|
You are viewing
Volume 40, Issue 12
April 8, 2003
To return to the current issue please
click here.
|
 |
April 8, 2003
Gun debate ends
By Andrew James
Mesa Legend
The governing board ended the push to arm Maricopa Community College Safety
Officers by way of a 3–2 vote.
Maricopa’s Governing Board made this decision at a meeting that took
place March 25.
This action brought to end a controversy that has lasted for several months.
Before voting the board discussed whether or not arming safety officers
with handguns would increase the safety for students, employees, and visitors
on its campuses.
Chancellor of MCCD, Fred Gaskin, began the dialogue by expressing his
concerns about the impact handguns would have if they were to make their
way into the district.
Gaskin reinforced his concerns by revealing the results of a survey designed
by a safety committee to gather the opinions of students and employees
about their safety and the arming of officers on campus.
The results from 7,240 surveys, roughly 5,000 students and 2,300 employees,
indicated that 81 percent felt safe on campus, compared to the less then
5 percent who felt unsafe.
The surveys also revealed that the participants felt that more lights,
security cameras, and emergency call boxes on campus were preferred to
arming security officers which ranked in at number 8 out of 11 different
choices.
Based on this information Gaskin urged the board to vote against the resolution,
finishing with words of appreciation and gratitude towards the fine work
and dedication of the safety officers.
At Gaskin’s conclusion the board opened up the discussion to the
community and eight presenters spoke in support of the resolution that
would allow security officers to carry handguns.
Director of College Safety at Phoenix College, Wilfred McFadden, was selected
to speak on behalf of Maricopa’s college safety directors and officers
to explain the severity of the situation and the need for handguns.
A gun is an essential tool for an officer to effectively perform his duty,
argued McFadden, and without that threat of serious bodily injury, security
officers themselves are being projected as a lesser force.
He attributed this as a contributing factor in the increasing trend toward
more violence on campus and more incidents involving firearms.
McFadden shared the qualifications of his fellow officers which include
several years of professional experience and education.
He continued by explaining that a fully equipped officer would be more
capable of responding to an emergency in a timely fashion.
A second representative for college safety officers, Charles Summers,
focused his attention primarily on the lack of efficiency and effectiveness
of other deterrent devices including pepper spray, stun guns, and tasers.
He warned, “pepper spray can easily be blocked from the eyes with
a hand reducing the effectiveness of the agent . . . stun guns take up
to five seconds to take effect and require the officer to be in constant
contact with the aggressor . . . and tasers can fire only one shot…if
it should miss or hit a backpack, it would be useless.”
The other speakers described prior incidents that happened to them that
may have been avoided had officers been armed, and urged the Governor’s
Board to act proactively and not reactively.
Governing Board Member Don Campbell concluded the discussion by explaining
that he knows people who were victims of crimes in their own neighborhoods
where cops patrolled the streets regularly, and their guns were not effective
because they were not there to witness the event.
Campbell explained that the situation involving the increase in violent
crimes on campus may be better handled by increasing the amount of security
officers patrolling the campus.
Following this idea Campbell asked the question of why a gun is the only
solution to the problem when other ideas have not been fully researched
and warned that the idea of guns solving all the problems is, “a
message that discourages people from thinking logically. Everyone seems
to be trying to solve problems through the use of guns and this would
create a hostile environment.”
Back to Top
| Previous Page | Home
|
|
|
