From: David C. Finster <dfinster**At_Symbol_Here**EXCHANGE.WITTENBERG.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Campus Carry Laws and Research Laboratories
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 18:02:17 +0000
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 7AB8F8BFE46C5446902F26C10EBF4AEAA28F324F**At_Symbol_Here**



This seems like a very good list of items that would argue against firearms in a lab.  However- if one is arguing with folks who think that it's OK to have firearms in locations where having PEOPLE (as opposed to objects) in harm's say is NOT a concern then I suspect it will not be a compelling argument unless the objects are viewed as being of more intrinsic value than people.  The argument extends to:  "If we arm everyone working in the lab, then it will be a safer place since they could quickly prevent anyone from entering the lab to shoot an innocent compressed gas cylinder."


Dom:  good luck!




David C. Finster
Professor, Department of Chemistry
University Chemical Hygiene Officer
Wittenberg University


From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:dchas-l**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU] On Behalf Of Margaret Rakas
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Campus Carry Laws and Research Laboratories




I would suggest that having the possibility of a bullet hitting the following could be pretty darn risky:


1) compressed gas cylinders

2) Cryogenic dewars (the large ones for helium, LN2, etc)

3) flammable cabinets 

4) flammable solvents

5) in-process synthetic reactions

6) Class 3B or Class 4 laser equipment (alignment devices, dye reservoirs, etc)

7) labs using radioactive materials

8) pyrophoric materials

9) labs designated as BSL-2 or BSL-3--you don't want to aerosolize those biomaterials


good luck, please let us know what areas you end up will be interesting I'm sure..




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



Margaret A. Rakas, Ph..D.
Manager, Inventory & Regulatory Affairs
Clark Science Center
413-585-3877 (p)

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.