Disclaimer:I am not a legal consultant and do not intend to give legal advice. If you are not capable of making your own decisions and taking responsibility for them, then discontinue reading. I accept no responsibility for anything readers say or do as a result of viewing this material.Some argue that, ideally, citizens should not own guns. But in an equally idealistic, albeit more responsible world, everyone would own and operate a firearm.Much has been made of potential concealed carry on campus laws. But a more relevant discussion — whether it’s aimed at discouraging or encouraging firearm ownership and use — would focus on defining the legal consequences of using a firearm, namely, by defining specifically when it’s appropriate to use one.Regardless of either argument, students — gun owners and non-owners alike — would benefit from this knowledge.Readers must understand the need to consult with an attorney and that state, local and federal laws and seek training in the operation of firearms and legal quandaries before risking being put in a situation that may require making a decision of this magnitude.The focus shouldn’t be the debate over gun control, but a commentary about the decisions surrounding the practical application of the law. Ignorance of the law affects people’s lives, and using ignorance as a legal defense will not hold up in the courts.Informed decisions save lives. So before you get all John Wayne on us, take a moment to learn the law for yourself.Because protection from violence is bereft without protection from the law. Perceived justice is not equivalent to legal justice.To distinguish between the controlled violence of self-defense and unjustified violence, it is important to understand what constitutes force.Lou Slaton, who sells firearms at Easy Pawn Shop and offers advice about gun use, said the more you contribute to the cause of violence, the harder it is to prove you were justified in using force.”Force,” Slaton said, “is decided by a judge. It’s not up to your interpretation.” Before using force, one must attempt to flee the threat, though Louisiana residents are no longer required to flee a residence, business or automobile.Slaton said firearms should always be the last line of self-defense.”You should only use it if you have to,” Slaton said. “The law is very specific about self-defense.”And in the eyes of the law, your actions matter more than your understanding.”You must face the consequences for your decisions,” Slaton said. “And you should pay for the wrong ones. The law is considered in relation to you.  If an immediate threat passes, you cannot draw a gun.”However, none of this knowledge will mean anything if owners can’t make a crucial initial decision. If the ability to use force — potentially deadly force — is present, the individual accepts responsibility for possessing the intent to kill and dealing with the resulting repercussions and guilt.This means using lethal force should result from a responsible decision-making process.When the choice is to kill or be killed, it hardly seems like a choice at all. But when the choice is be a victim or a killer, it becomes immensely more difficult.And without knowing the law, an informed decision becomes fanciful. If you can’t make this decision in a calm atmosphere — likely the one you’re in if you’re reading this — then you won’t be able to make this decision in a crisis.This is not to ignore the fact that the inclination to decline completely from using lethal force is not without equally dangerous consequences.Violence is never an effective long-term solution. But to make reasonable decisions that must be made immediately, it’s best to consider long-term consequences prior to being put in a potentially life-changing, or life-ending, situation.Daniel Lumetta is a 22-year-old mass communication senior from Metairie.– – – -Contact Daniel Lumetta at [email protected]