Peace of Mind for All 2

My topic was that the weapon restrictions in an around campus should be lifted. I'm going to redo a lot of my opening paragraph to spread out the thoughts more, so if I repeat things you read in my first post - it's okay! I may even change specifically what policies I focus on, so that I propose a smaller change. These are paragraphs for the 3 main points and a beginning conclusion.

=================================

Although most people naturally believe that crime will increase if the general populace is permitted to have weapons, this is statistically untrue. Generally speaking, counties in the United States that have looser gun laws have lower crime rates. To be fair, it should be pointed out that those counties might have looser gun laws as a result of already low crime. The NRA, however, recently published a study that compared crime rates in locations where uniformed, armed personnel were present with locations with no obvious security. They concluded that over 5,300 crimes were prevented each day in the United States by the mere presence of a firearm. Historically, a general pattern can also be seen in a larger scale. Famous political tyrants such as Hitler and Musoolini have almost always confiscated civilian weapons before their reign of terror began. As a first-hand witness of the near-civil-war that occurred in South Africa in the early 90's, I know there is a direct correlation between an increase in violent crime and strict weapons laws.

Criminals will probably always be able to acquire firearms and illegal weapons. After the Soviet Union stopped backing revolutionary groups in eastern Europe and central Africa, Belgium quickly became the center for illegal arms dealing--filling a hole in the arms market. The people who fund that market don't care what the government decides they are allowed to have. The people who do obey the law can only be victimized by those who don't, especially when criminals know there's a very slim chance of any capable retaliation until the police arrive. To give a good comparison, I recently purchased a hunting shotgun. It came equipped with a 2-shell magazine designed for firing bird-shot, and an uncomfortably long barrel. It cost me $300 and I had to spend most of a Saturday filling out paperwork and waiting for approval from various government agencies. Almost every piece in the gun can now be traced to me. A former acquaintence of mine acquired a Romanian-made AK-47 through a personal sale that required no background check and almost no paperwork. After the purchase, it was discovered that the gun had been equipped with a highly illegal post-market trigger, that made the gun fully-automatic. For $400, this gun was capable of doing a great deal more damage than my firearm, and the government would've had almost no way to track the weapon until the trigger was turned in later. Unregistered weapons and the people who buy them are the only real threats.

Perhaps the most valid argument against my proposal is that of safety. The BYU campus is not a place where criminals commonly lurk, but it is a place where one can and should demand a safe haven to seek education. Firearms do indeed have the potential for some serious accidents, but when handled properly they are perfectly safe. There are regulations and guidelines in place to keep firearms safe. Just as it can be said that most crimes with guns are committed by people who weren't supposed to have the gun in the first place, it can be said that almost all gun accidents occurred when people did something with the gun that they weren't supposed to. Most concealed handguns come equipped with special locks, safety features, and holsters that make accidental discharge a near impossibility. For instance, in most Glock and 1911 handguns, the trigger is locked in placed until the back of the grip is squeezed, and the trigger is pull directly backward. Unless your hand is in the position used for shooting - that's almost impossible to do at once, especially when kept in the appropriate holster Firearms stored in a car are required by law to have no ammunition in the chamber, and to be locked down. One will also find that the people who are most careful with guns, and have the greatest respect for their danger, are those that are properly exposed to and trained with guns.

Although guns and campuses generally don't mix, it is my firm belief that a careful reconsideration of the weapons policies in certain areas of Provo will help make the area around BYU even safer. While safety is of the utmost concern, I believe that the reasons that second ammendment was written are just as valid today in Utah, as they were over 200 years ago at this nations birth. There are countless situations when the government simply cannot succceed in defending it's citizens. In such circumstances, individuals have a right to arm themselves appropriately.

=================================
(It's just like Harry Potter 5! The ministry wanted to take away their magic!)

I made sure that I was discussing counter-arguments and acknowledging their validity. But did I weaken my argument too much?

I tried to focus on logos, and slightly on pathos. Do you think it was effective?

I tend to suck up a lot. Does my emphasis on logos hide that? I want it to sound more professional than pathetic (as in pathos...)