SB11 & HB910 This week....

[casp625]

[ [url=<img src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGbd3PJUYAA3oTE.jpg" width="100%" alt="Embedded image permalink" style="margin-top: -15px;">]Image[/url] ]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGbd3PJUYAA3oTE.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

looks like BBCode and HTML in one post :)

[juno106]

After a win for the NRA, Public Universities across Texas begin to prepare their Campus Carry Zones

https://twitter.com/LiberalDarling" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[The Annoyed Man]

Some of those folks are terrified, unfounded of course, but legitimately terrified nonetheless.

I understand the point you are making, but suggesting that unfounded terror which opposes my rights is legitimate is like saying that inappropriate anger is legitimate when it is directed towards me. I reject that notion out of hand. If the emotion is unfounded, then the ONLY thing that can legitimize it is when the bearer of that emotion comes to their senses and says "I'm sorry, you were right, and I let my emotions get the better of me. There is no reason you should be made to pay for my lack of perspective and grounding." In similar reasoning, inappropriate anger isn't acceptable, but it is forgivable when the person acknowledges the inappropriateness of their own emotion, and repents of it. Then I can reply to the frightened or angry person and say, "I understand, and thank you for withdrawing your fear/anger."

For those people who live in terror, I understand what they are feeling, but I will not give it the imprimatur of legitimacy, particularly when it is my rights they want to curtail. That curtailment doesn't affect them because they choose not to exercise those rights, so they are perfectly OK with letting their unreasonable fears drive them into urging the curtailment of mine.

That's not legitimate. It's not acceptable. And it is unreasonable to suggest that I should not do whatever I can to protect my rights — which are their rights too, even if they are afraid to exercise them.

[The Wall]

I just noticed that they sent HB 910 and SB11 to the Governor today. Wonder why they waited so long on HB 910?

[ATX117]

I just noticed that they sent HB 910 and SB11 to the Governor today. Wonder why they waited so long on HB 910?

The Senate signed them only this morning. The House Signed SB 11 this morning. The House signed HB 910 yesterday.

[TinaMiB]

This went out to UT Faculty and Staff this afternoon. I am sure they are receiving a few phone calls.

Hmmm doesn't sound too promising for tu students...

Have you seen anything on the Aggie side of higher ed? I have family and a lot of friends that I train with over there.

Tina

[Aggie_engr]

I've been out A&M for a couple of years now (class of 11') but I do remember not long ago the student body voted in favor of campus carry. According to the bill that passed students are only one variable in the equation of deciding which areas of campus are off limits and it remains to be seen just how much of an influence they have. I read somewhere on this forum the chancellor of A&M wasn't outright opposed to the bill so if I were a betting man I would put money on A&M students fairing better than our austin friends.

[Bladed]

All the bill says is that they can't ban concealed carry on the entire campus. There is nothing to stop university presidents from posting 30.06 on every campus building, resulting in concealed carry being legal/illegal in exactly the same places as before.

Except that posting 30.06 on every building would "...generally prohibit or have the effect of generally prohibiting license holders from carrying concealed handguns on the campus of the institution." Most students, staff, and faculty are required to be inside a building. If that building, or if most buildings, are posted 30.06, then these CHLs are effectively prohibited. And that is expressly disallowed by Sec. 411.2031.3.d1.

Granted, it would have been better if Sec. 411.2031.3.d1 had used the word "buildings". And it would have been better if some standard had been specified (e.g., "no less than 80% of the buildings"). Still, if they post every building 30.06 they are clearly breaking the letter of the law.

Short of a lawsuit, I am not sure how to enforce it except with saber rattling by the Attorney General and supportive Legislators.

What the bill says is that they can make regulations regarding concealed carry on the campus, including posting 30.06 on buildings, but can't prohibit concealed carry on the entire campus. Therefore, a college might need to bring its policy more into line with the prior state law (concealed carry allowed on the grounds but not in buildings), but there is nothing to stop them from prohibiting it in all of the buildings.

I agree with Charles that keeping a record of the colleges that ban concealed carry in all buildings will help make a strong case to the 2017 Texas Legislature, but that's not the same as having campus carry now.

From the bill:

The president or officer may not establish provisions
that generally prohibit or have the effect of generally prohibiting
license holders from carrying concealed handguns on the campus of
the institution.

Prohibiting it from all of the buildings has the effect of generally prohibiting from the campus.

That's what I was trying to say. Prohibiting it from most/all the buildings has the general effect of prohibiting carrying on the campus for those folks who are required by job/school obligations to spend their day inside the buildings. And that violates more than the spirit of the law. It violates Sec. 411.2031.3.d-1.

You need to read the entire bill.

From Senate Bill 11:

(1) "Campus" means all land and buildings owned or leased by an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education.

(3) "Premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035, Penal Code.

From Penal Code Section 46.035:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Because a campus encompasses more than just the buildings, it would be possible to prohibit concealed carry in all campus buildings, without violating the letter of Government Code Section 411.2031(a)(3)(d-1), which says that a public college or university cannot prohibit concealed carry on the entire campus. Whether that would violate the spirit of that section is a question for the courts, but it's not unreasonable to assume that colleges and universities will walk as close to the line as the courts will allow, and I doubt it would surprise anyone here to see colleges and universities push that boundary until the courts pull them back.

As Charles explained, this bill lays a solid cornerstone, but the structure that will protect CHL holders on college campuses remains to be built.

[v7a]

Am I the only one waiting with bated breath to hear what the New York Times Editorial Board thinks about the passage of HB910 and SB11?

[gljjt]

Where some people see defeat in SB11 I think I might see a touch of brilliance. As we all know you never get everything you want in a bill, especially in a bill that makes significant changes in what has been previously viewed as untouchable. In this case by giving some form of local control universities are given just enough rope to hang themselves. If presidents defy the legislative intent we may well see changes to the bill in 2017 that would not have been possible without that defiance.
I also believe that The board of regents are not going to be the rubber stamp that everyone assumes they will be. They are after all appointed by the governor and approved by the legislature.

This ^^^^^^^ Rosenthal, Motorist Protection Act - its deja vu all over again.

[J.R.@A&M]

You need to read the entire bill.

From Senate Bill 11:

(1) "Campus" means all land and buildings owned or leased by an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education.

(3) "Premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035, Penal Code.

From Penal Code Section 46.035:

(3) "Premises" means a building or a portion of a building. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.

Because a campus encompasses more than just the buildings, it would be possible to prohibit concealed carry in all campus buildings, without violating the letter of Government Code Section 411.2031(a)(3)(d-1), which says that a public college or university cannot prohibit concealed carry on the entire campus. Whether that would violate the spirit of that section is a question for the courts, but it's not unreasonable to assume that colleges and universities will walk as close to the line as the courts will allow, and I doubt it would surprise anyone here to see colleges and universities push that boundary until the courts pull them back.

As Charles explained, this bill lays a solid cornerstone, but the structure that will protect CHL holders on college campuses remains to be built.

Bladed, I'm not wanting to appear argumentative nor belabor the point. I understand the definitions of premises, etc. It comes down to what "carrying concealed handguns on the campus" means. If it only means symbolically carrying outside during my coffee break, then I am completely in agreement with you.

[J.R.@A&M]

This went out to UT Faculty and Staff this afternoon. I am sure they are receiving a few phone calls.

Hmmm doesn't sound too promising for tu students...

Have you seen anything on the Aggie side of higher ed? I have family and a lot of friends that I train with over there.

Tina

No. The main campus has a new president from out of state and outside the land grant university system/culture. So we'll have to see. Hopefully the System Chancellor will be a positive influence.

[TheCytochromeC]

An exerpt from and e-mail from the University of Texas at Arlington students:

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

A Message Regarding Texas Senate Bill 11

Dear members of the UTA community:

You are no doubt aware that the Texas State Legislature this weekend passed and sent to the governor for consideration Senate Bill 11, informally known as “campus carry,” allowing guns to be brought on to university property. While the broad implications of the bill are known, the details of implementation, including mechanisms for gathering input and processes to conform to the new requirements, still have to be worked out. We are conferring with the UT System and the Board of Regents on these. As we proceed, we will reach out to all members of our community for input.

In the event that you have not seen Chancellor William McRaven’s statement to the UT community in response to the passage of SB 11, it is posted below in its entirety.

Please know that the safety and security of our UTA family as well as all those who visit our campus is of the utmost importance and always foremost in our planning and actions.

Thank you for your continued support of The University of Texas at Arlington.

Sincerely,

Vistasp Karbhari
President



Statement from Chancellor William McRaven:

AUSTIN – Today, the Texas Legislature reached a decision on the issue of campus carry. While it is not what we had hoped for, I respect the Legislature’s decision. I also appreciate legislators for recognizing the very specific safety considerations that are unique to campus environments.

It is helpful that the bill was amended to allow our campus presidents to consult with students, faculty and staff to develop rules and regulations that will govern the carrying of concealed handguns on campuses. I look forward to working with our presidents as they craft these policies and bring them to our Board of Regents for review.

I pledge to our students, faculty, staff, patients and their families and to all those who may visit a UT institution that, as UT System leaders, we will do everything in our power to maintain safe and secure campuses.

I'm rather content we didn't get "what we had hoped for".

[Photoman]

An exerpt from and e-mail from the University of Texas at Arlington students:

Tuesday, June 2, 2015

A Message Regarding Texas Senate Bill 11

Dear members of the UTA community:

You are no doubt aware that the Texas State Legislature this weekend passed and sent to the governor for consideration Senate Bill 11, informally known as “campus carry,” allowing guns to be brought on to university property. While the broad implications of the bill are known, the details of implementation, including mechanisms for gathering input and processes to conform to the new requirements, still have to be worked out. We are conferring with the UT System and the Board of Regents on these. As we proceed, we will reach out to all members of our community for input.

In the event that you have not seen Chancellor William McRaven’s statement to the UT community in response to the passage of SB 11, it is posted below in its entirety.

Please know that the safety and security of our UTA family as well as all those who visit our campus is of the utmost importance and always foremost in our planning and actions.

Thank you for your continued support of The University of Texas at Arlington.

Sincerely,

Vistasp Karbhari
President



Statement from Chancellor William McRaven:

AUSTIN – Today, the Texas Legislature reached a decision on the issue of campus carry. While it is not what we had hoped for, I respect the Legislature’s decision. I also appreciate legislators for recognizing the very specific safety considerations that are unique to campus environments.

It is helpful that the bill was amended to allow our campus presidents to consult with students, faculty and staff to develop rules and regulations that will govern the carrying of concealed handguns on campuses. I look forward to working with our presidents as they craft these policies and bring them to our Board of Regents for review.

I pledge to our students, faculty, staff, patients and their families and to all those who may visit a UT institution that, as UT System leaders, we will do everything in our power to maintain safe and secure campuses.

I'm rather content we didn't get "what we had hoped for".

I must say, I am impressed with their "ivory tower" ability to slap someone in the face and make it seem like a pat on the back.

[Ruark]

"...Concealed carry on campuses....".

Sigh......