I just read Daniel Ruth's column in today's(4/21/2007) Tampa Tribune. I will link it as soon as they post it. If you get a chance, read it. Here is the response I sent him about 15 minutes ago.

Mr Ruth,
I just finished reading you column today. I feel you are completely wrong on this issue. It’s not just about guns, it is about a business entity being able me what I can and cannot keep in my vehicle. It’s about a company being able to search my vehicle without my permission. Today the “Company” says I can’t have a weapon in my vehicle, tomorrow it’s a certain book. The day after, it’s a certain music cd. Where does it stop? You may be willing to let some Rent-a-Cop search your car, I am not quite as generous with my rights. Florida “Castle Doctrine” states my car is part of my “Castle”, as for myself, I intend to make it as safe as my home.
In your column you wrote “company or university bans on weapons can serve to pre-empt spontaneous violent crimes committed in the heat of the moment.” The Virginia Tech tragedy was not a spontaneous event. It was planned. The shooter in this case, like many others, took advantage of the fact no one there was armed. When you ban weapons from an area, you create an area full of victims. If there was one person in that building at Virginia Tech with a handgun and the intestinal fortitude to use it, the death toll in this tragedy could have been greatly reduced.

Thank you,
Rich Evans
Land O’ Lakes, Florida


Let me know what you think.

ETA: Here is the link to the original column.

http://www.tbo.com/news/columnists/danielruth/MGB9V9L8R0F.html

I think you hit it right on the head there.  Well written.