The only thing "not well thought out" is the article as the previous commentors have already pointed out. I dearly hope that this will be taken as a learning experience to do some research and actually READ the legislation and its effects before openning mouth and inserting foot.

Opponents of Michigan’s concealed carry law employed this same sort of alarmist rhetoric – Cassandra-esque prophecies about blood in the streets – agitating against the legislation that created it. Police Chiefs from various municipalities warned at the time that if citizens could get carry permits without their say-so, Wild West lawlessness would follow just a surely as night follows day. The streets would become free-fire zones. Corpses would stack up like cord wood. Bo-o-o-o!

More than a decade later, it’s apparent the dire predictions of liberal opponents of gun rights weren’t just mistaken in scope or scale, the function of some misplaced decimal point. The scare tactics they were furiously peddling have been proven utterly & completely bogus – partisan fiction.

I fully appreciate the rose colored glasses that perceive UM’s campus as an extra-special place – magical, even. But exempt from (select portions of) the Bill of Rights? No one wields that authority, save perhaps the Supreme Court. No one should wield that power, least of all our Board of Regents.

The whole premise of this article relies on the belief that people who legally carry concealed handguns are dangerous. All of the arguments thrive on people's unjustified fear and ignorance of state law and concealed carry statics. There are already guns on campus, being brought by criminals. It's time to give the law abiding citizens of this country a way to defend themselves.
And if more guns causes more violence, why should the police carry guns?

How exactly is it "vigilantism" when it is already LEGAL to defend yourself and others with your personal firearm?

This editorial runs on the opinion that just because the "gun-free" label is attached to a campus, that it is less likely to have guns within it in the hands of criminals. Although anecdotal, I know that, for a few hundred dollars and a couple of phone calls, I have the ability to obtain an illegal firearm. With 30,000+ students living on and off campus, and a large amount of university employees, there is surely a decent amount of illegal gun ownership, and at least some of those guns are on campus or carried on campus illegally. It would be very irresponsible to say that just because the law is there that there is less illegal, with emphasis on the word illegal, ownership/carrying of guns, as there isn't any way to know which of the students around campus have a gun. The point is, guns already exist on campus, we simply have no way of knowing about it. If a student snaps and wants to go on a shooting rampage, he would definitely be able to obtain a firearm, illegally if necessary (and under 21). He isn't going to follow some "anti-gun" law if he is dead-set on hurting innocent civilians. The law serves no purpose other than not allowing legal carriers to carry a firearm on the Diag, while he is still allowed to carry his firearm in his vehicle or on the sidewalk next to Noodles and Company. If he had the intent of killing somebody, an arbitrary line isn't going to stop him.

There is no logical reason to make it illegal to carry a firearm on outdoor property, as the only people that are affected by this are legally licensed firearm carriers. Since the law still wouldn't allow carriers to go into classrooms (buildings), dormitories, or other sensitive areas, it wouldn't lead to more guns indoors. The only thing that would happen is that visitors (likely parents) would be able to keep their legally owned gun while in, say, a parking lot or other outdoor area that is owned by the university. Legalizing something that is legal in every other public outdoor area won't increase gun ownership, and won't substantially increase the amount of firearms on campus from day-to-day. It only concerns licensed gun owners, who have gone through the legal process to obtain a firearm and are law-abiding citizens.

Let me put this another way. Were I 21 and a licensed owner, I could carry a gun while walking on State Street, say, in Ann Arbor. I can carry it anywhere on public property (except for classrooms). I'm also legally allowed to keep my firearm on public school property while dropping a child off. However, just because I'm walking on State Street and pass some arbitrary line, I'm suddenly made a criminal, even though I'm still on state-owned property? That seems like a large fallacy to me.

The twelve college campuses that allow legal concealed carrying of firearms (all public colleges in the state of Utah, Colorado State University, and Blue Ridge Community College in Virginia) have seen absolutely no increase of gun mishaps, alcohol-related gun injury, or anything of the like since becoming carry-legal.

No substantial evidence has been provided by anyone opposed to this new legislation that making a campus gun free has limited the number of illegal firearms on campus. An unknown number of students illegally have firearms in their dorm rooms, and are carrying them on campus. There is no way to stop them, and that point is null because the only ones that should be worried about are the ones that don't have a firearm but obtain one right when they snap. The ones that snap are likely to not be visiting gun owners, but students or teachers that are here everyday. The only way to fix that would be to disband the university entirely, as there will always be humans that snap, and there will always be a way to illegally obtain a firearm. Restrictions on legal ownership only work to undermine liberty.

“Students shouldn’t have to walk to class or walk through campus at night wondering whether or not the people around them are carrying dangerous weapons. And the presence of alcohol in college life means that fights can easily escalate into gun violence and fatal injuries when firearms are present.”

1) 220,000 people are licensed by this state to carry a handgun. They went though background check and training as required by state law. So unless you never leave campus you have been round law-abiding citizen “carrying dangerous weapons”. (note there nothing dangerous about gun they are just chucks of steel only person using them is dangerous) Besides that point since armed robbers and rapes happing on campus you better be worrying about criminal “carrying dangerous weapons” despite the feel good band the campus has.
2) Under MI law you can’t drink and carry. When my friends and I were in college and want to drink we left our carry guns at home.
3) Note MSU already change campus police to about what this bill says this summer. No reports of problems. Utah you can even carry into class room for several years now and no problems again. So where are the statics and research you make these clams on?