My comments concern the article from March 10, “Gun bill advances with opt-out for colleges.” In the article Scott Rothschild offered comments from Rep. Valdenia Winn about not wanting to stand before a class in which some students were armed. She was quoted as saying they may have issues about grades or assignments. I believe there should have been some counterpoint to Rep. Winn’s comments to offset the obvious negative point she was making. Fair journalistic reporting would have shown all sides of this issue.
For example, the fact that concealed-carry holders must be 21 years of age eliminates most junior class students and ensures that track records of behavior in the university environment are known. Secondly all Kansas concealed-carry permit holders must pass background checks through the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office and the FBI. Students passing these checks would be at least as vetted as the KU campus police. Students who have passed these checks and taken the training course are probably the most respectable and highly cleared people on campus, more so than most faculty members I would guess.
It seems to me that if these facts were reported along with the opposing opinions of Rep. Winn and Board of Regents CEO Andy Tompkins, the people reading the paper could draw a conclusion based on all the facts and less on emotional reactions. As it was reported I do not believe the average reader can develop an informed opinion.