Brad Omland

A collection of my personal work

[bradomland]

COLUMN: Pro: Disclosed guns create a safer campus

As a pro-gun person, I can easily support the idea to conceal and carry on campus, but it’s equally easy to admit some regulation is necessary in our academic environment.

While I write on behalf of guns, I do not write in the name of recklessness. I believe those already permitted to conceal and carry in any other public setting should be allowed to do the same on campus.

College is a time of high stress combined with high levels of social interaction. A normal situation can go from calm to tense with or without the catalyst of a gun. Thus, safety is important.

I believe Senate Bill 177 was reckless in its regard for safety. Student Government Association President Alissa VanMeeteren said in the forum related to guns on campus, “People throw (responsibility) around on either side.... but this has nothing to do with responsibility. It has to do with safety.”

While the proposed, and since defeated, SB 177 raised concerns for safety, I believe there is room to allow guns on campus in academic buildings while still meeting individual needs for safety and responsibility.

Current gun policy states students are allowed to store guns in vehicles and in ROTC lockers on campus. The gun policy should be expanded to allow for anyone already permitted to conceal and carry in the state of South Dakota to do so in public, academic buildings across campus, while still barring guns from on-campus housing and athletic events.

Every student, in both on-campus and off-campus housing, should be required to notify the university if they plan to carry a gun on campus in order to assess risk. However, students should not be required to disclose to a fellow student if they own or carry a gun. If a student wishes to carry a firearm on campus, it should be seen at the belt and not concealed under clothing.

Allowing guns in public and academic buildings with these defined carrying standards satisfies the need for public safety while still allowing for individual freedom and security in personal quarters.

Criminologists say public, academic buildings and classrooms on college campuses are more likely to be targeted by a shooter and students are less likely to respond to danger in a timely and safe manner while in these buildings. Most classrooms at USD allow only one way in and one way out. Defenseless students become easy targets when the door is blocked by an attacker with a gun.

Prohibiting guns in dormitories allows for students to be safe in their personal quarters. The dorms are already secure area on campus with students only allowed access to their specific floor at all hours and only their specific building after hours. If an attack broke out in the dorms, students could quickly secure themselves in their rooms without the need to aggressively defend themselves.

Allowing guns in public and academic buildings, while still prohibiting firearms in the dorms and at athletic events, satisfies the need for public safety while still allowing for individual freedom and security at a personal level.

This is the compromise our university is ready and responsible enough to implement to satisfy the need for safety and security. Let us not wait until lives are lost in an attack to take action.

[bradomland]

Senate Bill 70 will reduce budget, recidivism

The South Dakota state legislature is back to work and a bill that would significantly alter the state criminal justice system has already passed the Senate chambers and is on its way to the House.

Senate Bill 70, written on recommendations from Gov. Daugaard and Supreme Court Chief Justice David Gilbertson, proposes to keep non-violent drug and alcohol offenders out of prison. Instead of prison time, non-violent offenders would undergo intensive probation and parole programs supervised by an expanded court system.

S.B. 70 seeks to accomplish two goals: first, to reduce recidivism rates in state prisons and to save the state $212 million dollars in prison costs. Officials say if nothing is done to stem a rapid increase in the number of inmates, South Dakota will have to spend $212 million in the next decade to build and run two new prisons. Last Thursday January 24, this bill passed the Senate by a vote of 31-2. Wide bipartisan support is expected to come from the House as well.

Of all the bills proposed so far, this bill is by is far the smartest bill to come out of the legislature. First, policies targeted at reducing recidivism rates are effective because they reduce crime rates. Second, a reduction in crime rates brings lower costs. Third, SB 70 creates incentives for offenders to succeed.   

According to a Pew/Association of State Correctional Administrators research study published by the USA Today in April 2011, South Dakota had the highest recidivism rate from 1999 to 2002 and 2004 to 2007 with 34.9 percent of paroled inmates back behind bars within three years. This study points out that policies targeted at reducing recidivism offer perhaps the ripest opportunities for achieving the twin goals of less crime and lower costs.

Policies targeted at reducing recidivism are effective because they hold the offender accountable and keep him or her connected to the community. Therefore being employed and connected to family and friends can be just as, if not more, effective as a costly revocation.

The study shows, more recently, offenders respond better to the prospect of rewards than the fear of punishment. Behavioral incentives, such as the opportunity to reduce supervision times, can be a powerful carrot, motivating offenders to obtain and hold a job, stay sober and in treatment, and abide by other conditions of release and avoid new crimes. In addition to promoting positive behavior by offenders, earned-time credits help clear caseloads so agencies can focus on higher-risk parolees.

 If SB 70’s proposals become law, reforms will be slowly implemented into small areas and grow as the program sees success in the form of savings and reduced recidivism rates. Now, that SB 70 has withstood the scrutiny of the Senate, it must face the will of the people and face the fury of democracy in the House.

The criminal justice reforms in this bill seek to reduce South Dakota’s highest recidivism rate in the country, cut future prison costs by $212 million and offer incentives for offenders to succeed. To support this bill’s commitment to fiscal and personal responsibility please contact your state Representative. A 2013 legislator listing by district can be found at legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2013/MembersByDistrict.aspx.