sense and sensitivity
by Paige Cram
Published: May 5, 2008
Last week, a shooting at a late night party led to a campus-wide lockdown at Florida Atlantic University, leaving the sounds of the school violence and gun control debates ringing in the country’s ears yet again. For every outcry of gun accessibility, lack of security or the need for prevention, there’s a counter-cry that is growing in strength and volume. It comes from Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC).
Founded shortly after the tragedy at Virginia Tech last year, the group has recently reached 30,000 members. According to the organization’s Web site, concealedcampus.org, their aim is “to push state legislatures and school administrations to grant concealed handgun license holders the right to carry concealed handguns on college campuses.” In other words, to bring guns onto college campuses, in the hands of select, “responsible” individuals, thereby encouraging self-defense and vigilantism in an emergency situation.
Days before the shooting at Florida Atlantic, the group grabbed headlines by hiring a notable keynote speaker for a presentation at the Virginia Tech campus - Eric Thompson, the man responsible for selling the guns that killed a total of 39 people at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University. The speech fell just a week after the anniversary and on the very soil of the VT tragedy, when emotions that may have simmered during the past year were already bubbling over. Regardless of the validity of the group’s aims or how researched their argument may be, they showed a horrific lack of judgment in hosting this event while the pain of so many people is still so raw. And Mr. Thompson, in choosing to accept the ill-advised invitation, is perhaps even worse. Especially in light of the fact that the speaking engagement could potentially increase his business.
Thompson did nothing illegal in the selling of those weapons, and he is certainly not responsible for the deaths that occurred, but it should be inarguable that his connection to the school shootings and the timing of the event was, at the very least, controversial.
However, Students for Concealed Carry on Campus vehemently defends its decision. The following is an excerpt from a statement posted on their web site: “Despite the attempts of some individuals and media outlets to paint Mr. Thompson’s appearance as profiteering and to portray SCCC’s decision to allow him to speak as insensitive, neither could be further from the truth.” To back up its position, the group pointed out it refrained from hosting public events on the day of the actual anniversary.
True. They waited seven whole days before scheduling the appearance.
They also argued that Thompson had graciously offered to sell his guns at cost for a period of two weeks, thereby clearing him of any charges of greed or personal profit.
Forgive me if, under the circumstances, his offer to make guns more readily available doesn’t immediately convince me of his selflessness.
I’m not making an argument for or against the character of Eric Thompson or the goals of SCCC. Personally, I find both questionable, but I respect the organization’s right to lobby on behalf of its beliefs and the beliefs of its members, and to seek out representatives who share those beliefs. However, I think its most recent activities are incredibly distasteful, and I think the defensive tone with which its organizers addressed the issue reeks of self-righteousness, even at one point attacking Virginia Tech spokesperson Larry Hincker for being openly anti-gun. When the grieving members of a community in pain expressed outrage over a poor decision, they could have simply apologized, and moved on. Instead, they chose to senselessly scoff at the accusations, and the accusers, who are mostly grieving family members and friends of those were murdered just a short year ago. It was an inadequate and inappropriate response to such a sensitive situation.
If the group wants to continue its work, and be taken seriously by legislators and universities across the country, it’s going to have to work on its image. Exercising better judgment is a start, and when that fails, learning to take criticism and owning up to its mistakes is the next step. When trying to convince the public that this is a group made up of only “responsible” individuals with whom a gun would be “safe,” it doesn’t help to be so aggressive and openly hostile, especially when being questioned for poor decision-making.
After all, guns don’t kill people. People do.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
(6)
May 14th, 2008 at 9:13 am
TAKE A STAND!!! YOUR SITTING ON THE FENCE
WHAT SAY YOU… GUNS MAKE IT EASY TO KILL
May 14th, 2008 at 9:43 am
The “fence” she presented was whether or not the SCCC’s actions were distasteful. And I’d say she most certainly took a side. The gun-control issue itself isn’t being argued.