Deterrence on college campuses, or what would Doc Holliday do?

According to the Merriam Webster online dictionary, deterrence is defined as: a: the inhibition of criminal behavior by fear especially of punishment b: the maintenance of military power for the purpose of discouraging attack.

The recent murders on college campuses resulted in some postulating by having colleges as weapons-free zones the perpetuators were assured a safe environment in which to conduct their violence. Initially, this seemed to be the outcries of NRA lifer members. Almost coincidently the DC gun ban has come before the Supreme Court. Given the climate of DC it seemed almost a slam-dunk that the Supreme Court ruling would uphold the city’s current gun ban. However, the Supreme Court initial ruling seems to be trying to find a balance between an outright ban and the Second Amendment. The mayor of DC feels that personal ownership of firearms will equate to more guns and thus more crimes being committed with those possessing guns. Others will argue that the ban on owning guns in DC has not deterred criminals from committing gun crimes.

I’ve avoided the top of firearms ownership on this blog as it tends to be a polarizing topic. Both sides of the gun rights issue have strong views and tend to ignore arguments contrary to their beliefs. However as I work with leadership at my college to try and prepare the campus for dealing with the possibility of violence, I keep going back to my military roots for solutions short of creating a fortress out of a college campus. I’m not sure if the shootings are Virginia Tech or Northern Illinois University could have been avoided had students or faculty been armed. It does warrant some discussion though as colleges and universities across the nation struggle with how to prevent future shootings on their campuses. On one hand, first impressions of having an armed populace of students and faculty would appear to create a situation ripe for violence. I don’t know of any studies of that show the impact of having legal firearms on campus and the potential impact to preventing crime. On the other hand look at the last time you heard of anyone becoming the victim of crime at a gun show. I’m sure there are a variety of images that come to mind regarding that last statement, depending on your point of view. The point remains that criminals (and terrorists for that matter) look for the softest points of any society or system to attack.

The University of North Carolina (UNC) and Auburn University both lost students recently to random violence. In both of these cases, young women were randomly killed. Both victims were young females traveling alone at the time they were murdered. To my knowledge, neither of the victims were armed. A valid question that should be asked is were the killers emboldened to commit violence by the knowledge they would most likely NOT encounter an armed student? Even if neither of the victims had been armed on the day they were murdered, would the killers have gone through with attacking the victims if there had been a possibility of encountering an armed victim or passerby?

Increasing the presence of guns, some would argue, increases the chances for violent acts committed with firearms. Those who own firearms legally and go through concealed training courses are very responsible citizens. The possibility of a criminal encountering an armed citizen inclined to perforate their physicality with a bullet may give some cause to pause. No one has attacked Ft Knox because the price for failure is just too high. A similar strategy may be needed on college campuses. The would-be criminal needs to consider carefully that failing to choose the right victim (in an environment with armed citizens) could result in bodily injury to his person or even death.

Deterrence is an acceptable foreign policy strategy yet when it comes to providing a safe and secure college environment (especially if deterrence means an armed campus populace) many tend to favor other alternatives. Keeping a campus an open environment means turning colleges and universities into fortresses is an unacceptable (and costly) alternative. Policies and procedures can only go so far in protecting the students and faculty from random violence. Modern society today has produced some of the most irreverent and impolite people seen in many generations. Is it rational to think that these people would be anymore inclined towards civil behavior just because it is written in a student handbook? It may be time to re-evaluate the “weapons free” policies of most colleges and universities. Only by causing criminals to rethink their courses of action BEFORE they commit murder and mayhem can we hope to increase the safety and security of our campuses.