As you may or may not know, the Board of Governors at the Colorado State University, against the vocal wishes of the student body, has recommended to President Tony Frank that the school not allow licensed conceal carry permit holders to exercise their right to carry on campus. Below is my letter to Dr. Frank:
Dr. Frank,
As an actuary (Fellow of the Society of Actuaries, or FSA), I have reviewed quite a number of studies with respect to the issue of concealed carry laws and crime rates. One book that has done an exhaustive study of data down to the county level across the country is John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime.” I have read the book in it’s entirety (which is a bit of a chore because it is quite dry), and I have also reviewed the various critiques – both pro & con – of the book. I have yet to meet anyone with statistical/analytical training who has actually read the entire study who has any legitimate arguments against the main thrust of the methodology nor of the conclusions of the study. There are some smaller points that could be argued, but I believe that the thrust of the study is quite legitimate. The bottom line is that concealed carry deters crime and that the gain far outweighs any perceived (i.e. media sensationalized, anecdotal) risk. As someone once said to me, a collection of anecdotes do not constitute data. (But they do make great headlines.)
The concept of “Gun Free Zones” being an effective deterrent to violent crime, where current laws against said violent crime are impotent, is so stunningly absurd on its face that it is a testament to the lack of critical thinking in the public consciousness that so many people would swallow this canard hook, line & sinker.
When we exercise our right and assume our own personal responsibility to “carry”, it is our full knowledge of the terrible consequences that crime, and the use of force of any sort to protect oneself, can create which demand that those of us who carry must be diligent in our training to be aware of our surroundings, identify and avoid potential trouble, and utilize escape as our first lines of defense. Only in the case of violent, asocial behavior that threatens life or great bodily harm would we ever draw a gun. But if, God forbid, me or my family are ever placed into that situation despite our best efforts, each one of us will lay full claim to our fundamental right of self-preservation, and we will not allow that right to be abridged.
While I appreciate your considered effort towards some sort of a compromise, it is not a special “exemption” on a case by case basis that we seek. That would not only violate our fundamental rights, but it would also undermine the very premise of concealed carry as a deterrent to crime. Artificially limiting the “allowable” use of concealed carry permits would negatively affect the statistical probability that an individual might be carrying concealed such that the deterrent effect would be significantly diminished if not lost completely.
Please do not attempt to “solve” a “problem” that does not exist. The only “problem” you have at the moment is one centered around publicity and the University’s management of this situation. Bowing to a vocal, misguided minority of tenured “liberati” driven by emotion, instead rational thought based upon facts and logic would be a true problem. How ironic it is that professors in “higher education” would choose narrow minded dogma over critical thought, but unfortunately, this has become all too common today. The fear mongering of those who would claim that your campus has heretofore been dangerously unsafe and that draconian efforts that abridge constitutional rights as well as the fundamental human right of self preservation must be undertaken to correct this tremendous deficiency should be perceived as what it is – an insult to the history and tradition of Colorado State University and an attack on our personal rights and freedoms.
As a leader, please advise your Board of Governors that critical thinking is not dead, that there are those of us who are inclined to continue to pursue it, and that since it is the responsibility of Colorado State University to teach it, they should at least indulge the public’s assumption that they also practice it themselves. Perhaps this could one of those vaunted “teaching moments” that we’ve heard so much about lately.
