I also had a blast at the annual Denton Arts & Jazz Fest, which was within easy walking distance of my apartment. I volunteered at our campus fund-raising booth as a cashier (we were partnered with a local North Texas chain of taco shops based in Fort Worth that has a presence in Denton as well). The weather was nice both days, though unseasonably chilly on Sunday.
Anyway, last week was the annual protest week for Students for Concealed Carry On Campus (SCCC). I personally wish it was "Students, Faculty and Staff for Concealed Carry On Campus" (SFSCCC) but it is the older students (21 and up) who do, of course, have to take the lead on this issue. In Texas, Gov. Rick Perry last year told the Texas State Rifle Association he would work on this issue so that Texas would never enable a VA Tech-type incident.
Now, as it turns out, our campus has no students actively involved in SCCC, and thus no one to serve as a rallying point, and as such, though I did not personally go out of my way to look, I did not see any students with T-shirts and empty holsters participating in the protest. Nevertheless, our campus news service made everyone aware of the event in advance, to avoid any confusion about it. The email that was sent out was strictly informational in nature, implying no endorsement. I am going to quote some of the campus traffic this generated, but I will leave the names & positions out to protect the identity of the respondents.
Back around the ides of April, this informational message was broadcast on the general campus list:
During the week of April 21-25, there is a national campaign set by the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. We may have students who choose to join the initiative by joining college students across the nation to protest against state laws and campus policies that prohibit concealed handgun license holders from carrying their concealed firearms on college campuses. Students who participate in the protest are asked to wear t-shirts and empty holsters and may pass out flyers.
Innocent enough, I thought. Others, though, engaged their fingers and emotions first...
"This is appalling that this is coming across [campus] e-mail much less faculty list. The promotion of any self-serving agenda is inappropriate at this level. Please take me off of the faculty list if this is the kind of garbage I have to receive. Respectfully submitted, Prof. X."
someone else in campus Admissions felt the need to sound off next:
"This is a bit shocking to me.
Does the University have any plans to educate students about gun violence and how concealed weapons are the WRONG way to protect themselves?
It seems we have a responsibility as educators not let this pass by without comment."
And the "right" way, presumably is to dial 911? Even on a small campus like ours, and with a good police force such as we have, the truism still stands--when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Let me recommend a book for you:
This book definitely makes you think, and is a kick to one's complacency.
Professor Y was right to point out:
"Whether appalled or shocked by the announcement, we as a faculty cannot forget that we work for a STATE institution and, as an agent for the state, the university cannot prohibit or limit the rights of any student to FREEDOM OF SPEECH. We are all guaranteed the right to peaceable assembly and and demonstration.
If you are opposed to any potential demonstration, you have the right a public forum as well."
Another faculty member noticed that the original messenger had been unfairly maligned and had this to say:
"As much as I disagree with the agenda of the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, I do feel compelled to thank [Dr. __ ] for giving us forewarding that this protest might be coming to our campuses. ([who] was not promoting the event, simply stating it might happen.) I would rather be aware of what I might find coming to work one morning next week that simply show up to a protest. I would want to know if any other group might be organizing as well - whatever the issue. Every campus has a free speech area for a reason: we are encouraging our students to think and develop opinions of their own, even if we disagree with them. And, yes, it would be good to see accurate information about gun violence disseminated to our students. Perhaps this is something we could work on?"
I laughed out loud at the last line. I mean, yay, good pro-Free speech "even for speech we dislike", yada yada yada, but I'm guessing this person considers the Brady campaign and IANSA and related anti-gun groups as a good source for "accurate information". As a Librarian who cares about accuracy of information, if you had accurate information about gun violence, you could not reasonably oppose the aim of SCCC, pure and simple. Be careful what you wish for.
Yet another pro-Free speech commentator, and possible supporter of SCCC (at least that's how it reads, though in fairness may not be what the person *meant* to say):
"Well this certainly stirred debate, which is a good thing. While we may not agree or even find such an activity offensive, our country was founded on the principles of freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. This is a right which we must honor even if we oppose their stance. As a university we of all groups should understand this right as we also support academic freedom for faculty and students to express sometimes unpopular views. Please don't attack the messenger, [Dr. ____] , [who] was simply informing us of the event not endorsing it. Those of us who oppose the concealed handgun policy should also let our voices be heard."
Mmmm, yeah, you go first. I'm too new here to boldly denounce the policy in person; I'm taking a big enough risk with this blog, and doing my utmost to focus on what is being said and not the personalities saying them. I'm not a "gun blogger", though I do read a number of them. I'm just not that avid of a shooter or that knowledgeable to blog the topic 24/7. And let me re-state for the record that I'm politically Left-wing/Pro-Green, even downright socialist/anti-capitalist in some of my views. But the anti-gun stance has been crippling to Democrats, especially well-to-do, otherwise well educated Democrats who have nice jobs, live in nice houses or apartments, donate generously to NPR, buy from L.L. Bean. I know, as I semi-sorta belong on the fringe of that demographic. It utterly alienates Democratic politicians from great swaths of the American working class. Not that the Republicans have ANYTHING to offer them but a promise (sometimes broken) to respect their basic gun rights and sometimes pander to their pet religious prejudices. At least you get more good quality civil liberties pie with Libertarians, even if their economic policy is just as brutal on the working class, if not more so, than regular GOP economic policy.
Anyway, a senior faculty member weighed in next:
"...As repulsed by the idea of students carrying concealed handguns on campus given the recents events across the country, I am dismayed over the outrage that has stemmed from this most recent email. We are supposed to be instilling in our students the drive to go out and make a difference in the world, and stand strong for what they believe in, despite how outlandish it might be to some.
I regular remind my students that if it weren't for a vocal minority a century ago, they would not have the opportunity to participate in the upcoming election, much less have one of the top tier be a female. I encourage my students to use the free speech areas on campus, knowing full well there are bound to be political, social, and cultural perspectives that clearly violate my own personal standards.
Quite frankly, given the social temperament of our campus, I can't imagine this protest to very large at all or spark any significant change in the way most members of the student body or faculty feel about this particular issue. The issue of concern here is the number of faculty who have voiced a concern, not over the topic being addressed, but the right of students to take a stand on an issue that intersects with personal opinions. As faculty who are attempting to mold the minds of the future, we should be applauding students, not for the stance they're taking, but for taking a stance at all. We should be reminding them that as citizens, they have the freedom to think, the freedom to speak, and the freedom to be wrong.
Dr. Q."
I am glad that our faculty are willing to at least stand up for Free speech and all. That really is wonderful and no small thing. But clearly a lot of work remains to be done to change attitudes about the basic human right of self-defense in this country, on or off our college campuses.The most even-handed response came from this senior staff member:
"...I would like to offer my view on this issue as one who has been at the university for many years and has seen issues come and go on campus.
First, I must remind you that [Dr. ___ ] original message was only informational. It was neither an endorsement nor a criticism of the issue.
Many years ago, now, a group I would describe as overtly passionate about their beliefs in the right-to-life came to campus, as part of a national campus tour, to display information about their anti-abortion position. This included large graphics of fetuses, etc. They were allowed on campus because they were sponsored by a legitimate [campus] student group and displayed their information in a free speech area designated by the university. I would say that the event was successful in that student and faculty were informed in advance that the group would be on campus, students with opposing views were given a free speech area at the same time to allow for other opinions, and a healthy discussion of issues seemed to take place. Information about how to avoid or ignore the display was also provided to students so that those who wished not to participate could do so.
So, now we have the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. And, they have organized what they believe will be a national “Empty Holster” campaign, designed to inform more people about individual states’ gun laws regarding the ability to carry concealed handguns on college campuses. Similar to other “informational awareness campaigns", this will ask students to wear a particular item to represent their views. This allows individual students to identify themselves as having beliefs similar to the group organizing the campaign.
Let us remember a few things:
- Wearing an empty holster is not against any state or federal law.
- Wearing an empty holster does not entitle the wearer to discuss issues within a classroom, unless it is part of the curriculum or the instructor allows it – that is, free speech areas are available to any students who wish to make use of them by signing up for a particular time and particular free speech area.
- University campuses have been, are, and will remain, the safest places one can spend one’s time. Statistically, when you drive off campus, you increase the risk of felonious assault by incalculable odds. The number of college students killed on all campuses by other students over the past fifty years has not surpassed the number of citizens (some of whom were university students) murdered in each of the major metropolitan areas of our country in any one given year.
- Students, faculty and staff who do not wish to be part of any discussion or debate of these issues have the right to ignore those who do.
I hope, just as others have expressed, that the university campus can remain a place where civil discourse about issues is always welcome and that we challenge our students to learn or clarify the process of understanding issues which impact the beliefs they form or hold. I believe that if we can teach [our] students this skill, they will find themselves better able than others to be successful in their work and in their communities.
"Thank you, [Q,] I applaud your message!
I am nauseated by the very idea of carrying concealed weapons on campus. Even more intolerable, though, is the thought that as faculty we may stand opposed to the very idea of allowing others to exercise free speech. It is essential to our way of life that we defend the freedoms of all of us. Our freedom has been bought with a dear price--the least we can do is appreciate that sacrifice."
And there you have a round up of faculty views on SCCC and its aims at my workplace. Ugh.
Even if state law changes, it will still be an uphill battle to change university policy. And I would only quibble with the "statistical" part of the even-handed statement by pointing out that campuses tend to under-report crime, and that campus police are often at cross purposes, fighting crime on and near campus, but also reporting to university presidents who want their university to look good and encourage students to enroll there versus somewhere else.
I obey the law and campus policy. I may hate them, but they are what they are, and right now I need this job. If I were a bit more senior, in an institution with faculty status for Librarians including tenure, I might be more vocal than this. But for now this quiet space in Cyberspace is all the freedom of expression I choose to exercise at this stage.
I reiterate that it's going to have to be the students who will do the heavy lifting on this issue. Those of us faculty and staff who support the aims of SCCC are way too much in a minority among our colleagues to be effective. Students on the other hand, pay tuition, and the university wants to keep getting their tuition money and fees. Thus they have to at least nominally pay attention to you if enough of you complain. Take time to educate yourself about firearms, about self-defense, and then really study what happened at places like VA Tech and why, and what would be your best chance for surviving something like that on your campus.The more recent tragedy in Illinois is more food for thought--Illinois is already one of the most heavily gun-controlled states in the entire USA. There is no right to concealed carry there. And yet they had a bloody campus shooting. If restrictive gun control were really the answer, you'd think universities that allow concealed carry on campus--out in Utah--would be like going to school "at the OK Corral", with "blood in the streets" (everyone's favorite pair of tired simile and/or metaphor)...except that it's not. It's pretty tranquilo out there.
I patiently await the decision in the DC v. Heller case. It should be a victory for freedom, and our 2nd Amendment rights if preliminary analysis of the oral arguments by various experts and commentators are accurate.
At least some in the anti-gun movement are acknowledging that in order to implement their full agenda it will take nothing short of a repeal of the 2nd Amendment--which, lemme tell ya, ain't gonna happen.
I reiterate that I'm not a gun blogger, I'm a Librarian and library blogger who happens to care about this issue. I just wish my colleagues were as passionate about the 2nd Amendment as we unambiguously agree we are are about the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
As it turns out, I did not view any students wearing SCCC t-shirts nor wearing empty holsters. Unless more students make a visible showing, faculty and staff are not going to go out on a limb to join you. Thank you, SCCC for all that you do...I just wish our students would get involved and get informed.
1 comment:
Although the Justices (Chief Justice Roberts in particular) indicated that the Court might create a new basis for judging infringements of what they clearly are leaning to uphold as an individual right, if they use STRICT SCRUTINY this would also include a PROVABLE EFFECT -- infringements not only would have to be the least restrictive, the they would have to GIVE THE DESIRED EFFECT.
No gun control laws have (or likely can) pass this portion of the requirement -- nor likely others -- if strict scrutiny is applied.
Under strict scrutiny, judges must also must presume that the law in question is invalid, and a court will uphold the law only if it is found to meet the requirements.
Notice the effects of Miranda rulings -- and how LITTLE infringement is allowed there.
None of the CDC, the National Academy of Sciences, nor DoJ was able to find that ANY gun control reduces VIOLENT CRIME, SUICIDE or ACCIDENTS in any significant manner.
Even Brady/NICS fails scrict scutiny miserably.
Whether it or other laws fail under Heller, will only be known (some time) after the Court finds it an individual right and publishes a full decision including scope and criteria (if any) for lower courts.
Post a Comment