[_____V_____]

A lot of related threads and articles which sprung up during the Virginia Tech Massacre pointed basically at one thing - was the banning of weapons from college campuses really justified?

On one hand, student leaders argued that allowing a concealed weapon after being approved of a permit was a must, and it could have helped in avoiding what happened at V-Tech.

But counsellors and university staff, who are upholding it more strictly, still believe that "with all the altercations, stress, drinking, not getting enough sleep, getting stoned, grudges...the last and worst thing would be is to add a gun or a weapon to the equation."

But can strict gun control policy really stop some students from breaking the rule? If someone wants it, he ll get it. And keep it. Some would break the rule just for the heck of it. Which makes me bring to your notice, right now as I type this...how many students all across the US are in their college campuses WITHOUT a concealed weapon on them, or in their lockers/bags?

What about those who wish to protect themselves? Here, I d like to quote from a movie, "I d better be with a gun and not use it, rather than not have one when I need it the most." Gun rights activists are justified by this argument.

There are two equal sides to the coin - will there be a spur in similar incidents and upsurge in violence if such a possible step is taken in the future? Or do we want a strict gun control policy, which might eventually lead to another V-Tech situation, and leave the students at the mercy of the gun-toting rampager(s)?

Your take.