Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 9043
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
- Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Some bad apples in every bushel. I think it is also a loss of their CHL for a period of time. They shouldn't be quite so cavalier about breaking the law.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1335
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:17 pm
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
I don't agree with restriction of natural rights. Guns carried, by law-abiding adults, in the classroom or the post office (or anywhere) don't bother me in the least.
But guns should not be carried in places where they are banned. Not in the present shall-issue, carry-almost-anywhere environment. I won't carry into our little post office because if by some quirk of unintended bad concealment I got caught, my legal troubles would encourage gun-grabbers to crack down on everybody.
Life is about risk management since you can't eliminate risk entirely. Gun free zones are riskier, by just a smidge, most days, than gun freedom zones.
If you want to go to college under present laws, you assume the risks involved with an environment where only criminals bear arms. You might get away with sneaking your gun into the classroom, of course, but you can't change whether criminals arm up (and you're becoming a criminal yourself if you pack), and you can't change the fact most of your fellow students will choose to obey the law. It won't be like on the street where there might be another CHL to help in the defense against an attacker. You'll be on your own.
From another perspective, wouldn't it be a bit galling to see a local peace officer carrying where he is forbidden? In federal court, for example? My thinking is if you're going to hold me to the law, by deadly force if necessary, you can obey it yourself, brother.
Why should we get a free ride?
The fight to carry in particular areas is just a battle. The overall war was getting shall-issue license to carry almost everywhere. We won. Please don't give it up on post-victory battles.
And, please, support future constitutional carry in rational ways. For now, obey the laws we have. They respect the right to carry in a lot of places.
But guns should not be carried in places where they are banned. Not in the present shall-issue, carry-almost-anywhere environment. I won't carry into our little post office because if by some quirk of unintended bad concealment I got caught, my legal troubles would encourage gun-grabbers to crack down on everybody.
Life is about risk management since you can't eliminate risk entirely. Gun free zones are riskier, by just a smidge, most days, than gun freedom zones.
If you want to go to college under present laws, you assume the risks involved with an environment where only criminals bear arms. You might get away with sneaking your gun into the classroom, of course, but you can't change whether criminals arm up (and you're becoming a criminal yourself if you pack), and you can't change the fact most of your fellow students will choose to obey the law. It won't be like on the street where there might be another CHL to help in the defense against an attacker. You'll be on your own.
From another perspective, wouldn't it be a bit galling to see a local peace officer carrying where he is forbidden? In federal court, for example? My thinking is if you're going to hold me to the law, by deadly force if necessary, you can obey it yourself, brother.
Why should we get a free ride?
The fight to carry in particular areas is just a battle. The overall war was getting shall-issue license to carry almost everywhere. We won. Please don't give it up on post-victory battles.
And, please, support future constitutional carry in rational ways. For now, obey the laws we have. They respect the right to carry in a lot of places.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 5240
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:26 pm
- Location: Richardson, TX
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
All that does is demonstrate their lack of judgment. Rather than obey the law and choose not to patronize establishments that deny them the right to self defense, they, in their arrogance, choose to break the law AND ignore the desires of the business owner.joelamosobadiah wrote:Unfortunately, I know a handful of CHL holders who don't think this way. I have been told things like, "I would rather risk a misdemeanor than risk my life" in the discussion of off-limits areas. These are the CHL types that when something does go wrong it hurts all of us as a result.
That's a very selfish and childish behavior.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Maybe I am jaded...
I would doubt the individual was a CHLer or if he was in possession of a weapon at that time. Even a newby would know that it is
illegal to carry on campus at this time. Furthermore, I don't know any other CHLers that openly admit to carrying. It is kind of the
discussion that me and my colleagues have about open carry, why would you want the bad guy to know you had a weapon?
Also, the professor should have known that the new campus carry is not yet effective; therefore, the student was currently violating
the law.
I would doubt the individual was a CHLer or if he was in possession of a weapon at that time. Even a newby would know that it is
illegal to carry on campus at this time. Furthermore, I don't know any other CHLers that openly admit to carrying. It is kind of the
discussion that me and my colleagues have about open carry, why would you want the bad guy to know you had a weapon?
Also, the professor should have known that the new campus carry is not yet effective; therefore, the student was currently violating
the law.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5079
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: DFW Area, TX
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Until campus carry comes in effect, it's a 3rd degree felony.joelamosobadiah wrote:Unfortunately, I know a handful of CHL holders who don't think this way. I have been told things like, "I would rather risk a misdemeanor than risk my life" in the discussion of off-limits areas. These are the CHL types that when something does go wrong it hurts all of us as a result.baldeagle wrote:I tried to find out what the punishment was for carrying illegally on campus, but I wasn't able to. I think it's a class A misdemeanor, but I'm not sure. In any case, if the student was really armed in the classroom, he was violating the law, and I question whether he even has a CHL. Every CHL holder knows that you can't carry inside a campus building. I disarmed every day when I parked my car and would never have violated the law like that. No matter what this other fellow does, you should never consider carrying inside a campus building until it becomes legal to do so.
PC §46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense
if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a
firearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds
or building on which an activity sponsored by a school or educational institution
is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or
educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public
or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the
institution;
...
(g) An offense under this section is a third degree felony.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 5240
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:26 pm
- Location: Richardson, TX
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Thanks, Scott. Don't know why I couldn't see that.
That means that, if you carry on campus and get caught, you could be found guilty of a third degree felony and lose your right to carry for at least 10 years. Not very wise, in my opinion.
That means that, if you carry on campus and get caught, you could be found guilty of a third degree felony and lose your right to carry for at least 10 years. Not very wise, in my opinion.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 5079
- Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: DFW Area, TX
Re: Carry on campus anyway - active shooter situation
Yes and if you can't convince the prosecutor to defer judgment you'll lose your right to own/carry for LIFE, with a felony conviction.baldeagle wrote:Thanks, Scott. Don't know why I couldn't see that.
That means that, if you carry on campus and get caught, you could be found guilty of a third degree felony and lose your right to carry for at least 10 years. Not very wise, in my opinion.
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"