Tejano Tribune has it wrong about concealed firearms
The 2017 school year will surely bring about many cases of students suffering from Didaskaleinophobia. Simply put, Didaskaleinophobia is a fear of going to school.
As Senate Bill 11, which not only allows students, but also faculty and the public to carry concealed weapons on campus, takes effect, that same year there is another phobia that will be on the rise, namely
Hoplophobia. Hoplophobia is a term first used in the mid-1960’s to describe an irrational concern for firearms.
After reading the last article published in the Tejano Tribune mid-June, it is clear that this, like many other articles on the matter, was written using more emotion and passion rather than facts and logic. It is important to note that in responding to this article, there is no intention to accuse anyone of being a hoplophobe.
True hoplophobes are rare. The intentions are to examine the cause of the widespread concern with guns on campus and to use facts, logic and reason to maybe alleviate some unfounded concerns expressed in the article. Let’s begin.
In May, the Tejano also ran another story where it surveyed students about their opinions with respect to allowing guns on campus. Regarding the survey it states, “The results were mainly one-sided, with more than half of the participants disagreeing with the bill being passed.” How can we explain the survey being one-sided? That’s simple.
If another survey was passed asking students if they believed we live in a violent society, the answer would undoubtedly be yes. Yet, if probed further, most students will be unable remember recent or any acts of serious violence against their persona. For the most part their lives could be quite peaceful.
As it turns out, the violence they think they are familiar with comes from one single source, the illuminated screen. TV, movies, the Internet and even news publications can alter the perception of the reality in which we live.
We in the borderland are doubly bombarded with news and stories of violent gun crimes being perpetrated both in the U.S. and Mexico. It is no wonder then that most of those surveyed would disagree with the bill, since they are conditioned to relate guns to the criminal element and hardly ever to the overwhelming majority of sound-minded, lawful and peaceful gun owners.
It is important to note that more than 90% of mass shootings occur in gun-free zones, such as Virginia Tech and the Aurora Theater. As a matter of fact, the Aurora shooter could have gone to any of the larger and closer theaters near his home but chose to go to the one which had banned guns during the premiere of the Batman movie.
At this point in time EPCC is a gun-free zone. Which gun banning law will stop a mass shooter? The answer is not one will do so.
Currently, there is no magical barrier around EPCC which will prevent anyone sitting next to you in class from illegally carrying or even using a firearm.
Gun bans only stop the law abiding citizen from protecting themselves and those around them not the deranged mass shooter bent on causing as much destruction as possible.
Furthermore, to insinuate that teachers will fear students carrying a lawfully concealed gun when emotions run high over grades is irresponsible. Under that same logic, doesn’t that same argument hold true today.
The difference is that today teachers truly have to fear a similar scenario because the student who might be carrying a gun is doing so illegally and hence has dubious intentions. Legal gun ownership does not equate to criminal intent.
The New York Times reports that most mass shootings happen in the matter of minutes. Now, no one is saying that an armed citizen will always heroically stop a mass shooting during that short time or that
they will even attempt to do so. It does, however, give them and those around them a greater chance to avoid becoming yet another victim. For example, that was the case in the 1966 UT Austin sniper shooting.
Several citizens grabbed their weapons and fired back at the sniper, gaining time to allow 3 cops and another citizen to finally put an end the massacre, saving additional lives in the process.
It’s true that many EPCC students will be able to lawfully conceal-carry once the bill takes effect and yes, many as young as 21, but gun alarmists give little to no credit to the armed citizen.
First, they tend to view the active shooter as so highly trained and skilled that resistance against them is futile, viewing armed citizens as so untrained and unskilled they’re absolutely unable to perform even a task as simple as covering a door from six feet away and emptying a magazine at an active shooter as soon as he enters.
Not to mention that in many of the cases when a citizen has stopped a mass shooter, the citizen was either former or current off-duty law enforcement officer.
EPCC students and staff include many brave ex-military and ex-members of law enforcement who know how to handle a live fire situation. Gun alarmists tend to think the active shooter will enjoy every advantage, while the armed citizen will suffer every possible misfortune (i.e. police will immediately shoot the armed citizen on sight).
They seem to think police will surely be unable to tell the difference. To spell it out for those driven by emotion rather than logic, a spree killer who succeeds in killing looks for another target, a defensive shooter stops shooting once the threat is neutralized.
As mentioned before, true hoplophobes are rare. They mainly represent those who have had a truly traumatic experience involving a firearm. Most of the rest of the gun fearing public suffers from an artificially created fear. Most haven’t even seen, carried or even worse have never personally used a gun to even understand them.
Personally, I will not a fear anyone next to me in class who carries a legally concealed weapon. The same way I don’t fear any law abiding citizen who carries a concealed weapon on the street today.
There is no difference.