Trump’s response to Vegas was a conscious, poor choice
America has a uniquely American problem with mass shootings. Here at Wichita State, we need to have our own discussion.
America has a uniquely American problem with mass shootings. We can’t stop them from happening.
After Stephen Paddock fired on a crowd attending a country music concert in Las Vegas killing at least 58 and injuring more than 400, President Donald Trump made comments on Monday morning calling the act, “pure evil.”
He’s right, Paddock’s murder of innocent people was an act of pure evil.
It was also an act of terrorism.
Paddock’s murder of more than 50 innocent people incited and inspired fear. He isn’t only some crazed loner, he’s another crack in our fragile sense of peace.
Paddock, a 64-year-old white male, was a domestic terrorist.
The fact that Trump didn’t make that clear during his remarks wasn’t a mistake, it was a conscious choice and a poor one.
It’s a disdainful habit that holds us back when we call a white gunman, “lone wolf,” or “mentally unstable.” Those titles are often half-truths. The person may be both of those things, but their murder of civilians incited fear.
Now battle lines are drawn as one side calls for gun-control legislation and the other side calls for the Second Amendment protections, offering up mental illness instead. We’ve seen this argument go 12 rounds before following mass shootings in Aurora, Charleston, and Newtown.
This debate always ends in stalemate. If anything, these policy skirmishes only serve to keep people entrenched in their political party. They’re the reliable, satisfying meal for the bleeding-heart liberal and the greedy conservative.
Here at Wichita State, we need to have our own discussion.
Under Kansas law, no permit is required to concealed-carry a firearm and anyone can concealed-carry on public university campuses.
Do we feel safer?
While it’s doubtful that anyone is wandering campus with an automatic rifle like Paddock used in Las Vegas, the idea that someone would need to carry a firearm with them always is rooted in unrealistic fear. It makes things more dangerous for everyone on campus.
In a hypothetical active shooter situation, someone with a concealed firearm that decides to intervene is probably more likely to be misidentified as the shooter or to injure themselves or others. We have campus police for a reason other than to write parking tickets.
Do we assume that this person who acts has the dozens of hours of invaluable response training? Or is it more likely that this person is either an enthusiast or a casual hunter?
How can students even be sure that a person taking advantage of the concealed-carry rules on campus understand basic muzzle or trigger discipline? Is the chamber clear when they set their backpack down in class?
The idea that a good guy with a gun makes us all safer is unfounded, and now is the perfect time to revive the gun debate here on WSU’s campus. This kind of firearm policy is silly.
America has a uniquely American problem with mass shootings, but this time we don’t have to let the wheel turn over again.
It’s time for change.
Late to comment • Oct 9, 2017 at 11:53 pm
My greatest issue with this is the definition of Paddock as a terrorist and using it as justification for an anti-concealed carry view.
First, a terrorist is someone with an agenda and a reason for their violence – a cause that justifies their murder of innocent people. As of right now, Paddock had no motive, and it seems that he was likely mentally ill and went on a killing rampage.
If we’re going to speak about actual terrorism, we should look at Orlando, San Bernardino, or Ohio State. Those killers had a motive and an ideology that they were killing for. Would it not have been better for people under assault from these actual terrorists to be able to defend themselves? Although what happened in Las Vegas couldn’t have been stopped by someone concealed carrying, the three cases listed above could have been. Shouldn’t we instead focus on the estimated 2.5 million lawful uses of self defense in the United States every year? Shouldn’t we appreciate living in a country that gives us the right to defend ourselves from madmen and terrorists? If you’re so concerned about terrorism, look to Europe. They don’t have guns, so a terrorist in a truck mowed down, killed, and wounded just as many people as Stephen Paddock. Acts of terrorism are almost a weekly occurrence throughout the EU, and there’s nothing Europeans can do to defend themselves from it. Evil people will always exist and will use any means necessary to end life.
Equating campus carry to the actions of a psychopathic murderer is not only uninformed, but asinine. Should one of these people walk into a classroom ready to kill you, your friends, and everyone around you, I’m sure you’d appreciate those students who lawfully carry defending you. If you’d taken a concealed carry course, you’d also know that active shooter response is part of how we’re trained. Campus police and Wichita police can respond in minutes, but that doesn’t matter when seconds count. Carriers aren’t a threat to you or anyone else… We’re here to protect people like you and will lay down our lives to protect your right to call us all murderers and criminals.
D • Oct 3, 2017 at 10:49 am
By law, the chamber should be empty. It was a stipulation to the carry law placed on campus carry.
When laws aren't followed • Oct 3, 2017 at 11:58 am
Correct. I think Dillon is bringing up that people still don’t necessarily follow laws and can be careless. Laws are great, but if they’re not actually informing people’s decisions then there is a possible firearm going off in someone’s business class as they sit their bookbag down.