The linked story doesn't really describe why this is a problem. It shows a debate between CC enthusiasts and gun control enthusiasts over whether legal concealed carry makes places safer.
I don't have a real opinion, but I don't think there's convincing data either way. I very much doubt that gun control laws dissuade suicidal killers, though.
Well, what I was presenting as the problem was that legislation was about to pass legalizing guns on campus.
Let me say something about why this is a problem. Back when I started grad school, a disgruntled office staffer was overheard in a bar saying that he was going to bring his gun to campus the next day. Fortunately, he never showed up to work. But if he had, it would've made everybody a lot less nervous if we could've had campus security say, "sorry you can't come here if you have a gun."
Again, if you're worried about gun violence at school, I don't see how rules against guns on campus help. Those disgruntled workers obviously don't care about the rules, because they are already willing to break the rules against murder.
So here's how the rules help: if you know that somebody has a gun and a grudge, you can tell him that he can't go meet his colleagues with the gun.
It's not a good assumption that all those disgruntled workers are already hell-bent on murder. Putting obstacles between suicidal people and death (I've heard) works pretty well in reducing suicide rates from bridge-jumping and such. It takes more commitment to solve a puzzle to execute your suicidal intention than it does to commit suicide in a moment.
People get angry and bring a gun. Some of them will have second thoughts by the time it comes to shooting. If some of them are about to walk into the building and a security guy says, "Sir, you can't come in here if you have a gun, people have heard you say that you were going to bring one today" some of them will go home instead of meeting the co-worker and who knows what happens next.
The tip of the iceberg is the hell-bent maniacs. But assuming a distribution of crazy that isn't wildly bimodal, there's going to be a lot of people who will be deterred if the security guard shows up and makes some friendly but firm remarks.
Nicholas Beaudrot is an accidental political observer living in Seattle, Washington. By day he writes software for Amazon.com, snowboards, and plays ultimate frisbee. By night [and morn] he posts to this blog, runs the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally, and tries to cook decent Italian cuisine. A graduate of Brown University with a joint degree in Mathematics-Computer Science, in late 2003 Nicholas felt the urge to put his knack with numbers towards a greater social purpose than winning his fantasy baseball league or taking up poker, perhaps in an act of penance for not voting in 2000. He has been spotted standing in line for Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, on the Atlanta area quiz bowl program "Hi-Q", and as a young boy in national broadcasts of the Christmas Eve service at the Cathedral of Saint Philip. If you play Halo 3, Team Fortress II, Rock Band 2, Catan, or a number of other games, he's on Xbox live as niq24601.
Neil Sinhababu is a philosophy professor at the National University of Singapore. It's a tropical island with good public transit and they're very nice about not caning him. He's fond of red-state college towns like Austin, where he got his PhD. Much of his research is in ethics — hence his alias "Neil the Ethical Werewolf," which contains the name of his philosophy blog. He has also published on Nietzsche and on how to have a girlfriend in another universe. His utilitarianism shapes his goals and tactical views, and makes it impossible for him to stay away from politics. At Harvard, he won a student government election by eating fire in each dorm room in his district. He'd be happy to use this skill to help Democrats in tough races. He likes drinking with smart people and dancing in altogether ridiculous ways. At his last project, War or Car, he showed that you could buy each US household a Prius or each panda a stealth bomber for the price of the Iraq War.
4 comments:
The linked story doesn't really describe why this is a problem. It shows a debate between CC enthusiasts and gun control enthusiasts over whether legal concealed carry makes places safer.
I don't have a real opinion, but I don't think there's convincing data either way. I very much doubt that gun control laws dissuade suicidal killers, though.
Well, what I was presenting as the problem was that legislation was about to pass legalizing guns on campus.
Let me say something about why this is a problem. Back when I started grad school, a disgruntled office staffer was overheard in a bar saying that he was going to bring his gun to campus the next day. Fortunately, he never showed up to work. But if he had, it would've made everybody a lot less nervous if we could've had campus security say, "sorry you can't come here if you have a gun."
Again, if you're worried about gun violence at school, I don't see how rules against guns on campus help. Those disgruntled workers obviously don't care about the rules, because they are already willing to break the rules against murder.
So here's how the rules help: if you know that somebody has a gun and a grudge, you can tell him that he can't go meet his colleagues with the gun.
It's not a good assumption that all those disgruntled workers are already hell-bent on murder. Putting obstacles between suicidal people and death (I've heard) works pretty well in reducing suicide rates from bridge-jumping and such. It takes more commitment to solve a puzzle to execute your suicidal intention than it does to commit suicide in a moment.
People get angry and bring a gun. Some of them will have second thoughts by the time it comes to shooting. If some of them are about to walk into the building and a security guy says, "Sir, you can't come in here if you have a gun, people have heard you say that you were going to bring one today" some of them will go home instead of meeting the co-worker and who knows what happens next.
The tip of the iceberg is the hell-bent maniacs. But assuming a distribution of crazy that isn't wildly bimodal, there's going to be a lot of people who will be deterred if the security guard shows up and makes some friendly but firm remarks.
Post a Comment