Reply #31: Interesting comparison. [View All]

[rrneck]

Both the military and universities concern themselves with the same basic demographic group of people. But the organizations are light years apart.

It might be fair to say that the military is designed around dealing with dangerous weapons in one way or another. That makes it highly focused, rigidly hierarchical, and closure oriented. It probably attracts people for whom that mindset has some appeal.

A liberal arts university on the other hand is exactly the opposite. It's stock and trade is ideas, not a few of which are dangerous as well. It's multi disciplinary, authority questioning, and sponsors research with an expectation of cultural change. Pretty much everything the military, an organization designed around weapons, is not. Universities attract a lot of people who simply don't have the temperament or mindset to deal well with firearms. Placing guns into that environment presents a lot of unique challenges.

I don't like the idea of guns in universities. I would rather there not be a firearm at any university ever. Of course I don't like the idea of home invasions, muggings and rapes at universities either. I can't see any reason to deny someone the right to carry at a university if they can legally do so elsewhere.

I haven't been able to conjure up any new type of firearms regulation that I thought would work in a university environment. But everyone there is supposed to be there to learn. Instead of another layer of regulation, it seems to me that another layer of education would be the solution. I was reminded in another thread how few actual soldiers there are in this, the worlds latest (and perhaps last) empire. Maybe it's time for compulsory national service. I'm not talking about a draft, or service that is exclusively military focused, although that could be an option. But I'm tired of people thinking that higher education is just a quick stop on the way to a bigger paycheck.