As a senior at this university, I have been blessed that I have not been faced with the task of looking down the barrel of a gun.

I have been mugged by two individuals who were looking for trouble and I believe that I should have the right to protect my life.

So, the day after my 21st birthday, I drove down to Hamilton Court House, paid my $45 for a background check and processing fee, and waited for my concealed weapons permit to arrive in the mail.

I am not allowed to carry my revolver on campus nor have I needed it.

But I find it hard to believe that an individual who made up his mind to cause injury would be deterred because he did not have a concealed weapons permit.

In response to Bobby Andres’ statement in Monday’s article regarding gun related injuries, I want to change his statement to allow an equally scary and enlightening view:

“Studies [will show] a household with a [car] is statistically more likely to have a [CAR]-related injury.”

The statement can be used for anything – from knives to doorknobs.

The mere presence of anything will significantly increase the chance an accident occurring involving the object.

In 2007, there were 47,098 deaths due to motor vehicles compared to the 30,769 deaths caused by firearms, according to the August issue of the National Vital Statistics Report.

Yet it is more acceptable to drive a car than carry a gun.

We are given a license to drive at the age of 16. Compared that to the law requiring you to be 21 to purchase a handgun.

I find Catherine Mencher, Kara Slavik and Vanessa Guzman’s letter both misleading and misinformed.

Firstly, their accusation that the punishing of a Georgia basketball player due to a possession of a utility knife was hypocritical is not applicable.

It is currently illegal for weapons to be on campus; therefore, the individual was punished.

As Chief Williamson stated, this was not a subjective issue open to interpretation but a matter of right and wrong and the law said it was illegal.

I also have issue with their statement about having guns on football days.

It is illegal to carry a concealed weapon to any public gathering such as a football game and this bill would not effect that stipulation.

It would also not change the stipulation that it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon while under the influence of any drug.

This would include Adderall and alcohol.

If you would like to read more about this I would recommend visiting www.georgiapacking.org for an explanation of Georgia’s concealed weapons policy.

Regarding the billboards announcing “no background checks,” some of those are anti-gun billboards used to inform the public that most gun shows do not perform background checks.

This is factual since they are not legally required to do so with the exceptions of a some states.

Some people argue that allowing concealed weapons on campus will lead to more violence.

But I would like to ask each student at this university this:

How would you feel if a person came into a classroom and began opening fire? I would like to be able to remove my gun from my holster and save my own life and the lives of my classmates.

I would be committing an act of violence by firing at the shooter but I would be saving lives.

How many lives could have been saved at Virginia Tech if someone in the first classroom the shooter entered had a concealed weapon and used it?

I hope that this bill will pass and allow the law abiding individuals of this university to protect themselves and their classmates.

- William McVay is a senior from Midland majoring in risk management and insurance.