A reader writes re: Fencing Team Banned From North Dakota State University Because Of ‘Weapons Policy [via foxnews.com]:
I’m an atypical gun enthusiast, but feel at home and welcome in the world you’ve created to discuss broader gun rights and personal autonomy. There’s been a lot of coverage of college students that defend themselves with firearms, from the citation of the Piers Morgan “cite a time an ar-15 was used for defense” and onwards. North Dakota State University [NDSU] is a very conservative state, and has a lot of love for firearms, but their ideas of personal liberty are not as expansive as might first seem apparent. I came from an anti-gun family, so I started off with other weapons and eventually found my way to firearms, so this issue is near and dear to my heart. Full disclosure- fencing lead me to question whether weapons and discipline improve personal character . . .
Here’s the statement from the once and former fencing coach Enrique Alvarez.
“The current interpretation of the non-weapon policy in NDSU…understands our fencing equipment as weapons,” says the club’s coach Enrique Alvarez.
Alvarez has been fencing since his early teens. He says despite their appearance, the foils, epees and sabers they use don’t have sharp edges or points.
“This is a spring and a flat tip that if you press the spring against the body of the other person, will be awarded a point,” he demonstrates.
Nonetheless, NDSU’s Police and Safety Office Director Ray Boyer cited the school’s policy manual and Code of Student Behavior, saying sabers and swords are prohibited on campus:
“They are deemed weapons, and as such, possession or use on University owned or controlled property is prohibited,” he says.
Would it be possible for you to post something about this, about how gun freedom doesn’t necessarily mean freedom from hoplophobia? The policy cites even training swords which are laughably weak as “weapons” and “perceptions of danger” with such weapons.
This is not a red/blue issue, as this is happening in North Dakota, but a statist/non-statist, personal liberty issue. ROTC is allowed to operate whereas simple fencing is not. This is outrageous, so far backwards I don’t have words for it, and enraging. I’d love to engage the greater firearms community to rally to the defense of the martial freedoms, whether freedom to wrestle, fence, or shoot.
A concerned fencer to firearms owner