Concealed Handgun Carry on Campus (HB 1893)
Texas HB 1893 would allow Concealed Handgun Licensees to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of Texas institutions of higher education. This includes public and private universities. The bill also states an institution of higher education cannot prohibit CHL’s from carrying on campus, although they can regulate handgun storage in dorms. The language of its Senate companion bill (SB 1164) is identical. If passed, HB 1893 becomes effective September 1st, 2009.
The bill has bipartisan support and passed the House Committee on Public Safety last Wednesday. It will be debated next in the House (date pending), although it will go through several additional stages before becoming law.
Is this bill good for the university? For example, how would it impact enrollment rates, crime or violence, the number of students having or obtaining a CHL, etc? Should UTPA (and other institutions of higher education) be compelled to allow the carrying of a concealed handgun on campus? Should private universities also have to comply?
On the other hand, despite the rhetoric, and probable fantasies of several gun toting students, it is unlikely that the presence of concealed handguns will lead to any great increase in security against unsociable counter-strike addicts with ambition for a fiery end, let alone the typical muggers, murderers and thieves. Correct practical firearms training addresses the fact that getting someone with a gun to react quickly, decisively and effectively with a weapon in a deadly force encounter is a product of a unique psychology or years of training/experience. (Consult Col. Grossman's "On Killing" for the decisive book on the subject.) This is one reason why NCOs are so valuable in the military. The likely hood of Duddley ShootRight engaging a psychopathic mass murderer effectively and decisively are slim, though existent.
Where this issue does become important, aside from the power plays and fantasies of most interest group members, is for potential stalking and/or abuse victims and people who have had kidnapping or other threats made against them(here in the valley? A thousand times nay!) who may possess CHLs for said threats to their safety. Unless the University feels it financially prudent to subcontract Blackwater guards for said people, a CHL is the only realistic means of defense for many a victim of abuse. These people pose significantly less of a danger to the student body than the all to familiar combination of a 24 pack of Natural Light from the Aziz down the street and a drivers license. Not allowing CHL on campus provides a certain period of disarmament and helplessness for people whose lives may be in danger from criminals and the deranged. I believe that it is these people who we should most consider, rather than the Bad Boyz fantasies of firearms possession which are the principal informants of the typical supporters and detractors of this bill.
But for us educated students and future leaders of the modern world, guns is the solution. Intimidation is easily transferred through a barrel, which happens to shoot bullets, which happen to sometimes kill people. With a gun we can easily stop a catastrophe, a homicide, a suicide, a killing spree, a mass murderer. You name it, a gun can stop it. Want to get out of class early, point your weapon to the air, fire a bullet and leave. A great statement to show who's in power.
But what about those students that forget to bring a pencil to class or a scantron, both of which are essential to taking a test? They can easily forget to put the safety on their new gun. And this is the only problem that I can find. But we are innovators, and solutions always come to us. So what if a weapon happens to fire itself by accident because the owner didn't put the safety on their pistol, and that bullet happens to injure or kill someone? Well the injured person can easily be charged with attempted murder on fellow classmates for having a gun on campus. After all we'll never know who really wants to use the gun for a bad purpose, so random punishment will be the key to this bill.
I've written more than I would on a regular essay. This should show my support on this magnificent bill.
I admit, I don't know a thing about guns, but man, I can't wait to go buy one and bring it to school every day. One thing is for sure: I will feel safer.
Ravaging Straw Men, while fun, is no substitute for the reasoned analysis of the subject at hand, whether or not legal state of Texas certified CHL holders are to be allowed to carry their weapons on college campuses. If anything, possession of a CHL goes far to encourage responsible behavior in a CHL holder. Having a CHL and carrying a weapon opens one up to a wide range of new penalties, steeper punishments and potential derision and embarrassment than one might imagine. Also having one's entire set of finger prints on file with the DPS might do much to encourage good behavior. CHL holders have not been proven to have a higher crime rate than non CHL holders, in fact the opposite is true. Will legal guns on campus solve a great many problems? Probably not. Will it cause any problems? Probably not. The most proactive thing the university could do to prevent mass murder on campus is to defuse a thousand ticking time bombs by building a parking garage on campus.
This being said, the primary arguments of those opposed to CHL holders having their existing handgun carrying rights extended to state universities seem to be that violence will increase once CHL holders can carry on campus. I have yet to hear a reasoned argument for why this might be so. Other than throwing a straw man down a slippery slope, the opinions presented above, and those like them, seem to accomplish little. "But what if a CHL holder snaps and decides to murder a professor or go on a campus rampage?" Well it seems that there is not a damn thing to be done to stop it. Problem is, with the law as it is now, there is not a damn thing to stop it anyway. Same for a non-CHL holder. Same for a deranged chemistry student, or a Krav Maga master. Same for anyone in this university with a compass, ball point pen or pocket knife. The primary grievance of those opposed to the bill seems to be the removal of their current illusion of security.
A BAD IDEA
Samuel Freeman
The Advance News Journal
8 April 2009
Representative Joe Driver, and Senator Jeff Wentworth, both Republis, have introduced legislation to permit persons with concealed firearms licenses to “carry” on college campuses.
Texans are gun lovers. Most would give up their gal, even their horse before they would give up their guns. Makin’ love to one of those sweet babies is a heck uv’a lot gooder ‘n sex--well, not in my opinion, but certainly in the opinion of many Texas “gun lovers.”
I’m not one of these “ban guns” folks. Growin’ up in the deep south, I’ve been around guns all my life. My father had shotguns and pistols, and taught me to shoot when I was 9 or 10. On my 21st birthday, my birthday presents to me were a Smith and Wesson .38 and a fifth of Jack Daniels. I took both home. Loaded the .38, put it on the kitchen table, and poured me a couple of ounces of good bourbon.
I was sippin’ when my parents came home. Mother was a bit shocked. Dad laughed hard, got a glass and asked if he could have some of my whiskey. Since I’d been drinkin’ his before I could shoot, I said sure. Then he asked if he could see my pistol. Well, I’d been firing his for years, so I said okay to that too. He reached over, picked it up, unloaded it, looked at it, reloaded it, and set it back down on the table.
From the table, it went to the glove box of my car where it rode for the better part of 30 years. I acquired a 12 gauge shotgun, ‘cause “scatter guns” are a good thing to have. Fourteen years ago, I thought the conceal to carry law passed by the Texas Legislature was good. History has borne that out. Most revocations of licenses have been for carrying in prohibited places, such as a bar, church, government building, or educational facility.
The 1995 “conceal” law specifically prohibits carrying in these places, and for good reason. The judgment of the Legislature in 1995 was sound; it remains sound today. The law should not be changed to permit carrying concealed weapons on our college campuses.
The bill, of course, is in reaction to what happened at Virginia Tech, with the belief, had concealed weapons been permitted on campus, there might have been someone who was armed who could have “taken out” the guy, saving lives. Perhaps, or perhaps not. Firing a weapon at an inanimate target, or hunting game is one thing. Firing a weapon at a human being is something else, especially when that human being is firing back. IF you never have been in that situation, trust me on this.
Hypothetically, it would be good if someone were armed if a lunatic on campus started shooting people. But the potential risks significantly outweigh any potential benefit.
First, in a fire fight, being able to take good aim at a target who is armed and firing is not easy --ask policemen who are trained in the use of weapons with the expectation they may have to fire their weapon while under fire. The exchange of gunfire in a crowded classroom is as likely to result in more casualties as it is to save lives.
How often are innocent bystanders wounded in police shootouts with criminals? And those innocent bystanders are not always shot by the criminals, but sometimes by errant police rounds. Think of a person who had never fired at a human being in his/her life firing at someone shooting at them. Not a pretty picture.
One justification given is protecting women who are being attacked. Lordy, male Texans do love to protect their wimmenfolk--that is, when they are not smacking them around.
IF we are thinking in terms of the woman having the weapon to defend herself, forget it. Women who carry pepper spray still get attacked because the attacker is on them before they can get the pepper spray out. Don’t try to feed me the line, “pepper spray is not as effective as a 380,” because I have been hit with pepper spray. It will stop you in your tracks, and is easier to put “on target” in a struggle than a round from a pistol.
Some arguments simply are borderline stupid. Daniel Crocker, of students for Concealed Carry on Campus says: "If someone has the right to protect themselves everywhere else, there's no reason they should lose that right to self-defense and protection when they cross an invisible line."
Okay, sport, what is the difference between the “invisible line” of a college campus, and the invisible line of a church, government building or bar? I mean, if this statement has any logic with respect to college campuses, it should have exactly the same logic for a bar. We do not let people with carry licenses carry in bars because of the possibility of people drinking getting into an argument, with one pulling a gun and blowing the other away.
Representative Aaron Pena offers an even sillier argument--he’s just trying to protect gun owners’ rights. Then why not protect their “rights” to carry in bars, or government buildings? How about visitors to the Texas House carrying in the gallery? Given the Texas Legislature, I think that is one a lot of us could go for.
Most Valley Legislators support the bill with Rep. Veronica Gonzales being one of the few to oppose it. She is right; our other State Legislators are wrong and need to rethink their positions.
In case you’ve missed the “action” on college campuses for the past 8 years, colleges are places where extremely controversial subjects are discussed and debated. Sometimes passions run high; sometimes extremely high.
On 11 October 2001, Gary Rodriguez and I had an extremely acrimonious debate over U.S. foreign policy at UTPA. Gary and I subsequently became friends; but that night, not only were we angry at each other, passions were high in the audience too. The UTPA police had several police officers in the auditorium, and more patrolling the grounds outside. They were so concerned, they offered Gary and me armed escorts to our cars after the debate was over. Exchanges between Gary and I were heated, but there also were heated exchanges in the audience during the question period.
What if people legally could have carried weapons into that debate? The UTPA police probably would have had twice as many officers present. What if someone in the audience pulled a gun and started firing, and what if others who were armed pulled their guns and started firing too? How many people would have been shot? How many would have died?
You might say, “but that is a hypothetical”. Yeah, and that is exactly what all of the justifications of the proposed law are based on--hypotheticals. I am on campus most days. I’ve seen students get into heated arguments. I’ve seen people go “eyeball to eyeball.” I’ve seen women harassed and assaulted. One of my students was stabbed in a parking lot on campus. I understand all of these things. I also understand this law is more likely to result in people being injured than protected.
It truly is a bad idea.
The concealed handgun legislation is a very pressing matter because it has already passed one chamber, we are here trying to get our Texas State reps to sign off on keeping it off the floor. We have very little time to try and stop this but we are determined!
This blog is an incredible asset to us right now as we sit in our hotel rooms brainstorming and reading through the piece of legislation over and over again thinking of new ways to defend our reasons for not allowing this bill to get any further than it has. Thank you for your comments! We ARE your voice at the state level and guarantee that you are heard!
We shall have updates tomorrow!!!! Wish us luck!!!!!!!