UTEP Journalism Prof Says ‘No Guns In My Classroom’


By Brandon via concealednation.org

A University of Texas El Paso professor isn’t backing down after a new law was passed in Texas that allows concealed carry on campus. The journalism professor, David Smith-Soto, hangs a ‘No Firearms Allowed’ sign in his classroom in defiance. Speaking of the recent campus shooting in Mississippi, Smith-Soto says that it only strengthens his beliefs of not allowing firearms on campus . . .

“I was outraged, we don’t need guns in the classroom. I don’t want guns in my classroom,” Smith-Soto said. “I’m dead set against it because anybody who can carry a weapon legally on campus can snap at any time.”


Statistics, though, show us that law-abiding gun owners aren’t the ones the professor should fear. Based on the bold statement above, Smith-Soto is placing myself and anyone else who carries a firearm into the ‘crazy person’ category. To that, I take offense.

I would tell Professor Smith-Soto that many of us train, and I would tell him that over 99% of us are law-abiding citizens.

Smith-Soto plans to keep his “no guns allowed” sign up even if his building will allow guns under the new campus carry policy, which all Texas colleges must submit before 2016 to the Texas Board of Regents.

As for the University of Texas, El Paso, they told KFOX14 that they have a student/faculty task force cobbling together a campus carry policy.


  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    I wonder if this assclown will spend a week in jail for contempt. But I don’t expect so. After all, judges only throw people in jail for “violating” “civil rights” that they like.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Kinda hard to find someone in contempt when there is no court order to be in contempt of. The Texas legislature passed the campus carry law; it wasn’t ordered by a court.

      1. avatar Norman says:

        A court only Affirms law, it doesn’t MAKE law! That is the job of the legislature, which it did in this case by passing the campus carry law. He would not be in contempt, but he would be in VIOLATION of the law!

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          If the sign doesn’t carry the force of law (and his “No Berettas” sign surely doesn’t), then how is he violating the campus carry law? It’s not up to the individual professors to decide which areas of campus are “disarmed victim” zones, so he can bitch and cry and stamp his feet all he wants, but unless he physically disarms a student who is otherwise carrying legally, he’s not really breaking the law.

        2. avatar Another Robert says:

          Stinkeye’s got it, the guy isn’t violating anything with his tantrum-throwing and sign-hanging.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          And he can be ignored, and someone should tell him that he IS being ignored.

        4. avatar int19h says:

          If he actually does find out that someone in the class is carrying, and throws them out, and that person sues and wins (which they would), and he still refuses to let them carry in class – then he would be held in contempt.

        5. avatar Hannibal says:

          He would not be in violation of the law under conventional reading of that law. The law simply nullifies another law (any law prohibiting guns in that situation), it doesn’t state that college professors must do X.

        6. avatar teebonicus says:

          Hannibal – No, but if he were baited into denying services to a lawful carrier, he would most definitely be subject to a lawsuit, and he would place the college in the position of taking disciplinary action or become a co-respondent.

      2. avatar Dave R says:

        Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
        Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

        Look it up, what he is doing is a federal crime

        1. avatar Seth says:

          What he is doing is exercising his Freedom of Speech. It doesn’t violate anybody’s rights for a professor to fingerpaint on the wall of a classroom; no student has a right to have a blank wall in front of him.

        2. avatar Jason says:

          So if he put up a sign saying “no Blacks” or “no gays” then that would be protected by freedom of speech as well, by your logic.

    2. avatar Richard Staccone says:

      This fool is only making a political statement by flaunting his far left views, because the odds of a licensed gun owner snapping in his classroom are non existent. It has never happened. When are we going to demand that professors just teach class, instead of displaying their anti American beliefs?

    3. avatar Accur81 says:

      TX might to action on this anti-gun bafoonery. Will Eric Holder and his ilk see jail time? Doubtful.

    4. avatar CorkyF says:

      What do you expect from someone with a hyphenated name. Probably a Homosexual.

  2. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    3 words for his students with a chl, concealed means concealed. Unless he gets a 30.06 sign for his class his feeling mean sweet FA, so carry on!

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but I was under the impression that open carry was allowed in Texas in the same way as concealed carry.

      1. avatar juliesa says:

        I believe guns still have to be carry concealed on campus. This idiot fascist prof will never know if his students are carrying or not.

        1. avatar Jarhead1982 says:

          Hand t-shirts to all the students entering his class saying I SUPPORT THE 2A AND CONCEALED CARRY, and on the back LIKE I AM DOING NOW…..

        2. avatar Bob says:

          He actually believes that his sign will really keep guns out of his classroom.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Open carry is forbidden in every circumstance except “travelling” until 1 Jan 2016, after which a bunch of confusing stuff happens, still need a CHL, and has to be concealed in certain places, including campus. But OC will be widely legal for the first time in about 100 years. Progress is progress.

    2. avatar Blue says:

      This was my thought as well. Seeing the No Beretta sign without a 30.06 means nothing if you’re CCing properly.

      1. avatar Bob H says:

        I see this all the time, a “no desert eagle” sign at my sisters favorite restaurant, a “no 1911” sign and even the oh so common “no Berettas and Glock” signs…. Too bad in order for signs to be valid in TN they must also contain “substantially similar” language to the text that the law dictates. Basically, in TN a no gun symbol without text doesn’t carry the weight of law. It also says the signs have to be clearly posted at all entrances…. So to wrap up 90% of the businesses that Say “no weapons” have no legal recourse beyond asking you to leave, but of course I’m not going to correct them ?

        1. avatar Chaz says:

          so if they have a ‘no glock’ sign, and mine’s a Springfield Armory and my wife’s is a Sig Sauer………we’re not defying their sign huh? cool…….

    3. avatar Amok! says:

      The school must put the 30.06 sign and designate his class. He cannot do it himself and have the sign be legally enforcable.

      To the professor: Nice Piled higher and Deeper Projection

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        I’m assuming that because this is a public university and not a private business that hanging a 30.06 sign isn’t an option.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          That is my understanding. Also, he does not own the property, or even rent it, he has no control whatsoever, his stupid sign is meaningless. He is a moron, and that judgement should help students decide whether to take his class, which undoubtedly requires buying his book. He’s a MORON!

        2. avatar Another Robert says:

          Well, it IS a “journalism” class. And the state of modern “journalism” is pretty good evidence that the ones taking such classes are not exactly the best and the brightest.

      2. avatar Juanito ''Johnnie'' Ibañez says:

        Wonder what his Ph.D is in…Hoplophobia, perhaps?

  3. avatar Cliff H says:

    Once again puts the lie to the idea that it is necessary to be smarter and more logical to be a professor…

    Why are so many people paying a lot of money to force their kids to sit in this guy’s classroom again?

    And by the way – if you are carrying concealed, how will he know?

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      He is a JOURNALISM professor–which means that he isn’t teaching logic anyway.

      1. avatar Publius says:

        The journalism industry died long ago. Now we just have the propaganda industry calling itself “journalism” in order to get people to be more receptive of the message.

  4. avatar Don Johnson says:

    Well, fortunately, he is at a college where they teach about investing rhetoric and argument. Any student worth half a salt will recognize that this person and his sign do not carry the force of law behind them. Honestly, I can see Texans being so offended at his persistence that concealed carry students will suddenly make up over 90% of his student base just to be sure he knows he can’t enforce his policy.

  5. avatar Researcher says:

    His behavior is no different than the woman that refused to do marriage licenses for gay couples. Is he doing it because his religion(progressivism) is anti gun?

    1. avatar Bill Kohnke says:

      I’m not sure your comparison is fair. As I understand the new Texas law, the professor has no authority to kick a student out of class for legally carrying a gun. If he attempts to do so on his own authority, he will be in violation of the law. As for the Kentucky clerk case, she refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because doing so would violate KY law. The SCOTUS ruling applies only to the actual case they reviewed. And while it is common legal practice to apply SCOTUS rulings broadly, it does not mean SCOTUS has created new state laws, or reinterpreted exciting state laws. All they can do is strike down those laws, not replace them. As a result, until each state revises its marriage license laws, the prudent course of action is to issue no licenses at all. Indeed, some state are considering abandoning the practice altogether, which would return us to the way it was in the early days of our country.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        Another big difference is that the professor did not make a claim that allowing students to carry in his class would violate his religious conscience. He doesn’t like the law and is speaking out of bigotry. Some people believe that the woman in KY is bigoted to but her ‘bigotry’ is based on thousands of years of religious tradition. His is based on ignorance.

        1. avatar Joncee says:

          Hmmm, like slavery was excused because of “thousands of years of religious tradition”?

        2. avatar Paladin says:

          How many years does a particular breed of ignorance need to be around before it becomes an acceptable justification for bigotry?

        3. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Not all systems of slavery are equal. Under the Mosaic law, slavery was more like bankruptcy. Instead of seizing and selling your assets, you could be sold into slavery for 7 years to pay off your debts. There were also very strict rules about how slaves were to be treated. Beating your slave was not an acceptable practice. When the Jews became ‘slaves’ of Babylon they became citizens and some even became advisers to the king. The Romans weren’t so kind.

          Yes, some ‘Christians’ used the Bible to defend the African slave trade, but they were wrong. Their brand of slavery bore little resemblance to the slavery condoned in the Bible. Not all ‘faith based’ beliefs are legitimate, but who’s job is it to determine which are and which aren’t? The government? That would be a direct violation of the First Amendment.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Hers is based on ignorance as well, even if it is thousands of years of deliberate, enforced ignorance.

        5. avatar int19h says:

          >> Bible. Not all ‘faith based’ beliefs are legitimate, but who’s job is it to determine which are and which aren’t? The government? That would be a direct violation of the First Amendment.

          Well, for example, some people in Middle East have a sincerely held religious belief that you should have your head cut off on account of being an infidel not paying the submission tax. They also have many centuries of tradition backing that belief. Would you prefer your government to prevent them from doing so, or would that also be a direct violation of the First Amendment?

        6. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          int19h – So as if slavery wasn’t enough, now we’re making a moral equivalency of not supporting gay marriage to beheading innocent people? How about this, if a church won’t perform a gay marriage should they lose their tax exempt status? Should the state seize their property? Should the state force a private business owner out of business if he or she doesn’t wish to participate in the ceremony? Should that business owner not only lose their business but their home as well? We aren’t arguing whether or not gays can marry, we’re arguing whether you have the right to decline to participate.

          Neither the Bill of Rights nor the federal government has authority over entities overseas. Other than shear might and the will to fight. The choice to fight to defend the lives of Christians in the middle-east would be seen as an act of the devil by some and the hand of God by others. I say let’s have at it and let God decide. Kind of like we did with Hitler.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Did god grant states the authority to interfere with holy matrimony? WTF are states doing charging money for “marriage licenses”? How is that their business at all?

        1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          I’m confused. You said above that the woman who stopped issuing ALL marriage licenses was doing so out of ignorance and then you turn around and claim that the state has no right to issue marriage licenses.

        2. avatar Juanito ''Johnnie'' Ibañez says:

          Look it up for yourself: marriage licenses are racist-based creations.

    2. avatar Another Robert says:

      Researcher: Read my reply to pwrserge above; the campus carry law is statutory legislation. It is not a court order. And the good Prof’s sign has no legal effect. You are comparing apples and turnips here.

  6. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    While you can point out this is projection at it’s finest, the real problem for anyone wishing to carry in this ass clown’s class is that if he is aware of it, he will simply express his passive aggressive nastiness against the student in the form of negative grades in the subject. Unless the student is auditing the class – no grade recorded, he can have his petty revenge against them. No point in a student complaining to the Dean, because nothing will happen to this guy.

  7. avatar Stoopid says:

    Would be nice to see him try to physically enforce his rule and get shot in the process.

    1. avatar M J Johnson says:

      No need to go that far, thankyouverymuch.

      1. avatar Stoopid says:

        Why not?

        1. avatar Seth says:

          Much more fun just to watch him get laughed at. Makes for a better video, too.

    2. avatar Another Robert says:

      I think I see troll sign.

  8. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    I hope the very active Texas open carry people show up in his classroom. Then when he forces the issue he can be arrested and put in jail for not following the law, just like a certain office clerk in Kentucky was.

    1. avatar JJVP says:

      The new law does not allow open carry at universities. Only concealed carry.

      1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        I should have said it is my fantasy. They are currently working on a bill to allow carry open or consealed on school grounds in texas.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        JJVP, doesn’t that apply only to students? I think I recall others can OC on campus without problem.

  9. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    ‘Speaking of the recent campus shooting in Mississippi…’

    Because that little sign worked so well in Mississippi. Typical liberal, take the obvious failures of your policies and use them to argue for more of the same.

    1. avatar Ben says:

      Plus, it wasn’t a student that did the crime in Mississippi… It was a professor, and he probably supported the school’s anti-gun policies. Yep, worked out well for all concerned…

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Well, he did not get shot by his target. So everything is good!

  10. avatar FedUp says:

    If Smith-Soto (his married name?) doesn’t want to work on an armed campus, he always has the option of quitting. The school can always hire more. It’s not as if there’s a shortage of journalism faculty, especially kneejerk progressive idiot journalism faculty, anywhere in the country.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Caught that too–how many guys run around with those hyphenated names? Granted, it is Mexican custom to use both your parents’ birth surnames, but they are not hyphenated when they do that. I’m guessing this guy is just hopelessly politically correct.

      1. avatar clickboom says:

        He adopted his wife’s surname in hyphenated form to empower her and their relationship in the face of a misogynistic society.

        I just made that up, but it fits the narrative. Lol!

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          That’s pretty much what I was thinking, actually. Terminal political correctness.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Or maybe he’s a moron. Does he have a “no morons” sign? Aha! I thought not!

        3. avatar Juanito ''Johnnie'' Ibañez says:

          UTexas itself is becoming more and more Left Wing…and this clown is proof it isn’t limited to just the “Moskow on the Colorado” (aka: Austin) campus.

          Surprising, David Smith-Soto, son of WW-II US Army vet Leon Smith, is Jewish and seemingly did add his Spanish wife’s last name to his.

      2. avatar dh34 says:

        While it’s common practice Hispanic community to adopt the surnames of both parents, it seems to be more prevalent among those of mixed heritage who want to capitalize on the Hispanic credential for professional reasons…like being an OFWG teaching at a university on the border.

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          Probably so–at least among the Hispanics who are living here in the USA. In Mexico itself, of course, it’s common.

        2. avatar FedUp says:

          Last I knew, you didn’t get affirmative action credit in government employment for being Jewish or named Smith, but you did get it for having “an Hispanic surname”. I used to joke about changing my name to Hernandez and applying for a state job.

          I never thought of simply sticking a four letter word like Soto on the end of my name, so I guess I have to give him credit for innovation in playing the system.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      He is Hispanic.

      1. avatar Juanito ''Johnnie'' Ibañez says:

        He is Jewish; born in Costa Rica where his Army dad was stationed during the war: his wife is Spanish.

  11. avatar Mk10108 says:

    All well and good up to the moment a non law abiding active shooter presents. Then I suppose the first question will be, by the profussor any one with a gun, followed by please protect me.

  12. avatar Heartland Patriot says:

    I know that Texas has unique laws regarding the signage that is required to keep concealed carriers out of a business or other location. If the sign put up isn’t correct according to the law, then it means nothing. So, let him put up his little fake signs, and those who are properly licensed and trained will know they can legally carry past that sign…just like the criminals would do anyway because they don’t care about ANY signs, even the ones that are according to the law.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Since he doesn’t own the public universities, signs he puts up have no more meaning than signs I put up.

      In fact, if I were within 50 miles, I’d buy a professionally printed Firearms Welcome sign and epoxy it to his office door.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Gorilla glue rocks!

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          3M VHB tape is brutally strong stuff.

  13. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    No Berettas allowed. Got it.

    1. avatar clickboom says:

      He’s a GLOCK, guy

  14. avatar Azrael Mackay says:

    He can hang a sign all he wants, it doesn’t matter. Or does it? The only problem is we don’t yet know the specifics of how much power the institutions will have to prohibit carry within the changes to the Texas state law regarding concealed carry on campuses (open carry will continue to not be lawful on college campuses) From what I understand so far, they can restrict carry and possession in school owned dorms, my concern is allowing them any concession for restriction then might result in a sort of prohibited area gerrymandering, if you will, a sort of convoluted map of restricted and unrestricted areas, that may result in it being impractical to carry and be in compliance with the law. Also, the colleges may still be able to get around all this by putting a clause against guns in the student handbook (that students agree to being compliant with when becoming a student, and enrolling in classes) We shall see.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Even if it all works out that the University can do as you describe, that still does not mean this individual professor can do so. He does not own that property nor does he (alone) set policy.

      He’s a typical control freak, Statist Progressive that sure seems to truly believe that what he thinks is some sort of fundamental truth and everyone else should bend to his ‘greater intellect.’

      1. avatar Juanito ''Johnnie'' Ibañez says:

        “There has been lots of progress during my lifetime, but I’m afraid it’s been heading in the wrong direction.”
        ~Ogden Nash, April 4, 1959 issue of ‘The New Yorker’

        “It’s not ‘Progressive’ as in ‘Progress’ but ‘Progressive’ as in ‘Cancer’.”

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      None of which affects concealed firearms at all, since he/they can’t see them. Maybe he plans to frisk all the babes! #dirtyoldman

  15. avatar Anonymous says:

    The prof isn’t thinking this through.

    I’m dead set against it because anybody who can carry a weapon legally on campus can snap at any time.

    Anybody who can carry a weapon illegally on campus can snap at any time as well. And if they do – they aren’t going to care about his no gun sign or any pieces of paper that say you can’t bring a gun on campus as has been proven by many examples. His no guns allowed sign will only deter the law abiding.

    1. avatar Dustin says:

      So, by his logic, someone who has already snapped is totally incapable of doing anything wrong or defying his stupid little sign…

      College Professor, you say? Smart guy, you say? Really? This is why I never went to college. To have judgment passed on me by such blithering idiots, and pay for the privilege…

      Google has taught me more about Electronic and Mechanical engineering than I’ve learned from any number of degreed engineers I’ve known and worked for. I ended that sentence with a preposition, and I’m not going to change it.

      1. avatar JoshtheViking says:

        Just because someone can look up factoids on google, doesn’t mean that he really knows anything about how to apply a subject. Spending several years applying complex mathematics to engineering concepts usually does. Also, just because someone can’t teach doesn’t mean that they don’t know how to do.

        Do I care about most degrees? Not really. However, engineering degrees are some of the few degrees that actually mean anything anymore.

  16. avatar Bob says:

    It would be interesting if another professor put up a “no blacks” or “no gays” sign on a classroom door. How wonderful to see the liberals try to justify one bad sign against another one.

  17. avatar Kyle says:

    We’re i one of his students and did not have a great fear of a low grade, I’m afraid I might need to ask him,

    “So, any other amendments to the constitution you’d like to ban? Care to bring back slavery? Get women back off the voting rolls? How about quarter troops in my guest room?”

  18. avatar Dustin says:

    Wow! Not allowed? With such strong words, I’m sure every psychopath will just give up right away and go home! He said so! He made a sign! Holy crap, there’s no way anyone bad could just plain ignore that crap!

    I mean, all the government did was make a law that says that if you kill someone, you die too! That’s nothing compared to a sign and words from a brain-dead propagandist! How is it that us stupid ammosexuals just don’t seem to understand? I’ve seen the light! I’m going to go blow a Muslim and vote for Bernie Sanders! How did I miss it? I feel like such a fool! All this time, laws, hateful words, and laws are all I really needed. All these shootings I hear about could have been prevented if only murder had been banned and some liberal had put up a sign while blaming the jerks that say it won’t work! If I hate guns and conservatives hard enough, the dead will come back to life!

  19. avatar dh34 says:

    Bless his little heart.

  20. avatar Ralph says:

    “I don’t want guns in my classroom.

    His classroom? Who the hell does he think he is? That classroom belongs to the State of Texas, you stupid sh1t, and if you don’t like the rules you can get out.

    The little tin gods of academe — man, do I despise them all.

    1. avatar Seth says:

      The possessive in English has many meanings and “my classroom” meaning “the classroom I teach in” is a perfectly valid one.

  21. avatar Grindstone says:

    “I’m dead set against it because anybody who can carry a weapon legally on campus can snap at any time.”

    Because that happens all the time…

  22. avatar Kendahl says:

    I wonder if the professor allows big, strong football players in his classroom. After all, one of them might snap and beat to death a 98 pound nerd who dared to disagree with him.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Or an OFWG who told him he had to leave his gun at home.

  23. avatar gsnyder says:

    I suppose the University gives Smith-Soto the power to make this choice, but personally I see a far greater danger in bringing attention to ones self on the issue. Now every nutbag knows and Smith-Soto has made a challenge for the deranged to take a shot at him. The Professor is not smart. Studied, yes, smart, no.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Not really studied, either. He’s a journalism prof, I’m not certain that requires a high school diploma.

  24. avatar anomad101 says:

    I don’t trust college students with sharpened pencils. If they still use them, or even know how too.

  25. avatar Gregolas says:

    As someone who has carried on the 2 college campuses where I taught and at the city attorney’s office where I was prosecutor, all of which forbade carry of firearms, I thumb my nose at this “professor”.
    Unless he has been duly deputized by the administration to enforce university trespass laws, his declarations and signs aren’t worth the paper his diplomas are printed on.

    1. avatar Diamondback says:

      Damn it, where’s the Like thingy?!

      I only pay attention to NO GUNS signs on courthouses, incarceration facilities and the secured areas of airports.

      Otherwise, I exercise my rights too and am prepared to fight any charges plus file counter charges against any “authorities” that decide to pursue UNCONSTITUTIONAL charges against me. Don’t need a lawyer either!

  26. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    he is a bitter and now broke (http://borderzine.com/2015/08/crowcaw-flying-yuans-and-crouching-renminbis/) old man. Soon he will be eating dog food and writing about recipes for purina kibble. Interestingly, if you read about him, he is Jewish . . yet he wants to surrender.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Amazing, DD, this guy has been around the bend for a while, and he’s supposedly teaching our kids something. No wonder …

  27. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    my favorite website for snooty professors (I used to go and ding my ex wife):


  28. avatar Libertarian says:

    If this is an public campus room white no critical chemical substances then change them white criminal charges if he not follow the law and remove him from job if he repeat !!

  29. avatar William Burke says:

    What the hell is that giant thing in the middle of his face?

  30. avatar Charles Ray says:

    Mexican socialists gotta mexican socialist.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Turns out he’s Costa Rican, not Mexican. Not that that makes much difference, the main thing is he’s just another irrational gun-muggle.

  31. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    This sign itself, even if the professor or school had the legal authority to bar someone from concealed carry, would not itself have the force of law. It doesn’t comply with the provisions of section 30.06.

    HOWEVER, a lawful 30.06 sign isn’t the only means of communicating the institution’s anti-gun policy (again, assuming the institution even has the authority to maintain such a policy.) A 30.06 sign provides “effective communication”, which applies to everyone and conveys the policy passively.

    An institution can communicate the policy directly and individually, though, which can be accomplished in writing provided to the individual directly. In that case, the form and wording of the direct written communication need not comply with the signage specifications outlined in section 30.06. This is crucial.

    I’m assuming facts not in evidence here, but stay with me. If a professor would post such an anti-gun sign, when he has no legal authority to do so, wouldn’t one expect this professor to repeat his unilateral ban via the course syllabus? If this professor does that, then he’s conveying an anti-carry policy which he has no legal authority to maintain. In fact, it’s a policy which he would be legally barred from maintaining and communicating, per the new law under section 411.209 of the Govt. Code.

    Regardless, of this professor’s moot sign or illegal hypothetical syllabus, licensed concealed campus carry in Texas doesn’t go into effect until August 2016. So be aware of the law.

  32. David Smith-Soto of the University of Texas El Paso must be STUPID if he can not read and COMPREHEND “shall not infringe”. Democrat, Republican they are the SAME coin and we are have been on a downhill slope and neither party has stopped the inflation, deflation or the ations.
    No double standards put the DC politicians on Obamacare and SS and then lets see where it goes.
    Thanks for your support and vote.Pass the word.

  33. avatar JSJ says:

    Never trust a grown man with a hyphenated name.

  34. avatar Dave Kravetz says:

    It’s not his classroom…it’s a public institution. Paid for by the people of Texas. Next Issue please!

  35. avatar pres stone says:

    i know no one wants to read this but this is what our founding fathers would have said as well.

    1. avatar Jason says:

      Article only mentions that James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were in attendance. It does not say how they voted.

  36. avatar Diamondback says:

    I want to STRONGLY ENCOURAGE his students to file federal lawsuits against this asswipe pos USURPER for KNOWING, OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN, VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW

    Re. CRIMINAL Code: 18 USC Sections 241, 242
    CIVIL Code: 42 USC Sections 1983, 1985, 1986

    Roll the Constitution up and beat his traitorous arse with it!

  37. avatar atc-tech says:

    Hmm… The sign only bans Beretta 92 and similar… Good thing I carry something different. It’s not even a proper 30.06, even if he did have the authority to post it.

  38. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    I wonder if that sign violates UTEP policies regarding signage? If anyone is allowed to post just anything, anywhere, then perhaps some students should post some signs in response to this one… a nice image of the Gadsden flag, for example.

  39. avatar Jason says:

    Professor Smith-Soto, it is not “your” classroom. You must obey the law and respect your students’ 2nd Amendment rights. You are nothing more than a liberal version of Kim Davis. If you can’t do your job legally, than quit or go to jail.

  40. avatar Thomas says:

    … I think this feller has to be running for the title of the “El Paso Asshole” of the year for his liberal left declaration against the laws about self protection by the state of Texas…

  41. avatar Harold Ogilvie says:

    Who will this idiot get to enforce his sign? Is he going to call the police or campus security? Maybe he wants to be laughed out of the college. I wonder how he will feel if he tries to disarm a student and all other students back up the student.

  42. avatar joe fritz says:

    Like the Ky clerk that would not issue marriage licenses, he too must follow the law whether he likes it or not. I should have known it would be UTexas. FIRE HIS ASS for not following the law. He is in El Paso–I am sure Tony Llama boots could use some help over there.

    1. avatar Ben says:

      Ummmm…. Yeah. She DID follow the law.

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