As you may have heard, many University of Texas-Austin faculty members have expressed their outrage at the impending outbreak of Second Amendment freedoms on their leafy urban campus. One aging prof quit at the prospect and a Nobel laureate pledges civil disobedience. Some of the student body have announced their intention to arm themselves with other less lethal options. But all the sturm und drang has been leading up to this: UT-Austin president Gregory Fenves — having been dragged kicking and screaming through the process — has just announced a new policy for campus carry in advance of the August 1 go-live date . . .
While there are many facets to the new policy, in essence it boils down to guns OK in classrooms, not in dorms. Mostly. Here’s Fenves’s email just sent to the UT-Austin community.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 10:16 AM
To: University of Texas at Austin-HR-ALL-ALLUTEMPLOYEES-Official <[email protected]>
Subject: Message Regarding Campus Carry PoliciesDear UT students, faculty and staff:
I have decided on the policies for UT Austin that comply with Senate Bill 11, the Campus Carry legislation that goes into effect Aug. 1, 2016, and submitted them this morning to Chancellor William McRaven. Please see my letter to the chancellor and the policy document that details my decision.
I have thoroughly reviewed the policy recommendations of the Campus Carry Working Group and decided to adopt them. Under the law, I cannot adopt a policy that has the general effect of excluding licensed concealed handguns from campus. I agree with the working group that a classroom exclusion would have this effect. As we have communicated since last June when SB 11 was approved by the Texas Legislature, current law does not permit open carry of handguns on campus or our buildings under any circumstances.
I do not believe handguns belong on a university campus, so this decision has been the greatest challenge of my presidency to date. I empathize with the many faculty members, staffers, students and parents of students who signed petitions, sent emails and letters, and organized to ban guns from campus and especially classrooms. As a professor, I understand the deep concerns raised by so many. However, as president, I have an obligation to uphold the law.
I have appointed a Campus Carry Implementation Task Force to be led by Dr. Gerald R. Harkins, associate vice president for campus safety and security, to deal with the many aspects of implementing these policies. The Task Force will develop guidelines, rules and practices, as well as address the process for determining gun-exclusion zones under the policies. Because SB 11 is a new law, we will monitor its effects on our teaching and research, as well as our ability to recruit and retain faculty members and students.
Although there is great anxiety about the impact of SB 11, I urge you not to let this weaken us as a university community. The world looks to UT with the highest regard for our excellence, our pride and our unity. Let us show the world that UT can face such challenges.
I am proud of the accomplishments and hard work I see across campus every day. UT is a vibrant community that is leading the world. I commit to you that we will provide for safety while fulfilling our vital role as a leader in learning and discovery.
Sincerely,
Gregory L. Fenves
President
Policy #3 is pants on head retarded. Mandated Condition 3 carry will get people killed.
So carry a revolver.
Yes, because the answer to an obsolete technique is to switch to an even more obsolete gun…
I’d hate to have one of those “obsolete guns” discharged into me!
The same could be said about a wheel-lock pistol, but you won’t see me carrying that either.
Yea. Tell you what, how about you stand 75 yards away and I’ll shoot you center mass with my 3″ GP100 loaded with Double Tap 158gr. hollow points, and then we can have a discussion about the obsolescence of the revolver.
How about we doubletap five targets each a 7 yards and see who manages to get done first?
Being a dangerous weapon does not make you not obsolete.
A Mossin-Nagant is a very dangerous rifle, I would still take an AR15 every day and twice on Sunday.
If you were shooting .357 magnum you wouldn’t need to shoot each target twice. And by your logic, all single stack pistols are obsolete. And I’d take the Mosin-Nagant if I might need to be taking shots over 200 yards.
I have to go with Nonsense on this one. I would carry a revolver, while campaigning for #3’s removal. Just because I cannot carry my preferred piece does not mean I won’t carry.
Sorry bro, but you need to look at your defensive ballistics data. Most .357 magnum loads out of a concealed carry revolver are only a little nastier than 9mm out of a Glock 19 or comparable. A 45ACP will destroy the ballistics of both rounds without the need to go to a wrist breaking .44 magnum snubby.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto2.html
9mm 4″ barrel with a +P 125gr JHP = ~1200 fps and ~400 ft-lbs of energy
.357 magnum 2″ barrel with a 125gr JHP = ~950 fps and ~250 ft-lbs of energy
.45 ACP 4″ barrel with a +P 220gr flex lock = ~950 fps and ~450 ft-lbs of energy
You need to go to a 4″ revolver before you start beating 9mm performance which results in a MUCH bigger gun.
Oh, and I’ll still take the AR out to 500 yards. Beyond that, it’s a matter of not being able to hit, not power. A mk12 SPR clone can reliably put lead on target out to 600-700 meters with the right ammo. A Mosin cannot.
You can find watered down loads in any caliber. Full pressure loads (not +p) like the Double Taps I use come out of a 3″ barrel with 600+ lb/ft of energy and around 800 lb/ft out of a 6″ barrel.
Which 5.56 ammo you use makes a big difference. M193 and M855 won’t tumble when they hit flesh passed 200 yards so they’ll punch a nice clean tiny hole through the target. 5.56 is also pretty bad when it comes to wind drift.
Semi-auto pistols are better at some things and worse at others compared to revolvers. Claiming that revolvers are ‘obsolete’ makes you sound like a fool. They pack more power, range and accuracy. Semi-autos are much better when a high volume of fire is necessary. I pack a revolver because the odds that I’ll need the range, power and accuracy is higher than the possibility of encountering 7 bad guys who won’t run away when the shots start firing. That and the rounded profile of the revolver means that they don’t jab me in the side when I bend over or sit down.
Citation needed. The 125gr CorBon loads whose data I used for the math are hardly “under powered”. Out of a 3″ barrel, they push 1271 fps which means that they BARELY beat out a equal weight 9mm. (~70fps difference) If we want to compare apples to apples, I can always move up to .357SIG which pushes more or less the same performance specifications as fairly hot .357 Magnum. (~1300 fps out of a 3″ barrel)
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357sig.html
I love wheel gun fanatics. They are completely incapable of understanding why their technology has been relegated to niche applications. (aka IS OBSOLETE)
Unless we’re talking big-bore hunting rounds (which you will never use for personal defense), I can always find an automatic that pushes the same pill just as fast and has twice the capacity at 2/3 the weight.
http://www.doubletapammo.net
This is your problem, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Back in the 50s and 60s Smith & Wesson made revolvers that wouldn’t take the abuse of full pressure .357 ammo. They just told everyone to practice with .38 special. This went on until Ruger came out with the security six and forced S&W to stop selling crap.
In the meantime, all the major ammo manufacturers started downloading the .357s. If you go go Double Tap or Buffalo Bore and look for 9mm you’ll find +p and +p+. But in .357 you’ll find standard full pressure ammo. I’ve never seen a +p .357 load. (Although Buffalo Bore does have +p .44 magnum loads.)
You do have a point with 2″ barrels. At that point you’re losing so much velocity it’s not really worth it IMHO. Even another half inch will get you another 75 fps.
Ok then… Let’s do an apples to apples comparison.
Your DoubleTap Ammo out of a 4″ barrel revolver.
http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/product&path=126_140&product_id=338
1600fps for a 125gr pill that gives us 710 ft-lbs of muzzle energy
Compare that to a 5″ threaded barrel SIG P226 in .357 SIG (comparable size and weight to a 4″ .357 revolver)
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357sig.html
~1500 fps for a 125gr pill that gives us 624 ft-lbs of muzzle energy
Now that’s using comparable handguns with fairly hot .357 Magnum loadings and average .357 SIG loadings.
You give up ~86 ft-lbs of energy for doubling the capacity. Seems like a fair tradeoff to me.
Sorry bro, but I researched this quite a bit before I settled down on my position vis-a-vis wheel guns.
Sure, the .355 (not 7) Sig comes close, that’s what it was designed to do. You won’t get the accuracy though, and you’re limited to 125gr. bullets. Step up to 158gr. .357s and you get the same advantage in power at the muzzle and a huge increase at 50 yards. It also tames the muzzle blast a bit. If you want a better apple to compare, look at 10mm.
I’ve researched this myself. I’ve owned, shot and carried a variety of autos. Frankly I just like my revolvers more than any auto I’ve ever shot. Nothing against autos, like I said, they’re better in some ways, worse in others. If you bought one you might understand.
I own several revolvers in a variety of caliber’s. (7.62 Nagant to 454 Cassul) But let’s be honest, there’s a reason why nobody who has to use their guns for a living carries a revolver anymore. The power is excessive, the gun is impossible to control, and the capacity sucks. The mechanical reliability advantage has long faded by the wayside so what’s left?
Wheelgun, obsolete…??? What manner of dolt are you…???
Now we’re getting somewhere. I don’t use my gun to make a living. Sure, if you can’t handle the recoil the extra power doesn’t do you much good. And some autos nearly negate the reliability advantage. There’s the fact that revolvers don’t scatter shell casings all over the place with your fingerprints on them, which is a big advantage in certain jurisdictions. The fact you can use SEMI-jacketed hollow points.
If you’re out looking for a shoot out with gang members the round count outweighs all the advantages of a revolver. But for a civilian, there’s nothing an auto can do that a revolver can’t do as well or better until you’ve shot your sixth round. And in the real world, the odds of needing 7 rounds is about the same as winning the lottery and getting struck by lightning on the same day.
Meh… I’m more concerned about having enough ammo to put multiple rounds into an assailant without worrying about running out if there is more than one of them or if I miss. I’m a strong believer in the idea that anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting enough times to make the threat stop. I also don’t have any illusions about my gun being a laser guided precision weapon. If I can miss, under stress I have to assume I will miss. (Or at least not hit something vital.) I’m also too lazy to tote around a rifle in .50 BMG.
Well I’m not poo-pooing your decision or anyone else’s. If you want to carry a double stack 9mm with 17 +1 rounds and 3 backup magazines, more power to you. If you want to carry a .22LR derringer that’s fine with me too. I figure the mere display of a gun, any gun, will get you out of trouble 90% of the time. There’s a chance that my choice to carry a revolver will get me killed, but that’s so remote I might as well make better use of my time worrying about being hit by a meteorite. In turn, there’s a chance that your limited range and power could get you killed, but that’s pretty remote as well. I like the fact that if Mahmoud the jihadi is pointing an AK47 at me a hundred yards away I’ve got a reasonable chance of putting him down (given 6 shots). You like your odds if you’re jumped by a gang of assholes. Mostly we’re just carrying what we like to shoot.
I can make hits with a 9mm at 50 yards fairly reliably. Let’s be honest, a hot 9mm is not THAT much slower than a .357 magnum. The difference is MAYBE 300 fps.
In most cases, I’d rather have twice as many shots. I carry a M11A1 (basically a P228 that takes 15 round P229 magazines)
I could hit 60% on points on silhouettes at 50 yards with my Beretta 92 from a standing Weaver stance, but it’s more like 100% with the GP. That’s not entirely the accuracy of the weapon itself but the ergonomics play a part as well. And stretching it out to 100 yards, I can usually get 4 hits out of 6 from a rest with both my GPs on a 12″ round target. Guys who practice a lot can do 6 for 6. Unless your initials are J(erry) M(iculek) you’ll need a rest at 100 yards. A car hood would do fine though.
Power’s less important, but if Nosler’s BC is correct and Hornady’s ballistics calculator is correct, at 100 yards I should get the equivalent of a good 9mm +p load from a full size duty pistol at the muzzle. At 200 yards I’ve still got the equivalent of a 3″ barrel 9mm. That shot would take a bit of luck, even with 6 tries. I’d just have to remember to hold 40.8″ high and 15.4″ into the wind.
You’re a better shot than I am. When I say “reliably” I mean I can employ the magazine and hear the steel ring a time or two.
My mentality is that if I’m making shots with my handgun at 50 yards, I’m either competing or something is horribly horribly wrong. (Even for a combat situation.) Let’s be honest, Johnny Jihad is not going to hit the broad side of a barn at 100 yards.
Inside any realistic engagement distance, a good +P 9mm is going to be more than sufficient. If we take that as a given, then it becomes a game of inherent accuracy (a wash with most quality handguns), reliability (see above), and capacity.
I’ve burned through my full combat load (210 rounds) in an ambush before, hitting nothing but air and cover. After that, I was the clown that rolled out with a double load and got mocked by all the boots who were on their first deployment. My personal opinion is that more ammo is never a bad thing, and if I have to live with a few minor tradeoffs, well… If I got used to having an extra ten pounds on my personal gear, I can deal with not having a portable cannon on my hip.
Full disclosure, half the year I carry a little PPK/S because I don’t want to be a test case for what “mostly concealed” means in Illinois. … and yes… some of the 03s I used to hang out with would call me terminally paranoid.
‘Let’s be honest, Johnny Jihad is not going to hit the broad side of a barn at 100 yards.’
That’s what I’ve always heard about the venerable AK47, but I’m still looking for cover and a rest before I return fire.
When the SHTF I’d rather be hiding in the bushes with my Remington 700VTR .308 with the 12x Nikon scope. But with the bi-pod and all it’s pushing 10 pounds and at three and a half feet you can forget about carrying it concealed. Accuracy and power verses volume of fire – sometimes it’s a wash.
THIS!
Viva la wheelgun!
I see a lot of the new Kimber revolvers being graduation from high school gifts. Take it to class, then clean it up all nice and shiny for your BBQ.
Or just carry condition 1?
The only way they find out is if you have an ND or have to actually shoot someone to defend yourself and others. Am I missing something? If you have an ND its your fault so don’t come to me looking for sympathy if you get kicked out of school on top of any other civil penalties you might incur and if you have to defend yourself first who is going to remember if you did or did not rack the slide to chamber a round and second who cares at that point? #3 is just to make the lawyers happy.
Ding ding. Concealed is concealed.
I still hold that they cannot mandate anything that is beyond the scope of the carry laws in general. They cannot stipulate carry conditions anymore than they can stipulate an ammunition capacity. The only authority given them by law is whether or not you can carry in an area of campus property, an not the condition you carry in..
That’s pretty much the position I would take as well…
And how exactly are they going to know if you have a round chambered or not? If you are concealing properly they don’t know you are carrying. If they don’t know if you are carrying, they can’t check to see if you have one in the chamber.
Carry in classrooms not dorms? You just told the baddies where to go and how to get their murdering done.
Message to the dog with the big nuts. STOP IT.
Looks like staying in a dorm is not a requirement, so only people who do not carry anyway will be staying there; others would probably get a University Apartment, or just stay off campus. As far I as I understand, dorms are generally inhabited by people under 21 anyhow, so they can’t legally concealed carry anyhow; it would be a good target anyway. Still, you are right that it does kind of call out the best place to go if you want to find unarmed people.
Meh, non-issue and no big reveal. The vast majority of the campus community either cannot carry because of their age or employment, or won’t carry by their own choice. So the entire place is still a target rich environment for spree shooters of whatever motivation.
What matters is that individuals can arm themselves now and have that option available to them on a personal basis, which is how most violent crime on a college campus plays out, anyway.
#3…idiotic and unenforceable.
I already deactivated my loaded chamber indicator, but I don’t plan on presenting my loaded firearm for inspection, anyway. How did these people learn to be so stupid.
How did these people learn to be so stupid?
Decades of government run education.
DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!
My dad used to call it “Educational Incest” – the same stupid ideas being getting stupider each time they are taught to the next generation of academics, who then grow up to become… stupid academics teaching an even greater level of stupid to the next generation of aspiring teachers, as so on and so on..
All of this takes place in a carefully shielded echo chamber, sustained by tax dollars and kept fully insulated from all intrusions of reality, until the cultural philosophies have intellectually fermented to the point of true Darwinian failure.
In short, these carefully shielded enclaves are the only place on earth where this level of delusion does NOT result in the carrier’s immediate extinction.
NOT in dorms? So where is a student living in a dorm supposed to store their firearm?
I dont think this policy will have much effect. By the time a student is eligible (age-wise) for a carry permit, most live off campus anyway.
Not saying I agree with the policy, but as a responsible gun owner I would find it difficult to store a gun inside a dorm room. They just aren’t secure since a roommate who you don’t necessarily know very well has a key and in most places the RA, who is really just another student you also don’t know very well, also has a key. Additionally it’s not like you can modify anything in the dorm room to bolt down a safe.
Moreover, dorm rooms are often targets of thieves, given the high end stereo equipment and computer equipment often found there.
There are more people coming and going from dorms than just residents – staff, administrators, maintenance, and many students who live off campus will often have dining cards to use dorm cafeterias.
EDIT: I just spotted (b) of PS No.16
Well, just because you don’t live in a dorm doesn’t mean you don’t ever or often visit a dorm. Upper classmen serve as Resident Assistantsand live in the dorms, receiving free room and board (depending on the school) in exchange fir serving in that capacity.
You could be dating someone who lives on campus, or have friends who live on campus. You could have a study partner or group project members who live on campus. Sure, there are other places to meet, but sometimes someone’s on campus room is the most convenient.
I don’t agree with the policy, either, of course. It’s designed to comply(ish) with the law, while frustrating and inconveniencing as many people as possible. I think they hit their target with this ukase.
Look for the no fire arms in dorm policy to be the first one the school get sued for.
So is someone going to challenge him to report, publicly, what problems have been detected after every month for a year, and then every year for the rest of his tenure? Because I have money says there will be none, and he will owe Texas and Texans an apology for being a know-it-all jerk abusing his authority.
“I do not believe handguns belong on a university campus…”
Unlez der cops haZem, bercuz der State R good. I R loves der State and der State lovers me bak.
Most gun carriers would probably agree with him, but since the campus crime-fairy has yet to figure out how to disarm/disable would be criminals, it remains incumbent on each individual to secure their persons and property from such.
RIght on. You and I will likely get called fuds….but in a perfect world no guns on campus. Its a place for civil discourse and education. Challenging idea with idea, and exploring possibilities. A place we go to grow our minds and form opinions. In a perfect world I like the idea…..unfortunately we don’t live in that perfect world, and i want to carry anywhere a bad guy might.
So in a perfect world my daughter would be defenses against two unarmed men who decide to rape her? I’m sorry guns belong on campus.
They know that a ban in the dorms is a defacto ban in the class room. Unless you are a towny where are you going to keep your guns? The fact that this guy is stupid enough to put in writing that he opposes this policy is useful though. It will make it all the easier to prove any restrictions that he puts in place are a defacto ban. In my opinion his lawyers messed up in letting him send out this email is all I can say. Never let your clients talk about something in an email, on a subject that is likely to be the result of impending litigation. Email is forever.
Policy Statement #1 clears the way for storing (safely) in dorms.
I doubt there are very many students at UT that are 21 and still living in the dorms.
Infringement is still infringement, no matter how few people have their rights denied.
No doubt it’s an infringement. But it’s not a de-facto ban.
To a 21yo living in the dorm, it would seem to be a distinction without a difference.
He can move. Not saying it’s right, but it’s not effectively a ban. If you’re the anti-gun professor who lays awake at night freaking out about the possibility that someone might be carrying a concealed weapon in your class, you’re not going to get much solace from the fact that that particular student can’t live in the dorms.
Baby steps…
Who says you must live in the dorms ever to visit the dorms? With this policy, your choices are: go store it in your car, go drop it off at home, violate the law, stand outside the dorm entrance waiting for whomever lives there, or just not date, work with or hang out with anyone who lives in the dorms.
Based upon the dorm capacity (~6K) and enrollment (~51K total, 38.4K undergrad), this means that ~12% of the total student body (or, 16% of undergrads) might live in dorms. As noted, most dorm occupants are undergrads who could not have a handgun anyway. Not a major problem.
The current Chancellor, Bill McCraven, a UTexas alumnus, lived off-campus as an upperclassman — in a co-op where other student residents had firearms. He therefore probably knows from experience that it is unlikely to be a problem.
It’s fun watching the hoplos twist themselves into pretzels, isn’t it? Pass the popcorn.
I’m tickled pink contemplating how a bunch of anti-gun academics had to learn enough about firearms to write:
POLICY STATEMENT | NO. 3
A license holder who carries a semiautomatic handgun on campus must carry it without a chambered round of ammunition.
Was there a practical demonstration? Did it involve smelling salts and fainting couches?
Golly, I guess I better carry a full auto then.
“It’s fun watching the hoplos twist themselves into pretzels, isn’t it?”
Absolutely.
What I would love to know is, now that Fenves has wilted like the Viagra has worn off, is anyone keeping a list of the faculty who have stated they will quit (or worse) if they see O/C guns in their classrooms?
It would be *really* fun to rub their noses in it… 🙂
“However, as president, I have an obligation to uphold the law.”
What a tool. The greatest law of the land is the United States Constitution. We obviously need to pen a law that provides consequences for violating the 2nd amendment. Hows this:
“We the people, of the United States of America, declare the violation of the Bill of Rights, to be punishable by the brand of a traitor and immediate exile. Attempts to re-enter the country to be considered a war crime, punishable by death.”
“We the people, of the United States of America, declare the violation of the Bill of Rights, to be punishable by the brand of a traitor and immediate exile. Attempts to re-enter the country to be considered a war crime, punishable by death.”
This should be an article of the Bill Of Rights….. except the USA doesn’t exile traitors it executes them!!!
Stop hating on revolvers. Pull trigger, go bang. Why mess with perfection? BTW, I still hate the Longhorns for ruining the Big 12. M I Z!
‘…many University of Texas-Austin faculty members have expressed their outrage at the impending outbreak of Second Amendment freedoms on their leafy urban campus.’
Been a while since I’ve been to Texas, but as I recall Austin isn’t leafy at all this time of year. If you want leaves you’ll have to head down the road to San Marcos.
Or is Al Gore actually on to something?
Yeah, that 30 miles makes a huge difference in leaf coverage.
I’m pretty sure it’s a pot joke…
Ah then… well… keep Austin weird!
Words re: gun laws that have not been said much, lately.
PrezBO thinks it’s his job to CHANGE the law……
The camel’s nose is in the tent. When the sky doesn’t fall, we can push for more civil rights. Statists, don’t go away angry, just go away. I hear the U Haul rates to the gun grabber paradises are very favorable.
Depending on where you relocate to, there are even nice gentlemen with colorful bandannas who will be on site shortly after you arrive to help you unload your uhaul.
Not kidding… when I last lived in the inner city (bad part of Akron, OH), a U-Haul was the biggest “COME ROB ME NOW” sign you could possibly put up. They hit my place within 20 minutes of me leaving once I pulled the Uhaul up out front. Pried through a steel security door in a shared interior hallway.
Also, FYI – if you think those steel mesh security doors are, you know, impenetrably secure – you’re kidding yourself. They opened mine up like a can of tuna and reached through to unlock the door, then kicked in the actual wooden door underneath.
Go Zips!
“This policy is reasonable and designed to reduce the possibility of accidental discharges.”
“Texas Government Code §411.2031(d-1) provides that the president of an institution can adopt reasonable rules, regulations, or other provisions to address specific safety considerations after consultation with the university community.”
Um, #3 is not reasonable, and it will likely lead to more accidental discharges on campus, not less. Imagine every student with a CCW having to unholster their firearm, clear it, and re-holster every time they go on campus and then unholster, load, and then re-holster when they leave campus. You would think in their position they would spend at least 10 minutes learning about the tools they are trying to write rules for. Considering most college degrees mean nothing these days, I suppose it should not surprise me.
All this is basically irrelevant anyway because, unless they’re going to impose TSA style checkpoints at all entrances or random “stop and frisk” procedures, these laws are unenforceable.
I’m a Texas college student and even though it’s illegal, I know a good 3-4 people who carry on various college campuses.
Whats that phrase again? Right, concealed means concealed.
I’m a Texas college student too. I know at least a dozen students, all in the same building, that will occasionally take their firearms to the range after class. If those liberal professors knew all of the ordinance in the trunks of our cars on a daily basis, they’d have a heart attack. What’s a concealed carry piece when you have a scary black rifle with several hundred rounds of ammo on campus? Kind of proves our intentions.
Suck on that one McRaven.
Whenever this is said:
“I do not believe handguns belong on a university campus, so this decision has been the greatest challenge of my presidency to date.”
I want to smack the person over the head with one of those sporting event foam hands with “THEY ALREADY ARE AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN” written on it.
Boo hoo, now you have to wonder if a student you are discussing a bad grade with during office hours has a gun in his backpack… you should have been wondering that BEFORE TOO you academic twits. The circumstances are NO DIFFERENT now than before, except the benevolently-armed students you’ve been interacting with your whole lives (who never have never and will never hurt you) aren’t unfairly in jeopardy of criminal prosecution for something that isn’t illegal. The only other “difference” is you’ve thought about it for the first time in your lives, so now in your ego-centric world view this “threat” went from “not existing” to existing”. Boy, your minds are sure are powerful arbiters of reality!
Why is it I get the feeling that the faculty that has the most problem with campus carry are the same ones that have always acted like smug superior a-holes in front of their students. There is no more threat to their well being now, than there has always been. They’ve just lost their false security blanket that allowed them to feel comfortable treating people with disdain.
Yuuuup.
THAT is the comment of the day Don! Outstanding!
What will they do when it doesn’t become the alleged “Wild West” as Open Carry hasn’t become?
Yeesh.
25 separate rules…. death by a thousand cuts?
Sounds like they’re trying to create an environment toxic to lawful CC without coming right out and banning it.
“As far I as I understand, dorms are generally inhabited by people under 21 anyhow”
Except when they aren’t. I’m attending college in a bad area, and my parents won’t approve of off-campus residency because it’s a bad area, but now students such as myself are in a worse predicament than before. Disarmed in a bad area.
Whereas banning carry in classrooms would cut out say 90% of concealed carriers, banning in dorms would cut out say 20%. The fact of the matter is that concealed carrying shouldn’t be banned anywhere on campus.
Before you suggest to carry anyway, it’s only a matter of time before someone would find firearm-related paraphernalia or smell the Hoppes’ during a “safety inspection”.
This leniency towards banning firearms in dorms sets a horrible precedent.
“It’s okay if we only censor/ban this bit, it’s not a very significant part of the whole.”
We should all know how pragmatic incrementalism goes by now.
Since no campus busybody would ever get me to remove my gun from my holster and allow them to inspect it, seems like there would be no way for them to ever know in what condition I was carrying.
If I ever had to use my gun, I’d insist “I chambered a round when I drew my gun. You must have missed it.”
Campus carry provisions are not enforceable unless they wall off the campus and have pat-downs and metal detectors at every entrance.
I actually suggest they go ahead and do that. The first 18-year old coed to get groped by a security guard for “secondary screening” will result in a massive lawsuit and the dismantling of opposition to campus carry in a de facto manner.
Regarding policy statement 4: If my handgun is safe around adults, it’s safe around children. This makes no sense.
In the findings under Policy #3, it says “Texas Government Code §411.2031(d-1) provides that the president of an institution can adopt reasonable rules, regulations, or other provisions to address specific safety considerations after consultation with the university community.”
So, this means a clueless president of the institution can consult with an equally clueless university community and adopt totally ignorant policies, regardless of the facts and…… what’s that called? oh yea, DATA, that shows the policy is bad, wrong and does not accomplish what’s intended.
Boy am I glad I got out of school when I did.
to be fair, if you read the original policy recommendations, policy #3 is ironically the only one that is even remotely based on facts from their study of campus carry at other schools (something about NDs being the only issues other schools had reported). I’m not saying it is right, it sure as hell isn’t enforceable, I’m just pointing out that of all 25 policies, this is the only based on the “facts” from the working group’s report.
WOW, 25 policies, some good, some awful stupid. The more policies there are the more misinterpretation that could arise.
Alright guys and gals….gonna give my .02 worth here.
Truthfully I am on both sides here…yes I can be….here’s why…I have shot 38spcl 2.5″ barrel and it was very accurate at 12 yards. Very.
I own a 9mm semi auto with a single stack 8+1 rated for +p loads though I do not shoot them.
My limited experience with the 3.5″ barrel has me shooting well at 14 yards with some bullseye’s at 50+ feet.
Would I use the 38 special 5 round revolver for CC?? DEFENSE??? Absolutely.
Do I trust my Hi Point single stack 8+1 with over 500 rounds thru it with no issues??? Absolutely. Will I conceal carry with it….under a jacket yes..in my pants…NO!
We all have our preferences. Revolvers, semi auto, …. better to be good AND familiar with what you shoot than fall prey to everyone else’s opinions…semi educated or not.
Huh?
Coming next to the State of Kansas. K-State admin already have their panties in a wad, and this is a fairly conservative town. Can’t wait to see how the folks in Liberal Lowrents are going to react.
If you ever hear someone whine about “blood in the streets” over Texas, do what I do. Kindly remind them that Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Utah, and Wisconsin have had campus carry for years without incident. They might immediately revert to their juvenile logic, but at least you tried, eh?
Good point, but logic does not work with emotion driven leftists.
By mandating “Israeli Carry” the university is creating a barrier between themselves and someone holding them responsible for a negligent discharge. Both police and civilians have ND’s on a regular basis, and an ND on campus is probably the greatest risk associated with campus carry. This is because many people are untrained, inexperienced, and have no idea what a proper holster is.
Experienced individuals may carry otherwise, but for someone who knows little or has little experience with firearms, it’s not bad in all cases. It’s risk mitigation.