Campus gun bill

http://unitingfreshfoods.com.au/?x=alternative-viagra-drug purchase viagra without prescription Josh Hart

enter site Staff Writer

http://mustadam.co/?x=viagra-drugs-in-nigeria-the-yoruba In a controversial move, Florida lawmakers earlier this month pushed forward a bill that would allow people to carry guns on college campuses. Reactions have been heated, with one reporter saying “the logic couldn’t be worse” for a bill of this kind.

warfarin drug contraindications with viagra Others are supportive of the bill. Marion Hammer, an NRA lobbyist, said the campus gun ban creates an environment where “murderers, rapists and shooters can commit crimes without fear of being harmed by their victims.

get viagra fast The polarized opinions are not surprising. The topic of gun violence on college campuses is hot on the lips of Americans and has been since the shooting at the University of Texas at Austin in 1966.

speed the drug ingredients viagra What’s surprising is that, for a subject that is so divisive, there are few statistics supporting either side of the guns on campus debate.

male fertility drugs clomid A cursory Google search reveals, well, nothing but opinion pieces.

Digging a little deeper, I found that of the 19 fatal, on-campus shootings in America since 1966, nine of the firearms used in the shootings were obtained legally; five of the firearms were obtained illegally; and five were obtained through unknown means. In exactly one case, a firearm was used in self-defense against the shooter.

What does this one use of a firearm in self-defense say about their effectiveness on campus? Not much at all. One might cite firearm statistics for areas off campus as evidence of the applicability of certain laws at a university, but that would be a mistake. A college campus is primarily occupied by the young and potentially reckless, the new and uninitiated. Like it or not, this demands different rules from the real world.

This lack of relevant statistics, in a rational world, would mean that the reaction to the proposal of this law would be significantly less polarized, but apparently we don’t live in a rational world. If we’re to formulate discourse, we need to be acutely aware of what we know and what we do not know.