The Opinion
Pages
Op-Ed
Contributor
When May I Shoot
a Student?
By GREG
HAMPIKIAN
FEB. 27, 2014
BOISE, Idaho —
TO the chief counsel of the Idaho State Legislature:
In light of the
bill permitting guns on our state’s college and university campuses, which is
likely to be approved by the state House of Representatives in the coming days,
I have a matter of practical concern that I hope you can help with: When may I
shoot a student?
I am a biology
professor, not a lawyer, and I had never considered bringing a gun to work until
now. But since many of my students are likely to be armed, I thought it would be
a good idea to even the playing field.
I have had
encounters with disgruntled students over the years, some of whom seemed quite
upset, but I always assumed that when they reached into their backpacks they
were going for a pencil. Since I carry a pen to lecture, I did not feel
outgunned; and because there are no working sharpeners in the lecture hall, the
most they could get off is a single point. But now that we’ll all be packing
heat, I would like legal instruction in the rules of classroom engagement.
At present, the
harshest penalty available here at Boise State is expulsion, used only for the
most heinous crimes, like cheating on Scantron exams. But now that lethal force
is an option, I need to know which infractions may be treated as de facto
capital crimes.
I assume that if
a student shoots first, I am allowed to empty my clip; but given the velocity of
firearms, and my aging reflexes, I’d like to be proactive. For example, if I am
working out a long equation on the board and several students try to correct me
using their laser sights, am I allowed to fire a warning shot?
If two armed
students are arguing over who should be served next at the coffee bar and I
sense escalating hostility, should I aim for the legs and remind them of the
campus Shared-Values Statement (which reads, in part, “Boise State strives to
provide a culture of civility and success where all feel safe and free from
discrimination, harassment, threats or intimidation”)?
While our city
police chief has expressed grave concerns about allowing guns on campus, I would
point out that he already has one. I’m glad that you were not intimidated by
him, and did not allow him to speak at the public hearing on the bill (though I
really enjoyed the 40 minutes you gave to the National Rifle Association
spokesman).
Knee-jerk
reactions from law enforcement officials and university presidents are best set
aside. Ignore, for example, the lame argument that some drunken frat boys will
fire their weapons in violation of best practices. This view is based on
stereotypical depictions of drunken frat boys, a group whose dignity no one
seems willing to defend.
The problem, of
course, is not that drunken frat boys will be armed; it is that they are drunken
frat boys. Arming them is clearly not the issue. They would cause damage with or
without guns. I would point out that urinating against a building or firing a
few rounds into a sorority house are both violations of the same honor code.
In terms of the
campus murder rate — zero at present — I think that we can all agree that guns
don’t kill people, people with guns do. Which is why encouraging guns on campus
makes so much sense. Bad guys go where there are no guns, so by adding guns to
campus more bad guys will spend their year abroad in London. Britain has
incredibly restrictive laws — their cops don’t even have guns! — and gun deaths
there are a tiny fraction of what they are in America. It’s a perfect place for
bad guys.
Some of my
colleagues are concerned that you are encouraging firearms within a densely
packed concentration of young people who are away from home for the first time,
and are coincidentally the age associated with alcohol and drug experimentation,
and the commission of felonies.
Once again, this
reflects outdated thinking about students. My current students have grown up
learning responsible weapon use through virtual training available on the Xbox
and PlayStation. Far from being enamored of violence, many studies have shown,
they are numb to it. These creative young minds will certainly be stimulated by
access to more technology at the university, items like autoloaders, silencers
and hollow points. I am sure that it has not escaped your attention that the
library would make an excellent shooting range, and the bookstore could do with
fewer books and more ammo choices.
I want to
applaud the Legislature’s courage. On a final note: I hope its members will
consider my amendment for bulletproof office windows and faculty body armor in
Boise State blue and orange.
Greg Hampikian is a professor of biology and criminal justice
at Boise State University and a co-author of “Exit to Freedom.”
1 comment:
What an interesting pairing of fields. The letter showed up as on OPed in the NYTimes, where I first read it, but has been spreading around - largely I imagine because of the combination of humor and common sense. When do you imagine the rahrah for guns legislators will remove the metal detectors from their own places of work and allow open and/or concealed carry?
Post a Comment