Mesa Legend - ARCHIVES - Vol. 40, Issue 8


Volume 40, Issue 8. Today is .

You are viewing
Volume 40, Issue 8.
January 21, 2003

To return to the current issue please click here.

Students, staff divided over guns on campus
By Carly Schorman
Mesa Legend

Photo by Carly Schorman/Mesa Legend
Les Strickland was one of the officers to speak in favor of arming the district’s certified college safety officers.

A forum was held at Phoenix Community College to discuss the potential arming of Maricopa County’s college safety officers.

Albert Losa directed the forum which he described as an “exchange of opinion.”

A panel of four introduced both sides of the debate.

“Firearms are a last resort;
once you pull that trigger, you can’t take
that bullet back.”

Governing board member Linda Rosenthal and Wilfred McFadden, head of Campus Safety at PCC, spoke in favor of arming officers while Alan Haffa, a professor at PCC, and student Patricka Fletcher argued against. Students were also present to share their opinion.

Rosenthal began the discussion by asking, “Safety officers want to protect us. Are we giving them the needed tools?”

Rosenthal explained, “I read safety reports. Over the years they’re getting longer and longer.” Continuing, she described the fear she experiences leaving her home, walking to her car, or in a number of other situations. Armed safety officers would make her feel more secure, at least on campus.

“I do not feel safe until guns are on campus,” agreed Leonard Montez-Bailey, student forum chair at PCC.

Guns do not equal safety according to Haffa who said there is “no way to be safe, school would have to be like the airport.”

Additionally, Haffa does not believe armed officers would lower the crime rate on campus. He “would like to see statistical evidence” that guns do or do not lower the crime rate. Haffa alleged that “statistics from previous years show no rise in crime. Most crimes are burglary and auto theft.”

“Pima (Community College) has armed officers, yet their crime rate is comparable,” Haffa added.

“Safety officers are out in the public, in uniform which gives the opinion that they are armed with a handgun,” McFadden said of officers who must respond to emergency weapons situations.
Armed safety officers may serve as a deterrent. As explained by McFadden “criminals know the officers are not armed. They know they can just come on to campus and do what they want.”

McFadden, who spent 30 years in law enforcement, explained that campus safety is a position commonly filled by retired police officers as a second career. Consequently, safety officers “have more experience than a lot of police,” according to McFadden.

“Young police officers are more likely to make a mistake. The campus only hires experienced officer.”

“I have a lot of respect for our officers. The best trained individuals can make mistakes. Mistakes with a gun can be tragic,” said Haffa. “A student or staff member could be shot.”

Every time a gun is needed, McFadden maintained “we have to wait for a local police officer. The police will only respond immediately if another officer is in trouble otherwise they will get there when they can.”

“Police officers wonder why we don’t have weapons.”

Guns might prove useful “if an officer is available in an emergency situation,” maintained Haffa. However, in most situations, if not all that have arisen on Maricopa campuses that might have been aided by the use of a weapon no officer was present. Haffa said, “Unless there, a gun isn’t a whole lot of good.”

“If some wacko wants to kill, (he goes) to a gun free zone,” McFadden asserted using the “active shooter” scenario seen at Columbine as an example. However, the situation at U of A involving an “active shooter” occurred on campus despite the fact that the officers were armed.

Haffa, a humanities professor, commented, “Many universities do arm officers, but not all,” continuing to say that the community colleges are “not behind the times at all.”

“Not many violent crimes occur,” Haffa claimed that arming officers might simply be “contributing to a culture of guns and violence.”
Armed officers may “create the impression that campuses are not safe,” according to Haffa.

Patricka Fletcher, the only student to speak on the panel, said she doesn’t “feel threatened on campus.”

Conversely, Fletcher believes “kids won’t feel safe on campus if they see an armed guard while walking to class.

Alternatives to guns were suggested. Haffa recommended examining other possibilities such as stun guns, more officers, escorts, and increased surveillance.

McFadden said, “stun guns are great, but they’re not enough. Pepper spray only stops asthmatics and not very determined criminals.”

“Firearms are a last resort; once you pull that trigger you can’t take that bullet back.”

McFadden named the methods used prior to use of a gun: officer presence, verbal, control tactics, mace, and additional non-lethal methods.

McFadden pointed out that “most officers go through their career without ever using a gun.”

Student Courtney Hinman said he is “totally opposed to arming guard.” Hinman proclaimed that guns “tarnish the college’s image.” Furthermore, Hinman didn’t feel “the crimes on campus justify guns” nor did the “isolated incident at U of A” change his belief.

Les Strickland, a campus safety officer, asked, “What about our safety? Don’t we have the right to protect ourselves?”

Jerry McCown, also a campus safety officer, pointed out that “most high schools have armed officers.”

One student simply said, “I do not want my tuition money to pay for guns.”

Another student tearfully conveyed the feelings of many present when she said “Guns just scare me. This is not a good idea.”