koine2002 wrote:This. There's no way it would've passed (it probably would've been chubbed to death on the house floor) had it been more specific or been more restrictive in terms of university determination. This got the law on the books. It's much harder to get a law on the books than it is to incrementally modify it to what you initially wanted. Once it's on the books it's very hard to take off.Jusme wrote:Soccerdad1995 wrote:I am not an expert on the law here, but are there no guidelines on what areas can be declared off limits and also on who is authorized to make this determination? It seems that this decision may be counter to the actual law.
At a minimum, this is more evidence that the folks running our universities cannot be trusted with discretion in determining areas that meet the legal requirements for exclusion of LTC holders. Much as with government owned property, I think we need to take this discretion away and just eliminate the ability to restrict carry on any publicly owned land or premises.
I think that the legislators intentionally left out exact wording as to what each University can determine to be "prohibited" areas, some because of special circumstances to the individual campuses, and some so that the issue can be revisited in the next session. This is a new law, and with all new laws there will be "growing pains". The Regents, Administrators et al, have been pretty much able to write their own rule books for years on public university campuses, and they don't like being told they no longer are fully in charge. They don't see themselves as subject to legislative rules, and will continue to push the limits as much as they can until they are forced to change. Some have done an exemplary job in trying to comply with the law, TAMU, and Texas Tech for example, but UT and it affiliates are the ones pushing back. There will have to be more precise wording included in the law during the next session, and when LTC carriers on campus prove all of the fears and predictions wrong, a lot of universities will implement some of their own changes. JMHO
I actually had a great conversation with Senator Brian Birdwell regarding the Campus Carry bill, and he said that they wanted the Universities to be able to limit areas that were specific, and unique to their campus, while still maintaining the intent of the law. When I spoke with him, he had only read some of the preliminary proposals from a couple of Universities, and that he and others were going to compile lists, of things that he felt may need to be addressed, and possibly changed if necessary, but that the main thrust was to get the bill passed and then "tweak" it later.