UA President rejects guns on campus

[SRH78]

I would be more worried about a liberal college professor teaching (indoctrinating) on campus than a legally armed and licensed 21 yr old student .

[Oldgringo]

I would be more worried about a liberal college professor teaching (indoctrinating) on campus than a legally armed and licensed 21 yr old student .

A smatterin' of liberal instructors on campus is not a bad thing. Otherwise, how would you know what you're for and what you oppose. It's called education as opposed to indoctrination.

[stroo]

There is not a "smattering" of liberal professors on college campuses. On the vast majority of campuses, it is a liberal professor stew with a touch of moderates/conservatives.

[Oldgringo]

There is not a "smattering" of liberal professors on college campuses. On the vast majority of campuses, it is a liberal professor stew with a touch of moderates/conservatives.

Even so...

[Heartland Patriot]

Nope. I think guns should be everywere. My reservations are with a thing that I'll call 'group maturity'. There's probably a more scientific name.

I don't know how it was when you were in college but that scene can often get pretty loose. A mature 21+ y.o. student with a CHL is one thing. A partying group of 18-21+ y.o. students is another thing altogether...if you will recall. Please don't compare armed young people in the military to armed college students. Those are totally horses of different colors.

FWIW, I'm all for the mature and responsible students and instructors being allowed to CC on campus.

75% or your stated demographic is not even eligible to have a CHL.

I do understand your point though

If a 21 year old person on campus can be trusted with alcohol and a 4,00 pound deadly weapon, why are we concerned with them having a smaller weapon?
As is proven time and time again... those who have gone through the process to get a CHL, are not at issue with the reality of crime and illegal gun use. It really is not debatable, unless those against ignore or flat out lie. (both common).
Same with carrying on a Military base.
Same with carrying anywhere.. The facts ARE CLEAR AND IRREFUTABLE ... It is not the honest citizen with a concealed gun carried under permission of a CHL that are committing the overwhelming majority of gun related crimes.. It is criminals, who do not obey laws, signs, or ignorant University presidential demands.

With bronco78

[stroo]

Problem is there is a very large dose of liberal indoctrination not education going on in colleges today.

[srothstein]

This Cato study is already discussed in another thread.
Here's my takeaway regarding campus carry.

after Colorado’s 2003 concealed
carry law was enacted, Colorado State University
decided to allow concealed carry,
while the University of Colorado prohibited
firearms. The former observed a rapid decline
in reported crimes, while the latter, under
the gun ban they claimed was for safety,
observed a rapid increase in crime. Crime
at the University of Colorado has risen 35
percent since 2004, while crime at Colorado
State University has dropped 60 percent in
the same time frame.

All I can say is.....

I did not read the Cato paper, so my objection might be answered in it. I make it here so anyone who wants to use this can understand some of the possible objections. My understanding of a time series analysis is fairly weak as this is more advanced statistics than I have been involved in. But one of the things I have learned in my recent studies is how to read things like this more objectively.

The quote certainly makes it look like the phrase "more guns, less crime" is true, but we are predisposed to believe that viewpoint. In a fair and honest study, there are numerous factors to be considered. From this article, we do not know if these were considered or not. For example, how did the population (enrollment and faculty) at each school change during the same period, especially in reaction to the policy decisions? It is fairly easy to show that as population goes up, crime goes up, until a certain point where it starts to drop. Were the demographics similar enough earlier to be a valid comparison, or was it more like a UT vs. A&M comparison? If something like this rule were to happen in Texas, I would expect UT to keep guns banned while the Aggies would be more likely to remove the ban. The same difference in political attitudes might also account for other factors that might have affected the crime rate. Which brings up a final point to consider, but were there other policy changes made that might have affected the crime rate? For example, say that one school decided to allow guns, but beefed up the police department on campus because they expected more problems.

I think that we now have enough schools that have made this decision, or had it made for them in the case of Utah, that a valid study could be made by a proper scientific analysis. But, as I said, this type of analysis is beyond my skill level right now. I would love to see the NRA and the Brady Bunch jointly fund a study by some university criminal justice department to see what the results are. It would take both of them together to fund it to avoid the accusation from either side of bias in the study if they did not like the results.

And I have to point out that an honest and fair study, properly controlling for all other variables, might not be to our liking. My gut feeling is that it will say there is no net effect either way on safety on campus. I don't know if that will help us or hurt us.

[Heartland Patriot]

This Cato study is already discussed in another thread.
Here's my takeaway regarding campus carry.

after Colorado’s 2003 concealed
carry law was enacted, Colorado State University
decided to allow concealed carry,
while the University of Colorado prohibited
firearms. The former observed a rapid decline
in reported crimes, while the latter, under
the gun ban they claimed was for safety,
observed a rapid increase in crime. Crime
at the University of Colorado has risen 35
percent since 2004, while crime at Colorado
State University has dropped 60 percent in
the same time frame.

All I can say is.....

I did not read the Cato paper, so my objection might be answered in it. I make it here so anyone who wants to use this can understand some of the possible objections. My understanding of a time series analysis is fairly weak as this is more advanced statistics than I have been involved in. But one of the things I have learned in my recent studies is how to read things like this more objectively.

The quote certainly makes it look like the phrase "more guns, less crime" is true, but we are predisposed to believe that viewpoint. In a fair and honest study, there are numerous factors to be considered. From this article, we do not know if these were considered or not. For example, how did the population (enrollment and faculty) at each school change during the same period, especially in reaction to the policy decisions? It is fairly easy to show that as population goes up, crime goes up, until a certain point where it starts to drop. Were the demographics similar enough earlier to be a valid comparison, or was it more like a UT vs. A&M comparison? If something like this rule were to happen in Texas, I would expect UT to keep guns banned while the Aggies would be more likely to remove the ban. The same difference in political attitudes might also account for other factors that might have affected the crime rate. Which brings up a final point to consider, but were there other policy changes made that might have affected the crime rate? For example, say that one school decided to allow guns, but beefed up the police department on campus because they expected more problems.

I think that we now have enough schools that have made this decision, or had it made for them in the case of Utah, that a valid study could be made by a proper scientific analysis. But, as I said, this type of analysis is beyond my skill level right now. I would love to see the NRA and the Brady Bunch jointly fund a study by some university criminal justice department to see what the results are. It would take both of them together to fund it to avoid the accusation from either side of bias in the study if they did not like the results.

And I have to point out that an honest and fair study, properly controlling for all other variables, might not be to our liking. My gut feeling is that it will say there is no net effect either way on safety on campus. I don't know if that will help us or hurt us.

A lot of the time, I appreciate what you have to say. This time, I don't and here is why. I don't care about the statistics in regards to whether or not each school is made safer as a whole. I am not an LEO and I am not going to "secure" the school. I don't care about anything in that regard except being armed to have the potential to protect myself and those around me that I choose to protect (family, friends, etc) if a deadly force situation were to be encountered. I also know, though I obviously cannot prove, that the bad guys simply DO NOT CARE about any laws or policies restricting weapon possession on a college campus, and the signs that tell them about said policy. That automatically puts me at a disadvantage against them, IF they decide that the institute of higher learning I am attending is the one where they want to initiate violence. I was deemed responsible enough to be "granted" a concealed carry license...do they really think that I automatically and instantly become irresponsible the minute I set foot on a college campus? I cannot even keep it in my vehicle because if it were discovered by some unfortunate accident, I could be kicked out of school and my academic career (and perhaps future employment) ruined. I understand the need for 30.06 because private property is important...but the institute I attend is PUBLIC. I am law-abiding and licensed to carry a concealed handgun. That should be enough.

[Oldgringo]

Nope. I think guns should be everywere. My reservations are with a thing that I'll call 'group maturity'. There's probably a more scientific name.

I don't know how it was when you were in college but that scene can often get pretty loose. A mature 21+ y.o. student with a CHL is one thing. A partying group of 18-21+ y.o. students is another thing altogether...if you will recall. Please don't compare armed young people in the military to armed college students. Those are totally horses of different colors.

FWIW, I'm all for the mature and responsible students and instructors being allowed to CC on campus.

75% or your stated demographic is not even eligible to have a CHL.

I do understand your point though

If a 21 year old person on campus can be trusted with alcohol and a 4,00 pound deadly weapon, why are we concerned with them having a smaller weapon?
As is proven time and time again... those who have gone through the process to get a CHL, are not at issue with the reality of crime and illegal gun use. It really is not debatable, unless those against ignore or flat out lie. (both common).
Same with carrying on a Military base.
Same with carrying anywhere.. The facts ARE CLEAR AND IRREFUTABLE ... It is not the honest citizen with a concealed gun carried under permission of a CHL that are committing the overwhelming majority of gun related crimes.. It is criminals, who do not obey laws, signs, or ignorant University presidential demands.

With bronco78

As do I. There is no issue with "the reality of crime and illegal gun use". The question is the group mentality/maturity setting of party/football weekend on a college campus. It is a sticky wicket, eh?

Oh well, I have no kids nor grandkids in any college anywhere and I have no business on any campus. Let 'er go boys, let's see how it works out....for all of us.

Best wishes, Bronco!

[apostate]

Oh well, I have no kids nor grandkids in any college anywhere and I have no business on any campus. Let 'er go boys, let's see how it works out....for all of us.

Thanks. I think.

I'm early 40s and got my original CHL in 1996. I have a bachelors and a masters degree and I'm currently taking classes part-time to qualify to sit for the CPA exam. It's absurd that I can't legally carry inside buildings on campus.

I believe if campus carry had passed, the typical person carrying (legally) on campus would resemble me more they would resemble someone auditioning for a Spring Break video.

[chasfm11]

As do I. There is no issue with "the reality of crime and illegal gun use". The question is the group mentality/maturity setting of party/football weekend on a college campus. It is a sticky wicket, eh?

Oh well, I have no kids nor grandkids in any college anywhere and I have no business on any campus. Let 'er go boys, let's see how it works out....for all of us.

Best wishes, Bronco!

We can agree to disagree, based on a couple more points.

1. The "group mentality" that you talk about is not isolated to the campus environment. Young adults who have never set foot on a college campus are involved it, too. The truth is that many times the party atmosphere that you are speaking about occurs in off-campus houses, not the college dorms. Those off campus houses aren't legally controlled by the school. I do understand that school policies cover them but that isn't the same as the TPC or Federal gun free zone control.
2. Tonight, I will be going to the UNT campus to attend an event. I do this fairly often. When I attended UT Arlington classes, more than 10% of my classmates had grey hair like me. The demographics on campus today are different than you might expect, with a lot more people over 25 attending classes. I will tolerate disarming to pick up my granddaughter at her school during broad daylight. I see no excuse at all for my having to disarm to walk into a University building late at night. It is nothing but Liberal gun paranoia gone awry.

[Oldgringo]

As do I. There is no issue with "the reality of crime and illegal gun use". The question is the group mentality/maturity setting of party/football weekend on a college campus. It is a sticky wicket, eh?

Oh well, I have no kids nor grandkids in any college anywhere and I have no business on any campus. Let 'er go boys, let's see how it works out....for all of us.

Best wishes, Bronco!

We can agree to disagree, based on a couple more points.

1. The "group mentality" that you talk about is not isolated to the campus environment. Young adults who have never set foot on a college campus are involved it, too. The truth is that many times the party atmosphere that you are speaking about occurs in off-campus houses, not the college dorms. Those off campus houses aren't legally controlled by the school. I do understand that school policies cover them but that isn't the same as the TPC or Federal gun free zone control.
2. Tonight, I will be going to the UNT campus to attend an event. I do this fairly often. When I attended UT Arlington classes, more than 10% of my classmates had grey hair like me. The demographics on campus today are different than you might expect, with a lot more people over 25 attending classes. I will tolerate disarming to pick up my granddaughter at her school during broad daylight. I see no excuse at all for my having to disarm to walk into a University building late at night. It is nothing but Liberal gun paranoia gone awry.

The only disagreement we have in your statement above is having to disarm to pick up your grand daughter. That makes about as much sense as the school zone cell phone thing, IMO.

As I said above, 'let 'er go boys' and allow legal CC on college campuses. If the students don't have the maturity and judgement to handle that awesome responsibility, then disallow the right while rigidly punishing the offender/s.

[chasfm11]

The only disagreement we have in your statement above is having to disarm to pick up your grand daughter. That makes about as much sense as the school zone cell phone thing, IMO.

As I said above, 'let 'er go boys' and allow legal CC on college campuses. If the students don't have the maturity and judgement to handle that awesome responsibility, then disallow the right while rigidly punishing the offender/s.

I agree that the gun free zone at the elementary school doesn't make sense but my tolerance level for that is better than for the UNT campus.

The interesting thing about CC on campus is that all of those who could carry in college buildings already have or could get a CHL in Texas. They already have that responsibility to carry in other locations. It seems illogical to me that they would suddenly go beserk upon entering a college building any more than I would. We have 21 year olds (according to my reading of the DPS statistics) with CHLs today. Passing campus carry would not change or expand that in any way. It would just expand the places where they could CC. A 21 year old can have a CC and go to a Frat house where a party is underway this evening. If that level of irresponsibility existed, it would have surfaced in the newspapers by now, at least to my way of thinking. We all know that the news print media would grab a story about a shooting at a Frat party by a CHLer in a heartbeat. Somehow, I don't think Texas students are less mature or lacking in judgement than Utah students, where CC is already permitted. Nope, it is just another "blood will run in the streets" scare tactic.

[warhorse10_9]

A lot of the time, I appreciate what you have to say. This time, I don't and here is why. I don't care about the statistics in regards to whether or not each school is made safer as a whole. I am not an LEO and I am not going to "secure" the school. I don't care about anything in that regard except being armed to have the potential to protect myself and those around me that I choose to protect (family, friends, etc) if a deadly force situation were to be encountered. I also know, though I obviously cannot prove, that the bad guys simply DO NOT CARE about any laws or policies restricting weapon possession on a college campus, and the signs that tell them about said policy. That automatically puts me at a disadvantage against them, IF they decide that the institute of higher learning I am attending is the one where they want to initiate violence. I was deemed responsible enough to be "granted" a concealed carry license...do they really think that I automatically and instantly become irresponsible the minute I set foot on a college campus? I cannot even keep it in my vehicle because if it were discovered by some unfortunate accident, I could be kicked out of school and my academic career (and perhaps future employment) ruined. I understand the need for 30.06 because private property is important...but the institute I attend is PUBLIC. I am law-abiding and licensed to carry a concealed handgun. That should be enough.

srothstein, you are falling into the same trap the legislature fell into this last session. They made it about campus safety and not personal safety a person's right to it. If I can carry in other highly populated areas, why cant I carry on campus. The institute I attend is also a public institution, they should not even have the power they have now to ruin my future simply because I choose to carry after I leave campus and am forced to leave my gun in my car. Let's bring the campus carry argument back to where it belongs please. I don't want to secure the campus, I want to secure myself and my love ones no matter where I may be. My choice to better my life by pursuing a higher education should not limit my rights to self-defense.

[terryg]

A lot of the time, I appreciate what you have to say. This time, I don't and here is why. I don't care about the statistics in regards to whether or not each school is made safer as a whole. I am not an LEO and I am not going to "secure" the school. ...

srothstein, you are falling into the same trap the legislature fell into this last session. They made it about campus safety and not personal safety a person's right to it. ...

Guys, I think you should go back and re-read srothstein's posting. He did not actually take any position on the subject or try to make it about campus safety. He was merely commenting on possible statistical fallacies of using the figures in the Cato Study presented by RoyGBiv. He was essentially cautioning that the figures in the studies, as presented, might not paint a completely accurate picture. The same concerns went through my mind as I read the Cato post - or at least some of the same concerns ... i.e. how did the population change, the culture of the varying schools.

RoyGBiv was making an argument about campus security. srothstein merely cautioned that using the data in isolation may not be a statistically sound way to support that argument. He didn't say one way or the other that he supported it. In fact, my take away from his final statement was that he probably does not favor using campus security as an argument for campus carry.