In today’s Sunday Review, New York Times Op-Ed columnist Frank Bruni rails against Texas’ move to campus carry. “Take a moment with that phrase. Get beyond its amiable alliteration. It’s an endorsement of guns in a haven for scholarship and theater of ideas where there’s an especially powerful case against them.” By people who don’t have a clue. Like Frank, frankly. Bruni’s anti-ballistic beat-down is boilerplate bile – professors will be muzzled by the possibility of being muzzled, drunken students will go off-half-cocked, suicide will stain dorm room walls, that sort of thing. More interesting: the top comment on the website, penned by a self-professed “university faculty member” . . .
As a university faculty member for more than 40 years I have had occasion to deal with students provoked to fury by something said in class, students who come to class drunk or drugged, students arriving with stress or anger from something happening somewhere else and yes, on two or three occasions with students carrying firearms.
When that has happened it used to be a matter of excusing myself for a moment, calling security, and letting law enforcement address the situation. And while I have had students come to blows in class I have never worried about personal safety. A couple of times students have come to see me in the office angry about a grade but in the end everything worked out.
But I wonder whether we have reached a tipping point where faculty will give everyone an A grade to avoid irritating students who think carrying guns is a necessary part of problem-solving and conflict management. It is hard not to chuckle at the irony of admonitions to hace trigger warning [sic] about a phrase or photo when there is someone in class mentally caressing the trigger of a Glock in a backpack.
And having taught for years in Texas I know students there are just as vulnerable to the pressures and anxieties triggering violence as students anywhere else. It is unfortunate we must live with a world of legislative Walter Mittys who make up for their self-loathing from kissing the feet of plutocrats that they subject us all to unnecessary danger from the weak-minded among us.
Judging from the commentator’s screen nic, it’s entirely possible his students were “provoked to fury.” (USA999. Gedddit? The U.S. is the Great Satan.) But I don’t believe for a second that “on two or three occasions” he dealt with “students carrying firearms.” First of all, two OR three? I can remember exactly how many times I’ve had a gun pointed at me, and I’m not an anti-pistol prof.
Second, unless he lived in a open carry campus carry state, how did he know “two or three” students were carrying firearms? More to the point, how did he survive? In fact, USA999 debunks the idea that students angry over grades will perforate their prof. And then he’s off on the usual ammosexual trigger-caressing ad hominem B.S. As for his last comment . . .
It’s a perfect embodiment of the educational establishment’s anti-gun animus. So much so I feel obliged to repeat it: “It is unfortunate we must live with a world of legislative Walter Mittys who make up for their self-loathing from kissing the feet of plutocrats that they subject us all to unnecessary danger from the weak-minded among us.” In other words, legislators are wanna be’s (dictators?) who hate themselves for kowtowing to capitalists. No-goodniks who dare to represent voters, who are a bunch of cretins.
It’s more proof – if proof be needed – that our education system is polluted by teachers who despise America. People who don’t have a clue about what makes our Constitutional Republic a safe haven for citizens who value life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have every reason to despise these acrimonious academics. We should help them seek immediate, alternative employment. Call it off-campus carry. [h/t JP]
What’s hilarious about their argument is they seem to forget that this country was founded by gun owners. We wouldn’t have the education system we have today if not for guns and the people that wielded them when it counted.
Liberty and the creation of the most “free” country on the planet was created with brilliant minds and guns. Simple, guns grant us liberty and the freedom we enjoy. They always will. Because whenever a tyrant rears their ugly head, we send over people with guns to sort it out.
These professors need to brush up on their history.
Granted, I’m sure the Native Americans feel differently, but that’s a whole other pile of worms.
A whole nother can of worms? I’ll open that can. A slight digression, but not by much. It relates to being adequately armed to protect ones self and ones community from a predator(s). And also it relates to the politically correct mind control poison as pushed by these same “intellectual elite” that fights to keep us disarmed and defenseless in their bastions of higher(mind control)learning.
Native Americans? Being a native means you were born in the country described. That means I’m a Native American with a German, Scottish and French heritage.
Otherwise known as a proud American.
The rest of our history with the Indians that were here before the arrival of the europeans that became the newest native americans?
How do you think the Indians controlled the territory they occupied before the arrival of the europeans? By force of arms. The best analogy of the politics of the time is the current drug wars between motor cycle gangs. They control their prime drug routes and drug territory by being the fiercest and most ruthless fighters compared to the other gangs. The Banditos, as an example in their control of New Mexico as thier home turf.
There was no concern if a tribe lived in an area first. The only concern was were they good enough at war to keep control of the best hunting grounds. If they weren’t, they were pushed out or enslaved and the stronger tribe took over.
The Europeans that became americans were simply better at the being the biggest and the baddest at warfare in controlling the territory.
The whole point is that we can’t fairly judge the past by the standards of the present. Now, the behavior of all involved, both Indian and European, would be considered out side the pale. So just as slavery was an accepted norm by the Indians and europeans of the time, we no longer accept slavery as acceptable today.
End of digression. Back to the main article.
So this is simply another example of a predator having free reign to slaughter at will in this GFZ due to tyrants dictating too their subjects where and when those subjects can protect thier lives.
Does the fool not understand that most of the students will be older students who are probably seniors before they can legally carry a gun? Most of the emotional students complaining about grades are the younger kids.
“As a university faculty member for 40 years”, says it all. Very few, if any, real life experiences. Living in a world of perceived “better than thou” people, sitting around in a smoking jacket, drinking an expensive liquor, of some sort, and “solving” all the problems that have been developed by people who view themselves as free.
Sevenmag
I see that every day on my campus. Drives me nuts sometimes. And if you try to have a discussion with one of these types, you’re a heretic and ostracized.
Higher learning? HA!
The idiot is projecting. Maybe I’m smarter and more self-aware than the average person, but when I took my carry class, I immediately started acting and thinking in a more responsible manner. And that was before I even started carrying.
The people that are going to carry legally are more mature and responsible than most Americans, and definitely most liberals. They have thought long and hard about reality, ignored the shrill emotional cries of idiots, and gone their own way.
Thinking that a student with a carry license is going to shoow up drunk or stoned? Sorry, that’s the average Democrat voter.
Exactly!
That mindset of accountability and obligation which you describe is probably among the most cogent and compelling reasons to debunk boneheaded elitists like this professor of naiveté. He with his false, fabricated, self indulgent illogical analysis is simply full of shit.
And there you have it folks, the new excuse for the grade inflation that has been going on for many years on the average college campus. Every gets an A; no more flunking out of college. No matter how dim witted the student. I had to give that guy an A because he gave me an evil look and he always wore a loose shirt over his jeans so he had to be carrying a gun!
You have to love the ridiculousness of these teachers who think they’re going get shot because they give little Timmy a B instead of an A grade.
I don’t think I know of anyone that carries on a regular basis who has the concept that the gun will be involved in settling all of the conflicts in their life.
For some reason those with more of a liberal mind set always think everyone around them is so fragile emotionally, that they will just start firing for the tiniest of reasons
I love it when people acknowledge me!
Anyhoo, I always relished B grades because I was a solid C student. I was the poster child for “Smart enough to do the work, but lazy enough to do just a passing amount.”
Oh, boy, do I ever love the high-pitched wailing of little tin gods. Like the egotistical bureaucrats who run the motor vehicle bureau, college teachers and administrators have exploited their situational power for so long that even an imaginary challenge makes their blood run cold. It’s a wonderful thing to behold.
Well said.
“But I wonder whether we have reached a tipping point where faculty will give everyone an A grade to avoid irritating students who think carrying guns is a necessary part of problem-solving and conflict management.”
Carrying a gun is not about massaging a C to an A. The problem solving and conflict management a concealed carrier is concerned with is stopping a mass shooter preying on citizens.
Funny…the thing college is supposed to teach, solving problems, is routinely ignored when addressing an active shooter.
The “give every student an A to avoid conflict” crap is already happening before carry is allowed on campuses. Profs and universities are already bending over to trivial complaints and gripes known as microagressions. Several professors have written articles regarding the current students and how some can’t handle any adversity in life? These are not the ones that will be carrying concealed unless the reached the Eliot Rodger/Vester Flanagan/Chris Harper Mercer position regardless of campus policy.
Honestly, if i wanted to read the nyt I’d buy one but i have enough toilet paper already and ive already changed the parrots cage this week.
More proof universities are an institution not for the people but for the elite. Think about it; if I were an east coast billionaire I wouldn’t think twice about GFZs because I don’t carry a gun and my security staff is exempt. Universities teach from the perspective of elites, something 98 percent of people will never be able to use. In my experience the focus is on unsolvable problems, theoretical and overly simplistic models, and equality and justice for everyone but white Christians. There’s no sense of the real world anywhere on a university campus and that comes right down from the elites that want to brainwash everyone. Any given campus is filled with regular people that should have rights, but they are treated like children because that’s what elites do, treat everyone with contempt. When questioned they use weak arguments that wouldn’t last three seconds in their own rhetoric or logic 101 class.
That’s why they get so upset about the idea of rights on campus, because they are bastions of elitist indoctrination. Teach the youth today they have no rights, to hate religion, to be completely idealistic, and get them in patterns of thinking that absolves them of any responsibility and you have a future of easily influenced idiots. Universities are strongholds and training camps in the war on responsibility.
I was an adjunct for three years. Had multiple grade disputes, but they were typically respectful. At no point did I ever fear for my physical safety. I’m not saying that security issues don’t happen, they obviously do, but I seriously have to wonder about profs who claim that so many of their students are on drugs, threatening violence, etc. My experience couldn’t have been more different, and most of the academics I know feel the same way.
It never ceases to amaze me how people think that a law will stop a criminal.
But only certain laws actually work, I guess. Those prohibiting campus carry will be obeyed by those willing to ignore the laws against murder.
“But I wonder whether we have reached a tipping point where faculty will give everyone an A grade to avoid irritating students who think [their helicopter parents are] a necessary part of problem-solving and conflict management.” I think his quote works a little bit better as edited.
That photo is some grade A trolling…
What this professor fails to realize is that, even without the law, kids would still carry if they intended to shoot him. And he made it 40 years without being made dead by those same students.
This argument is straightforward as far as it goes. My experience, however, tells me that it would still lead to a disconnect between you and the purported professor. He/she is making an additional, unstated assumption, i.e., that having the gun readily at hand will lead to an impulsive reaction by student that would not happen if the student had time to think before going home and getting a gun. For those familiar with the literature, this assumption would be similar to the one that has been invented out of whole cloth by junk science purveyors like Matt Miller of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. I suspect most gun owners would have a tough time understanding how the “impulsive gun use” assumption makes it into the thought process a gun control advocate – especially given there is no empirical support for it of which I’m aware – but if you ever get into one of those fictional “conversations” called for by talking heads you may have to be patient in eliciting the essence of their arguments so that you can agree on the empirical question of relevance.
What you have to understand about university faculty, and Liberals in general is that they have no basis in rational, common sense. Their agenda is simple . . . absolute control over everything because they think they are smarter than everybody else.
Why else would would they want to keep the masses on welfare? Uneducated, unemployed people follow what they are told as long as you give them free stuff to perpetuate their dependency.
Precisely. They love having ghettos around their campuses, too.
Most of the College faculty worships the Marxist Leninist State and are its intellectual elite high prophets and priests.
The professor is “projecting” his psychological issues onto his students.
The Left in academia is about power, power over people.
USA999 is a cowardly bully, thats all.
All of the anti-campus-carry arguments consist of theoretical conjecture, with no facts to back them up. They tell us that something bad could happen or might happen or will happen, but those things HAVE NOT happened on campuses where carry is already allowed. Here are the facts they so conveniently ignore.
Campus carry has been legal and happening at several universities and community colleges in several states for several years. In all of those places for all of that time, campus carry has not been a problem or resulted in any problem. There also have been no mass shootings where campus carry is allowed. (UCC in Oregon is in a Campus Carry state, but the college regulations make it appear that it is prohibited.) The evidence (not frightened theoretical conjecture) indicates that campus carry works. Therefore we should allow it on every other campus. Period.
No more what-if arguments. Present some solid evidence, or shut up. When university staff were asked to do that in a campus carry hearing in Florida, they had to say that they had no evidence to support their case.
The only people you have to worry about are the same ones you do now, the ones you never know about. And they bring whatever they want or need to get their plan executed. (morbid pun). Had the Vet been armed at Umpqua lives would have been saved, but not the assailant. Dumb logic to empower the bad people by having gun-free areas.
Back in the Day it was fashionable for a young gentleman to be proficient in the manual of arms,
usually Sword cane’s were a rage along with an assortment of knives {Bowie}, and a number of smaller pistols! Early churches often required their congregation to be armed, FDR was the first Democratic President too make an issue for Gun Control, kind of peculiar that most hi profile shooters were democratic voters! or came from liberal Parents who were Democrat, Most Anti-gun Control extremist’s have a similar view as do the Perverted Religions { from the Pope on down they want control} none of these people believe in any freedom except for themselves! beware of everything!
If they feel that they would just have to give out A’s out of fear I think I’m going to enroll immediately!
Here is my very favorite description of college professors, in an excerpt from “Hush Money” – a mystery by Robert B. Parker)
“University politics is very odd. You get a lot of people gathered together who, if they couldn’t do this, really couldn’t do anything. They are given to think they are both intelligent and important because they have PhDs and most people don’t. Often, though, not always, the PhD does indicate mastery over a subject. But that’s all it indicates, and, unfortunately, many people with PhDs think it covers a wider area than it does. They think it empowers their superior insight into government and foreign policy and race relations and such. In addition these people are put into an environment where daily, they judge themselves against a standard set by eighteen- or twenty-year-old kids who know little if anything about the subject matter in which their professors are expert.
There is no liberal agenda, however goofy, that will not attract their attention. There is no hypocrisy, however bald, that they will not endure if they can convince themselves that it is in the service of right thinking.”
College students, please feel free to make copies of this quote and leave it (anonymously) on the desks in all of your classrooms.
Why are people so quick to sue gun and ammo manufacturers and retailers but not the gun free zone? If they declare a school or movie theater a gun free zone they are telling you that you are safe and don’t need to worry about protecting yourself. We’ve got that covered.
When they fail to honor that commitment, they should be held liable. They should be the first to be held accountable after the criminal.
Home schooling to start. OR school uniforms to lessen the “stress” of trying to impress those that are the problem. No double standards put DC politicians on Obamacare and SS.Thanks for your support and vote. Pass the word. mrpresident2016.com