As most, if not all of you, are aware, currently, under Texas law, CHL holders may not carry on the premises of an institution of higher education unless that institution has adopted a policy otherwise or given written permission to the license holder. See below for the relevant statute:
[QUOTE=Texas Penal Code]
Sec. 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;[/QUOTE]
I high lighted the last part because that is what I would like to discuss. During the last legislative session, the Legislature almost amended this to allow for legal carry by license holders, but it narrowly failed in the Senate. After exchanging e-mails with Alice Tripp of the Texas State Rifle Association, I confirmed that the language in the above section of the statute does allow the institutions themselves to adopt a policy that would allow for legal carry by license holders. Given that the community college where I teach is located in one of the reddest parts of a red state, I would like to introduce a measure to the faculty association to put before the board of regents a proposal to adopt rules that would do just that.
Some of the points I plan to bring up:
1. CHL holders have a much lower arrest rate for crimes than the overall public so pose much less of a risk of violence than non CHL holders. The "blood in the street" argument is an irrational fear that has never been supported by the facts.
2. None of the mass shootings at schools that have been increasing in frequency have been carried out by a concealed carry licensee. Prohibiting CHL holders from carrying on campus does not deter someone intent on committing murder from bringing a gun onto campus.
3. All of the recent mass shootings in the US have occurred in places that prohibit the lawful carrying of concealed firearms by licensees. Surveys of criminals in prisons have consistently shown that one of the strongest deterrents against crime is a criminal's fear that the intended victim may be armed. Not allowing CHL holders to exercise their right to carry on campus leaves the entire population on campus more vulnerable, not less. Allowing CHL holders to carry would serve as a deterrent to criminals on campus, especially those intent on murdering unarmed victims.
4. The right to self defense is one of the most fundamental of all human rights. Many faculty and staff work at odd hours and find ourselves alone in buildings late at night or on weekends. Prohibiting us from carrying a firearm for our protection violates our rights to self protection.
5. Many faculty and staff have CHLs. Under current policy, licensees must either leave their firearm at home or in their vehicle. Leaving firearms in vehicles on campus increases the likelihood that a criminal would gain access to a firearm in the process of burglarizing a vehicle on campus.
One of the arguments that someone just recently presented to me was that allowing faculty and students to be armed would inhibit freedom of speech. Personally, I don't see this as a valid concern. Long before I even owned firearms of my own (well, if you don't count the Rem 1100 shotgun my Dad gave me when I was 13 to got duck and goose hunting with him), I always thought that it was a prudent approach when dealing with people to assume that there is a good chance that they are armed. That has never stopped me from voicing my opinion or arguing my point with anyone. The only thing this approach limits is one's inclination to incite someone to violence. A rational argument, no matter how emotionally charged, should never be something that incites violence. Because the CHL law requires licensees to carry concealed, no one should know if a faculty member or student is armed, so how can their carrying a firearm intimidate anyone? My response to this line of argument will be to ask the instructors how many fist fights have broken out in their classrooms or offices while debating academic topics or even discussing student performance (or lack there-of). Personally, I have never seen an academic debate devolve into violence, so I do not think that individuals carrying firearms would increase the likelihood of violence. If anything, I think it would decrease the likelihood, because if one approaches individuals with the thought that there is a chance that they might be armed, one is likely to rely more on logic and reasoning and less on personal insults to make one's point, which decreases significantly the chance that an argument will become violent.
Any other points y'all can think of? Any suggestions you might have for better presenting the above points?
As a complete aside, here are some pics of my 1911, since all posts are better with pictures:
1978 Colt Series '70 with work done by John Harrison. The Silent Thunder Fusion is for concealed carry, the leather cross-draw holster is for when I'm out on hte ranch.
