Many have talked about what might have happened had the legislation allowing the carrying of concealed weapons on campuses not been rejected in Virginia; the latest essay or post I've come across is by Michelle Malkin.
I am willing to accept that if a shooter happens to come upon someone who is carring a CCW, there is a possibility that he could be stopped then and there. However, let us consider some possible negative effects as well.
What if there is more than one person carrying a concealed gun? And what if they come across each other? Might not there be a possibility of "friendly fire?"
After all, how do you know he's not the shooter? How does he know that you're not? How do you resolve such a standoff without injuring someone who is innocent, and at the same time without disarming yourself? If someone else perceives you as a threat, as you are pointing your pistol at him, and he is pointing a gun at you, and all around you there is chaos, what is the likelihood of an accidental or deliberate discharge taking place?
Even if there is an established protocol with respect to the police officers who confront you (that is, when the police arrive and see you armed, they will probably order you to put the weapon down, and if you don't, they will take action), what about SWAT snipers who are not close to you, but can only assess the situation from afar? Would they have orders to shoot any civilian running around with a gun and seems to be a threat?
If the shooter is obviously harming others, you may be justified in taking him down then and there. And, if you see someone carrying a gun but not firing on other students when there are plenty around, you could presume that he isn't the shooter. But how many civilians have the requisite training and discipline to make these sort of judgments? What happens if you two are alone? Then what can you assume, and how would your determine with certainty that he is not a threat? Would it be necessary to pass a law to circumscribe one's right of self-defense by prohibiting offensive action? Is there any other way to temper your enthusiasm to go out and take the shooter down yourself, in the interest of saving the lives of your fellow students, and possibly putting yourself in the situations that I've just discussed?
At least if you are in your home defending yourself and your family, there are more presumptions you can make about an stranger or intruder, but even then one has to be careful--you wouldn't want to fire on a police officer who fails to identify himself or has done so, but because of the "fog of war" cannot be heard.
So the administrators of the schools, and others opposed to the VA legislation do have some reasons in support of their position. If people were to be allowed to have CCWs on a campus, it seems that some sort of training by the local community would be necessary, including the development of some sort of procedure for self-identification, both to others and to the police.
Requiring open-carry doesn't seem to be a solution, because that simply makes innocent civilians the first target of a shooter, who obviously won't be following laws requiring open-carry. Such measures which presume and require that "everyone follow the rules" will not work if criminals and aggressors do not obey.
Certainly one could argue that the right of firearms should be limited to citizens. And perhaps a more extensive background check should be in place, but what would be satisfactory, short of a psychological examination by a state-recognized psychiatrist? And would this be an unnecessary burden to the citizen who wishes to purchase a firearm, if the state chooses not to pay for the psychiatric evaluation?
Another possibility would be some sort of evaluation process for citizenship--both respect to those who are born here and those seeking to be 'naturalized.' A more robust conception of citizenship than the popular one we have now, with a clear delineation of duties and responsibilities, as well as "rights." So perhaps the community would have some role to play in endorsing me as a citizen and recognizing that I have a right to own a weapon. If the community and gun sellers have a better acquaintance with their fellow citizens, this would be an additional check againt those who shouldn't own a gun because of the danger they pose to themselves and to others. Still, would that be enough to satisfy both mothers and supporters of the second amendment?
Citizens who wish to own a gun probably need to learn how to deal with the effects of adrenaline and so on--they would do well to read Lt. Col. Grossman's book On Combat, and learning from the experiences of police officers and so on, so that they can learn how to make good judgments despite the autonomic responses of the body to danger. I am not opposed to militias or requiring training and service of all eligible males--I just don't want to see this done by the Federal Government. Militias should be local, under local (democratic) control. The link between virtue, citizenship, and serving in a militia is a part of the American heritage that we should preserve and re-establish where necessary.
Even if one is not persuaded that it would be to his benefit to get such training, perhaps the legal liability associated with getting a CCW permit and using a weapon in an emergency might. Another reason to pass a law that CCW permit holders get some sort of training from local law enforcement or some government agency.
Such "supervision" should be kept as local as possible, in accord with subsidiarity. I may not have a problem with my fellow-citizens knowing that I own a weapon, even if I fear the Federal Government having this information. Individuals cannot stand alone against tyranny--if they are to be successful, they need to develop trust and civic friendship with their fellow citizens. (Of course, such a civic friendship is not merely necessary to prevent tyranny, but is also needed if relocalization is to have any sort of permanency. As it was mentioned in a previous post, encouraging everyone to build up the bonds of community may also diminish some of the causes that lead to alienation. But this requires a commitment to justice and benevolence and a common culture [particularly moral understanding].)
I'd be especially interested in looking at the Swiss model with respect to forming and maintaining a true citizen's militia. And also, the experience of other countries, particularly Israel, in training civilians how to thwart a mass killer while avoiding friendly fire.
[an earlier post with links related to the Swiss army]
No comments:
Post a Comment