My colleagues voted 11-3 against allowing campus police to be armed.

Sometimes being a professor is embarrassing.

In the real world, ivory towers can exist only if they are surrounded by armed men. For some reason (we may need a shrink for this), the people who live in the towers react to this by demeaning their defenders and loathing their weapons.

In the last 30 months, there have been shootings in seven schools. These assaults have resulted in almost 90 casualties (51 dead and 38 wounded).

In each case, the murderer continued to kill people until they sickened of it and killed themselves, or left the school by their own choice. In no case did the shooter ever meet a defender with any realistic chance of stopping them.

In the same period of time there have been an estimated 12 deaths in schools from fires. Yet, all school buildings are equipped with fire extinguishers, alarms, and expensive safety materials.

My own building at the university has safety doors, automatic door closers, alarms, fire-resistant materials, and office doors that can't be set in an open position. Why? Because someone may die in a fire.

But this building (unless someone is hiding them) contains no weapons of any kind that would defend the people who reside here from a statistically higher threat.

Fire fighters are not prevented from carrying axes, even though axes have been used to kill people since the first person wandered out of a cave and invented the thing. (A special note to my hypersensitive colleagues: axes have also been used to kill persons who could be the poster child for "diversity" in any given moment.)

Last April, a South Korean student at Virginia Tech killed 32 and wounded 25. He then killed himself.

In January of 2002, an African student walked into the Appalachian School of Law and killed three and wounded three. He was later arrested.

In 1976, a U.S. student killed seven and wounded two at Cal State Fullerton. He was later arrested.

In 1991, a Chinese student who evidently was upset about not winning a prize, killed six and wounded one at the University of Iowa, before committing suicide.

Just in case you believe that it is the flawed U.S. Constitution that allows these shootings, in 2002 an expelled German student killed 15 and wounded seven in Erfurt, Germany. He killed himself.

There are practical applications and then there are esoteric ivory-tower theories. Academic progressives lean toward the esoteric, especially when certain sacred icons are involved.

Guns are an evil icon. They should not be allowed anywhere for any purpose. Why? Because, they should not be allowed anywhere for any purpose.

This is a type of religious fundamentalism in its most basic form. You see, if we are righteous, then other people will be motivated to be righteous, but even if they won't, we, the righteous, are willing to allow others to suffer and die in righteousness.

Twenty years ago, the crowd that now refuses to arm police were the same who pushed for a unilateral nuclear freeze. Our own troops could go into harm's way without equal deterrent because the other side would do the same when they saw our good intentions. If not, then our troops would make wonderful martyrs for progressive righteousness.

Let me be as blunt as possible so that no one can misconstrue my opinion.

The best way to stop a shooter who is killing people, is to kill him, and kill him as soon as possible. It doesn't matter why he is doing this, or what weapon he is using. The gun held by the defender is not a symbol. It is not simply something to keep the crime from happening in the first place, although I would argue (with good supporting evidence) that the defender's gun is a deterrent. The defender's gun is for killing shooters who are attempting to kill people.

Officers should have access to guns. They should be trained how to use them, and they should be willing to use them.

I would take this one step further. There ought to be one person in every building, unknown to anyone except the police, who is armed to the teeth. A person who has also been trained and is willing to put his or her own life on the line for the students.

Why should students and parents expect anything less?