass shootings has indicated that the majority of fatal mass shooting occur in areas where guns are allowed. Additionally, right-to-carry laws do not reduce mass shooting or the average number of people shot in those incidents. Similarly, when a gun shooting occurs the criminals are rarely stopped by the students or civilians possessing the guns. The net effect on the right to carry guns has negatively impacted to campus safety and public safety. The effect is likely to be more dangerous when extended to campuses. Risks for suicide attempts, violence, risky behaviors, and alcohol abuse are significantly elevated among campus students and college-age youths. The possession of guns raises the risk of lethal outcomes from these behaviors and in this setting. Even if guns on campus have some protective effects against mass shootings available evidence suggest that it is not always the case. The net effect on students, staff, and faculty safety results to more deaths, more threats with firearms, and more nonfatal gunshot wounds.
References
Blair, J. P., & Martaindale, M. H. (2013). United States active shooter events from 2000 to 2010: Training and equipment implications . San Marcos, TX: Texas State University.
Eisenberg, D., Hunt, J., Speer, N., & Zivin, K. (2011). Mental health service that is utilized by college students in the United States. The Journal of nervous and mental disease , 199 (5), 301-308.
Luthra, R., & Gidycz, C. A. (2006). Dating violence among college men and women: Evaluation of a theoretical model. Journal of interpersonal violence , 21 (6), 717-731.
Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2002). Firearm availability and unintentional firearm deaths, suicide, and homicide among 5– 14-year-olds. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , 52 (2), 267-275.
Miller, J. H. (2011). The Second Amendment goes to college. Seattle UL Rev. , 35 , 235.
Miller, M., Hemenway, D., & Wechsler, H. (2002). Guns and gun threats at college. Journal of American College Health , 51 (2), 57-65.
Nieuwenhuys, A., & Oudejans, R. R. (2010). Effects of anxiety on handgun shooting behavior of police officers: A pilot study. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping , 23 (2), 225-233.
Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., Zeoli, A. M., & Manganello, J. A. (2004). Association between the youth-focused firearm laws and youth suicides. Jama , 292 (5), 594-601.
