From: porterjb**At_Symbol_Here**COMCAST.NET
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Campus Carry Laws and Research Laboratories
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:00:18 +0000
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 1055704007.206940.1449248418777.JavaMail.zimbra**At_Symbol_Here**

Declaring an area a gun free zone works only if people abide by it. If someone like the people in California decide to bring in guns and shoot the place up isn't the declaration meaningless???? Since the likelihood of anyone carrying concealed suddenly starting to fire their weapon would be small,  would it be better to have someone to at least be able to defend those in the lab vs. just letting them all get shot?  I think it is a sad commentary on our times that we even have to have discussions like this! What we need is better leadership not more signs or declarations!!!   Jim

From: "Allen Niemi" <anniemi**At_Symbol_Here**MTU.EDU>
Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 11:21:56 AM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Campus Carry Laws and Research Laboratories

Here's the way I look at this. There are many labs where gunshots would create an additional hazard, including fires, explosions, equipment damage, etc, (gunshot wound hazards are obvious but not relevant just to labs). The rationale for allowing people to carry weapons seems to center around the need for self protection. However, I do not see how allowing more shooting will make lab fires or explosions less likely and there are other means to mitigate the hazard created by an attacker. I would make a list of all labs where gunshots or the presence of a gun would create an additional or unacceptable hazard and push to designate them as gun free for that reason. If I were on the other side of the argument I would claim that gun owners are so well trained that their sharp-shooting skills would result in fewer total shots fired (be prepared to respond to that).


On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Casadonte, Dominick <DOMINICK.CASADONTE**At_Symbol_Here**> wrote:
Hi All,

This is the first time I have posted a question to the general community;
we are interested in your opinions and perspectives.

As many of you know, the State of Texas passed a concealed carry law
during the last legislative session. While universities cannot declare an
entire public university a =C5=82gun-free zone=CB=9B, certain areas can be declared
gun free. Hospital and child care facilities, as well as public
auditoriums and Board of Regents rooms have often been exempted at other
state universities.

At Texas Tech, our Institutional Laboratory Safety Committee has been
exploring under what conditions certain laboratory or research areas
should be declared gun free. So as not to bias the discussion, I will not
tell you where we are heading. But it did raise to my mind the question
that with a number of states now adopting similar laws, should EH&S
professionals be brought into the discussion at a national level?

What do you all think about this? Should all synthesis labs be gun free?
Should only certain areas, like NMR facilities or areas with high magnetic
fields, or areas with cryogenic tanks, be gun free? What about flammables?
Labs with pyrophoric materials?

I am copying Matt Roe, our head of EH&S, to this discussion thread, so
that a couple of us can follow the comments.


Dom Casadonte
Texas Tech University

Allen Niemi, PhD
Occupational Safety and Health Services
Room 322 Lakeshore Center
Michigan Technological University
Phone: 906-487-2118
Fax:     906-487-3048

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post

The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.