arizonarifleman.com shares an email from “The Regents Professors (RPs) at the UofA, ASU, and NAU…” in response to the Arizona Legislature moving towards passing Campus Carry. (SB1467) “Gun Safety Charter: We affirm that no student should be obligated to be in the presence of an armed faculty or staff member, and no faculty or staff member should be obligated to be in the presence of an armed student on the university campuses of Arizona. In the event that SB 1467 is enacted into law, we request action by the Arizona Board of Regents to segregate the campuses into armed and weapons-free communities. When such segregation cannot be enforced, protective action should include the provision of police protection, the substitution of electronic communication for personal interaction, and the cancelation of classes as a last resort.” Now where have I heard that word “segregation” before . . .

Replace the words “Armed” and “Weapons” with “Negro” and “Colored” and we are Smack Dab in the Middle of the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement.

What next? Will they decree that all of these “Carriers” wear a patch on their sleeve so that they may be easily avoided, lest they infect the babes who dwell in the Womb of University.

I cannot find reason to argue for any law-abiding, 21 year-old ADULT, having passed the mandated tests and background checks, to be denied the civil-right of self-protection while attending a publicly funded University.

It seems very apparent that the small minority of adult students, graduate students, and faculty, that do decide to carry, will be subject to some degree of discrimination.

Imagine you are a grad student working on your PhD. Also, you are a 90-pound female. Since you are eco-friendly, you like to take public transportation as much you can. Lately though, you have had some unsavory run-ins with weirdos and miscreants and decide that since you are now legally able to carry to, and at, work you will do so.

At some point, someone spills the beans, or it is at least suspected that you are a ‘Carrier’. After reading the above proclamation, can you honestly expect to be treated fairly and be given the same opportunities as a non carrier. Or will you face an uphill battle against a Bulletproof Ceiling?  

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

38 COMMENTS

  1. Nevermind the miscreants on the buses, sexual assaults on college campuses are a big problem.

  2. As an ASU grad-student, I can say that I know many fellow (grad) students who would choose to carry. Actually, I also know many faculty members in the department who are avid shooting enthusiasts and would also be inclined to carry. There are 2 students that I know (although not in my department) who do carry TO campus, but lock and secure their piece before entering school property. Since I typically drive my motorcycle to school, I’m still trying to figure out the best means of securing my pistol when not on me.

  3. The sickest comments are always from “law enforcement officials” of universities. They literally do nothing but write tickets all day. Meanwhile the constant flow of robberies, rapes, and murders around campuses are kept quiet. Our overlords don’t want us independent from them. The only reason we don’t have a complete gun ban in this country is because of freedom loving people and because joe sixpack still feels a desire to protect his family from dirtbags. Given the chance, government would take away our silverware. This is also why open carry is like holy water to vampire. They cannot allow a tax slave to step out of line and visibly assert his independence. Other sheep might start testing the fences.

  4. I can see professors ‘wanding’ students at the classroom door in order to identify those dangerous carriers. I wonder how those same professors would react to the proposal that those in the university community be segregated based on how they exercise other constitutionally protected rights?

    Maybe we should have separately designated classrooms and buildings for those who express liberal and conservative opinions. Just as with the second amendment, exercising the first amendment can be very disconcerting to some people. I say we herd all the lefties into their own buildings and make them congregate only among themselves. And if that can’t be done, classes should be cancelled as a last resort.

  5. I had an epiphany this morning: If they are sooo worried about a lack of training on the part of ‘Carriers’, why don’t they offer, for credit, a 40-hour CCW class for students. This would be enough time to get a good handle on the legal stuff, as well as get them good hands-on time in the “lab”…

  6. Travis, Why is it so difficult for you and your friends to accept the fact that some people disagree with you? These university people are educated and worldly folks who don’t agree that guns legally allowed on campus will make things better. They think it would make things worse. If anyone is biased it’s you. You’re the one with something to lose. You’re the one with something at stake here. So who has the most to be biased about? You do.

    I could, and sometimes do, turn it around on you. Your not only the biased one, you’re also the anti-freedom one. If I were a student at AU or a professor, I’d want the freedom to not worry about people having guns on campus. There’s enough trouble controlling that now without making it legal especially in a State where anybody who wants to, can carry a concealed gun. In the great State of Arizona, you’ve got a lot of people with guns who are not responsible enough to handle them properly.

    • AU? Huh? ASU, UoA (or UA), and NAU thank you!

      And actually, since we cannot currently carry on campus, we have something to gain here – not lose. Since you are not a student (and perhaps never were), I’m not sure where you’ve developed your rationale about wanting to feel safe in the classroom (other than news media and general hoplophobia). The classroom is rarely the scene of a crime. I’m a big guy – 6’3″, 325lbs and the walk back to my car after my night class is a “situational awareness overload”. Bushes, brush, trees, far-away parking lots, etc all make the 1/2-mile walk back to the lot a bit overwhelming. Spare me your “you’re being paranoid statement” also – there are hundreds of reported rapes, assaults, robberies, etc each year on college campuses to both men and women. These of course, are the ones that are actually reported. Real-to-life figures are probably double since many rapes in general don’t go reported, and because many college police departments don’t want to ruin their college’s reputation and possibly impact enrollment (you think VT enrollment went up the following year?).

      Also, where is your data to back up the “you’ve got a lot of people with guns who are not responsible enough to handle them properly”? Other than JLL in Tucson, when was the last time you heard of an incident where a person who was legally able to carry a pistol – regardless of their experience or ability – had an accident or was otherwise negligent? The last accidental discharge I’m aware of in the State of AZ was from an off-duty police officer (link to follow, I’m looking for it now).

      • Patrick asked me, “Also, where is your data to back up the “you’ve got a lot of people with guns who are not responsible enough to handle them properly”? “

        Don’t you read the same news that I do? Or, are you saying the percentage of irresponsible gun owners is so low it’s a write-off?

        Or, are you falling back on the oldest trick in the book, ask for proof where you know none exists and then say, a-ha, I knew it?

        • WOW – so you’re saying that NO evidence exists about irresponsible gun owners, BUT that the local news presents news-worthy stories (not to be confused with…. a data point!) about irresponsible gun owners in action? Please, asking for ANY material to support your claim is hardly the “oldest trick in the book”.

    • Your not only the biased one, you’re also the anti-freedom one. If I were a student at AU or a professor, I’d want the freedom to not worry about people having guns on campus.

      I want the freedom to not have to see your irrational statements.

      Does it feel like I am taking away your freedoms with that statement? Like maybe your first amendment rights? It should, because I am not asking for freedom at all I am just limiting yours under the guise of extending mine.

      You are doing the same thing. You already have the freedom to decide if you are going to worry about it or not. But what you really are after is removing the second amendment freedom of others under the guise of extending your freedom.

      You apparently think you are clever, threatening to turn the argument on others and all, but you are really displaying irrational behavior that is devoid of logic. In short, you are screaming “it’s not fair,” like a big baby because you didn’t get both your scoop of ice cream and Johnny’s scoop too. Grow up!

    • “These university people are educated and worldly folks…”

      Oh puh-leeze. I just about spit out a mouthful of Diet Coke when I read that line. I can’t think of any other group of people more insulated from the realities of the world than those immersed in academia their entire adult lives.

      • “Oh puh-leeze. I just about spit out a mouthful of Diet Coke when I read that line. I can’t think of any other group of people more insulated from the realities of the world than those immersed in academia their entire adult lives.”

        lol, I couldn’t agree more. My exes father was a doctor who never left the U since he started school himself. He teaches. My old high school BFS entered and became a mechanical engineer. He never left the school. He teaches as well.

        Guess who I would not want changing my locks? Guess who I would not like to have attempt to assist me in a life or death bleeding scenario?

    • MikeB302000
      I respect everybody’s right to say whatever they want to say and however they want to say it. That is their RIGHT as guaranteed by the US Constitution. I know and accept that many people will disagree with me and I with them. This is America. Being able to voice one’s opinion and not be punished for it is what makes this country great.

      That being said, there are a couple of things I would like to address in your post.
      1. You mentioned that the university is comprised of “educated” folk. I think you and I can both agree that “educated” is a relative term and the amount of time one has spent in school is not indicative of their intelligence…which is also relative.
      2. You stated that if you were a student or faculty member you would want the “freedom to not worry about people having guns on campus.” Right now it is illegal to have a gun on campus. Does that mean everyone is free not to worry about guns on campus? No, it only means that they are free not to worry about people having guns on campus legally. The law does nothing to protect them from the illegal presence of guns. But don’t worry, I’m sure that the paper the law is printed on will do an excellent job preventing guns from coming on to campus. Just look how well it worked for Virginia Tech.
      3. You stated “In the great State of Arizona, you’ve got a lot of people with guns who are not responsible enough to handle them properly.” First, you have no facts to support that statement, but I will ignore that fact for the sake of the argument. How many people do you see out there that are bad drivers? Hint: a lot. Every accident is caused by someone not obeying the law (i.e. irresponsible car owners). How many people die each year in automobile accidents who’s deaths could have been avoided if we had just made some laws regulating driving? Oh wait, we did. Shouldn’t I have the freedom to not worry about bad drivers on the road? Shouldn’t someone’s right to drive be revoked if they break a traffic law? It would certainly save lives. Never mind how many people will be inconvenienced. The important thing is that the hand full of drivers that remain (i.e. the minority) will feel very safe. Of course this whole thing is absurd, but the difference between the campus scenario and the driving scenario is that US Citizens are guaranteed the right to bear arms. The Constitution says nothing of driving.

      • Handguns are not illegal on the Virginia Tech then nor is it illegal now. The prohibition against guns only applied to students, faculty, and staff. Firearms are legal on college campuses in Virginia with a few exception. It’s illegal in George Mason University’s academic and administrative buildings but not illegal on the campus itself.

        • Since the prohibition only applies to students, faculty, and staff, then the prohibition applies to everyone that actually needs a firearm on campus.

          • Do you have any idea how many family members descend on the Virginia Tech campus during football weekends?

    • These university people are educated and worldly folks who don’t agree that guns legally allowed on campus will make things better.

      Academics are “educated and worldly folks”??? HAHAHAHA.

      If I were a student at AU or a professor, I’d want the freedom to not worry about people having guns on campus.

      That freedom can’t exist as even under a total ban people can and will bring guns onto campus. There is no freedom to punish other people to feed your delusion that you are free from having to worry about people having guns on campus.

      I could, and sometimes do, turn it around on you. Your not only the biased one, you’re also the anti-freedom one.

      You aren’t turning it around, you are using Orwellian doublespeak, formerly known as bald faced lies, in an attempt to deceive us.

    • It seems that you may have over looked the fact that this segregation would only keep legal gun owners from carrying in class. As always, it boils down to the issue of criminal acts – these restrictions don’t mean anything to an individual who doesn’t obey the rules.

    • Mike,
      Currently there are 71 campuses in three separate states (Utah, Colorado, W. Virginia) that already allow for concealed carry. The grand total of crimes committed, either by, or against concealed carriers is exactly ZERO. So, where is the blood in the streets, parking space shootouts, and wild west you anti-freedom hoplophobs are always crying about?

  7. All hail academia, Communism’s last bastion. They cried when the Soviet Union fell, and they want to wipe away their tears with our Constitution.

  8. A few words about the picture: the little poppinjay blocking the doorway to the University of Alabama is George C. Wallace. The guy facing him down is my first boss (as a lawyer), Nicholas D. Katzenbach. Nick Katzenbach was my hero — even though the entire confrontation was carefully staged and scripted to allow Wallace to make his stand prior to surrendering in the face of the federalized National Guard. It was all worked out in advance — kinda like Wrestlemania.

  9. Okay so students, staff, and faculty can’t be armed. How about those of us that don’t fall into that category? For example, visiting parents of students? Friends of students? Their policy would only disarm themselves but do absolutely nothing against visitors.

    This policy sucks for gun rights and gun control simultaneously. It takes a good education to make something this terrible.

  10. I think the guns on campuses think is stupid. I’ve been to waaaay too many parties to want to see most of those people armed. Would make date rape a little easier for the Frat boys. The whole thing is going to “backfire” and I think more innocent people are going to get killed than protected by this stupidity.

    • Whjat about the idea that being armed will make frat boys more responsible? Or is it testosterone uber alles?

    • What makes you think all those people at the parties you go to aren’t armed? Did you frisk and wand everyone there? It is naive to assume that the people around you at any given time are unarmed simply because it is illegal.

  11. The old, fallacious, drunken party argument keeps coming up. The only one effected by this law change are 21 year old adults who have already had the background checks and taken the class. Stop with the “irresponsible children” argument already.

  12. So fine, have guns on campuses. How about some meaningful training requirements to minimize risk to others? And, while we’re at it, here’s something that makes great sense to me: if you carry a gun, carry insurance. If the risk of injury to innocents is as low as most carry advocates seem to believe, then the cost won’t be high. My financial worth to my family over my statistical life is well over 5 million dollars. Carry 5 million dollars of liability insurance and I’m fine with you carrying a gun on campus.

    Also, how about some common sense laws to go along with the constitutional carry craze. 1) Get caught with a weapon under the influence of ANYTHING that impairs judgment and you lose the right to carry a firearm for a decade AND until you’ve demonstrated improved judgment–prescription drugs, alcohol, illegal drugs–anything.

    I believe in individual gun ownership and the ability for individuals to carry a firearm. I’m (finally) mature enough to understand that for the most part, the notion of gun toting self-defense is emotional or fantasy based rather than practical.

    I see so many people that shouldn’t even, IMO, be allowed to drive. I sure as hell don’t want them carrying guns.

    • Also, how about some common sense laws to go along with the constitutional carry craze. 1) Get caught with a weapon under the influence of ANYTHING that impairs judgment and you lose the right to carry a firearm for a decade AND until you’ve demonstrated improved judgment–prescription drugs, alcohol, illegal drugs–anything.

      You should look deeper into the laws. In most states that have Concealed Carry and Constitutional Carry (maybe even all of them) being under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs, or certain prescription drugs (I mean I am on prescription strength vitamin D, this in no way impairs my ability to handle a firearm responsibly, and in fact not taking it would make me more at risk of irresponsible gun behavior) is a no no. A big no no.

      I can carry, or I can have a beer. I can’t do both. So I don’t drink, ever. The closest I get is the occasional Shirley Temple (hey I like the taste, don’t knock it) or virgin daiquiri. Nor do I even think about using drugs.

      The punishment for getting caught under the influence while armed is pretty severe. I would bet most college partiers when informed of this will choose to either not have a gun or not be a partier. The stupid ones who do both will quickly become examples for the rest on what not to do.

      Quick aside story, that is related and funny. I went into the local Red lobster with a couple we are friends with recently and sat in a booth within view of the bar (CC is legal here in a place that serves drinks, you just can’t drink). I was wearing my Glock 22 in an inside the pants side holster and for whatever reason wound up sitting on the outside edge of the booth with that side pointing out of the booth. I ordered a Shirley temple, because as I said I like them. And my wife ordered a virgin strawberry daiquiri (she just doesn’t drink because she hates alcohol). The drinks come to the table, and moments later so does the manager. The manager asks if I would accompany him to the back, I inquired as to why and he said he and the bartender wanted to ask me something. I thought it odd but agreed to go along just to find out what was going on, since I knew I had done nothing wrong.

      Once in the kitchen, the manager, the assistant manager, the bartender, and my waiter surrounded me at which point I did start getting nervous, I realized where my gun had been in the booth thought they had probably seen it and were nervous. Then the manager said “You can’t bring your own alcohol into this restaurant and add it to our drinks, that is illegal and we could lose our liquor license if we allow it.”

      I remember being perplexed and wearing a confused look on my face. I responded “I have no Idea what you are talking about.” The bartender wasn’t buying it and said “You’re a liar; I saw the bottle in your pants as you were sitting there.” And at this point I became extremely worried and started thinking of my options. Do I tell them it is not a bottle it is a gun, do I show my gun and reveal it contains no alcohol only bullets, or do I insist the cops come so I can explain it to them instead. Being a quick thinker I went for option D. I didn’t want anyone to think I was a threat, I didn’t want to show the gun, and I didn’t want to have the commotion that would come with waiting for the cops. So I asked the manager if I could show him something from my wallet, he nodded, I pulled out my wallet and my CC permit and handed it to him while saying “What you think you saw was actually that, I can show you if you’d like but would rather not scare anyone. I can’t drink with it, so that is why the drinks are alcohol free. If you want us to leave I will gladly pay for the drinks.” He handed me my permit back. Assured me I could stay. Sent his employees back to work. But said he would like to see it if I didn’t mind. I showed him without ever removing it and soon after realized he just wanted to see it because he was a gun enthusiast himself. He even gave us all desert for free because of the misunderstanding. But I didn’t order anything else that came from the bar because I was pretty sure the bartender still didn’t like me, and didn’t need spit in my drink.

      My takeaway, which I am sure is completely different than what everyone else got from the situation, was: Is bringing your own alcohol into a restaurant and ordering a virgin drink so you can mix it yourself really something people do? Enough for them to be on the lookout for it like that? Virgin drinks I thought usually had like ginger ale or something to replace the volume of the missing alcohol, so wouldn’t you at best get a watered down drink by doing that?

      Oh, and I did check later, when sitting in the pants I was wearing it does look kind of like the shape of an inverted capt morgans bottle, it is one of those plastic ones that is supposed to mimic the curve of your hip. Maybe I need a better inside the pants holster, gun show coming up so I plan to look into it.

    • “I’m (finally) mature enough to understand that for the most part, the notion of gun toting self-defense is emotional or fantasy based rather than practical. “

      So Chad; the 800,000 to 2,000,000 defensive uses of firearms annually are fantasies?
      I suggest you do a little research to help on your understanding because you appear to be ignoring the overwhelming evidence contrary to what you assert.

      • I have read both of the main published reports of defensive hand gun uses. Both are fraught with unsolvable statistical problems. An additional major problem is that people who report a single defensive gun use, tend overwhelmingly to report multiple defensive hand gun uses, skewing the statics heavily.
        The available statistics did not address whether the defensive gun uses were inside or outside the home–so they are irrelevant to the concealed carry issue.
        However, at the end of the day, I support generally the right of properly trained and vetted individuals to carry a concealed weapon.
        BTW, reading NRA propaganda is not research. Do you have a legitimate source for your information other than the two published studies?

        • Should we assume that the statistics you use coming from the Brady Campaign, LCAV, VPC, or any of the other anti-Second Amendment groups are legitimate?

  13. I think their ‘solution’ is a great idea!

    Let the hoplophobes have their own pretend “gun-free zones”, and let those who believe in the individual liberty to look out for one’s self and innocent others have their “legal gun zones”.

    We will then see where the mass shootings then occur, and who goes running to whom for protection in abject terror.

    And then, there will BE no argument.

    Yeah. That’s it.

  14. “I think their ‘solution’ is a great idea!

    Let the hoplophobes have their own pretend “gun-free zones”, and let those who believe in the individual liberty to look out for one’s self and innocent others have their “legal gun zones”.

    We will then see where the mass shootings then occur, and who goes running to whom for protection in abject terror.

    And then, there will BE no argument.

    Yeah. That’s it.”

    I don’t know about yourself but if I am out and about or inside my home and a lunatic starts a spree – I am:

    1) Protecting me (and my own if they are present).

    2) Avoiding getting shot and killed (and my own if present).

    3) Leaving the scene as quickly as possible (with my own if present).

    4) Not helping anyone who may be shot or getting shot at.

    To break it down:

    1) My gun is for my protection and the protection of my family. As are my actions.

    2) My family and my life being intact to appreciate them (my family) is very important to me.

    3) If you or a stranger is being shot at and my helping you increases my chances or my families chances of hurt or harm. I am sorry you did not arm yourself as is constitutionally your right.

    Too many people think that gun owners, CCers and open carry folk are out there to be heroes. Personally, I feel the need to let those dreamers know that if you are in the shit and my helping you garners notice or ire of said shit, then too bad. Deal with it. Let me know how it turns out. There is no law that states I need to put myself in harms way because you are against guns and therefore have none and are now the victim of such.

    I just felt the need to say this as there have been some rather assuming statements on here as of late, that state; I, Buuurr will stick my neck out for such silly folks or any folks in general.

Comments are closed.