Press release from Students for Concealed Carry:

AUSTIN, TX – The same organization that claims campus carry will “put a chill on public debate” and “intimidate faculty from tackling controversial issues” will once again hold an anti-campus carry rally in an area of the University of Texas at Austin campus where the licensed concealed carry of handguns is already legal. This is the fourth such rally since April 28 to take place in an area of the UT-Austin campus where the possession of firearms is legal . . .

The rally, sponsored by the group Gun Free UT, is scheduled to take place at 12 PM Tuesday, November 10, in the west mall rally space on the UT-Austin campus. Because Texas law does not classify the publicly accessible outdoor areas of a college campus (e.g., UT-Austin’s west mall rally space) as part of the “premises” of the college, and because this event is not sponsored by the university, nothing in the Texas Penal Code prohibits a concealed handgun license (CHL) holder from carrying a concealed handgun at the rally.

Antonia Okafor, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry (SCC), asked,

If these faculty and students aren’t afraid to directly challenge concealed handgun license holders at a rally where license holders can carry guns, why should we believe that students or faculty will be afraid to discuss controversial issues in a classroom where license holders can carry guns? For that matter, why should students or faculty be more concerned about speaking their minds in a classroom where a license holder might be carrying a gun legallythan in a classroom where a criminal or lunatic might be carrying a gun illegally?

After Texas Senate Bill 11 (the campus carry law) takes effect on August 1, 2016, the firearm restrictions in campus buildings will still be much more stringent than are the current firearm restrictions in UT-Austin’s west mall rally space. Under the campus carry law, only trained, licensed, carefully screened adults (age 21 or above) will be allowed to carry concealed handguns in campus buildings. Under the current law, any non-felon over the age of 18 may lawfully possess a long gun (rifle or shotgun) in the publicly accessible outdoor areas of campus. Okafor noted . . .

At this rally, an eighteen-year-old who has undergone no training, vetting, or licensing could legally have an AK-47 with a folding stock stuffed inside his backpack, yet members of Gun Free UT are more than willing to stand in front of the crowd and discuss one of the most controversial topics to affect college campuses in the past decade.

This isn’t the only way in which the rhetoric of Gun Free UT conflicts with the reality of campus carry. The group also claims that campus carry will lead to an increase in student suicides, despite the fact that 90% of suicides occur in the victim’s home while 95% of UT-Austin students over the age of 21live off campus, the fact that CHL holders are already allowed to store handguns in their cars parked on campus, and the fact that more than 150 U.S. college campuses have allowed campus carry for an average of more than five years (a combined total of more than 1,500 semesters) without a single resulting suicide, suicide attempt, homicide, assault, sexual assault, or accidental death.

When it comes to polling data and scientific studies, Gun Free UT repeatedly ignores the preponderance of data, which conflict with their position, and cites outliers that support their position. They ignore two impartial University of Texas/Texas Tribune polls that found more Texans in favor of campus carry than opposed to it and, instead, cite a gun-control group’s internal poll that claims the opposite. They ignore the vast majority of peer-reviewed studies (including a 2015 study from Texas A&M University) showing that licensed concealed carry cannot be shown to lead to an increase in violent crime and, instead, cite one of the only studies to find the opposite.

“If anything reflects poorly on Texas universities, it’s not the state’s new campus carry law,” Okafor concluded, “it’s the poor reasoning skills demonstrated by the academics who oppose it.”

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY — Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com.

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

23 COMMENTS

  2. “If anything reflects poorly on Texas universities, it’s not the state’s new campus carry law,” Okafor concluded, “it’s the poor reasoning skills demonstrated by the academics who oppose it.”

    Oh snap! That’s the sound of self righteous liberal heads popping like corn. I’m sure the academics in question can come up with a sane and cogent retort that doesn’t involve demonizing evil white peni. /sarc

    • They will probably just cover their ears, close their eyes, and shriek NUH-UH until the freedom lovers decide that dealing with childish bullshit isn’t worth their time.

    • That’s a truth worth saying again: If anything reflects poorly on Texas universities — on any university — it’s not new campus carry laws, it’s the poor reasoning skills demonstrated by the academics who oppose them.

  3. “If anything reflects poorly on Texas universities, it’s not the state’s new campus carry law,” Okafor concluded, “it’s the poor reasoning skills demonstrated by the academics who oppose it.”

    Damn, that was cold. I love it!

    • Nice one, indeed. That’s about as close to an Ezekiel 25:17 moment as is likely to happen.

      Although, I took two of my degrees from Texas universities. Hey!!!!!

  4. Again, campus carry, being protested by students who don’t qualify based on age for concealed carry anyway.

    Worried that professors will be intimidated by students? Geezz. A far larger percentage of the faculty and staff will be eligible for a hand gun license than students. Campus carry will see more faculty and staff armed than students.

  5. They’ve held 4 rallies where conceal carry is legal? And they haven’t been shot yet?!

    You’d almost think that CCW holders aren’t as violent as they are portrayed by the anti-gunners.

    • ‘They’ve held 4 rallies where conceal carry is legal? And they haven’t been shot yet?!”

      Um, that’s because it not a gun-free zone. If it was, well, who knows what would happen!?

  6. It’s a State school. If they can’t comply with the laws of the State and the US Constitution then:
    1. Cut the State funds from the budget. Stop paying Faculty salaries. Stop paying scholarships.
    2. Terminate all police powers.
    3. Terminate all abilities to sign a contract and commit funds.
    4. REVOKE their State Charter.

    Let the hippies fund it by having a drum circle.

  8. A group of academics plans to sue the school, in order to prohibit carry in classrooms and dorms. I say if you don’t like it, quit. I’m sure that there are plenty of schools in NY/CA/WA/etc that might hire them…open up spots for the next generation of professors that want to teach.

    • What are they going to argue? That they have a “constitutional right” to “feel safe”? (Hey, it worked for Highland Park, Illinois, so who knows.) Actually, the court’s analysis of such a claim would be fascinating, especially if that court were to apply the reasoning that courts must give “due deference” to legislative enactments, as courts have done with respect to challenges to infringements on 2A rights.

  9. Well, now we know it isn’t proximity to the self-defense firearms per se that has given these professors such a fright. They’ve proven that. So what is it, really?

    Once a sense of independence and personal responsibility creeps into the classroom by way of peaceful students prepared to defend themselves from violent attack, is it what comes next that fuels the fear? And what might that be? An intellectual curiosity backed by determined and skeptical inquiry? Oh the humanity!

Comments are closed.