As we approach a new academic season, schools are not significantly safer than they were at this time last year. In some respects, this is surprising. Gun violence in schools is in the news, and the #MeToo movement has exposed sexual assault incidents on college campuses across the United States perpetrated by students, as well as faculty, medical personnel and coaches entrusted with the care and training of those in their charge. Yet nothing changes the status quo of offering “thoughts and prayers” and the call for more, not less guns, in the public square.

The problem with simplistic and knee jerk answers to complex problems is that they often cause cascading unintended consequences that cause more problems that they solve. Case in point: allowing professors and students the right to bring a concealed gun into the classroom as part of a relaxation of state conceal carry laws. What could go wrong, right? As it turns out, plenty. However, the wave of public acceptance of guns on campus, led by Texas, has serious momentum.

So, let’s step back and take a deep breath and review the concerns raised by those opposed to such drastic changes in the higher education environment. An eye-opening argument is presented in AP’s The Conversation feature revised in July of this year entitled “Will Guns on Campus Lead to Grade Inflation?” According to its author, Jessica Smartt Gullion, assistant professor of sociology at Texas Woman’s University, the decision by state legislators in Texas to allow people with handgun licenses to carry concealed firearms on college campuses in what was called its “Campus Carry” law sets up a dilemma for professors between upholding professional ethics and protecting their lives.

Stress, Anxiety And Guns

This is not implausible. As Gullion points out, there are examples of gun violence in classrooms even before it became legal to bring weapons on campus. In 2014, a professor was shot by a student at Purdue in front of a classroom full of his students. In 2009, a student attempted but failed to shoot his math professor on the campus of Northern Virginia Community College. In 2000, a graduate student at the University of Arkansas shot his English professor. Speaking for herself, Gullion explained, “In my five years as a college professor, I have had experience with a number of emotionally distressed students who resort to intimidation when they receive a lesser grade than what they feel they deserve.”

She goes on to relate an incident she had with one student that points to matters that could have spiraled out of control if that student was carrying a gun. “Here is an example of one such threatening experience: one evening in a graduate course, after I handed back students’ papers, a young woman stood up and pointed at me. ‘This is unacceptable!’ she screamed as her body shook in rage. She moved toward the front of the class waving her paper in my face and screamed again, ‘unacceptable!’ After a heated exchange, she left the room, and stood outside the door sobbing. All this was over receiving a B on a completely low-stakes assignment. What followed was even more startling. The following week, the student brought along a muscle-bound man to class. He watched me through the doorway window for the entire three hours of the class, with his arms folded across his chest. And if this wasn’t enough, the young woman’s classmates avoided me on campus because, they said, they were afraid of getting caught in the crossfire should she decide to shoot me. After that, every time she turned in a paper I cringed and prayed that it was good so that I wouldn’t have to give her anything less than an A.”

Guns on campus could create an environment of fear. Think of it as bullying on steroids. The high-pressure atmosphere on college campuses is the perfect breeding ground for disaster. Think about it. Think about how important a GPA is to a student. Great GPAs get you into a top-notch school, good GPAs, not so much. A student can lose a scholarship or some forms of financial aid with one low GPA report. For foreign exchange students, a lower GPA can mean losing financing from their country and the end of their dream to finish their education. Imagine how this kind of pressure and desperation can lead to suicidal thoughts and misplaced anger and resentment. Now, insert a gun into that equation. Is it unreasonable to suspect that in the not so distant future professors on conceal carry campuses may begin to wonder if it’s worth risking his or her life to give an unruly student a failing grade.

My own experience presents a cautionary tale. As a former English teacher, I had occasion to fail a student for missing too many classes. It wasn’t up to me, it was a mandate. Miss 40 days without a valid medical excuse, and you automatically fail. One angry student showed up in my classroom after receiving his notice. After yelling and threatening me, he began hitting me. Luckily a security guard showed up and took him away. Looking back, I shudder to think what would have happened if he had a gun.

Unfortunately, the need for a “feel good” solution to school safety does little to address the underlying problem of school safety and creates an environment of fear and intimidation that tears at the integrity of the system. And the potential for disaster is growing.

Which States Allow Concealed Carry?

According to National Conference of State Legislatures reporting the potential for concealed carry on campus exists in all 50 states. There are 16 states that do not allow concealed weapons on college campuses:

•  California

•  Florida

•  Illinois

•  Louisiana

•  Massachusetts

•  Michigan

•  Missouri

•  Nebraska

•  Nevada

•  New Jersey

•  New Mexico

•  New York

•  North Carolina

•  North Dakota

•  South Carolina

•  Wyoming

In another 23 states individual colleges and universities have the power to decide whether or not concealed carry weapons can be brought on their campuses:

•  Alabama

•  Alaska

•  Arizona

•  Connecticut

•  Delaware

•  Hawaii

•  Indiana

•  Iowa

•  Kentucky

•  Maine

•  Maryland

•  Minnesota

•  Montana

•  New Hampshire

•  Ohio

•  Oklahoma

•  Pennsylvania

•  Rhode Island

•  South Dakota

•  Vermont

•  Virginia

•  Washington

•  West Virginia

State legislators and courts in 10 states searching for answers to gun violence now have provisions allowing the carrying of concealed weapons on public postsecondary campuses. These states are:

•  Arkansas

•  Colorado

•  Georgia

•  Idaho

•  Kansas

•  Mississippi

•  Oregon

•  Texas

•  Utah

•  Wisconsin

Tennessee allows faculty members with licenses to carry weapons on campus but not students or the general public.

An article on the website of The National Conference of State Legislatures explains, “Utah remains the only state to have statute specifically naming public colleges and universities as public entities that do not have the authority to ban concealed carry, and thus, all 10 public institutions in Utah allow concealed weapons on their property.

Recently passed Kansas legislation creates a provision that colleges and universities cannot prohibit concealed carry unless a building has ‘adequate security measures.’ Governing boards of the institutions, however, may still request an exemption to prohibit for up to four years.

Wisconsin legislation created a provision that colleges and universities must allow concealed carry on campus grounds. Campuses can, however, prohibit weapons from campus buildings if signs are posted at every entrance explicitly stating that weapons are prohibited. All University of Wisconsin system campuses and technical community college districts are said to be putting this signage in place.

Legislation passed in Mississippi in 2011 creates an exception to allow concealed carry on college campuses for those who have taken a voluntary course on safe handling and use of firearms by a certified instructor.”

And they report that state courts have systematically narrowed the rights of state colleges and universities to impose their own bans of concealed weapons on their premises. The University of Colorado and the Oregon University System had their bans overturned because it was deemed that these systems “had overstepped their authority in issuing the bans.”

Conclusion

Gullion concludes her piece by posing the questions, “will we soon see a new sort of grade inflation, with students earning a 4.0 GPA with their firepower rather than brain power? And if so, what sort of citizenry will we be building on our campuses?” These are sobering questions that must be explored and answered now. •

California Supreme Court  Finds Universities And Colleges Have “Duty” To Protect Students On Campus

Part of the problem with school violence is a lack of accountability. It’s too easy to generally blame society or say the problem is too complex to deal with effectively. With gun makers shielded from litigation and a lack of infrastructure to deal with stalking, assault or abuse complaints, people are getting frustrated. Someone, anyone has to be accountable for injustices if only to light a fire under the society to provoke improvement and change. And this frustration has spawned a new term – “duty of care” – that defines responsibility on a whole new level.

The California Supreme Court has determined that public universities and colleges in the Golden State owe a “duty of care” to their students to protect them from foreseeable acts of violence by fellow students. The 7-0 decision issued recently in The Regents of the University of California v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County reversed a decision by the Second District Court of Appeal, which sided with UCLA and dismissed a lawsuit against the University of California Regents filed by Plaintiff Katherine Rosen, a UCLA pre-med student who had been slashed across the throat and brutally stabbed multiple times by a mentally ill student while working in a chemistry lab on campus.

Prior to Rosen’s 2009 attack, different departments and personnel at UCLA had documented numerous red flags about her assailant, Damon Thompson, relating to erratic, violent behavior as a result of schizophrenia. He’d made numerous threats against students, including Rosen, and despite these multiple red flags, UCLA failed to perform any type of threat assessment pursuant to its own policies and procedures.

“Today’s decision by the California Supreme Court not only begins to bring justice to Katherine Rosen but forces universities and colleges to take responsibility for the safety and well-being of their students,” said Brian Panish of Panish Shea & Boyle LLP, the firm that represented the plaintiff, at the time of the decision reversal.

“To this day, I still struggle to understand how I was viciously attacked amidst a room full of my classmates and TA in the middle of the day while working on an experiment in Young Hall at UCLA,” said Rosen. “I am thrilled and relieved by the justices’ decision to overturn this ruling, and I am hopeful it will provide the impetus for colleges throughout the country to mobilize their resources to develop and implement real, effective strategies to protect their students.” •

ArmingTeachers? Not So Fast, Says Parents

The 50th annual PDK Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools reveals that parents have grave concerns regarding if schools can keep their children safe. These same parents believe that schools need metal detectors, better mental health screenings and even armed police guards. But what they aren’t convinced of is the need to arm teachers.

It’s a sad state of affairs that little more than a quarter of surveyed K-12 parents have strong confidence in their school’s ability to ward off a violent attack. Despite their fears, two thirds of these parents do not want to put their children in a classroom that has an armed teacher. Only a quarter of these parents think that an armed school staff would keep their children any safer. As a matter of fact, a third think their children would be less safe.

The results are from a new random-sample national survey on issues in public education by Phi Delta Kappa International, the association of professional educators (pdkinternational.org). The survey has been conducted annually since 1969, first as the PDK/Gallup Poll, and since 2016 as the PDK Poll, produced for the association by Langer Research Associates. •