Recent orders
Campus Carry Laws Shootings have become quite rampant in the United States
Name:
Course:
Professor:
Date:
Campus Carry Laws
Shootings have become quite rampant in the United States, and the most alarming thing is that there are no comprehensive laws to govern and restrict gun ownership in the country. Buying a gun is as simple as walking into a store and paying in cash with no additional requirements such as background checks. It comes as no surprise that anyone can purchase a gun and walk into the street and start shooting indiscriminately. Mass shootings have become an almost regular part of breaking news headlines. It is shocking that with all the innocent lives claimed by senseless gun violence, there is yet to be a law that severely limits gun ownership. Even more worrisome is the fact that some Americans staunchly stand by the right to own guns, ignoring the danger that comes with it. Schools and colleges are among the most affected public spaces when it comes to gun violence. It is with this situation in mind that the campus carry laws have been put in place in an attempt to restore sanity in school grounds. However, it is still an intense debate on whether or not people should be permitted to carry firearms inside campus, with both sides of the divide giving compelling reasons for their position.
Some of the most horrific killings are the Columbine High School shootings in 1999 that claimed 15 lives, the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings that claimed 32 and most recently in 2018, 17 people died in a Parklands high school. These statistics show that there was an average of one shooting in the year 2018 (Arrigo & Acheson 136). It is clear that schools and colleges are soft targets for crazed shooters, and more needs to be done to protect the young people in our schools. Other public spaces, such as malls and clubs, have also fallen victim to gun violence. This matter is not restricted to the United States only; Britain and New Zealand have also been victims. On the 15th of March this year, a shooter attacked the Christchurch mosque in the relatively quiet New Zealand, resulting in the death of 51 Muslims in prayer at a mosque. The response to the fatal shooting was fast; the country tightened its gun laws and even banned some types of firearms. Sadly, there has been no similarly swift response in amending gun laws in the US despite the high number of shootings.
Different states in the country have different campus carry laws. These laws refer to the permits to carry concealed weapons within campuses. Some colleges allow licensed holders to carry concealed weapons within campus. These states include Idaho, Arkansas, Georgia, Texas and others. Other states allow individual colleges to choose whether or not to allow weapons within their campuses. Some states impose certain restrictions such as Tennessee gives licensed faculty permission to carry their hidden weapons within the campus, but students are not allowed to do the same. In other states, people can keep their arms concealed in their locked cars within the campus.
There are several reasons given in support of the permission to carry weapons within campus. Statistics have shown that students have the highest percentage when it comes to supporting campus carry at 57%. Faculty are less enthusiastic, with only 37% in support, and the least supportive of campus carry are school administrators, only 19% of whom support carrying weapons on campus (Bennett et al. 348). The most prominent reason is that the student and faculty can keep themselves safe in case of any danger. Within the campus, there are many dangers that students face on a daily basis, including rape, assault, and violent robbery and stalking. Some stalkers show up at their target’s doorstep and follow them around. Despite trying all measures including restraining orders, some stalkers will not relent, and most often they will end up hurting their targets, including raping them and even killing them. If the target were allowed to carry their weapons around, they would feel more secure knowing that they can protect themselves in case of anything.
The second argument for campus carry laws is that the right to carry a weapon is enshrined in the constitution. Students and faculty should be able to enjoy the right to carry their concealed weapons even within campus. There is no reason as to why people should be denied their constitutional rights to carry their weapons simply because they happen to be within campus grounds. Before a person is given authorization to carry a concealed weapon, they have to be trained; it has been found that permit holders are the most law-abiding and they are therefore unlikely to misuse their guns. Citizens should retain their rights so that they can be able to protect themselves in case of any danger to themselves or other people.
There are many views that oppose the campus carry laws. The first reason is that gun laws in the country are quite lenient, and therefore, anyone can get their hands on a gun. There are no background checks carried out when a person buys a gun. If a student or member of faculty that is mentally ill gets their hands on a weapon, their behaviour is quite unstable, and this puts others around them at risk. The second opposition to campus carry is that accidents from the concealed weapons are quite frequent. A person carrying a concealed weapon can accidentally set their gun off injuring themselves and other people. In addition to this, students and faculty will be quite nervous if they knew that one of the people in their class or grounds had a gun (Proffitt). They cannot predict the behaviour of the weapon holder; therefore, they have to be on high alert all the time. For this reason, students and faculty will not be able to concentrate on their core activity on campus, which is academics. Additionally, college students that want to commit suicide will be more likely to do it if they have firearms within their reach. People who attempt suicide with a gun succeed 85% of the time compared to only 2% who try using a drug overdose.
The third reason critics present against campus carry is that many college students engage in behaviours such as alcohol and drug consumption; these activities make them prone to erratic behaviour. For example, if a drunk student were to walk around campus with a gun in their pocket and get into a confrontation with someone, they are likely to draw their weapon and hurt other people. Handling firearms within the campus is, therefore, more likely to increase tensions rather that defusing tense situations. Another reason against campus carry is that it is very easy for a student’s firearm to be stolen from their dorm (Bouffard et al. 327). Theft within campus is quite prevalent, and this creates the danger of someone accessing guns that belong to others, even licensed owners.
Most of the students in college campuses are quite young, and therefore, they cannot be lawfully permitted to hold firearm permits. For this reason, the argument that a student or faculty member might have prevented the mass shootings of the past by countering the gunman holds no water. In further opposition to campus carry, it is argued that the job of dealing with armed assailants should be left to professionals such as campus police. These police have been trained for months, and hence, they are qualified to deal with such situations (Wilson & Wilson 32). Contrastingly, license firearm holders are only trained for a short period, such as one day. For this reason, they are not equipped to deal with explosive situations such as a shooter on campus.
Both sides of the debate give very valid points. Many students in support of the campus carry insist that being able to carry concealed weapons on campus would help them protect themselves. They can be able to fight their attackers on equal grounds. In addition to this, campus carry proponents say that the number of fatalities and injuries from campus shootings would have been significantly reduced if there had been a student or member of faculty who had a gun to retaliate against the gunmen. On the other hand, the arguments against campus carry laws are numerous.
Most states in the country allow campuses to come up with their own policies when it comes to campus carry. Not surprisingly, most of the campuses have chosen a gun-free policy within their grounds. Most of the students on campus are not yet old enough to be permitted to carry concealed weapons. They also engage in alcohol and drug use; thus, most of the time, they are not in a stable frame of mind. If they are allowed to carry a weapon, is it highly likely that accidents will happen that will lead to deaths. In case of any small altercation or argument, a student will be tempted to draw their weapon, and this might result in fatalities. The best course of action is to keep campuses gun-free so that students and faculty can devote their attention and time towards the core business of the campuses, which is imparting knowledge.
Works Cited
Arrigo, Bruce A., and Austin Acheson. “Concealed carry bans and the American college campus: A law, social sciences, and policy perspective.” Contemporary justice review 19.1 (2016): 120-141.
Bennett, Katherine, John Kraft, and Deborah Grubb. “University faculty attitudes toward guns on campus.” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 23.3 (2012): 336-355.
Bouffard, Jeffrey A., et al. “How many more guns? Estimating the effect of allowing licensed concealed handguns on a college campus.” Journal of interpersonal violence 27.2 (2012): 316-343.
Proffitt, Jennifer M., et al. “11 Preventing Violence or Promulgating Fear? ALEC, the NRA, and Guns on Campus.” (2017).
Wilson, Charles P., and Shirley A. Wilson. “Perceived roles of campus law enforcement: A cognitive review of attitudes and beliefs of campus constituents.” Professional Issues in Criminal Justice 6.1 (2011): 29-40.
According to Ronald Takaki in Chapter 2 of A Different Mirror, how does Mary Rowlandson’s narrative support his interpretatio
(Name)
(Instructors’ name)
(Course)
(Date)
American Culture
According to Ronald Takaki in Chapter 2 of A Different Mirror, how does Mary Rowlandson’s narrative support his interpretation of events in the 1670? Find additional examples and quotations in the excerpt from Mary Rowlandson’s captivity narrative in the Kaleidoscope reader and relate them to Takaki’s interpretation.
According to Takaki, The Tempest, one of Shakespeare’s plays can be used to explain a lot if attitudes and conceptions people have about the Americas and the development of race ideologies and concepts. This play was first released in 1611 and it served as a creation masquerade for a new American society (Takaki 25). Ireland was being invaded by the British and Caliban, a character in the Shakespeare play, was likened with the ‘wild Irish’ that was invaded by Britain. The author indicates that the English invaders destroyed Ireland for a period of two centuries, and even celebrated their triumph over the Irish people by taking slain Irish soldiers’ heads for trophies (27). In this chapter, the author likens these events with the play The Tempest which was really about the newly found world. In the view of the author, the name of Caliban was derived from cannibalism or cannibal. To him the obsession of the European colonizers of this period could be likened with cannibalism. The Indians, on the other hand, were likened to the devil by Takaki. They also represented other attributes such as sin, the body, laziness, sexuality and lack of self- control.
‘… On the surest ways to confirm an identity….. is to find some way of measuring what one is not….’ (Takaki 41). This is probably one of the most significant quotes in this chapter, emphasizing the need and interest of the author in identities. In the same chapter, Takaki relates or associates the narrative of Ki- wa- kwe- skew, which was another creature, thought to be the sister of the story’s main character, the cannibal. In the translations of the author, this creature was probably used to represent the oppressive Europeans.
The captivity narrative of Mary Rowlandson in a way supports the interpretations made by Takaki in his book. Mary was captured by warring Indians who attacked the English people with cruelty. They killed children, babies, women and men and beheaded some of them. They burned people’s houses with people in them and took captive those who remained. The reason why Mary’s story can be used to support the interpretations of Takaki in chapter 12 is because they both have the same views of the Indians. Takaki indicated that Indians could be likened with the devils, with sinful people, who did not have self control. Mary, on the other hand, describes them in the same hateful manner. When she is taken by the Indians, she is taken to a deserted town where they camp for the night. Mary says that spending that night with them was the hardest thing with their ‘… roaring, and singing, and dancing and yelling of those black creatures in the night….’ (Rowlandson 23). She even likens the scene with hell. The same view of Takaki of Indians is supported by Mary when she calls them ‘… brute, savage, barbarous enemies…’ (Rowlandson 24). When she fell over the head of the horse she was placed on with her wounded child, she says that the Indians laughed at her like inhumane creatures, they even enjoyed seeing this happening (Rowlandson 25). This supports the interpretation of Takaki of Indians as devilish, sinful creatures that lacked self control. She also constantly refers to them as pagans and herself as Christian (Rowlandson 25). This further supports the translation by Takaki that the Indians were sinful and devilish creatures. Mary does not have any kind words for the Indians after they destroyed her life, took away her loved ones and destroyed her home. It is no doubt then that she has the same interpretations as Takaki of the Indians. She says that they are savage bears, and roaring lions who did not fear man, God, or even the devil. To her they were the devils themselves who brought mush suffering to her. Though she says they did not abuse her chastity, her descriptions of them show them as the sinful creatures without self control that Takaki talked about.
Both of these authors have a similar interpretation of the events that took place in the 1670s. Though Takaki has additional interpretations of the European who invaded Ireland, he also includes in his interpretations some opinions he had on Indians who went into war with the Europeans. Much of Mary’s text is about the Indians and how barbaric they were in their war. All in all, her description of the events that took place in the night she was captured supports the interpretations of Takaki of the same.
Works cited
Rowlandson, M. (n.d). A narrative of the captivity and restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson: 20- 35.
Takaki, R.T. (2008). A different mirror: a history of multicultural America. New York: Little, Brown, and Co., 2008
Campbell
Student’s name
Institutional affiliation
Course
Date
Campbell is a strong advocate for a society free of prejudice and harassment. Race, color, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, marital status, military or veteran status, physical or mental disability, medical condition, age, religion, genetic information, or any other protected classification under federal, state, or local law will not be tolerated (Collins, 1994). Every employee is expected to support the company’s commitment to providing all employees with equal employment opportunities.
Campbell encourages its employees to treat one other with decency, respect, and kindness. Every employee has the right to work in a free of harassment, intimidation, and bullying environment. Harassment, bullying, and discrimination can happen in a variety of forms, including unwanted physical contact (sexual or otherwise) (Shea, 2002). jokes or other words, photos, voicemails, or emails made at the workplace that are insulting, aggressive, or unpleasant
The organization places a premium on shared ownership and goal clarity. It plans to offer a demographic data dashboard that represents the demographics of the organization. It also generates a scorecard to track the progress of its approach. It is developing a 360-degree feedback program for our management, and all paid workers have a performance target that is directly related to I&D, in order to instill accountability throughout the firm. It’s also amending its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics to better represent the inclusive organization it aspires to be. At Campbell, we want to foster an environment where people can be themselves while also feeling accepted and encouraged to do their best work.
Campbell is dedicated to keeping and developing correct books, records, and accountings in a transparent and honest manner. Employees are responsible for ensuring the accuracy, completeness, and truthfulness of the company’s financial records, contracts, agreements, and any other papers (however trivial) (Collins, 1994). In the marketplace and among investors, financial honesty helps to retain trust and reputation.
References
Collins, Douglas (1994). America’s Favorite Food: The Story of Campbell Soup Company. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. ISBN 0-8109-2592-3.
Shea, Martha Esposito, and Mathis, Mike (2002). Images of America: Campbell Soup Company. Arcadia Publishing. ISBN 0-7385-1058-0.