Lucio_3300_L8-RP copy

Concealed Weapons on Campus
Mitigating the Risks of Concealed Weapons on Campus
Isaac R. Lucio
INTS 3300-[D01]
Dr. Gail Bentley
Texas Tech University

Abstract
The topic of concealed carry is a very political issue that socially requires debaters to
pick a side and argue. In actuality, it is a subject that needs to be researched and understood more
intently so that state and nation-wide solutions pertaining to gun control, gun safety, gun
educations and campus safety, can be generated. On that precipice, using the ten steps of the
Interdisciplinary Research Process, a literature search was conducted from the perspectives of
engineering and organizational leadership in pursuit of a more comprehensive understanding and
new knowledge of theories relating to concealed carry on campus. The types of research done in
the literature found were both quantitative and qualitative including literature searches,
instructional articles, and real active shooter experiment and analysis dissertations. Once
background and perspective was established from each discipline, those theories and concepts
were integrated with the goal of answering a wicked question. How can the improvement and
education of gun safety minimize the risk brought about by the allowance of concealed carry on
campus? The analysis of communications, training, and management in terms of safety, students,
faculty and staff brought about concepts of situational awareness, and campus safety systems.
Through the integration of knowledge, a new understanding was formed. It was from this the
new understanding that ideas were formed regarding people that have concealed carry licenses
and the reality of just how at threat a campus is at a given time. Also, new understanding lead to
suggestions for future research on people who already have concealed carry licenses and where
or how often they actually do carry a weapon.

Step 1: Define the problem
The second amendment to the United Stated constitution states “A well regulated militia,
being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall
not be infringed (U.S. Const. amend. II).” The contents of this amendment have sparked debate
nationwide for many years. The issue has ventured even more into the spotlight due to the
violent mass shootings in the last ten years and even dating back to the shooting that took place
in Littleton, Colorado at Columbine High School on April 20th, 1999, that saw fifteen deaths and
twenty-one wounded members of faculty and students. Since then, government officials have
been under extreme pressure to take a side on gun control laws governing the United States.
More recently, the pot was stirred by the 2008 shooting in DeKalb, Illinois at Northern Illinois
University that killed 6 and also injured twenty-one members of faculty and students. On April
16th 2007, at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, the most deadly campus
shooting in the history of the United States occurred, killing a staggering thirty-two student and
one faculty member, while injuring twenty-three more people. As death tolls are announced, and
more campus shootings occur, gun control, gun safety, and campus safety move closer to the
forefront of public discussion. Naturally, it would seem that a focus has been concentrated to the
prevention of such devastating crimes. The nature of these mass murders has inspired a heated
debate regarding the allowance of concealed weapons on college campuses as a solution or
precautionary measure in the future. As government officials, students, and parents of students
continue to explore the possible solutions to the ongoing risk of campus shootings, the debate
over allowing concealed weapons on campus to licensed owners is coming to a head. The most
relevant detail to this topic that merits in-depth research is in the risks that come with allowing

concealed weapons on campus, which is the primary focus of this study. More specifically, how
can the improvement and education of gun safety minimize the risk brought about by the
allowance of concealed carry on campus?
Step 2: Justify Using an Interdisciplinary Approach
This study is clearly in need of an interdisciplinary approach because of the complexity
of the problem. An interdisciplinary question is one that is open-ended and too complex to be
addressed by one discipline alone, and that is researchable (Repko, 2012). In order to come up
with a complete understanding of this issue, with intentions of deriving real examples for future
program implementation, one must view the subject from more than one perspective. For this
problem in particular, there is a necessity to create a new technology, or a new system to allow
the freedom to bear arms while maintaining the security of the campus. Differences in political
opinions have hindered the emergence of a successful solution, as many deadly campus
shootings have come and gone. In order to create new technology or ideologies, one must view
the topic through a different lens.
Steps 3 & 4: Identify Relevant Disciplines & Conduct the Literature Search
New perspectives are born from standing at different angles to look at a problem.
Viewing a problem through the filter of a specific discipline provides a different angle of vision
than other relevant disciplines. For this problem, many sub-disciplines are required to gain
relevant knowledge about campus carry and the risks involved. The disciplines and sub-

disciplines that are potentially relevant to this study are engineering, civil engineering,
community development, industrial engineering, economics, law, leadership, sociology,
psychology, public safety or public health, and government. The most relevant disciplines are the
fields of study that “provide information about the problem that is essential to developing a
comprehensive understanding of it” (Repko, 2012). Because there are so many sub-divisions of
engineering, and because there are so many sub-divisions of engineering that directly apply to
safety and mitigating risks produced by the thousands of students possibly carrying a weapon,
engineering will stand as one of the two most relevant disciplines to this topic. Engineering
encompasses many of the other potentially relevant disciplines and is more relevant because of
it’s general nature, and design theories. The second of the two most relevant disciplines,
organizational leadership, or leadership in general, pertains more to the communication of
knowledge and the educating of students and faculty. Organizational leadership also relates to
things like problem solving, management, learning and training. Because leadership is such a
broad topic and also has many subdivisions under it’s name, there are many different ways to
apply this discipline to the wicked problem. These two fields of study also hold an umbrella over
many of the more specific disciplines a-for mentioned as potentially relevant.
Step 5: Develop Adequacy in Each Relevant Discipline
According to Repko (2012), it is imperative to have a working knowledge of the major
theories, key concepts, and research methods in order to have adequacy in these two disciplines.
Repko (2012) explains that fully understanding the relevant theories of different disciplines help
scholars understand some aspect of the natural or human world. In order to view an issue from a

specific perspective, one must be completely familiar with how a discipline views the world.
The overall perspectives of the most relevant disciplines on how the improvement and
education of gun safety can minimize the risks brought about by the allowance of concealed
carry on campus are stated below:
Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines engineering as “the application of science and
mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made
useful to people.” Through the application of that knowledge, engineers look to design systems
or solutions that can be applied to real world problems. Engineers are also interested in
dissecting and understanding existing ideas and arrangements, and making them more efficient.
An engineer’s perspective is logical and structured, leaning heavily on the engineering design
process, which is very similar to the scientific method. Generally, key components in the
engineering design process include: define the problem, conduct background research, define
specific parameters, brainstorm solutions, develop solution details, build a prototype or model,
and finally, test and modify the solution. If there is a problem, engineers believe that it can be
solved exercising the engineering design process. Engineering research is usually quantitative in
nature where results can be mapped or charted for correlational study. The term engineering
holds an umbrella over many other sub-disciplines of engineering. Moreover, each of those sub-
disciplines has their own specific theories and formulas for conducting research and solving
problems. For example, industrial engineering deals with the design and operation of production
and service systems, and the people who operate in these systems. Industrial engineering is a
bridge between engineering and management. Some theories of industrial engineering include

optimization, or operations research, quality control, and quality assurance. Engineers view the
issue of concealed carry on campus as a parameter to abide by while creating a system or
innovating safety methods. Engineers desire to fully understand how the issue has been handled
up to this point, and then figure out a better, more efficient method of mitigating risks, in this
case, risks being violence or death. From an engineering perspective there can always be a better
system developed whether campuses allow concealed weapons, or don’t allow concealed
weapons.
Organizational leadership views the world as something to be learned and adapted. In
order to become a leader of many, one must become worldly so to understand all walks of life. It
is necessary to understand the worldview of others in order to be able to communicate on an
intimate level with people that are looking for guidance or improvement. Leadership
effectiveness is most generally based on demographics, task competence and interpersonal
attributes. The subheadings of these topics include age, race, intelligence, agreeableness and
communication skills. One of, if not the most, relevant key to leadership is communication and
the ability to communicate in different ways with the intention of reaching all. Former
presidential speechwriter James C. Humes said, “The art of communication is the language of
leadership.” The leadership perspective views firearm possession as a culture that should be
learned and understood. Since Texas is a shall-issue state, an extremely diverse group of people
is able to acquire a license to carry a concealed handgun. It is important to learn about this
demographic of the world and build leaders that can grow a positive culture to mitigate risks.
These two disciplines differ drastically in terms of research methods. Engineering
research methods are primarily quantitative and look to calculate things like precision, boundary,
strength, and speed. Systems are analyzed using formulas like Ohm’s law, Kirchhoff’s law, and

the First law of Thermodynamics. Engineers strive for efficiency and maximum output among
other calculable solutions. The literature found about engineering is related to design, creation,
and efficiency. The studies that have been done are about the different engineering processes,
and about research that can be measured and tested against other results. Conversely, leadership
methods are qualitative and reflect a desire to measure leadership effectiveness. The methods of
leadership studies are significantly more emotional, and require extraversion, charisma, openness
and other essential personality traits. Maximizing personality strengths and minimizing
personality weaknesses are examples of growing leadership ability. The literature found in this
discipline is about studies of personality traits, social skills, and interpersonal communication.
Step 6: Analyze the Problem and Evaluate Each Insight or Theory
Organizational leadership and engineering offer the most relevant theories and view
points on the topic of concealed carry on campus. In particular, they help to understand and
explain how the improvement and education of gun safety can minimize the risks brought about
by the allowance of concealed carry on campus. Organizational leadership will help shed light on
ways to improve communication and education. In particular, communication and education of
new technology or safety measures that could help campuses be safer by being more prepared.
The engineering discipline will help look at safety through a designer and innovator’s point of
view, so to somehow find new gun technology that may be useful for campus safety.
In particular, American preferences for “smart” guns versus traditional weapons: Results
from a nationwide survey attempts to create more literature and background, in a quantitative
manor, on the subject of smart guns, or guns that can only be operated by an authorized user. The

study uses a forty-five-question survey to get a feel for American’s general opinion smart guns.
Inquiries include demographics, gun preferences, and real situational scenarios that require either
or decision-making. Further, this study examines differences in preference patterns among gun
owners and non-owners. Data were obtained from a nationwide online survey with five hundred
and twenty four respondents in February 2016. The study finds that, among non-owners, older
respondents and those with pro-gun attitudes are less likely to prefer smart guns to traditional
firearms. Among gun owners, those with moderate political views, those with a history of
victimization, and those residing in the Northeast are all more likely to prefer smart guns. Males
and those with pro-gun attitudes are less likely to prefer smart guns.
Merriam-Webster (2015) defines leadership as the power or ability to lead other people.
From the organizational leadership perspective, many of the concepts are less about gun control
and the ease with which people come to acquire guns. Instead they are more about how to handle
extreme situations once they are already upon us, and how to prepare people to handle possible
active shooter events in the future.
The authors of the United States Active Shooter Events from 2000 to 2010: Training and
Equipment Implications article are all directors of Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response
Training (ALERRT) center at Texas State University in San Marcos. ALERRT aims to provide
the best research-based shooter response training in the nation. These veterans of law
enforcement have given the term active shooter event a definition, and have done research on
every active shooter event from 2000 to 2010m boasting a stunning quantitative method.
Utilizing internet databases, they have researched detailed statistics of every active shooter event
in that decade and organized the results for correlational analysis.

Using their expertise in criminal justice and law enforcement, the officers were able to
supplement the researched data with prior experience, to develop ideas for future response team
training. They have characterized events and shooters so that they can implement the most
efficient method of training for each possible scenario. From equipment requirements to
breaching tactics, the authors have shown solutions for nearly every active shooter situation that
could happen in the future.
There are ways for campuses to improve their student’s situational awareness and be
proactive about their safety before ever being threatened by a shooter on campus. Although
statistically unlikely, citizens must plan for an active shooting event in order to have a better
chance of surviving or helping. These concepts are detailed in the Journal of Law enforcement’s
Preparing civilians for an active shooter event. It is important to train the brain to be prepared
for possible situations to lower levels of stress and panic when the time comes to act. The first
step to increasing the likelihood of survival is to be of the mindset that an ASE could happen.
Situational awareness is paramount in the moments leading up to an ASE, because anticipated
knowledge could mean the difference between life and death. Being prepared and having a plan
in all situations is beneficial, but having training and practice is of even greater value. If worst
comes to worse, one has to be ready act and possibly do things that they may have never done.
Using tactics like avoid, deny, defend, could keep civilians alive long enough for first responders
to suppress a shooter. Also, basic first aid training could save someone’s life that might not
otherwise have been reached in time. The methods used to create the new knowledge in this
article are qualitative and they center around emotional self-instruction. The department of
homeland security offers webinars and workshops to improve active shooter preparedness.
Things like this could be offered or even required in schools so that people will not be shocked

or frozen during times of terror. However, apparent in most of the researched, is the necessity for
people to understand that this could happen on campus as early as today. Helping everyone
understand that there is and will always be a threat to campuses everywhere, regardless of what
gun laws are or are not in place, is the first step to educating people and making campuses safer.
Once this realization is made, campus heads can begin to implement systems of education
students on active shooter safety, and gun safety.
Some possible systems that could be implemented or mirrored are researched in The
Effects Of Active Shooter Resilience Training Programs On College Students’ Perceptions Of
Personal Safety. One hundred and thirty-six randomly assigned undergraduate students at a large
private university participated in the study. Three groups of students completed two shooter
resilience-training programs, and one group of students did not complete one at all. Safety, fear,
and resilience were measured in the Student Perception of Personal Safety Survey. The analysis
of two broadly diffused active shooter resilience training programs narrowed a considerable gap
in evidence-based research. Using a quantitative method, the author concluded that potential
victims that had been exposed to training before the event often credited that training with giving
them a lifesaving response strategy. Also, many victims of active shooter incidents may have
survived had they been trained to react immediately to a threat, to know in advance where exits
were located, and to make appropriate decisions to run, hide, or fight when exposed to an attack.
Higher education administrators and public safety leaders should invest in training and education
to build student, faculty, and staff resilience to active shooter events.
It seems more than realistic to implement these programs that might help students be
prepared for an ASE on campus in the future. According to the department of education in

(2012), the average student acquires his or her bachelor degree in six years and four months. Six
years and four months would be one fourth of a student’s lifetime at that point. The idea of
implementing programs to increase safety and improve situational awareness for a fourth of all
student lives seems more than beneficial. The notion of not being prepared for violence in the
future is just as disturbing as an actual event happening, especially when the resources for
situational awareness, gun education and active shooter event preparedness are out there.
Step 7: Identifying Conflicts Between Insights
In reference to Repko (2012), "theories and their insights from the same discipline
typically conflict in important ways because each discipline differs considerably in its internal
coherence." From the perspective of leadership, or communication, education and training, risks
can generally be minimized by the increase of availability of relevant knowledge. One of the
most relevant conflicts in the literature regarding civilian preparedness, safety education, and gun
freedom on campus is in the empowerment of knowledge. In some cases it seems
completely necessary to educate students or potential shooting victims on ways to be more
situationally aware, and to be educated on the use of a firearm. According to Johnson (2016),
"citizens often lack the training given to law enforcement, which can increase a citizen’s stress
during an ASE." Not surprising, uneducated civilians are more likely to freeze or panic in a time
of crisis, making them no help, and in some cases a detriment, to the cause of suppressing an
active shooter. Conversely, the attempt at desensitization by education could easily have a
negative effect on students and faculty in the form of anxiety and fear. It is apparent that
providing education on what could happen, will lead to increased and possibly
unnecessary levels of anxiety and fear. These uncomfortable emotions could prevent a student

from performing at their best on a daily basis, or even drive a student to have panic attacks and
act outwardly on uncontrollable internal emotions. Fox (2008) suggested that the amount of
active shooter response training students finally receive should be enough to build a strong
background but should not teach them to fear for their lives and live in a constant state of
paranoia.
Step 8: Create Common Ground
According to Repko (2012),"The value of transformation in creating common ground is
this: Rather than forcing us to accept or reject dichotomous concepts and assumptions,
continuous variables allow us to push back assumptions and extend the scope of theory." In this
case, the amount of desensitization is the continuous variable to be measured. The spectrum
ranges from oblivious, sensitized, and uneducated, to over exposure causing fear and anxiety.
The middle ground will be defined as, enough education so to be confident and situationally
aware. Students and civilians need enough education to empower them to be prepared and act
during an active shooter situation.
Step 9: Construct a More Comprehensive Understanding
There is a reality that has loomed throughout the research of weapons safety, mass
shootings, and concealed carry. The reality is that active shooter events are like natural disasters.
Active shooter events could happen at any time of any day, and that is a hard truth. Schools,
politicians and lawmakers must make it common knowledge that there is a threat of violence on
campuses every day. Once everyone is on the same page, and has a mutual understanding of the
risks that exist in this world, campuses can begin to prepare for the worst-case scenario. The key

concept is preparation, “if the time to preform arrives, then the time to prepare has passed”
(Johnson, 2016, p. 5). It is important for students, faculty and staff to look at a campus through
the eyes of an active shooter. One must try to understand what types of things would stifle or
hinder a killer from being successful on his journey of destruction. More over, what types of
things might make it easier for a campus shooter to amass a high death toll? The answers to these
questions are what future campus security guides should be based on. If school officials are
serious and realistic about the safety of their campus in the future, it is crucial to begin to prepare
people for horrible events. An unprepared person is a soft target. Snyder (2014) wrote, “Building
resilience among at-risk student populations, the faculty that educates them, and the staffs that
support them is a moral imperative in a world in which evildoers will continue to prey on those
who appear unprepared to react. Soft targets must be hardened through proven educational
strategies, not emotionally driven reactions” (p. 19). There are many methods of possible campus
education that are realistic and worthwhile. Freshman students can be mandated to take courses
like the Department of Homeland Security’s “Active Shooter: What You Can Do” (2013)
training program, or the Center for Personal Protection and Safety’s (CPPS) “Shots Fired on
Campus: When Lightning Strikes (Student Edition)” (2008). These are just a few examples of
programs that could be put into place that might make a shooter weary of attacking a more
educated target.
Step 10: Communicating the results
Specifically, in the 2002 “Avoid, Deny Defend” principle developed at Texas State
University, the instructions begin with a disclaimer that reads, “This discussion assumes that no
one with a legally possessed concealed carry permit is present during the ASE” (Johnson, 2016,
p. 5). It is safe to assume, this statement implies that if there is someone with a concealed carry

license present, they are an asset to civilians, and could be helpful in the defense of human life,
or helpful in the suppression of an active shooter. Campuses safety directors should take this
theory a step further, and somehow use concealed carry permit holders as defenders in times of
need. It might make students faculty and staff feel little safer knowing that there are people in
classes that could possibly combat an active shooter if the situation ever presented itself.
Moreover, from the perspective of someone that means harm in the future, the possibility of
running into someone or even multiple people with a concealed handgun on them and a license
to use it, might be one more thing that could prevent that someone from conducting a deadly
rampage in the first place.
It is apparent that studies should be done on the amount of people that actually do have a
concealed carry license that go to Texas Tech, and that actually carry their gun with them to
class, or in their car at all times. This study would be beneficial in the possible organization of
voluntary defense. It is possible that there already exist enough defenses on campus to prevent a
mass shooting on our campus.
Strengths of this study include, examples of different concepts and ideas to teach to
students, faculty and staff in the future about situational awareness, and active shooter resilience.
Also a strength in the information identified that validates the need to understand that there will
always be a threat of violence in the world, and in this case on college campuses. It could be
beneficial to develop multiple ways of educating students on situational awareness and even
prepare them in classes offered for their major. Looking at this issue as something immanent and
likely can help civilians and possible victims get ahead of terror, and get ahead of a future
shooter.

Reference List
Blair, J. P., Martindale, M. H., (2015). United States Active Shooter Events from 2000 to 2010:
Training and Equipment Implications. Retrieved from
http://www.acphd.org/media/372742/activeshooterevents.pdf
Engineering. (2015). In Merriam-Webster.com Retrieved June 23rd, from http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/hacker
Fox, J. A. (2008). Campus shootings: A prevention primer. The Chronicle of Higher Education,
54(43), A64.
Fox, J., & Savage, J. (2009). Mass murder goes to college: An examination of changes on
college campuses following Virginia Tech. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(10), 1465-
1485.
Johnson, O. N., Carlson, P., Murphy, B., Flory, D., Lankford, B., & Wyllie, D. (2016). Preparing
Civilians to Survive an Active Shooter Event. The Journal of Law Enforcement, 5(2).
Retrieved from http://www.jghcs.info/index.php/l/article/view/432/379
Leadership. (2015). In Merriam-Webster.com Retrieved June 23rd, from http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/hacker
Repko, A. F. (2012). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Snyder, G. M. (2014). The effects of active shooter resilience training programs on college
student’s perceptions of personal safety (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Liberty
University, Lynchburg, Virginia.
U.S. Const. amend. II.
U.S. Department of Education. (2012).
Wallace, L. N. (2016). American preferences for “smart” guns versus traditional weapons:
Results from a nationwide survey. Preventive Medicine Reports, 4, 11-16.

Lucio_3300_L8-RP copy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to Lucio_3300_L8-RP copy

Similar to Lucio_3300_L8-RP copy (20)

Lucio_3300_L8-RP copy