The rights and the wrongs of the gun-on-campus issue
May 1, 2008

by Joseph P. Tartaro
Executive Editor

A tag game using toy guns and plastic balls as ammunition on the campus of Alfred University, about 80 miles southeast of Buffalo, NY, sent police into emergency mode the afternoon of Apr. 8 and triggered a two-hour, campus-wide lockdown.

Local, county and state law enforcement agencies rushed to the campus to aid university officers after the report of a gunman on campus came at 3:33 p.m. By 4:04, police were searching campus buildings. Students, faculty and staff were advised “to remain inside” until further notice.

“We had a staff member—a credible source—making a report of a student carrying a weapon,” said Susan C. Goetschius, the university’s director of communications, according to The Buffalo News. “We’ve got to treat it seriously, and we did.” Officers at the university immediately contacted Alfred police and the Allegany County Sheriff’s Office, and state police responded shortly thereafter.

“We went into lockdown mode while police systematically searched the buildings,” Goetschius said. The lockdown lasted until police secured the campus at 5:43.

The Right Way
“They eventually found the student matching the description with the green hooded sweat shirt in a chemistry lab,” Goetschius told The News.

Police, according to Goetschius, at that time confirmed that the purported gun was actually a nerf gun being used in a moderated, multi-student game of Humans vs. Zombies, a popular college campus game of tag.

The Zombies win if they tag and convert all the Humans. The Humans win if they survive. Under the rules of the game, no realistic looking weaponry is allowed, and toy guns may not be visible inside of academic buildings or jobs on campus. Darts must not hurt on impact and players may not use cars. Anyone who violates the rules is banned from the game.

Classes at the 2,300-student Alfred, which had been canceled at 5:09 p.m., were reinstated at 6 and proceeded as scheduled the rest of the day and evening.

University officials said the reaction was justified given the information they had. Given the murder of more than 30 students and teachers at Virginia Tech in 2007 and the more recent Northern Illinois University shooting casualties, school officials cannot ignore a “man with a gun” alarm these days. Many years ago, things were simpler and there seemed to be less lunacy loose in the world.

“It would have been irresponsible for us not to take this seriously, given the situations that have occurred on other campuses,” Goetschius said.

If anything, Goetschius said, the incident provided university and law enforcement officials an opportunity to test their response to a reported real-life threat. The school, used text messaging and other communications systems to immediately spread the alarm. However, properly handled as it appeared to be at Alfred, the alert and search lasted only 2˚ hours until classed were resumed at about 6 p.m.

No charges are expected to be filed against the student. However, the university will conduct an internal investigation and decide whether disciplinary action is warranted.

The Wrong Way
But not all university administrators and security personnel handle the threat of potential school mayhem with the same professionalism or sensitivity as at Alfred. Some of them can’t even use common sense in their training, as an incident at Elizabeth City State University (ECSU) in Elizabeth City, NC, illustrates.

ECSU is a school of almost the same size as Alfred, but administrators there got no passing grade in a Mar. 6 editorial board commentary in the Indiana Daily Student (IDS), a student newspaper serving the entire Indiana University system that has tens of thousands of students.

The IDS editorial was headlined “You’re all gonna die…psych!” Here’s the entire editorial:

“Imagine this scenario: You’re sitting in a foreign policy discussion section trying to keep your eyes open. Suddenly something happens that wakes you up really fast. A gunman bursts through the door and begins lining you, your classmates and your instructor against the wall.

“Are these the actions of some deranged, bloodthirsty killer? Well, in this case, it’s the work of your friendly university administration. They’re trying to help you feel safer.

Just eight days after five people were shot to death at Northern Illinois University, the administration of Elizabeth City State University thought it would be a good idea to test university preparedness for an attack by sending a campus police officer with a fake gun to storm into a classroom posing as a random shooter. Neither the students nor the assistant professor instructing the class had any idea that the scenario was only a test. At one point, the ‘gunman’ threatened to kill the student with the lowest GPA. Students said that they were ready to start jumping out of the windows. People in a nearby classroom reportedly barricaded the door with tables and chairs, and sent text messages to their parents. After ten minutes of horror, campus police arrived to take the man away. Jingbin Wang, the assistant professor of the class, reported that even then they were not told that the event was only a drill. Regardless of whatever benign intentions the administration may have had, this whole episode was just cruel,” the IDS editorial offered, before proceeding to tell of just how dangerous such a stunt was.

“Of course there was also the very real possibility that the undercover officer himself could have been attacked. Who could have blamed the students afterwards for harming or even killing the man? And if attacked, the officer would have had to defend himself as well. What if one of the students had been hurt in what was supposed to be a mock attack? This was just a bad idea all around, and the ones responsible for it should lose their jobs. Who would want to attend a university whose leadership was capable of making such bone-headed decisions?

“It’s understandable that universities are scrambling to make sure they’re not the next Virginia Tech or NIU. Theories abound on the best way to foster a safe learning environment, and ultimately it’s the University’s administration that has to make the decisions on how to best accomplish that. Anthony Brown, Elizabeth City State’s vice chancellor for student affairs, explained, ‘The intent was not to frighten them but to test our system and also to test the response of the security that was on campus and the people that were notified.’ Well, Mr. Brown, you did frighten them. There has to be a better way to evaluate the readiness of your procedure than to convince your students and staff that they are about to die.

“So we respectfully say to President McRobbie and the rest of the IU administration:

“We know you love us. We know you want us to be safe and well-prepared for emergencies on campus. But you don’t have to stage armed intrusions into our classrooms to prove your dedication to campus safety,” the editorial concluded.

The Utah Way
If the ill-advised drill from North Carolina had been tried in Utah, the only state where students and faculty with concealed carry licenses are allowed to carry on campus, it might have been the test gunman who would have been the casualty. But Utah administrators know better, as should campus officials in other states. Perhaps, if other states allowed students, faculty and administrators that are licensed to carry the means for defense on campus, the whole issue of campus security would be viewed from a more realistic perspective.

The concept of disarming everyone on campus, including security, started in the 1960s. That was 50 years ago and the world has changed. So too has our society. But the sky is not falling.

Utah’s approach deserves a close examination by lawmakers in other states, by the media and the general public.
Return to Archive Index