Believable but still UNBELIEVABLE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh remember my previous comment about the handgun that was found in a restroom on campus?

"A gun found inside a bathroom of a building at Wichita State University last week has been returned to its owner.

WSU says the gun found inside a bathroom of Jabara Hall Friday belongs to an employee at the university. That employee provided proof of ownership to get the gun back from university police, the university says."

Hummm it was an employee NOT A STUDENT. Why do I think this was a deliberate plant to create enough negative publicity to pressure the legislature into banning firearms on college campus?
 
There was a similar policy at K-state which tried to preclude open carry - it was defeated before my time there because the campus grounds are NOT "university property," but rather state public policy. The effort at Kstate was to thwart enforcement of the POLICY because the state law allowed open carry on public properties. At best, when the policy stood, the university could expel a student with no potential firearms charges (although they threatened to draw criminal aggravated trespass charges, but even the PD claimed that would never be called for charge). The policy was struck as it violated the state endorsed student right to open carry on state property. The law change was less of a clarification and a "state down" enforcement change on where we could be prevented from open carry. Previously, some state parks and other properties had policies preventing open carry (concealed carry not yet being legal at the time anywhere in the state), then the clarification and extension language was believed to have been a mistake since it seemed to include state university properties. When the universities asked for a modification to specify they weren't included, the state basically told them, "nope, no mistake, you ARE included." So I carried openly for any after hours visit to campus. There remained, as I mentioned prior, standing policy preventing carry in many of the building policies, and later a campus wide policy prohibiting open carry in any building was implemented, but the grounds were deemed by the state as external to the "jurisdiction" of the policy.

So WSU can write that policy, I suppose, just as they can write a policy which says a student could be expelled for wearing the color blue on the 3rd Tuesday of the month.

But again - that is a broad gap between law and policy. WSU and the Kansas Board of Regents don't write, nor enforce laws.

So the funny part then, to me, as a non-student Kansan - I could walk onto WSU open carrying, or carrying with a round in the chamber, and there would be no recourse beyond requesting me to leave, and trespassing charges if I didn't comply. A student, however, could be expelled from the University.
 
"So the funny part then, to me, as a non-student Kansan - I could walk onto WSU open carrying, or carrying with a round in the chamber, and there would be no recourse beyond requesting me to leave, and trespassing charges if I didn't comply."

That also applies to non-student Kansans. Trespassing charge only affects Kansans with Conceal Carry Permit.

"A student, however, could be expelled from the University."

This of course is the big stick. Being expelled regardless of how close the student is to finishing his degree and out the tuition money. I wondered if they are also refusing to give the student credit for his previously completed classes?

It'll probably take a while but a huge lawsuit win by a victim of a violent crime or the family of the victim will force a change.
 
Last edited:
BSA1 said:
Trespassing charge only affects Kansans with Conceal Carry Permit.
Click to expand...

A point of clarification - a trespassing charge applies to anyone on a property which they don't own, and have been asked to leave. If I walk into walmart, armed or otherwise, lay down to take a nap, and the manager asks me to leave, if I don't comply, I'm subject to potential trespassing charges. The permit carries with it enhanced responsibilities, but NOT having a permit doesn't excuse someone from trespassing charges if they try to stay somewhere, not their property, against the desires of the owners. I had to flex that particular muscle multiple times in college when I was moonlighting as a bouncer - if a person won't willingly leave, if they escalate to physical altercation upon attempt of forceful removal, we had the "red button" at the ready to drop public nuisance and trespassing charges against them.

I don't believe the Universities are foolish enough to rescind completed credits, and I can't imagine what might be the motivation to extend the standing expulsion and dismissal policies. Remember - these Universities have had expulsion policies for as long as they've been in business, and frankly, those policies have had "firearms violation" line items for a very, very long time. This change in accommodations to legal concealed carry would have no bearing to cause an increase in penalty above their prior firearms policies. I took credits from 3 Kansas Universities, to my recollection, all had a "forfeit current course-load costs without credit" type of language in them, but the completed coursework was still the possession of the student.

There are a lot of reasons Universities can use to withhold transcripts, which in many contexts can be just as bad as rescinding the credits entirely. But I don't recall that ever being a condition of expulsion property - unless the student complete payment towards the active course hours following dismissal. I had a few students get the stanky boot when I was coaching at K-State, some with which I still keep contact today, 10-15yrs later - I don't recall any of them having trouble getting access to their completed course work to transfer elsewhere.
 
So if all the liberals will resign over campus carry we need it everywhere!
I taught adjunct at a local college for 22 years. Of course it had a no carry rule, but we were luckily co-located with the municipal police and fire academies and had a strong criminal justice degree program so there were quite a few police officers attending classes there working on their degrees. I would always quietly approach those in my classes early each semester and assure them that, a) I supported and encouraged them carrying in class and, b) there was an undeclared .357 in my briefcase if ever needed. Of course this was an entirely open campus with a minimal unarmed security force (mostly parking enforcement guys) and in fact there were several instances where faculty were alerted that this or that student or former student had made threats or been involved in acts of violence on campus. Asked what we should do in case of an active shooter incident we were advised to lock our classroom doors and hide under the desks. I said fine, OK . . .
 
Varminterror said:
I had a few students get the stanky boot when I was coaching at K-State...... I don't recall any of them having trouble getting access to their completed course work to transfer elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I would worry that expulsion from one school would cause most, if not all, others to reject your application out of hand. When registering for a non-degree class at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, I remember being asked for proof that I was in "good standing" at Metropolitan Community College where I had taken some programming classes. I don't know how far "good standing" goes beyond not owing them money.
 
"A point of clarification - a trespassing charge applies to anyone on a property which they don't own, and have been asked to leave."

A Trespassing conviction could cause the person with a conceal carry license to lose it. I can still open or conceal carry but cannot carry out-of-state without the license.

Since Kansas allows permitless carry a Trespassing conviction has no impact on the right to carry.
 
BSA1 said:
"A point of clarification - a trespassing charge applies to anyone on a property which they don't own, and have been asked to leave."

A Trespassing conviction could cause the person with a conceal carry license to lose it. I can still open or conceal carry but cannot carry out-of-state without the license.

Since Kansas allows permitless carry a Trespassing conviction has no impact on the right to carry.
Click to expand...

Which was the point I made before someone took a left turn and argued against the possibility for a trespassing charge for someone without a CCHL... You inferred incorrectly my statements, which support anywhere, any time you're not supposed to be somewhere, you are subject to trespassing charges. I made no statement - despite your effort to argue and put words into my mouth - which suggested any implication difference for a trespassing charge with or without a permit.

BSA1 said:
Trespassing charge only affects Kansans with Conceal Carry Permit.
Click to expand...

Trespassing charges don't hinge upon possession of a Kansas CCHL. Having a permit when convicted for trespassing because of carry costs you your permit, but NOT having a permit doesn't absolve you of trespassing charges.

Of course, you did also try to correct one of my posts by stating the same thing I had, so maybe you're reading over things a little too quickly:

Varminterror said:
So the funny part then, to me, as a non-student Kansan...
Click to expand...

Which you copied and pasted, yet still contended my statement with the EXACT SAME PHRASE...

BSA1 said:
"So the funny part then, to me, as a non-student Kansan - I could walk onto WSU open carrying, or carrying with a round in the chamber, and there would be no recourse beyond requesting me to leave, and trespassing charges if I didn't comply."

That also applies to non-student Kansans.
Click to expand...

What applies to non-student Kansas does apply to non-student Kansans...

Seems like you were intent upon arguing for the sake of it.
 
I saw some traffic which I haven't been able to confirm on the Kansas Rifle Association page about a certain WSU employee who is a firearms instructor being blamed by another employee for the firearm left in the bathroom. I suspected I know who was implicated, but I haven't gotten confirmation either it was his pistol, or whether actual accusations were made.

He does have a handful of Ruger's and the holster seems like his type... But if it WAS his, I'm wondering if the other NRA E&T watchdogs are going to try to string him up, since he's not just an instructor, but a TC.
 
Varminterror,

You are reading waaaay to much in my comment how a Trespassing conviction affects the right to carry.

My only point is how the penalty for a licensed carrier and non-licensed one is way out of balance.

Getting a conceal carry license in Kansas is very expensive. The Application fees alone are $135.00. Then there is the mandatory 8 hour class and shooting qualification test. Figure in lunch, gas, time off of work and it is easy to spend $300.00 all together. My point is a person with a conceal carry license stands to lose a big investment along with the right to carry out of state.

Relax and carry on the good fight.
 
Last edited:
Concealed means concealed. If you're doing it right, no one will ever know. If you're going, "hey look at me, I'm carrying" or I'm in compliance" you're doing it wrong. JMHO
 
For those who care, I did get a followup from the Chief. He looked into it, discovered that drop-safe revolvers were considered, but "the committee felt that the policy should be consistent with the regent policy of having the cylinder or barrel round free." Whatever happened to letting each Regent's institution set their own policy?
 
jgh4445 said:
Concealed means concealed. If you're doing it right, no one will ever know. If you're going, "hey look at me, I'm carrying" or I'm in compliance" you're doing it wrong. JMHO
Click to expand...

Read their definition and how it applies to the following;

“Concealed” means completely hidden from view and does not reveal the weapon in any way, shape, or form.

How about it accidently showing when using a public bathroom?

Or maybe adjusting it's position when getting in or out of your vehicle?

Or maybe someone bumps into you and feels the gun?

What about it printing when adjusting your clothing after using the bathroom or bending over when putting something in the trunk of your car in the parking lot?

What about when driving your car when coming to class or leaving the campus?

Does this apply to gun accessories which might be seen or print?

For example; How about a cartridge(s) laying to view in your vehicle such as the catch tray on the dash? (Maybe you had gone shooting and had a few rounds left over in your pocket so you tossed them in the tray to use next time or just to reduce the stuff in your pocket.)

Or a gun magazine...

Or the box that ammunition comes in?

Maybe the only sure way to avoid violating their policy is too carry a mousegun in the front pant pocket. But what about ladies who need protection the most? Or maybe the gun or holster prints in the front pocket when sitting down during class such as wearing lightweight slacks?

And why should the student have to settle on a weak cartridge with questionable stopping power?

Can you refused to submit to a search...

of your person...

of your belongings such as your backpack...

of your vehicle (accusation that you were seen putting your gun in the trunk of your car)?

Can the Campus Police get away with arguing they feared for their safety merely because a accusation has been made?

For example "Officer I think that student is carrying a gun."

Officer "What makes you think that?"

Person "His shirt fits too tight on his side by his arm and I think it is because of a gun."

Being a retired State Employee I have a lot of experience with the mindset of Administrators and how it works. Kansas Administrators simply choose to ignore laws and regulations they do not like. With the agency I worked for it this was common. They continue to ignore them until a large lawsuit is filed. Then they continue to ignore them until a few months before the case it is go a trial. They then change their policies and regulations so they can go before the Judge and argue since they are complying with the law the case should be dismissed.

For people without the money to hire lawyers to sue the State this means the policies remain in force until the legislature gets involved and forces them to change their policies. In regards to the topic at hand this means a student is either going to have to be brutally killed or permanently injured and a large lawsuit is filed by their family or by them. The State will fight the lawsuit everyway they can as they have deep pockets so figure at least five years before the case will go to trial

Remember that being expelled from college is not a court trial. They have a hearing process before someone called "Conduct Officer", then it goes to a "Hearing Board." What this comes down to is at the conclusion of hearing process The President simply says you're out and that's it. Oh you can appeal...to the same people that help write and supported implementation of the policy.

Contrary to some of the previous comments these people are not ignorant or misguided. They are very liberal anti-2A and have wrote a policy that is as restrictive as they can get away with.
 
Last edited:
.308 Norma said:
I'd be curious about the Campus Police Chief's definition of "expert gun guys.":)
Click to expand...
No kidding! Who picks those "experts" anyway?
Sounds like the Campus Chief of Police gun knowledge is stuck in the 1950s. bet he doesn't know much about state & federal laws either.
Hope he is receptive to your education efforts.

BSA1 - the same goes for the administrators in most public Texas Universities, and worse in the private colleges. The student activist "antis" are off the charts in their ignorance.
 
Maybe a smarter thing to focus on is actually investing in real security. More access control to all doors, More CCTV etc. I was in the business for years. You would be amazed how much lack of adequate security they could have but don't. I can see where their stupid logic of their so called experts comes from. (as in Fake News). I am totally surprised these fake experts did not recommend that students not be able to carry 30 round clips in their pocket guns. You really cannot fix stupid.
Want to really save lives, enforce text message driving.
 
All I can say is that if Florida had adopted such a bill back when I was a UF employee, I would have been tickled pink to be able to carry a J frame sized .38 Special with 4 rounds in it. Beats keeping a quality letter opener on your desk or a heavy old "institution style" wooden chair next to your desk all to heck. Really beats the heck out of carrying a hard cased brief case you don't otherwise need back and forth to the car.

Until quite recently most of the worlds militaries trained to carry semi autos with empty chambers. Again while I tried never to do so and am not thrilled about the idea of not having a round in the chamber again I would be very happy to at least have a semi auto with a loaded mag and empty chamber on me rather than in a gun safe out in the car or at home when working on campus.

Does not matter if the rules the OP must live by make sense, they are the rules he must live by. A bunch of ya-yaing on a gun board is not going to make one whit of change in those rules.

-kBob
 
kBob said:
All I can say is that if Florida had adopted such a bill back when I was a UF employee, I would have been tickled pink to be able to carry a J frame sized .38 Special with 4 rounds in it. Beats keeping a quality letter opener on your desk or a heavy old "institution style" wooden chair next to your desk all to heck. Really beats the heck out of carrying a hard cased brief case you don't otherwise need back and forth to the car.

Until quite recently most of the worlds militaries trained to carry semi autos with empty chambers. Again while I tried never to do so and am not thrilled about the idea of not having a round in the chamber again I would be very happy to at least have a semi auto with a loaded mag and empty chamber on me rather than in a gun safe out in the car or at home when working on campus.

Does not matter if the rules the OP must live by make sense, they are the rules he must live by. A bunch of ya-yaing on a gun board is not going to make one whit of change in those rules.

-kBob
Click to expand...
You make a good point.
 
BSA1 said:
Read their definition and how it applies to the following;

“Concealed” means completely hidden from view and does not reveal the weapon in any way, shape, or form.

How about it accidently showing when using a public bathroom?

Or maybe adjusting it's position when getting in or out of your vehicle?

Or maybe someone bumps into you and feels the gun?

What about it printing when adjusting your clothing after using the bathroom or bending over when putting something in the trunk of your car in the parking lot?

What about when driving your car when coming to class or leaving the campus?

Does this apply to gun accessories which might be seen or print?

For example; How about a cartridge(s) laying to view in your vehicle such as the catch tray on the dash? (Maybe you had gone shooting and had a few rounds left over in your pocket so you tossed them in the tray to use next time or just to reduce the stuff in your pocket.)
Good points all BSA1. Then, by that definition, it is virtually impossible to carry "concealed" at all.
Or a gun magazine...

Or the box that ammunition comes in?

Maybe the only sure way to avoid violating their policy is too carry a mousegun in the front pant pocket. But what about ladies who need protection the most? Or maybe the gun or holster prints in the front pocket when sitting down during class such as wearing lightweight slacks?

And why should the student have to settle on a weak cartridge with questionable stopping power?

Can you refused to submit to a search...

of your person...

of your belongings such as your backpack...

of your vehicle (accusation that you were seen putting your gun in the trunk of your car)?

Can the Campus Police get away with arguing they feared for their safety merely because a accusation has been made?

For example "Officer I think that student is carrying a gun."

Officer "What makes you think that?"

Person "His shirt fits too tight on his side by his arm and I think it is because of a gun."

Being a retired State Employee I have a lot of experience with the mindset of Administrators and how it works. Kansas Administrators simply choose to ignore laws and regulations they do not like. With the agency I worked for it this was common. They continue to ignore them until a large lawsuit is filed. Then they continue to ignore them until a few months before the case it is go a trial. They then change their policies and regulations so they can go before the Judge and argue since they are complying with the law the case should be dismissed.

For people without the money to hire lawyers to sue the State this means the policies remain in force until the legislature gets involved and forces them to change their policies. In regards to the topic at hand this means a student is either going to have to be brutally killed or permanently injured and a large lawsuit is filed by their family or by them. The State will fight the lawsuit everyway they can as they have deep pockets so figure at least five years before the case will go to trial

Remember that being expelled from college is not a court trial. They have a hearing process before someone called "Conduct Officer", then it goes to a "Hearing Board." What this comes down to is at the conclusion of hearing process The President simply says you're out and that's it. Oh you can appeal...to the same people that help write and supported implementation of the policy.

Contrary to some of the previous comments these people are not ignorant or misguided. They are very liberal anti-2A and have wrote a policy that is as restrictive as they can get away with.
Click to expand...
BSA1 said:
Read their definition and how it applies to the following;

“Concealed” means completely hidden from view and does not reveal the weapon in any way, shape, or form.

How about it accidently showing when using a public bathroom?

Or maybe adjusting it's position when getting in or out of your vehicle?

Or maybe someone bumps into you and feels the gun?

What about it printing when adjusting your clothing after using the bathroom or bending over when putting something in the trunk of your car in the parking lot?

What about when driving your car when coming to class or leaving the campus?

Does this apply to gun accessories which might be seen or print?

For example; How about a cartridge(s) laying to view in your vehicle such as the catch tray on the dash? (Maybe you had gone shooting and had a few rounds left over in your pocket so you tossed them in the tray to use next time or just to reduce the stuff in your pocket.)

Or a gun magazine...

Or the box that ammunition comes in?

Maybe the only sure way to avoid violating their policy is too carry a mousegun in the front pant pocket. But what about ladies who need protection the most? Or maybe the gun or holster prints in the front pocket when sitting down during class such as wearing lightweight slacks?

And why should the student have to settle on a weak cartridge with questionable stopping power?

Can you refused to submit to a search...

of your person...

of your belongings such as your backpack...

of your vehicle (accusation that you were seen putting your gun in the trunk of your car)?

Can the Campus Police get away with arguing they feared for their safety merely because a accusation has been made?

For example "Officer I think that student is carrying a gun."

Officer "What makes you think that?"

Person "His shirt fits too tight on his side by his arm and I think it is because of a gun."

Being a retired State Employee I have a lot of experience with the mindset of Administrators and how it works. Kansas Administrators simply choose to ignore laws and regulations they do not like. With the agency I worked for it this was common. They continue to ignore them until a large lawsuit is filed. Then they continue to ignore them until a few months before the case it is go a trial. They then change their policies and regulations so they can go before the Judge and argue since they are complying with the law the case should be dismissed.

For people without the money to hire lawyers to sue the State this means the policies remain in force until the legislature gets involved and forces them to change their policies. In regards to the topic at hand this means a student is either going to have to be brutally killed or permanently injured and a large lawsuit is filed by their family or by them. The State will fight the lawsuit everyway they can as they have deep pockets so figure at least five years before the case will go to trial

Remember that being expelled from college is not a court trial. They have a hearing process before someone called "Conduct Officer", then it goes to a "Hearing Board." What this comes down to is at the conclusion of hearing process The President simply says you're out and that's it. Oh you can appeal...to the same people that help write and supported implementation of the policy.

Contrary to some of the previous comments these people are not ignorant or misguided. They are very liberal anti-2A and have wrote a policy that is as restrictive as they can get away with.
Click to expand...
 
Oddly, the rules almost encourage the carrying of a frontier type six-shooter. Hammer rests on an empty chamber: draw cock and fire.
 
RandyC said:
Oddly, the rules almost encourage the carrying of a frontier type six-shooter. Hammer rests on an empty chamber: draw cock and fire.
Click to expand...
With a double action revolver, the only change is that you lose one round. In my opinion, that makes it the best choice.
 
Why not look at the "glass half full"? I am sure that there are thousands of college students all across this nation who would love to have campus carry, even with these onerous rules.

I think that if I was there that I would carry a 2" Model 10 loaded with 5 in a nice thumb break IWB holster, and toss a couple of extra speed loaders/speed strips on my person.

Also recognize that getting the door open now will let you, and others in your state, to improve things in the future once the nay sayers are discredited in their "blood running in the classrooms" retoric.
 
BSA1 said:
. Being expelled regardless of
Click to expand...
The transcript would read "Expelled for Conduct Violation" (rather than academic insufficiency or the like).
Which would probably prevent being able to enroll in a similar school at all. Which would probably leave the student to the mercies of the on-line for-profits.

Now, an employee--the cohort most likely to CC on campus--would just have "termination for cause" as a bar to future employment (and quite a lot of U HR departments know the legal land mines in actually checking references and the like).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Personal preferences in CCW features/actions/safties
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
scurtis_34471
S
Ralph III
  • Locked
1911 style pistol for CCW?
2 3 4 5
Replies
119
Views
5K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
R
  • Locked
Single action, hammer down
2 3
Replies
51
Views
8K
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
D
  • Locked
The Conditions of Readiness: I Admit I was wrong
Replies
21
Views
1K
ColinthePilot
C
P
  • Locked
TRUSS vs Kangaroo Carry, and which gun?
Replies
3
Views
584
Sig88
S
Back
Top