University of Texas Austin campus at sunset-dusk - aerial view

The University of Texas (UT) has been in the uncomfortable position (for them) of being required to allow concealed handguns on campus. This has caused much agita among the professors, some of whom have taken to the streets to protest this latest reinstatement of Americans’ Constitutional rights. UT formed a committee to determine which areas would be ruled “off limits” for concealed carry. The fear: the entire campus would be included in this gun control loophole. The final report is out, and the result? Classrooms ARE NOT gun free zones any longer. From the report . . .

Our examination of states that already have campus carry revealed little evidence of campus violence that can be directly linked to campus carry, and none that involves an intentional shooting. We learned of four accidental discharge incidents. Two involved a license holder who was openly displaying a handgun to another person; the other two involved license holders who were carrying their handguns unholstered in their pants pocket.

We found that the evidence does not support the claim that a causal link exists between campus carry and an increased rate of sexual assault. We found no evidence that campus carry has caused an increase in suicide rates on campuses in other states.

In other words, the idea that concealed carry on campus will lead to “blood running in the streets” has no factual basis. The notion that the fears of some people on campus trump the rights of others doesn’t seem to have carried the day. As for their actual recommendations, the news is a mixed bag.

The committee determined that firearms must either be carried on the person (in a belt holster or similar, or in a bag that is within immediate reach) or securely locked in vehicles. The biggest wrinkle: while carrying on campus, UT demands that semi-auto handguns MAY NOT have a round chambered while being carried. How UT would enforce this requirement is anyone’s guess.

When it comes to locations where handguns are prohibited, the recommendations put any location involving students of lower education (K through 12) is off limits. That includes day care and collegiate sporting events. Another prohibited location: anywhere disciplinary hearings are being held, or places where volatile chemicals are in use (like laboratories).

On-campus housing is also on the prohibition list – except for the parents of students and “common areas.” Offices are up to the individual staff member’s preference. Classrooms had been the biggest area of contention, and it looks like they have sided with the pro-gun argument. From the report:

The Working Group is aware of, and sympathetic to, the overwhelming sentiment on campus that concealed carry should not be permitted in classrooms. Every member of the Working Group – including those who are gun owners and license holders – thinks it would be best if guns were not allowed in classrooms. Nevertheless, the Working Group does not recommend that classrooms should be designated a gun-exclusion zone.

In general it looks like this is a rather fair and balanced outcome for gun rights. Universities are locations where there is a large and vocal group of people who are very scared about concealed carry being allowed. The working group has done their best to allow as much concealed carry as possible while still giving professors who might have the vapors some room to impose their own gun free zones.

The most baffling thing: the prohibition against carrying handguns with a live round in the chamber, and again, how the UT system intends to enforce this rule (other than stop-and-frisk random checks). Still, this looks like progress.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

129 COMMENTS

  1. I said this in a previous post, but the thought that the campus is or has been gun free is comical. When I attended the university of Florida in the late 90s and early 00s I carried everywhere I went. No one knew and blood didn’t fill the halls. I knew if I was found out I’d be expelled. But it was easier to find another college if I needed to, than another life.

  2. Dorms? Otherwise, eat on it, anti’s.

    Also, is it too much to ask that when I visit TTAG, there isn’t a giant dissected hard-on right below the running poll? If you wanna push the idea we’re not all OFWG, how about advertisements that aren’t for flaccid, aged horn-dogs?

    Also also, whoever on the site that clicks on this shit & justifies its presence is a moron.

      • I just down loaded windows 10 and adblocker isn’t accepted by it yet , apparently , and ever since I did the download I can’t get through a sentence in comments without fart freeze .
        SUCKS

    • +1 for the removal of the dissected member ad… saw that earlier today out of the corner of my eye and had a good laugh once it dawned on me what it was!

    • Sometimes, I accidentally click on the link while scrolling on my phone.

      Pisses me off everytime.

      • That’s okay, it’s just your thumb that’s the moron 😀 (or rather, the fools paying the ad company)

        Ad Blocker should MORE than be able to cover this site’s ad-money needs with all the shilling posters here constantly do here for them (I know it works; but it’s stupid that this site has the ads of the scummiest celebrity news sites, yet has such excellent content.)

    • Agreed! I generally like this site, except the ads on this site are mostly spam and crap. This latest hard on at the top of the ads is seriously screwed up. I laughed about your OFWG comment.

      Signed – not an OFWG.

      • Hilariously while reading your comment, an add for Hormel Chili pop-up up on the sidebar. That’s not quite spam, though I do usually add a half can of spam per can of chili.

    • Onm the topic of advertising… most of them aren’t tuned to TTAG itself, but rather you get them based onyour browsing history…

      …so, bro’ where have you been before? 😎

      I, for instance don’t get any male tool, but I get all and every ad possible about nails….

      Andrea

    • Heard an interview about this last night. The concern of students having them in dorms was the possibility of theft from an unsecured room.

      They also stated that only less than one percent of the dorm students are over 21. Therefore, they were only impacting a small population. The vast majority of students live off campus.

      They do allow guns in the dorm common areas and they do allow visiting parents to carry into the dorm rooms.

      Again, this is about the security of an item could be stolen while unattended.

    • I’m actually ashamed to recommend this site to anti-gun people because of the atrocious quality of the ads. Many of them are actually not safe for work.

      • That’s been my whole point! All these azzhats shouting “ADDDDDBLLLOCKKERR!!!” don’t get that if I link this, it can be disregarded as trash because of the company this site keeps, in relation to godawful ads. It really does tarnish the image. thetruthaboutads

        • Sometimes I wonder if some of these adds are shoveled over based on stereotype. But I do see legitimate adds in some sections of the sight, usually the right sidebar, but the bottom of the page adds uniformly seem to be of the “click-bait” variety. How much revenue are those click-bait adds generating compared to the more legitimate add servers?

    • Dear RockOnHellChild, I will comment on what you have written: “Guns are loaded, or unloaded, none of this empty chamber crap”.

      I had a CCW in California for 22 years. During that time I seldom had a round in the chamber. Loaded magazine, no round in the chamber. There were 3 occasions during that time that things got dicey. All three times it was public transportation, near midnight, and feral hood rats. You could easily see what was was coming down, I knew damn well how long it would take to chamber a round, and I knew damn well the time to contact.

      So each time I had an imaginary line (12 feet) when the gun comes out, and another imaginary line (8 feet) at which I shoot. Just being practical here. Each time, the hood rats stopped, mingled around a bit, and split. Fair enough.

      So see things from their perspective: Here they got this old white guy alone in the dark. But he is squared off on them and the look on his face is sort of like Death with a sigh. They found something better to do.

      Now, agreed, a sudden attack from behind or such is an entirely different matter. You just might want to have a chambered weapon. I do not feel the need, but that’s just me.

      I know some cops, they all carry chambered, all of the time. This is no big deal. It is a good thing to be armed.

      Your statement, “Guns are loaded, or unloaded, none of this empty chamber crap”, is something that I have read in other places – Frankly, these are the words of the un-initiated, and one should choose his words carefully.

      • Rock’s phrasing might be infelicitous, but there is a real issue.

        From the CCW folks I know, most people do NOT carry without a round chambered. Lots of reasons for that; if your experience led you to carry with an empty chamber, well, it seems to have worked for you.

        But – to go from round chambered to empty chamber on campus, then back to round-chambered when off, is a relatively lot of gun handling – each instance an opportunity for a ND. This is Not Good.

        And what must revolver-carriers do? I didn’t see that addressed.

        And 12 and 8 feet? What happened to learning the results of the Tueller drill?

        • You are hitting on and around my concerns. Any excess handling is asking for trouble, mechanically and socially. If there is no empty chamber requirement in the State (and there isn’t in Texas) than neither should there be one on campus – why the campus thinks it can place additional burdens on gun carrying over and above those allowed it by the campus carry law is a mystery. Their options are limited to carry or no carry, not carry with caveats.

          And as you pointed out, it shows either ignorance of or inconsideration towards wheel guns.

      • First of all, I was in a car accident when I was a teenager without a seat belt and survived. It doesn’t stand as justification for not wearing one everyday. Same goes for your empty chamber story.

        Secondly, the only reason I can fathom someone would not carry a round in the chamber is he/she doesn’t trust themselves, or their abilities. If this be the case, professional instruction is needed.

        Finally, if one does not like the nature of my comments, one does not have to read them; you want sugar coating, buy some cookies.

    • Dear RockOnHellChild, I will comment on what you have written: “Guns are loaded, or unloaded, none of this empty chamber crap”.

      I had a CCW in California for 22 years. During that time I seldom had a round in the chamber. Loaded magazine, no round in the chamber. There were 3 occasions during that time that things got dicey. All three times it was public transportation, near midnight, and feral hood rats. You could easily see what was was coming down, I knew damn well how long it would take to chamber a round, and I knew damn well the time to contact.

      So each time I had an imaginary line (12 feet) when the gun comes out, and another imaginary line (8 feet) at which I shoot. Just being practical here. Each time, the hood rats stopped, mingled around a bit, and split.
      Fair enough.

      So see things from their perspective: Here they got this old white guy alone in the dark. But he is squared off on them and the look on his face is sort of like Death with a sigh. They found something better to do.

      Now, agreed, a sudden attack from behind or such is an entirely different matter. You just might want to have a chambered weapon. I do not feel the need, but that’s just me.

      I know some cops, they all carry chambered, all of the time. This is no big deal. It is a good thing to be armed.

      Your statement, “Guns are loaded, or unloaded, none of this empty chamber crap”, is something that I have read in other places – Frankly, these are the words of the un-initiated, and one should choose his words carefully.

    • There’s nothing wrong with Israeli carry. Its probably the best carry method for a college campus filled with a bunch of effeminate hipsters that have been coddled their whole lives and never given real responsibility.

      • Something tells me hipsters are not going to be wearing guns …

        Girl pants, which are too tight, and a winter cap in the summer, yes. Gun, likely not.

      • I have not problem with someone carrying empty chamber on campus if they prefer, but requiring it is a bit odd and will prove difficult to in force (except in an after the fact/ND situation).

        Most CCW instructors in the US will tell you to carry with a round chambered and as long as you have a holster that covers the trigger, where the possibility of an ND? Unless you are unholstering and reholstering, but why would you be doing that at school?

        The committee gave the reasoning that it was safer to allow CCW in the classroom than to provide weapon lockers based on the logic that addition handling increases the danger. Well, chambering and unchambering in absolutely no different.

        • It is absolutely a silly proposition and if they do try to enforce it some nincompoop is going to shoot themselves looking for a loaded chamber .
          bad idea boys and girls .

    • yeah, and what about revolvers? are we supposed to leave one empty, peacemaker style or can we fill the whole cylinder?

      • Those are all chambers, folks! You must leave all of them empty! Makes as much sense as expecting some professor is gonna check my chamber.

    • The empty chamber requirement is sexist.

      I’ve seen several women have difficulty racking a pistol. You want them to carry empty chambered and then have to accomplish the difficult physical task of chambering their defense pistol while being attacked?

      • Absolutely correct. My bride carried a semi for years, I loaded it and prepared it for carry, she knew how to fire it and how many rounds she had. No way she was going to rack the slide, I did the same at CHL classes, handed her the gun ready to fire. Now I think of it, now I do the same with her revolver.

  4. Well we are more likely to win with death by a thousand cuts. Try to see the silver lining, this means Texans and revolvers will go hand in hand once more.

  5. Seeing how they don’t want people carrying with a round in the chamber, it’s all the more reason to encourage them to carry revolvers. Win-win for everyone. 😉

      • This ^^^.

        As far as I cant tell the campus carry law doesn’t allow them to place any additional restrictions on carry anyways, so the empty chamber requirement falls outside the scope of their power. If they are going to allow you to carry at all (as allowed them by the law), you can/will/should carry as you see fit.

  6. “…while carrying on campus, UT demands that semi-auto handguns MAY NOT have a round chambered while being carried.”

    HA! Revolvers rule! I can carry a round in all 6 chambers!

  7. Majority of people in dorms are not of age to possess a handgun anyway so it doesn’t seem like a huge deal to me.

    • Yeah that was my first thought. Other than rifles, no one in their first or potentially second year are going to be old enough to carry or purchase a handgun so it really doesnt matter.

    • What does the 21+ year old on campus student who doesn’t have a vehicle do with their firearm when they’re not in class? Seems foolish not to let them defend themselves where they actually live most of the time.

      • This student is yours truly, Mark.

        Parents will pay for on-campus dorm, but not an apartment, due to my Father’s poor renting experiences.

        When I’m in the working world and income is a thing, that’s going to change. Until then I’m a sitting duck (one of two kinds of wildlife on my campus, including squirrels).

    • When I was an 18 year old Freshman, the guys on my dorm floor who could purchase alcohol were in the minority, but they weren’t rare. Heck, they made up 3/4 of my suite (I got three seniors for suitemates).

      And 18 is the age limit for possession.
      21 is the age limit for concealed carry in Texas.

    • No doubt. Completely stupid.

      No, someone should challenge that on the basis of wanting to carry a single shot, which would mean, in effect, being banned. Since the ban is therefore selective, it’s discriminatory.

      If they complain, “Well, you can choose to carry a Glock 17, just with an empty chamber,” well, that’s a bit screwy from the “too much ammo” perspective.

      “Okay, you are TELLING me you’d rather I carry a full magazine of ammo, just not one in the chamber, that I can load in a second or two, vs a firearm with one round just because it’s already in the chamber?”

      The illogic…it hurts sometimes.

      But, overall…better ruling than it could have been.

      • Not to be an asshole but… ok, I AM trying to be an asshole. Here goes.

        Ahem… Single-shot semi-automatic? Really?

      • I’m thinking that the “logic” (not that I agree with it) is that an empty chamber will prevent negligent discharges. Would have made more sense to require that semiautos have engaged manual safeties. I know the whole thing is stupid, but s requirement to use a safety seems less stupid than Israeli carry. Still, guns in classrooms ftw!

    • I’ve several women have difficulty racking a pistol. So let’s just call the empty chamber rule sexist, that’ll scary them university types.

  9. Kudos the the committee members for having the backbone to fly in the face of hoplophobic sentiment.

    • Agreed.

      Hat is off to the committee for even LOOKING at some data, much less coming to the correct conclusion from it.

      Now, cue public hyperventilating from overpaid, overcoddled, overly-self-important tenured faculty….The pompous, elitist responses over the next week or so should be mighty entertaining.

    • Agreed. I would’ve expected them to ban them in classrooms whether there was no evidence or a boat load of evidence of “blood in the halls” because feelz.

    • The local NPR station had an interview with the head of the committee this afternoon. He seemed mostly reasonable, but I came away with the impression that they might have been mainly concerned with following the law closely enough to not stir up too much animosity in the legislature, or trigger a lawsuit, while still restricting carry as much as they could get away with. I think this is mostly a blind pig finding an acorn, credit the legislature with having written the law restrictive enough that they couldn’t find a way to weasel out of having to follow it.

      One thing he mentioned is they considered banning guns in classrooms, but offering “gun lockers” where students could store their guns while in class. That they even considered such an idiotic scheme shows the lengths they were exploring to avoid allowing students to exercise their rights. Hopefully they abandoned that idea quickly, and didn’t waste too much of my tax money researching it.

      • +1. Steve Goode (I had him for Evidence years ago) is no fool.

        The “we can’t ban in classrooms because lockers would be too hard to do” is window dressing. The realpolitik is that the admin knows that trying to go toe-to-toe on this with a GOP-controlled state legislature and governor would be suicidal, especially given that they are already looking for excuses to cut UT’s budgets.

        Ergo, throw the faculty a sop on individual offices (but make it effectively unenforceable), make on-campus dorm rooms off-limits (meaningless, as less than 1% of on-campus residents are over 21, and I suspect that the vast majority of those are foreign students who are similarly ineligible for a CHL), add some “feel good” things like requiring Israeli carry (enforceable how?), and throw in a lot of language “validating” the feelings of the pearl-clutching class . . . but in the end pretty much submit to the law as written.

        Next phase . . . I’m sure we’ll hear from the usual suspects who will purport to ban CC in *their* classrooms. We’ll see whether UT will have the stones to discipline them. Smart money says it probably doesn’t.

      • Here or elsewhere, there was discussion about the gun lockers.

        They were proposed, because when you are in a committee, one of the keys to success is allowing every idea to be raised, no matter how stupid it may seem – the thought is you come up with everything and then you can rationally consider and remove those that won’t work, instead of missing a potentially innovative solution because the person vacillated.

        Anyway, the idea was raised and quickly rejected, for the same reason Israeli isn’t a great idea. The concern was that the frequent handling would increase the risk of ND. Additionally, it raises a major security risk as there is now a known and public cache of weapons begging to be broken into.

        I don’t fault them for discussing the idea. It shows that they considered every option in their discussion, which is a level of fairness we should expect from all.

  10. Rather than mandating Israeli carry, the exceedingly simple and highly effective solution is to mandate that everyone keep their handgun in a properly fitting (meaning snug) holster that covers the trigger guard. Whether you keep your handgun on your hip, in your pocket, or in a “container” (e.g. backpack, briefcase, purse, duffle bag), keep your handgun in a properly fitting holster and it will NEVER discharge unintentionally.

    • I would add a little bit more to that. Mandate that, while on campus, all pistols will remain holstered unless there is an immediate threat to the student’s person. Basically, you’re not allowed to show your gun of to your friends. If a gun is out without there being a threat, the carrier gets charged with brandishing.

      I say this because ND’s are more prone to happen when people are showing off.

      • Why would you think that should only be on campus? I consider that a rule all the time, including in my home. If someone wishes to see my firearm, generally, I will leave the room and return with an unloaded firearm with the slide locked back, or more likely say “no”.

    • or, my favorite. Carry however and where ever you like, but you are responsible for any discharges. There you go. problem solved.

      • Arkansas,

        By and large I agree with your sentiment.

        Look at this in terms of risk versus burden. The risk of a handgun discharging unintentionally when carried outside of a holster is a known fact: handguns carried loosely in pockets and purses have discharged without the carrier’s intent. Thus, while the risk of a loose handgun discharging is extremely small, it is definitely NOT zero. My proposal to eliminate such risk is to always keep your handgun in a tight/properly fitting holster that covers the trigger guard, whether you carry the handgun in your pocket, a purse, backpack, or whatever. And what burden does that represent? Other than the $15 it costs for a pocket holster or the $25 it costs for another type of holster for a purse or backpack, the burden is zero. Such a holster does not add any significant weight or bulk. And it doesn’t increase access time. (It doesn’t decrease your speed/ability to deploy your handgun for self-defense.) Therefore, since the burden is basically zero and the benefit is zero unintentional discharges, we owe it to our fellow human beings to carry a handgun in a holster at all times.

        Look at it this way. Is it okay for a person to detonate a bomb at a random location and time … as long as they are responsible for any injuries? The obvious answer is a resounding “NO!”. Neither is it okay to carry handguns in such a manner that they can “detonate” (discharge) at a random location/time … especially when you can carry handguns with equal access/benefit in an inexpensive holster.

    • It’s University policy, which means it’s enforceable under threat of expulsion for students or termination for employees. In my mind, that’s a greater deterrent than criminal prosecution.

  12. Lemme guess; Art (LAPD) Acevedo will be having his goons conducting stop & clear drills on random peoples’ handguns if they determine a gun is carried (printing is no longer illegal if unintentional, and TX is shall-notify) to enforce the ’empty chamber’ rule. What could possibly go wrong…

    • I think there would be some problem with Acevedo enforcing UT rules which have nothing to do with the laws of the city or state.

  13. So, “allowed”, but they are going to fuck it up so badly, the rules will be nearly incomprehensible.

    Got it.

    Oh well, it’s a start, and one item they have over AZ.

    Bastards.

  14. My guess is that the empty chamber rule is more about being able to bring something against someone who nd’s than it is about feeling safer if everyone has unchambered pistols.

  15. “The most baffling thing: the prohibition against carrying handguns with a live round in the chamber, and again, how the UT system intends to enforce this rule (other than stop-and-frisk random checks). ”

    They don’t need to enforce it. It just means that if you do get a negligent discharge, they’ll slap you with an extra fine (or expel) on top of that for violating that rule, since guns without a round in a chamber don’t go off.

    • “Your honor, the slide must have gotten pulled back by accident and accidentally chambered a round! Accidentally!”

  16. Here are people still thinking that calling a place gun free will actually keep someone from bringing a gun there that has intentions of harm.

  17. I’d be more than happy to accept Israeli carry, hell, any carry in CA by teachers, staff or vetted volunteers on elementary and high school campuses.

    Problem is its illegal in most counties, and CA AG Kamala Harris has tied up the Peruta lawsuit (“self-defence is good cause” to apply) in the 9th CA for likely the next 4 years, so kids and teachers on all campuses are simply defenseless, by fiat by the Elite Who Knows Whats Best for the Little People.

    The cops responding in 4 minutes were just blocks away, in the middle of a monthly active shooter training. Even then, when seconds count, the shooters got clean away, until they circled back in their rented SUV, its thought to trigger the IED left behind. Imagine if they had gone more effectively and efficiently to a second location?

    Meanwhile, its reported that the San Bernardino Muslim Terrorists had bigger plans, with pictures of kids schools on the cell phone that they tried to throw away…

    Remember, Beslan is the scenario that keeps counter-terror experts at the fusion centers awake at night.

    • … and, of course, CA is going the opposite direction as of Jan 1, 2016. The law on CCW on school grounds changes then, to disallow carry by CCW holders. There were exemptions for each of k-12 and colleges and universities; both have been removed.

  18. Big problem with the “requirement” not to have a round chambered.
    The Campus Carry law does NOT give them that authority.
    The only authority is for them to determine areas of the Univ. that would be gun-free, but they have to justify why and the places banned cannot be such that a defacto ban on guns across the entire university would be the result.

    The AG will likely straighten them out with a lawsuit. Would be kinda nice to see their ass whipped in public.

    • Read subsection (d-1) of section 1 of the final version of senate bill 11…

      “shall establish reasonable rules, regulations, or other provisions regarding the
      carrying of concealed handguns by license holders”

  20. It is still a good news, a progress on campus carry. Congrats!
    It shall be an example that many universities can follow.

  21. What is so hard to chamber a round in a split second? All this whining about a highly positive decision…

    • Sucks when your first indication that there’s an active shooter is when you get shot in the hand.

      ETA: It’s an internet gun forum. Of course we whine.

      Yes, it’s a positive decision.

    • Seen plenty of CQB gunfights that involved hands-on and good guy lucky to get one hand on gun and fire it at all, much less two that most use to cycle the action.

      Also seen in the real world: CQB gunfights where fractions of a second matter.

      Just to pick two well known cases: do you think George Zimmerman or Darren Wilson either one wanted to full around chambering a round? As a third, lesser known, example that shows the case for “ordinary carriers” better, check out Justin Schneiders story.

      Combine the two possibilities, and empty-chamber is a limit on self defense. For those that CHOOSE to do it for THEMSELVES…their choice. To have a committee of a university try to mandate it is, in a moral sense, almost as bad as banning guns outright.

      They want to limit ND’s. We get it. But, there are more sensible ways to do that.

  23. I think the interesting point was they moved past the old chestnut of “what if someone gets angry and shoots the place up?” to “what if there’s an accident?”.
    Carrying chamber empty is far from ideal, but in this case it’s a big step forward from the gun free zone nonsense.

    I suspect that, most gun owners being law abiding and thus observing these rules, will carry chamber empty even if the rule isn’t enforced.
    In the end that’s always been the problem. We obey rules while the bad guys don’t. At least this rule is less objectionable.

    • “I suspect that, most gun owners being law abiding and thus observing these rules, will carry chamber empty even if the rule isn’t enforced.”

      I suspect you are completely wrong, but then I was carrying 30 years before the law was passed allowing it, in states including NY and CA, as well as DC. I have always been law-abiding, with the 2A being the overriding law of the land. “Empty chamber” is an infringement on that which shall not be infringed. So you ignore it.

  24. Given that my carry weapon is (don’t laugh, one has to do with what they feel more confident) is a venerable Beretta 34 with an atrocious safety and no firing pin safety, I tend to carry with an empty chamber but with hammer cocked, since most of the resistence in racking the slide is done by the hammer rather than the recoil spring.

    To be honest I need to carry once or twice a year, thank G_d…

    • “Need to carry once or twice a year.”

      This always confuses me.

      My crystal ball is in the shop, so I never know when I might need to carry. (But I live in California in an ‘almost-never-issue’ county, so knowing or not, I don’t get to carry.)

      If I knew I might need my gun one day, why would I go to wherever that need might be present? Call the cops, bring a lot of friends with guns, maybe. Walk alone into a gunfight I know about? Not so much.

      • Simply I live in a quiet European country, where there is little if any need to go armed.
        But I like to be able to choose by myself if I want to.

        • You mean in Paris? You realize there were more people shot in mass killings in Paris this year than in the US during the past 7? Enjoy Europe, I won’t be visiting again.

        • “Simply I live in a quiet European country, where there is little if any need to go armed.

          But I like to be able to choose by myself if I want to.”

          As well you should.

          My point was that ‘need’ makes no appointments. Were I legally able, my choice would be to carry all the time.

          And then hope that ‘need’ never comes, but train as if it will come today.

  26. PRIVATE OFFICE CARRY PROHIBITION IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR CARRIERS! It is a big problems for students if they can’t meet their professor during office hours without first going to their car or all the way back home (commuting by bus, bike, or foot is preferred at downtown campuses for obvious parking reasons). The committee does recommend that faculty be required to meet with people outside of their no guns allowed private offices upon request but revealing to your professor or colleague that you are carrying a gun in their presence is very offensive to many if not most at a college like UT Austin not to mention inconvenient for the person you are rousting out of their private office. Even if you don’t seek to meet a professor in their office sometimes a professor will ask to meet you in his office right after class or right when you happen to bump into them in the hall. If this happens you have the same issue with offending or inconveniencing them if you don’t make up a believable not strange sounding excuse which is often difficult to do without lying to them. Some of us don’t like being compelled to lie even if it is something that could be categorized as a “little white lie”. Since the committee recommends professors give oral notice to those they are admitting into their private offices rather than posting a 30.06 sign at their door I must say that it sounds impossible to NOT reveal yourself as a concealed carrier when someone gives you notice at their door and you immediately make up an excuse why you can’t cross the threshold.

    In short this policy would subject carrying students and faculty to potential discrimination and/or SIGNIFICANT inconvenience.

    To anyone trying to explain why this policy would expose carriers to potential discrimination to people that would deny that discrimination would be an issue I suggest posing an argument as follows…
    Remind them that some people believe a CIVILIAN coming into THEIR classroom/workplace and standing next to them with a LOADED FIREARM is an offensive act. After all we are talking about people that wanted you to be handcuffed and thrown in a cage with a bunch of predators for carrying. I can’t think of a way that offending your professor, colleague, or boss wouldn’t be potentially detrimental to your academic/professional career.

  28. This article didn’t mention that that there is also a requirement for holsters recommended which is redundant with the empty chamber requirement.

  29. It’s great. Worst part about it is the prohibition on student housing.

    As far as the chamber empty thing, so what? Some goober in campus police doesn’t understand firearms or self defense so they placated him or her. Meh. Not like they’re doing chamber checks on the way to bio.

    I was president of my college rifle club 92-94. The unreal nonsense coming from lefty school administrators was amazing. The UT board apparently bothered to actually learned something. Awesome!

  30. I understand the un-chambered carry. Hence carry a revolver. They are prob worried about the “Sgt Rocks” carrying cocked and locked. I personally have seen an “oops” resulting in a discharge. Skunt the guys ass then went thru a seat and then the bottom of the car into the dirt. Luckly he was carring it in a offset police style holster.The officer who had it was trained and was very safe. 1911 style .45. I don’t remember what flavor it was. Not a colt though.

  31. What about the Dildos? Did the committee address any of the concerns about where they can be carried, stored? Are they permitted in classrooms and not in the dorms?

    TTAG- you need to do a better job of reporting all the facts that are important to your readers!

  32. *blinks* Huh. Didn’t see that coming. Cool.

    “On-campus housing is also on the prohibition list –”

    The Working Committee has made their decision – now let them enforce it.

    Next up: UT Off Campus Housing Boom – film at 11.

    Unexpectedly.

  33. “again, how the UT system intends to enforce this rule (other than stop-and-frisk random checks).”

    The “need” for random searches of students might look like a bug to you, but to a totalitarian statist, it’s a feature.

    • I’m confused. How can an ND happen with a holstered pistol of any type?

      I won’t say that carrying without a round in the chamber is stupid; however, I will say that carrying without a round in the chamber presumes that one will have two hands available when one needs to draw under duress – an assumption that introduces into the scenario far more risk than I’m willing to accept.

  36. Maybe I need to re-read the law, but I don’t recall the legislature allowing the university to make any changes to concealed carry laws. It only allowed them to list specific sensitive areas to prohibit carrying of guns. They could try to say the classroom is a sensitive area, but that would be challenged in court and by the next session of the legislature.

    • I’m pretty certain the vast majority of the murders at VaTech were in classrooms, while class was in session. Trying to make the case for defensive firearms not being needed in classrooms was going to be a real stretch.

  37. Wow, mining past events for data and using facts to devise plans… apparently you can still learn at school (at least in TX).

Comments are closed.