Monday, October 12, 2015

Governer Jerry Brown Bans Concealed Weapons on Campuses Across California

In the course of a month, there have been three, large college shootings in the Oregon, Texas, and Arizona. School shootings have been an unfortunately reoccurring problem in the United States, and as a result, Senator Lois Wolk introduced Senate Bill 707. SB 707 bans people with concealed weapon permits from bringing firearms on school campuses. It also creates extensive background checks, which Wolk deems necessary because she claims that gun permits are becoming easier to obtain.
On October 10th, Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill, causing it to be a law in California that bans permitted firearms on campuses, expect police officers and any other figures school districts allow.
This bill has spurred controversy over multiple gun associations. Some claim this strips citizen's rights under the Second Amendment to own and carry a weapon. Others, like the Firearm Policy Coalition claim that gun violence will increase because taking these rights away will threaten self dense on school campuses.
I believe this new law won't necessarily withhold and diminish any new gun violence, for people who are willing to shoot students, most likely do not care if they're breaking gun permit laws. However, I do think it's smart to try anything to lower the amount of school shootings.
What do you think about this new law? Do you think it'll truly decrease gun violence on student campuses or create more? Do you believe this bill could've included more citizen debate, like including the pro-gun association points of view, or do you think Brown did the right thing by immediately signing it? This reminds me of class discussions addressing the powers of Senators and other political figures. Clearly, there is a large upset because of this law; perhaps Brown should've listened to citizens more? What do you think?



Justin Chan said...

Thank you Meghan for your original post. With all the recent shootings, it is understandable that Governor Jerry would want to put more restriction on weapons. It is true that the new law "won't necessarily withhold and diminish any new gun violence," and I agree because those who carry out gun violence would not care about breaking gun permit laws; however, with this ban in place, there would be less guns brought to school for protection, contributing to an overall safer environment. Even holding a gun for protection sakes disrupts learning, as the gun is a constant reminder that danger may be present. Free from sight in this cause might equate to free from mind. In addition, by having this law, people who carry out gun violence would have a greater punishment; thus, it may not be a bad idea to have this ban. Some claim that this law is insignificant; however, if there are arguments in favor of this ban with few arguments against it, it is reasonable that this law should be passed.

In response to a few other questions, I believe that desperate times call for desperate measures; thus, Brown did the right thing by immediately signing it. I am sure those involved in this ban had the view point of pro-gun associations, and if the majority are against these pro-gun associations, then Governor Brown justifiably signed the ban.

Here is an interesting fact sheet from the pro-gun side:
Is there some spin present in this "fact sheet"? How valid are these statistics? What questions are raised after reading these numbers? Does this "fact sheet" change or strengthen your opinion about Governor Brown's ban?

Christopher Duan said...

I agree with Justin's point of view. although it is comforting for people to think that one is "safer" because of their sense of security by banning guns, shooters are already bent on murder and destruction, and I certainly think that a law that tells them "Don't bring guns here!" would be largely ineffective against shooters, who are in disregard of the law with or without the law. However, I disagree that holding a gun would make one feel less safe. Though it is a reminder that danger may be present, I think that whether or not someone has a gun won't detract from the level of danger is constant regardless of whether or not this student has a gun on him or her.
I think that Governor Brown did the right thing in signing this bill quickly in order to promote his liberal lean, but in terms of strictly from a cause to effect standpoint, I'm not sure if signing this law and enforcing it will make a significant impact on school shootings, and therefore maybe ill-planned in long term cost to benefit analysis.

Annika Olives said...

While I agree with Justin and Chris that this new law may not significantly change anything, I'd like to point out that there are plenty of school shootings, or at last incidents with guns, that don't go publicized each year. The ones that do, like Columbine or even the ones from the last few weeks, only gain national attention because a significant number of people were killed, or a shooter went to a school ground with the sole intent to shoot. What about the Antioch girl that accidentally shot herself in the hand a couple days ago with a gun she found in her middle school bathroom, ( I believe that Governor Brown took a step in the right direction in choosing to sign the bill; while it may not keep students safer in terms of mass shootings, it prevents these accidents and smaller scale situations from happening.

kristen said...

I also agree with the commenters here regarding the concealed weapons ban. We often hear an argument from pro-gun groups that "guns don't kill people, people do"; true but with the ease in obtaining concealed weapon permits, the proliferation of illegal guns dumped in and around the school neighborhood, the signing of this bill provides a step in the right direction. Almost an obvious and "I can't believe it" moment especially in this day and age where too many times we hide under the protection of the "right to bear arms and defend ourselves" from everyday common sense. Who needs to bring concealed weapons to schools? Who needs the protection? School must be made a safe environment, free from weapons. The Governor signed this probably thinking that this obvious "rule" should not have needed a bill to begin with! And no, there should be no more discussion with citizens on this topic.