Relaxed gun laws won't prevent violent crimes

Editor,

Daniel Martinez must be very ignorant to believe that freedom to carry guns on campus will somehow protect students, rather than endanger their lives. If we are allowed to carry guns to campus, the mayhem that occurred at Virginia Tech on April 16 would have been far worse. How does a professor teach a class knowing that his students carry loaded weapons to the classroom? Is it possible to give an F to a student with a loaded gun? Will the financial aid officers sit behind bulletproof glass?

Imagine that we can all carry weapons to campus. If an unbalanced individual walks into a class, pulls a weapon and opens fire, absolute chaos will ensue. The 20 students in the class will overreact as the adrenaline pumps through their bodies and open fire not only at the shooter, but at their classmates, as well. Other students who come into class brandishing their weapons, not knowing who initiated the violence, will start firing at everyone with a gun. Then, imagine the police coming. Who will they shoot? Where is the safety in that?

Martinez believes guns are a potential cure for all of society's ills. His argument is that if everybody were armed, criminals would not attack, because they would be shot. This argument is as good as the one that states that the death penalty deters people from committing capital crimes. If Martinez is correct, we should mandate that all people carry weapons.

I wonder if Martinez believes that if every country in the world had a nuclear weapon, no country would actually use nuclear weapons. Maybe Martinez believes we must invade Iran before it has weapons of mass destruction. However, according to his arguments, our position with regard to nuclear weapons should be to sell them to Iran and all other countries, thereby making them obsolete.

Universities are not places to exercise anybody's right to bear arms. In fact, one person's right to bear arms infringes upon my right to walk into class and feel safe. Why are guns that can shoot out more than 30 rounds allowed to be sold? What kind of protection does that type of a weapon provide? Ironically, the only incidents publicized are acts of violence against innocent people. Why do they not televise the use of guns as a tool for protection? Let me enlighten Martinez: It's because one out of 47 shootings are in self-defense. The other 46 are murders, suicides and accidental shootings.

If crime is truly the issue, ask the police which side of the argument they support. I guarantee it is not that of Martinez.

Isaac Padilla

UNM student