University of Virginia Library

Guns And 'Good Standing'

There are two matters that seriously
deserve the attention of the Student Council
when it meets tonight. One concerns
the "anti-gun" resolution passed at last
week's meeting; the other, the University's
policy on the withdrawal of students in
"good standing."

It is easy to dismiss Mr. Brown's motion
that the Department of Security instruct its
patrolmen to end the practice of carrying
firearms on their persons as a joke being
perpetrated upon the Unicops or, in the
words of one letter-writer, as an unrealistic
"pseudo-intellectual" measure. It is neither.
It is a sincere note of concern over the
increasing callousness of the American people
to the carrying and use of guns and over
the danger of trigger-happy, poorly-trained
law enforcement personnel, such as the
campus policeman at Maryland who came
near to killing a student.

Whether or not the University acts to
implement the Council's resolution is not
the important matter. What is of great
importance is that the Council should undertake
a thorough study of the Department
of Security's role in a university community.
There may be excellent reasons for University's
police to carry guns at certain times,
but they should be clearly and openly presented,
in place of the vague references to
mysterious "incidents" that occurred in the
past or the automatic reaction that "police
always carry guns"-even when issuing parking
tickets or raising the flag.

The Council should ask, for example,
exactly what were the incidents when guns
have been used and what sort of training
the University police are given in the use
of firearms. They should ask what sort of
weapons are issued and why. They should
inquire into the general background of the
University police, including their education
and previous experience, and investigate the
propriety of their playing the role of counselors,
as it were, in enforcing housing
regulations.

The second matter concerns the University's
long-standing policy that students
who withdraw from the University in "good
standing" must also withdraw from the
Charlottesville residential community to ensure
this "good standing." The injustice
and the unwarranted interference with an
individual's life that this rule represents is
clearly pointed out in the statement by the
American Civil Liberties Union (see page 1).
There is even the startling possibility that
Dean Runk could be successfully sued for
causing a student to break a contract he
had entered into. We understand that the
Administration is willing to end this policy,
and we hope the Council will express its
vehement displeasure with the policy so as
to hasten this revocation. This rule is an
excellent example of how the all-embracing
University can reach its fingers out, whether
intentionally or not, into every aspect of a
student's private life. This is one case where
the University's knuckles deserve to be
severely rapped.