Concealed Carry on College Campuses

The law deals just punishment"Just as every state has its own law concerning sexual assault, every state has a different sentencing scheme in place for people convicted of sexual assault. The federal government also has its own set of sentencing rules. For example, in California a sexual assault conviction carries with it a possible sentence of 24, 36 or 48 months in prison, as well as a possible $10,000 fine. This type of sentence is known as "determinate" since it results in a specific term of years in prison. As mentioned above, a judge will examine the facts of the case, including aggravating and mitigating factors, in order to settle on the exact sentence. In New York, sexual assault constitutes a class D felony. The sentencing judge has discretion to set the sentence, but the law binds the judge to impose a sentence within a certain range. Moreover, the sentence is an "indeterminate" one, which means that the judge doesn't set an exact term. Instead, the judge picks a range of years from in between the absolute minimum and the absolute maximum set by law. The defendant could serve the entire term or just the minimum amount depending on their behavior in prison and other factors. New York law sets the absolute minimum sentence for sexual assault at one to two years and the absolute maximum penalty at seven years. Judges can choose any range that falls within those limits."[1]My opponent would shoot you in the head for slapping someone's butt.My opponent claims that sexual assault deserves death. Clearly the law disagrees with him. I disagree with him, and so should you, the reader. The desire to have sex is a natural human impulse which modern society has largely learned to control and scorn. However, control of these impulses cannot be perpetual. Someone will let slip. Sex is natural and what qualifies as sexual assault can be something as simple as "touching an intimate part of another person."[2] While I think lewd behavior should be scorned, I think someone slipping their hand over another person's butt does not deserve to be shot to death. Such a punishment is extremely disproportionate.Catching a few bulletsPRO: "To clarify my 25% statistic, it is that 25% of all reported crimes on a college campus are rapes"This is a blank assertion by PRO. On the other hand, I've clearly shown that this 25% rape-report is based on fallacious data. I requote:"Around three-quarters of the women she identified as having been raped did not consider themselves victims of rape, and almost half of them had sex with their supposed attackers after the event identified as a rape had occurred."PRO: "... some statistics for you..."My opponent is claiming that concealed carry will solve the problems indicated by these statistics. I counter-assert that they will not. My opponent's statistics have no correlation to the resolution until he can show otherwise.PRO: "...more statistics for you..."These statistics are based off a survey of about 1600 criminals scattered throughout the states with questionable reliability[7]. 34% of 1600 is nothing to 8000.No concealed carry, lower crime ratesPRO: "college campuses usually have lower crime rates"I thank PRO for corroborating the negative case. College campuses usually have lower crime rates! And yet.. "The overwhelming majority of the 4,400 colleges and universities in the United States prohibit the carrying of firearms on their campuses. These gun-free policies have helped to make our post-secondary education institutions some of the safest places in the country. For example, a 2001 U.S. Department of Education study found that the overall homicide rate at post-secondary education institutions was 0.07 per 100,000 students in 1999.[5] By comparison, the criminal homicide rate in the United States as a whole was 5.7 per 100,000 persons overall in 1999, and 14.1 per 100,000 for persons ages 17 to 29. A Department of Justice study found that 93% of violent crimes that victimize college students occur off campus.[6] Despite the success of these gun-free policies, an increasingly extreme pro-gun movement in the USA is promoting legislation and litigation to force colleges and universities to allow concealed guns on campus. As a result, schools in Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Utah and Wisconsin have now been forced in different ways to allow the carrying of firearms on their premises (i.e. campus grounds, classrooms, dormitories, or parking lots)."[4] It's quite possible that college campuses have lower crime rates because of its general prohibition of concealed carry. Consider that for a few moments. We're doing really well in this area, why make it worse?Responsible carry can give people an effective way to murder someone else in self defense, but just because it can be used effectively, there's no reason to believe that it will be used effectively in all cases. My opponent says that 8000 homicides are criminal homicides, but that's exactly why we should not have a concealed carry policy. 8000 concealed weapons are used criminally. Why not just do away with concealed carry altogether? College campuses are a prime example of anti-concealed carry effectively lowering crime rates.[1] http://criminal.findlaw.com...;[2] http://www2.ucsc.edu...;[3] http://www.avoiceformen.com...;[4] http://www.armedcampuses.org...;[5] http://www2.ed.gov...;[6] http://www.bjs.gov...;[7] http://www.justfacts.com...;