The shooting rampage on the Virginia Tech campus April 16, 2007, remains the deadliest mass shooting on a university campus in our country’s history. In a dorm and classroom building, 33 people lost their lives.
This school shooting revived the ongoing debate over gun control.58 While news of the tragedy was still fresh, many news programs featured reports about the national debate over how to solve the problem of gun-related violence on college campuses. A heated debate occurred in Virginia’s own state legislature as representatives fought over whether concealed weapons should be allowed on their campuses. Virginia and 48 other states do issue gun permits allowing state residents to carry concealed weapons. The issue of whether to lift gun restrictions on college campuses has been hotly debated for the last decade or so:
Virginia voted not to, but Utah voted to allow students to carry concealed weapons on the University of Utah campus. Advocates for allowing firearms on college campuses argued that Virginia already has gun control laws that obviously do not work. If someone plans to kill a bunch of people and then themselves, regulations will not help, but coming face-to-face with another gun will. A concealed weapon is there for self-defense, and had faculty or students been armed, they could have used those weapons to stop the Virginia Tech killer. Opponents argued that allowing guns on college campuses is not going to solve the real problem, which is the reason for the violence; thus, we have to find ways to prevent people from using guns to express how disturbed they are. Opponents suggest attending to and treating the reasons for violence, not issuing gun permits to college students and faculty.
Try the following exercise. In a small group or as a whole class, to get a more vivid idea of the types of arguments made in this case, briefly research the issue of gun violence on college campuses and then simulate the point-counterpoint discussion, either between two class members or two large groups roleplaying each position.
1. How many arguments can you create to support each position? Put them on the board for all to see.
2. What fallacies can you identify in the arguments presented?
3. Assume the two “debaters” are members of a small discussion group charged with identifying a policy to prevent college shootings. What would you say and do if you heard the kinds of fallacies being expressed during the discussion?