San Antonio College Prof Wears Body Armor to Class as Campus Carry Protest

When campus carry was signed into law and took effect at Texas four-year colleges and universities last year, students and faculty at UT’s prestigious flagship campus in Austin registered their opposition by organizing feeble foot-stamping gestures of defiancefiling frivolous lawsuits and waving rubber penises in the air like they just don’t care.

Now that campus carry has made it through its first year quietly, community colleges have become subject to the law, too. And while most instructors are probably resigned by now to the idea of students carrying firearms on campus, that doesn’t mean that they like the idea any more than their four-year educational institution counterparts did.

One case in point: San Antonio College adjunct science professor Charles Keith Smith. As theranger.org reports,

Geography Adjunct Charles Keith Smith wore a bulletproof vest and Army helmet to teach his summer school class on Aug. 1 as a visual statement of his opposition to the campus carry law as it went into effect in two-year colleges in Texas.

“This is me making a statement that I do not approve of it, and I feel threatened,” Smith said in an interview after his class, GEOG 1301, Physical Geography.

He said he borrowed the vest and helmet from his son who retired from the Army.

You have to give Mr. Smith props for managing to his express his campus carry animus in a more dignified and restrained manner than those who shape the young skulls full of mush in Austin.

Smith said that with the campus carry law, he does not know who has guns and worries that the mental state of a student who carries a gun might increase the risk of a shooting.

It apparently never occurred to Mr. Smith that he didn’t know who had guns in his classes before the law went into effect August 1 either. He’d likely be horrified to learn the probability that he had students carrying firearms for years approaches one hundred percent. Let’s not tell him, though.

“I had a fistfight break out in class over seating two years ago,” he said.

“These guys have guns,” he said. He said he cannot imagine what goes on in the thinking of students 21, 22 and 23 years old who may not be mature enough to carry a handgun.

Being  educated in the sciences rather than history, Mr. Smith may not be aware that The Founders apparently weren’t at all worried about the thinking of adults of any age when they enshrined the RKBA in the Bill of Rights.

But Mr. Smith really isn’t all that worried about any perceived danger from having licensed concealed carriers in class among those soaking up his wisdom.

Smith said he would wear the vest and helmet for only a couple of days.

So it was all just anti-gun performance art. Mr. Smith evidently put on his little show (and invited the school paper’s photographer into his class) to garner a little attention. Mission accomplished.

 

comments

  1. avatar Nanashi says:

    ” The Founders apparently weren’t at all worried about the thinking of adults of any age”

    And why do supposedly pro-Constitution people insist the bill of rights doesn’t apply to minors despite this being indicated nowhere in the Constitution, Declaration or Federalist Papers?

    1. avatar Jim B says:

      I don’t know if you are being serious or just a troll but the rights of minors under the Bill of Rights and the Constitution has been addressed over and over by the Supreme Court, the ultimate arbitrator of the Constitution. For instance students at school do not have the protection of the 4th Amendment against search without a warrant. Students do not have the right to dress in any manner they decide but must obey dress codes and even wear uniforms. And yes, parents can set down rules for minors since parents are legally responsible for them and can be sued if the child does something that warrants a lawsuit.

      Minors cannot vote. That you think that they should be able to buy a gun is or think that there is something wrong that they cannot is…well ridiculous.

      So there is nothing strange at all about children not being allowed to buy guns. I am not sure if you are actually confused or just being sophomoric.

  2. avatar TexTed says:

    “students 21, 22 and 23 years old who may not be mature enough to carry a handgun”

    Yet — every male in the country, from 18 to 25, is required to register for the Draft with the Selective Service. So that brother of his that he borrowed the armor from was highly likely carrying not just a handgun but a fairly potent rifle at those ages. The Air Force won’t even let you join if you’re older than 27.

    Now, I’m not saying that 21-23 year olds are always at the pinnacle of wisdom, maturity and judgement — just that he borrowed his body armor from someone who was very likely that same age when they were in the military.

    1. avatar Mike Betts says:

      According to the story, the body armor and helmet were borrowed from his son, who is the Army retiree. That got me to wondering if such things as helmets and body armor are the personal property of soldiers and if they are entitled to keep them upon separation from the service. Wouldn’t it be funny if federal agents showed up at his son’s doorstep and placed him under arrest for misappropriation of government property after his father “let the cat out of the bag” with that stupid stunt?

      1. avatar Nanashi says:

        Is that camo pattern used by the US?

        1. avatar YAR0892 says:

          That vest is actually an IOTV in UCP- universal Camo Pattern- which was worn by the US Army. It is currently being phased out in favor of OCP- Operstional Camo Pattern- which is similar to Multicam. Odds are, his kid bought this gear on the open market, BUT it is possible it was stolen from a unit somewhere. They’re legal to buy and own, assuming they were legally sold. That said, most concealable weapons at classroom ranges would make it ineffective without level IV plates, as the vest itself only normally carries level III soft armor for spall and pistol caliber threats.

  3. avatar kevin says:

    Cool stunt bro. Let’s see how long until that uncomfortable, heavy old thing gets left behind.

    Actually, I’ve changed my mind: that triggers me, please remove it from my safe space.

  4. avatar Libertarian says:

    Time to pass hb 560 and lower the age for ccw to 18 in 2019.

  5. avatar Steve in TX says:

    Professors who use power point have a legitimate reason to fear their students.

  6. avatar Ron Matthis says:

    Dumbass … tell us how many weapons have you seen being carried??

  7. avatar Norincojay says:

    This guy is a complete idiot ruled by emotion and paranoia. Study after study has shown CCW holders are the most lawabiding group of people in this country. Anyone that fears lawabiding Americans suffer from serious paranoia to the extent they would benefit from counseling.

  8. avatar Vhyrus says:

    He’s a geologist, not a scientist. Don’t mix them up.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      To be fair, geology IS a legitimate field, unlike “climate science”. It does, however, tend to be on the more practical side of things than the bulging foreheads down in theretical physics talking about the properties of particles they can barely detect, much less analyze. Those guys rapidly approach “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” levels of uselessness.

      Mind you, my undergrad degree started life as applied physics before I got bored to tears and hopped the fence to full blown engineering.

      This clown is still an immature cretin throwing a temper tantrum.

  9. avatar strych9 says:

    “Geography Adjunct Charles Keith Smith wore a bulletproof vest and Army helmet to teach his summer school class on Aug. 1 as a visual statement of his opposition to the campus carry law…” his own idiocy.

    There. Fixed that.

  10. avatar Hannibal says:

    Students should complain that he is triggering them with his militaristic dress.

  11. avatar Bama61 says:

    Good grief, do these people expect anyone except their fellow crybabies to even care about something so childish?

    If you’re that scared stop teaching and find another job.

  12. avatar CZ Peasy says:

    He is not wearing armor. Its just a load bearing vest.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      And his son’s helmet. Did his son not have to turn that back in for reclamation?

    2. avatar DaveL says:

      He looks like he’s going fishing.

    3. avatar YARB0892 says:

      That’s an IOTV- Interceptor Outer Tactical Vest- that is an armor vest, not an LBV. However, if it doesn’t have the armor ibserts or plates, it’s virtually nothing more than a load-bearing vest.

  13. avatar Accur81 says:

    I’ve got extra body armor, and anyone asking to borrow it for a campus carry protest would kindly be told where to go and how to get there.

  14. avatar former water walker says:

    And a nod and a wink to you prof…you should quit in protest ?Put yer $ where your feeble mind is.

  15. avatar Jon says:

    Dear Professor Smith,
    You know what prevents shootings better than a bullet proof vest? A sidearm. If you need a vest, you are already in trouble. Why protest if you do not do anything to prevent? Also, those vests and the plates within those vests are sensitive items that are serial numbered. Therefore your son and you are in possession of stolen government property. If you are so inclined to do the right thing, I suggest that you turn in the stolen vest (and plates) to the local FBI field office. I suggest that you wear it into the field office with an air soft gun in your hand.

    1. avatar Mike Betts says:

      Don’t forget to paint over that orange thingy at the muzzle (where the pellet comes out) before you visit the FBI, okay?

  16. avatar Kendahl says:

    What’s ironic is that the people who worry Smith, with good reason, used to be the only ones carrying. Permit holders, whom he could trust not to harm him, weren’t about to ruin their lives by carrying where it was prohibited.

  17. avatar Nanashi says:

    Seeing 16 comments listed on front page, but zero in article (both the comments themselves and the counter)

  18. avatar P-Dog says:

    Most likely that’s just an empty vest. I wanna see him haul some plates in there. Let’s see how long he can stand during his lectures with that.

    1. avatar Mike Betts says:

      But what about his poor students? The plates in the vest may be a load, but what about the drivel he spouts while wearing it?

  19. avatar Kevin m says:

    Looks like James Randi.

  20. avatar Mark N. says:

    looks to me from that slide that he was teaching sex ed. I’d wear “protection” for that too.

  21. avatar Ed says:

    ” The Founders apparently weren’t at all worried about the thinking of adults of any age”
    It’s also quite apparent that the Founders didn’t count on what a bunch of whiny little bitches 99% of the population would become.

  22. avatar Ralph says:

    “students and faculty at UT’s prestigious flagship campus in Austin registered their opposition by . . . waving rubber penises in the air”

    Smith would have done the same thing but his rubber penis was being used.

    1. avatar Ironhead says:

      He is the big rubber penis.
      Stfu and teach. Thats your job and what ou are paid to do.
      You are not paid to throw a hissyfit cause you do like something.
      Teach dont whine.
      Be a role model for students. Not an example of what they shouldnt be.

      1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

        Absolutely. Look at the slide he is teaching from. Absolute baby food my kids learned in elementary school.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      At least that’d make a serviceable billy club if push came to shove (ew). That empty plate carrier of his is basically a fly fishing vest.

  23. avatar EGB says:

    Looks like he’s wearing the older ACU print IBA/IOTV. The vest + damn ceramic inserts suck in 100+ degree heat, must be nice to lecture while enjoying the state provided AC…

    1. avatar Dan in CO says:

      From the pic, I’d be willing to bet that he doesn’t have the plates in. It doesn’t even look like he has the Kevlar in it! I’m glad his son is no longer in the Army, he’s a part of this disarmament protest theater… the enabler.

      1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

        On the surface, the guy looks like he could be a real-man American type. Unfortunately, he is a pu$$ie.

        1. avatar D says:

          Yeah. F#$@ng vagina doesn’t even have any plates in it. Probably too much for that old liberal cunt.

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          Well, it’s not like anyone would willingly wear plates all day without Uncle Sam’s gun at their back ;). I say this guy is actually quite clever; he gets to wear a flyfishing vest with no increase/decrease in personal risk or even discomfort, and soak up tons of attaboys from his attractive lib-arts TA’s, coworkers, and students.

      2. avatar barnbwt says:

        Most likely it’s just some old crap he left at the guy’s house, lol

  24. avatar Arc says:

    If wearing body armor is the length of his protesting and its not disrupting teaching then its respectable indeed. The left should take note of this man, he sends his message across a lot louder than all the rioters at Berkley… I don’t even remember what the Berkley riots were about only that it was a riot… go figure.

    1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      Respectable? He is paid by the taxpayers to teach Geography to grown kids. Not to espouse his personal opinions. My entire journey through a very respectable engineering school did not once entail learning the personal opinions of a professor.

  25. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    This silly old leftist is in far more danger from heat stroke walking around campus than he would ever be from a student legally carrying a firearm. Would it be evil to offer him some nice insulating soft panels to go in his plate carrier?

  26. avatar Hunter427 says:

    That helmet is US government property, don’t know about the vest. Time for the feds to come knocking. Lol

    1. avatar Arc says:

      US Taxpayer property*

      As a US taxpayer, It doesn’t bother me in the slightest that he has NSN / issued gear. It varies from branch, unit, organization, etc, on what you can keep and what you can’t keep. For all we know, he was allowed to keep the equipment. I routinely raided the old IFAK/medical stuffings box at CIF with the O.K from the staff, it was all ‘expired’ and going to be thrown out, but the seals were still airtight and good.

      You can also buy USGI surplus gear, including NSN flacks, helmets, magazine pouches, grenade pouches, packs, everything. Buying some used surplus is a whole lot easier than filling out missing gear statements and getting the run around. Every supply unit is different, maybe his CIF/IF doesn’t want the kevlar back, maybe its disposable like the ISOMAT, pads, or poly-pro shirts. Maybe its a piece of DERMO gear and already written off but they let him keep it. Black canteen caps were changed to disposable, probably because everyone kept losing the damn things. Eye protection, random odds and ends, etc, disposable, you didn’t have to turn them in. One kid from my unit literally took a Kevlar out of the marked DERMO bin, not a single gripe about it.

      Maybe the kid bought the helmet with his own money while he was in the Army, I bought all sorts of gear while I was in the USMC, I have a whole damn deployment bag dedicated to all the crap I left with, and nice war chest just for all the uniforms, certifications, awards, etc. P-mags, NSN pouches, MARPAT tarp, Liner, etc. Bought with my own paycheck. Everything issued at CIF is also available for purchase at surplus stores, the MCX, etc.

      Hes innocent until you can prove him guilty.

      America!

      1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

        Can you translate any of that for us non-military types? Even us Physicians know to dumb down the jargon for the patients.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Sam throws away and “looses” nearly everything you can imagine/want. Possession 9/10ths etc.

          Until decided YOU are WRONG.

        2. avatar Arc says:

          His issuing facility may have written his helmet off as damaged beyond repair and let him keep it since it has been accounted for. Usually flacks and kevlar are required to be returned, however, if its so badly damaged that the facility that issued it refuses it back, you will need to fill out a ‘damaged or missing gear statement’ with the chain of command or outright buy a new one and turn the new one in. If this is the case, he probably bought the American taxpayer a brand new helmet out of his own pocket and kept the old one.

          Gear accountability isn’t a joke. The kid either paid for it via a gear statement and the cost was taken from his pay, the issuing facility let him keep it due to it being used up over the course of training / deployment, or he bought one for personal use. I had to sign for a laundry list of gear and I had to return every piece, be it by returning the physical gear, or forking up the money to buy the Taxpayers a new one.

          Just because something is general issue, or even stamped “property of the US government” doesn’t make it so, otherwise all U.S General issue surplus stores would be shut down.

          There is absolutely zero basis to “send the feds” after this kid over a helmet when its more than likely legally acquired.

          There is the slim chance he stole it from someone else or just picked it up, in that case its still Taxpayer property. People pick up all sorts of stuff, usually it goes into the squad or platoon gear bag.The bag tends to be passed from senior members to junior members. Sometimes people just keep stray gear they find or sell it come gear turn-in time. This is unlikely though…

        3. avatar Arc says:

          Double post.. some personal experience with DERMO gear…

          I should also add that my own command, while in Afghanistan, marked down a whole heaping load of stuff for destruction that was either broken or sort of broken. However, rather than throw it all in the burn pit, we all picked what we wanted to keep first, due to the fact it might be repairable back in the states. Its just not efficient for the USMC to try to send this equipment out of the country, get it repaired, then send it back in. However, our personal gear and bags are going to be transported out anyway so people were able to get it back that way.

          Everything is official, accounted for, and on paper.

          There were dozens of interceptor armors from an old ammo supply point at another outpost. We don’t use the interceptor anymore, but they show up from time to time. It was clutter in the supply point so anyone that wanted one was allowed to keep one. I wouldn’t trust the soft armor though, they were basically antiques and soft armor does expire over time. The options were basically destroy it in the burn pit, give it to the natives (seriously?) or pass them out to anyone who wanted one. The best option is obvious, pass them out rather than waste them. There isn’t enough room in the quad-con (mini-shipping crate), to fit this stuff and even if we could fit it, the options would remain the same in the states.

          Another instance would be the supply point in my own patrol base. The previous unit could never get enough ammo or worried they would run dry in a firefight with only 180 rounds per M16, 600-800 per SAW gunner, etc, so they would over declare what they expended and built up a modest amount of extra ammo, grenades, and such. All of this equipment was ultimately turned back in through official channels, with the exception of a pin-flare. We used the pin-flare for amusement and education. Its basically an early warning system, pin flares.

          TL:DR, sometimes old gear is better off just being passed down to the little people after its phased out and used up. It is very often accounted for and a record of what happened to it does exist.

      2. avatar Jon says:

        Judging by the pajama digital pattern on the vest, it is Army. In the army, the vest and plates are a serial numbered sensitive item. They are supposed to be turned in to CIF or whatever logistics agency they are issued from. However, the Army does a less than spectacular job of accounting for sensitive items. Due to the quality of accounting by the military, many veterans end up with “extra” vests, helmets, magazines, and other gear when they separate. When i separated, I had three unused sets of 7.62AP rated ceramic plates. I found them in an abandoned DERMO warehouse in Al-Asad. I assume ISIS found the ones I did not have room to take with me.

        I am assuming Professor Smith cannot endure an entire lecture with plates and therefore does not have them in the vest. As his gear stands, he has soft shell armor. It will stop any handgun round up to 44mag (not including FN5.7). His vest will not stop most rifle rounds including 5.56. Wearing body armor is a defensive gesture. It does nothing to stop an active shooting or prevent one.

        Professor Smith’s gesture against guns is meaningless and does nothing to actually solve the problem of a college campus shooting. It is merely an emotional outburst comparable to a toddler throwing a tantrum at Burger King because he could not have it his way. The best way to stop a shooter is to incapacitate him. Incapacitating a shooter is most quickly and effectively accomplished by shooting him until he stops shooting at others. The best way to prevent a shooting is for the shooter to know that his victims are armed and he is highly unlikely to accomplish his goals. Someone should explain this to Professor Smith but I doubt he would listen.

  27. avatar Noishkel says:

    No one tell them that body armor doesn’t work reliably at close range.

  28. avatar tiger says:

    It is a free country. The other side has their not entirely unreasonable feelings on the issue given the history of the Univ. Of Texas. In time he will find hopefully his fears unfounded and leaves the armor home.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Oh, yes, the unique history of a crazy dude who snapped & killed a bunch of people decades ago. So different from every other area of America, ever. The only semi-unique aspect to the story is that 1) he was a decent shot & was therefore more effective than the usual lunatic, and 2) that passersby were able to distract him with suppressing fire to a certain extent while authorities (one of whom was a deputized passerby) moved in for the kill.

      I heard the stupid T-sips lost the bastard’s brain a year or so back, btw (supposedly they never found a noticeable defect to explain why he snapped and decided to kill everyone)

      1. avatar Mike Betts says:

        I don’t know where you got the notion that Whitman’s brain had no abnormalities. There are numerous references to his having a brain tumor which caused him to snap.

  29. avatar PDW says:

    Head shot.

    1. avatar Ollie says:

      That’s for giving an “F”.
      A “D” might just be a kneecapping.
      A “C”, well maybe an earlobe or two.
      A “B”, Barrel dent to the middle of he forehead.

  30. avatar Matt Richardson says:

    Nobody is going to mention that he’s fussed about 20-somethings being armed while he borrowed the k-pot and carrier from his son who was in the army? Bet his boy was a 20-something and enlisted.

    Shit, I was in basic as 11M at the ripe old age of 17. They’d issued me a rifle before I’d ever even voted. The horror!

  31. avatar Jamesdc95 says:

    If his son has retired, he just fucked him big time so he could have his hissy fit. You dont just keep fucking body armor when you ets

  32. avatar FedUp says:

    Hey, Mr Smith!
    You going fishing right after class?

    (I’d never call an adjunct lecturer “Professor”, and I bet this one isn’t a “Doctor”)

    1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      There are no “Doctors” on that campus. Well maybe at the student health clinic.

  33. avatar Paul B says:

    Uhhhhh, are there any plates in that carrier?

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      Doubt there are rear plates with his posture

  34. Higher education is saturated with under performing over dramatic children – I’m talking about the profs.

  35. avatar Joatmon says:

    What a douche.

  36. avatar Rockhead says:

    Wow. Who would have imagined geography could piss people off enough to start fights?

    “IF I’VE TOLD YOU ONCE, I’VE TOLD YOU A HUNDRED TIMES, THAT’S AN IGNEOUS ROCK!!”

    “YOU TAKE THAT BACK, YOU SEDIMENTARY SONOFABITCH!!!

    1. avatar Jim says:

      Geol…nevermind

    2. avatar Mike1234 says:

      Its GEOGRAPHY … not Geology …. “maps and shite”.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Which, ironically enough, does actually get people riled (Tibet & Best Korea & Donetsk & whatnot)

  37. avatar Silentbrick says:

    He, he’s a GEOGRAPHY Professor…that means maps, not rocks. He’d be laughed out of class by a bunch of geology students. At least from my school.

  38. avatar barnbwt says:

    Look, it’s a geezer spouting off about geysers!

  39. avatar Vandikar says:

    Good for him. I dont care one bit if he wants to teach class in body armor.

  40. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    He forgot his K-pot

  41. avatar kenneth says:

    “wore a bulletproof vest and Army helmet… as a visual statement ”
    It sure wasn’t much else. A plate carrier with no plate isn’t much protection. But being a professor, he probably doesn’t know about things like that. You know, facts, evidence, reality, things like thatl….

    1. avatar Steve Day says:

      LOL. That’s the first thing I noticed too.

      When you are aware of how a loaded plate-carrier should look it makes watching TV/Movies quite annoying for your wife. ;o)

  42. avatar Southern Cross says:

    I think the “adjunct professor” is projecting his lack of self control on to his students.

    Note an “adjunct professor” does not have the formal qualifications for the title of professor but some on the board of the institution think his “experience” is enough to qualify for a teaching role.

    1. avatar Scrote McGee says:

      Completely inaccurate. An adjunct professor is just a part time professor.

    2. avatar Nigel the expat says:

      “I think the “adjunct professor” is projecting…”

      This is what most of those lib/prog who are anti-gun are doing. Projection. “I cannot be trusted/would shoot someone, therefore everyone else would act the same way”.

      Wankers.

  43. avatar Tom in NC says:

    What an old Geyser, spouting off like that!

    1. avatar Jeremy in AL says:

      I hope the students aren’t paying too much for that class. Looks like it is packed full of information that will help them succeed in the real world.

  44. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    Isn’t that the nice thing about freedom, you can wear body armor if you like, or carry a weapon, or a banana, or dress how you like. I am totally fine with him wearing body armor, he is an adult. He shouldn’t care what I carry either.

  45. avatar adverse4 says:

    Head shot.

    1. avatar glenux says:

      Exactly.
      This “educated” guy has never heard of headshots?
      That vest makes him look like clown in cammo.

      He’s cornered up against the wall.
      Where would go to evade getting shot?

  46. avatar ATTAG Reader says:

    I once had a motivational consultant that I hired for an employee seminar tell me he would dress up in a uniform and strut in like General Patton if I wanted. This reminds me of that. Except he was not a douche and I did not have him come in as Patton.

  47. avatar The Rookie says:

    Huh. I thought the Frugal Gourmet died years ago.

    1. avatar Klause Von Schmitto says:

      Jeff Smith’s cookbooks are some of my favorites. I hope the allegations weren’t true,

  48. avatar Vhyrus says:

    Is it me or are the comments disappearing on this article?

    1. avatar Ed says:

      Two different batches of comments, no less. WTF?

    2. avatar ron matthis says:

      The comment Imade earlier was removed. Censorship at play no doubt.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        TTAG commie in the wood pile? Did they get bought out without telling us?

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          My deleted comment referred to his son’s helmet. Didn’t his kid have to turn in his Kevlar for reclamation when he left the ARMY? Maybe there’s an issue of stolen U.S. property?

        2. avatar Mike Betts says:

          My comment concerning that issue went into cyberspace, too.

        3. avatar Mike Betts says:

          I wonder if it was a buy-out or a sell-out???

      2. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

        Some of my best comment nonsense ever has disappeared!!

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          Disappeared is a primitive concept. I prefer to think of them as battling evil in another dimension.

  49. avatar Roymond says:

    When I was in the education program at OSU, they told us that as employees of the state we are not allowed to express our personal opinions in any fashion during class time, especially on religious or political matters. I can’t imagine Texas being any different.

  50. avatar Warlocc says:

    This isn’t really a story. Dude doesn’t like a situation, so he made a statement. And he did it without trying to infringe on any rights or without stupid claims.

    We can argue all day that we disagree with his position because the presence of firearms generally makes us safer, though.

  51. avatar Carl in Alaska says:

    He need a Velcro back panel that reads “I’m a dumbass, shoot me in the groin”

  52. avatar Phil LA says:

    That looks heavy. A Glock 19 is about 30 oz fully loaded.

  53. avatar SouthernPhantom says:

    Dumb, but inoffensive and civil. If somebody wants to wear a vest all day, more power to ’em. San Antonio in August would not be my first choice of venue, though.

  54. avatar Klause Von Schmitto says:

    “He said he borrowed the vest and helmet from his son who stole them from the Army.”

    FIFY.

    1. avatar HP says:

      Hmm. He probably bought the items at a surplus store but is too proud to admit he spent the money.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        Trying to ride on his son’s (if he exists) military record for street cred. Stolen Valor Parent’s Edition.

  55. avatar TX Slvreagl says:

    Geography is a Social Studies class, not a Science class.

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Depends on the type of geography class.

      Physical geography is very much a science class since it deals with terrain features of the earth, why they are that way, weather/climate, etc.

  56. avatar Bob says:

    I would have asked for a tuition refund. No reason on earth that such an unstable person should be in a teaching position.

  57. avatar DetroitMan says:

    There, see? A true market-based solution to a perceived problem. Afraid of guns in your classroom? Invest in armor! It’s your right to protect yourself. If you would rather do it with armor than guns, that’s your choice. Bravo, Professor Smith! You resolved your issue without forcing everyone else to leave their means of protection at home.

  58. avatar Scrote McGee says:

    I am every bit as much a fan of the 1st Amendment, as I am of the second.

    1. avatar Ed says:

      Apparently TTAG does not share that sentiment.

  59. avatar A Brit in TX says:

    It’s sad that college students are having to be taught about Geysers at an elementary school level.

    He’s within his rights to do what he did, no harm, no foul. I’m sure his class had a few laughs at his expense though!

    As a professor (of sorts) though, he should have done some research into whether there was any change in violent classroom events before and after various states voted for campus carry. Mind you, I’m sure the stats would disprove his arguments and of course would therefore be disregarded by our left leaning superiors!

  60. avatar J says:

    Id ask “so is that AR500 or an Interceptor?”.

  61. avatar MAGA says:

    It doesn’t look like he’s carrying a gun though.

    That being said, I willingly violated university weapons policy for my last two years of college after I got my CCW. No one ever knew I was carrying a gun, and I never shot any of my fellow classmates (Imagine that).

    Before you judge me, a doctor in Pennsylvania stopped an active shooter with a gun that he carried in violation of hospital policy. The active shooter had 46 cartridges with him and clearly intended to shoot up the place.

    1. avatar chris says:

      So, what you’re actually saying is that, in addition to being somewhat prepared (because no one is ever really ready for the unexpected…thus…”unexpected”) you were quite willing to toss out the notion of “law abiding citizen” over it.

      See, theoretically justice is blind (we know that’s bull but whatever), so if you’d ever been caught out, so much for your 2nd Amendment right. That would have gone out the window. And your freedom, temporarily (along with most of your other Constitutional rights)…but you’d have been alive. And doing a stretch in GenPop…without a weapon to defend yourself, an otherwise “law abiding” citizen in a den of people that obviously don’t give a damn about the law.

      Just like you.

      Go ahead, make some justification for it. Or let someone else do it for you. The fact is, you were not “law abiding” when doing that, you were committing what may well have been a felony offense, risking your freedom and your rights and risking setting back everyone else’s right to carry and protect themselves in the process.

      So what this actually was was selfishness. Everyone else might have to pay for your selfishness.

      1. avatar Militant Centrist says:

        If his carry complied with state and local law but violated only University policy, almost everything you wrote is wrong.

        If it was a private university they could expell him and tell him that returning to campus would constitute trespassing. But that’s it.

  62. avatar CooperDoogles says:

    Maybe the Army would like to know where their IOTV and MICH went to after his son out-processed.

  63. avatar 2A approved says:

    Its ok for him to protest by wearing a Bullet proof vest at school. Try wearing one out in public and seed if the cops don’t get called in on you. Hey Prof why don’t you get with kaeppernik and you two can protest together in Canada. Jerk.

    1. avatar chris says:

      Someone points it out. That didn’t take long. Right on.

  64. avatar W. Matthews says:

    “Aging Liberal Hippy Douche, irrationally frightened of campus shooting, irrationally wears body armor that wouldn’t protect him in the event of a campus shooting. Irrationally”

    1. avatar chris says:

      Virginia Tech. Those two words are justification both for campus carry and for wearing a vest. It might not save him but he has a better chance of survival than anyone without one on. He just looked stupid wearing it. But he did get people talking. Listening to each other, not so much, but talking.

      1. avatar Scott says:

        If he doesn’t have SAPI plates in there (which he probably doesn’t) the vest will have the ballistic deterrence of a really bulky sweatshirt. In other words, he’d be just as fucked as everyone else.

  65. avatar W. Matthews says:

    Alternate headline:

    Geezer gives lecture about geysers.

  66. avatar Richard Kennedy says:

    Man….did he show em or what.

  67. avatar Me says:

    He shouldn’t militarize the classroom

  68. avatar ACP_arms says:

    That vest won’t do him any good if someone pulls out a AR-15 pistol loaded armor piercing “green tip” from their waistband.

  69. avatar Adam says:

    His son should be ashamed. If my dad asked me for my military gear in order to make an anti gun protest I would calmly tell him to fuck off and ask that he never disgrace my service again.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email