University of Houston - Releases Draft Campus Carry Policy

[JP171]

I believe that all these institutions are going to find that campus carry is a non issue that has been blown out of proportion by fears that are unfounded. Will they admit this, no not in a million years because the liberal mindset will not allow them to, and the human desire to be right is in all of us especially the left thinking "can't ever be wrong" about any subject they choose to champion. let them run around and make their opinions known and be seen for the fools they are. We don't have to address foolish fears, we as those who carry are the adults in this, while all these professors, deans and presidents of institutions of higher education are the fearsome children and give way to those fears.

[eyedoc]

The carry law allows some exclusions, federal buildings, churches, etc. - why not for public universities as well as private?

I like to think my old alma mater still knows what it's doing but it's been a long while since I left and I could be wrong.

You mean my right to defend myself ends because I teach? How are CHL holders so dangerous that they have to be banned from a university?

You are wrong about UH. 66 was ages ago. I think it is demeaning for them to have armed police officers at the concealed carry forums because the gun nuts might get violent. Yes, they are there for that reason.

[RHenriksen]

Armed Students Don't Worry Me - by a UH professor

Interesting read. The financial pressures and misplaced priorities of the administration are certainly concerns; the author left out the other worrisome trend, that of groupthink and the absence of tolerance for non-PC ideas (ie, 'diversity' of opinions).

[WildBill]

Armed Students Don't Worry Me - by a UH professor

Interesting read. The financial pressures and misplaced priorities of the administration are certainly concerns; the author left out the other worrisome trend, that of groupthink and the absence of tolerance for non-PC ideas (ie, 'diversity' of opinions).

It is an interesting read. Professor Zarestky's biography is very interesting too. Thanks for posting AndyC.

http://www.uh.edu/honors/about/faculty- ... retsky.php

[dale blanker]

Armed Students Don't Worry Me - by a UH professor

It seems like this gentleman has an agenda:
1. Climb onto some current highly visible topic (to be noticed?),
2. Spin, spin, spin,
3. Twist his notice into a topic more interesting to him.

Note that he did include the following comment:

In the best of all possible worlds, there would be neither concealed guns in our university classrooms nor congealed jargon in our academic papers.

So is he agreeing with UH administration or what?

[TangoX-ray]

Armed Students Don't Worry Me - by a UH professor

It seems like this gentleman has an agenda:
1. Climb onto some current highly visible topic (to be noticed?),
2. Spin, spin, spin,
3. Twist his notice into a topic more interesting to him.

Note that he did include the following comment:

In the best of all possible worlds, there would be neither concealed guns in our university classrooms nor congealed jargon in our academic papers.

So is he agreeing with UH administration or what?

No, I don't think he is. In a perfect world, guns would not be needed, and all discourse would be open and honest.

[dale blanker]

Armed Students Don't Worry Me - by a UH professor

It seems like this gentleman has an agenda:
1. Climb onto some current highly visible topic (to be noticed?),
2. Spin, spin, spin,
3. Twist his notice into a topic more interesting to him.

Note that he did include the following comment:

In the best of all possible worlds, there would be neither concealed guns in our university classrooms nor congealed jargon in our academic papers.

So is he agreeing with UH administration or what?

No, I don't think he is. In a perfect world, guns would not be needed, and all discourse would be open and honest.

Note the key word possible in his comment not perfect. I think his main point is that the net effect of campus carry is likely to be nil, it might help a little or hurt a little with respect to safety but we should be more concerned about other factors effecting the intellectual environment. Given that premise, his comment about the best of all possible worlds seems to put his feeling about guns about the same as congealed jargon which he seems to take delight in using as well as demeaning.

[ExNavyInHouston]

Here is an up close look at we are up against in the world of academia. I post as "Charles" at the bottom of this guest Op-Ed.

Enjoy the posts of "Gun Free UH."

http://thedailycougar.com/2016/03/08/th ... 2563338201

[Middle Age Russ]

I couldn't help it and chimed in with this:

Everyone has an opinion that is their own and everyone is entitled to it. Everyone is also entitled to bring whatever feelings, single-issue advocacy funded studies and cherry-picked statistics they want into a discussion. This is true in rational human discourse. It is also true that facts and demonstrable truths are not so personal. At issue is simply denying (or not) the right of a properly licensed person (as stated by others at least 21 years of age and passed a background check) to have a tool concealed on their person that can be used to project force -- a concealed handgun -- in the specific environment of a public university.



Fact: Licensed concealed carry of a handgun in Texas was enacted in 1995.

Fact: Since then, licensees have proven to be vastly more law-abiding than their unlicensed peers.

Fact: It is against the law to use a firearm to intimidate or harm another person except in very specific circumstances typically amounting to a clear and present existential threat.

Fact: Licensees have been informed of this and other laws -- and remain more law-abiding than their peers.

Fact: Violent criminals exhibit criminal behaviors -- including ranging into so-called Gun Free Zones with guns to perform violent acts.

Fact: The surest and swiftest way to stop a violent attacker is to return violence to him/her RIGHT NOW, with the tools at hand.

Fact: Tools that can project force further than arms reach are likely more effective against an armed attacker using similar tools.

Fact: The police (if not already engaging the attacker) will bring these same tools later (after at least some damage is done), and you call them because you want them to bring these tools.



I understand that many folks are simply scared of guns and abhor the thought of anyone around them either having or carrying them. The person using the gun to harm others is the problem, though, rather than the gun. Without that person putting his/her will into action by using the tool (gun, knife, axe, chainsaw, car, or whatever else), there would be no fear or heartache.



Virtually all of us (excepting thugs and similar violent criminals) don't wish harm to anyone except in cases where someone is presently trying to harm us or our loved ones. In such cases, regardless of locale, yielding a monopoly of force options to the attacker is simply stating that the attacker's life is more important than your (peaceable) life. I reject that idea and am therefore pleased that the Texas Legislature and Governor enacted licensed, concealed campus carry.

[joe817]

Wow! Well spoken Russ!

[dale blanker]

I couldn't help it and chimed in with this:

[Facts defending right to carry.]

I understand that many folks are simply scared of guns and abhor the thought of anyone around them either having or carrying them. The person using the gun to harm others is the problem, though, rather than the gun. Without that person putting his/her will into action by using the tool (gun, knife, axe, chainsaw, car, or whatever else), there would be no fear or heartache.

Virtually all of us (excepting thugs and similar violent criminals) don't wish harm to anyone except in cases where someone is presently trying to harm us or our loved ones. In such cases, regardless of locale, yielding a monopoly of force options to the attacker is simply stating that the attacker's life is more important than your (peaceable) life. I reject that idea and am therefore pleased that the Texas Legislature and Governor enacted licensed, concealed campus carry.

with the facts but the main problem is shown your statement shown in bold above. Besides that I'm guessing the administrators' other concerns are that reasonable people can do unreasonable things under stress and that the more carry there is in classroom the more likelihood there is for a problem, especially where there is a lot of immaturity and maybe some students under the influence of a psychotic pharmaceutical or stimulant or alcohol. This is kind of like when there are more and more cars are on the road it's more likely there will a crash and there are drivers with valid licenses that still drink and drive.

The administrations of UT and UH believe the educational environment will be adversely effected with campus carry. They are aware of all the facts and history concerning guns in the US and are still convinced they should not be in classroom. I'm guessing they are being objective in their thinking.

[WildBill]

I couldn't help it and chimed in with this:

[Facts defending right to carry.]

I understand that many folks are simply scared of guns and abhor the thought of anyone around them either having or carrying them. The person using the gun to harm others is the problem, though, rather than the gun. Without that person putting his/her will into action by using the tool (gun, knife, axe, chainsaw, car, or whatever else), there would be no fear or heartache.

Virtually all of us (excepting thugs and similar violent criminals) don't wish harm to anyone except in cases where someone is presently trying to harm us or our loved ones. In such cases, regardless of locale, yielding a monopoly of force options to the attacker is simply stating that the attacker's life is more important than your (peaceable) life. I reject that idea and am therefore pleased that the Texas Legislature and Governor enacted licensed, concealed campus carry.

with the facts but the main problem is shown your statement shown in bold above. Besides that I'm guessing the administrators' other concerns are that reasonable people can do unreasonable things under stress and that the more carry there is in classroom the more likelihood there is for a problem, especially where there is a lot of immaturity and maybe some students under the influence of a psychotic pharmaceutical or stimulant or alcohol. This is kind of like when there are more and more cars are on the road it's more likely there will a crash and there are drivers with valid licenses that still drink and drive.

The administrations of UT and UH believe the educational environment will be adversely effected with campus carry. They are aware of all the facts and history concerning guns in the US and are still convinced they should not be in classroom. I'm guessing they are being objective in their thinking.

I don't think that their fears and concerns are any different than at most other businesses.

[Middle Age Russ]

with the facts but the main problem is shown your statement shown in bold above. Besides that I'm guessing the administrators' other concerns are that reasonable people can do unreasonable things under stress and that the more carry there is in classroom the more likelihood there is for a problem, especially where there is a lot of immaturity and maybe some students under the influence of a psychotic pharmaceutical or stimulant or alcohol. This is kind of like when there are more and more cars are on the road it's more likely there will a crash and there are drivers with valid licenses that still drink and drive.

The administrations of UT and UH believe the educational environment will be adversely effected with campus carry. They are aware of all the facts and history concerning guns in the US and are still convinced they should not be in classroom. I'm guessing they are being objective in their thinking.

I am not sure I understand your issue with my statement. Do you not also perceive that there are folks with irrational fears regarding guns? The rest of that paragraph speaks to a rational consideration of what a tool is versus what they think it is. As for your analogy about cars on the road, it doesn't seem a perfect fit to me -- cars on the road are being actively used (as is typical) to convey people from one place to another whereas a concealed handgun typically remains in its holster and does not fire a shot.

Being aware of facts and history and letting facts and history guide your decisions and policy-making are two vastly different things as seems evident whenever "gun-control" discussions crop up. History, facts and reason are very quickly sacrificed on the altar of feelings and political correctness. The latter tendency -- exhibited by these university administrators -- is more the antithesis to objective thinking.

[dale blanker]

I am not sure I understand your issue with my statement.

I don't have an issue with your statement except maybe with the emphasis on the facts rather than the reasons concerning UH/UT gun policy. What I highlighted is the main problem. Remember, you're preaching to the choir here and almost everyone here including myself agree with your facts. But sometimes you have to look beyond the obvious and put yourself in someone else's shoes.

I was trying to imagine why the university administrators must be thinking about campus carry the way they seem to. And I do think my "more cars on the road" analogy was a stretch but had some applicability: licenses encourage but do not guarantee success, and increasing numbers of things make the prospect for their misuse increase too.