Denied CC for night class, WW(you)D?

[1911Tuner]

I thought this forum was called the High Road for a reason.

It is...and I was being High Road with that response that wasn't directed toward you or anybody else.

If I weren't being High Road, I'd have launched into a tirade that likely would have gotten me banned...because I'm about as fed up as I can possibly be with some stranger, who has no stake in whether me or mine live or die, has the audacity to tell me that I can't exercise my God-given right to self-defense wherever I go.

As it might be obvious...I have some pretty strong feelings about it. Take a guess as to why that might be.

 

[Feud]

Oh...An attack on your wife or daughter...or both.

Since I am unmarried I don't know where to even begin to understand the pain that such would cause. I don't know how to give a proper answer to what is beyond my experience, but I can say that with two sisters attending college this fall my sentiments hold true to them. I would rather they were either honest, or attending a different school that does allow the right to carry. I figure that it is better to have bad things happen for being a good person, then having good things happen by being a bad person.

It's good that Thomas Jefferson and the rest of those insurrectious rebels
felt differently when they risked their lives...their fortunes...and their sacred honor in setting up the Bill of Rights so that future generations could be secure enjoy the prosperity of all that they handed us.

Having read the Declaration many times as well as their outside reasoning to rationalize the rebellion I can't seem to recall where they listed "fair representation but we didn't want to obey when it didn't go our way" as one of them.

If you cannot see the difference between the oppression of the British and a school saying you can't carry on campus (while having the ability to go over the schools head by appealing to your popularly elected State Legislature to overturn their decision) then I am flabbergasted.

Hear that buzzin' sound? They're spinning in their graves because we're about to let somebody else undo all that they did.

Am I arguing against the right to keep and bear arms, have representation if one is taxed, or any other provision of the Declaration of Independence? No, I'm saying that if one doesn't like how a state or private institution is run then either change it, or vote with your feet. As Utah has shown the law can be used as a tool to reinforce our rights, and such is the proper way to go about this situation.

 

[Keegan]

What does she feel good about doing?

The first thing she said was "I don't care, I'm carrying a gun if I have to go to a class at night." Then I went and 'put us on the radar' by thinking we could all be reasonable human beings and talk about it. I don't know how they would even know who she is, though. There are at least a handful of people with our last name going to school there.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

"If they don't like the rules then go somewhere else, don't go at all, or get the rules changed through lawful civic means."
Tell six million European Jews that.
Have you ever heard of the AMERICAN REVOLUTION?! What are you, a Tory?

 

[willbrink]

"You aren't breaking the law, you're breaking a rule of that school."

Depends on the state. In MA for example (I know, shocking...) it is a law vs just school policy. Don't know what the law is in his state vs school policy, but always best to know.

 

[che_70b]

I still want to know where this idea of moral responsibility to honor the wishes of wicked men comes from.

 

[shdwfx]

deleted

 

[shdwfx]

I know of some strict Mennonite people that are so absolute in their aversion to violence that they will not defend their own families from aggressors, even rape in some cases. (Note: most Mennonites and Amish do not take it this far.)

Feud, you would probably agree that a hypothetical "oath" to forswear aggression (as is the religion of some) should not be kept when someone assaults your wife. Obviously, your duty to your wife is more important than whatever oath you gave.

In extreme hypothetical cases, I assume you agree that oaths have a limit. (if not, then I don't know what to say).

You do not, however, seem to agree that need for personal protection is grounds for breaking school code. Others do. (and the whole "well then don't go to school" isn't a realistic out here).

Point is, there is a limit to "oath-keeping" where you can break it and still maintain your integrity due to the claims of a higher duty.

Now we are just quibbling over where we draw the line.

 

[Treo]

I really don't see this as a matter of integrity as much as common sense. By writing the letter the O.P. has put his wife in a position where she's far more likely to have a bad encounter W/ the administration than a BG, bad form Pan, bad form.

What we don't know is where DW is in her academic career , we don't know what the school would do if she were caught. Imagine getting expelled in your last 6 months of Grad school. Honestly I'd be thinkin' twice maybe three times about breaking school rules.

 

[Prince Yamato]

Carry pepper spray and continue to write letters asking that they change the policy. The truth is campuses are relatively safe (though I still wish I could CCW on mine). If you're ever attacked, Pepper Spray gives you a chance to at least temporarily disable your attacker. If/when that ever happens, THEN you sue the school blind. So start looking at what your school's total purse is, figure out crime statistics (most universities publish them). Look at the numbers of total attacks on campus, look at the number of cases solved. If your campus is very dangerous and your wife is attacked, you have a case. You'll probably win the case too. I have a hunch all these campus rules will be shot to hell if Heller goes our way in June, anyway, so you probably have that to look forward to.

Also, a weapons violation will go on your academic/scholastic record. Good luck getting into other schools with something like that. On THR, we'd know what that meant. In academia, they're going to think you tried to pull another VT, failed, and got off on a technicality.

 

[Geno]

"...when available..." is the extenuating circumstance. The ROTC are not armed, and thus cannot fully protect. Document, document, document. Call and request an armed, uniformed officer each and every time she passes from building to building, from class to class as well as to and from the car. Tape record the calls...all of them. It IS legal.

Now that you have written one letter, generate a 2nd letter for explicit definition of "extenuating". I would also request not names, but numbers of students, past and present, who have successfully met the "extenuating" standard. Otherwise, they merely are presenting with a policy that is blanket prohibition, a la DC. Furthermore, you requested from the president, not a delegate. I would request this answer from the person who makes the decision...the president.

You also know that she can challenge the policy in Circuit court. Put the school and the court on notice that she intends to carry beginning X date/time, and which would render her a criminal per the law (in many states). They must then take the case proactively. IMHO, she would prevail. No where in the 2nd amendment does the word "...extenuating..." appear.

In closing, pray for Heller.

JMHO

 

[buck00]

I recently contacted the President of my wife's university to request a meeting with him so we could discuss the school's ban on personal safety, namely the rule that allows him to grant exceptions to the ban.

I normally would advise she carry anyway, as no one would know. This is what I did and a lot of other people I know did. * Unfortunately, you forfeited that option by believing the university would actually take your request to CCW seriously. :banghead:

Your wife is now on their radar either officially or unofficially. If she carries now, even if she does so quietly and securely, there is a chance they could do a "random search" or an "interview" of her one night just to make an example of her to the rest of the school. You can argue they won't, but is it worth flushing thousands down the drain... plus a black mark on her record if she tries to transfer to another school??

Looks like you're going to have to have some 20 yr old ROTC guy walking your wife back to her car every night... not sure you want that either.

 

[Coronach]

My personal opinion is that if it is only a rule of the school, you have a pretty clear-cut probability/costs/benefits analysis: what is your probability of being caught and punished vs the benefit of carrying (the probability of needing a gun and the consequences of not having it)? The probability of being caught and the probability of needing a gun are both pretty low, but one you can control (how well you conceal) and one you cannot (nutjobs on the loose), one has bad consequences (potential expulsion) and one has worse consequences (potential death). Only your wife can weigh those options and decide.

I caution you to make sure that you're ONLY violating school policy and not state law before you consider a career in civil disobedience. Everyone wants to be a protestor, no one wants to go to jail.

As far as the "you made an agreement" angle, yes, I agree, but I was in college once myself. They make you agree to all manner of stupid things, and unless you want to not go to college, the only realistic way to attend and have a life is to just ignore the more nanny-state requirements and be prepared to pay the price if you get caught breaking a silly rule. I decided that I could do the time, so I may as well do the "crime".

In my criminal justice classes they called this the "hedonistic calculus", so, see? I'm just using my book learnin' in real life.

Mike

 

[Feud]

Have you ever heard of the AMERICAN REVOLUTION?! What are you, a Tory?

So my advocacy of using self government to peaceably change public policy concerning the carrying of arms on public property makes me a Tory? Darn, I guess that puts me in the same category as Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Hancock, and all those other British sympathizers who fought to establish a democratic republic, against the wishes of the rebels.

In extreme hypothetical cases, I assume you agree that oaths have a limit. (if not, then I don't know what to say).

Certainly. For example, if one's wife/daughter/sister began to receive threatening/stalker type communication from someone, and the school refuses to allow them an exception, then I would not hold it against the person to take their safety in their own hands since the threat is specific and directed (not "something somewhere might happen that may endanger me").

You do not, however, seem to agree that need for personal protection is grounds for breaking school code. Others do.

I don't feel that "safety" as a giant blanket term is reason enough, no. Others may have whatever opinions that keep them warm at night, I just ask that they allow me the same.

 

[Coronach]

Your wife is now on their radar either officially or unofficially. If she carries now, even if she does so quietly and securely, there is a chance they could do a "random search" or an "interview" of her one night just to make an example of her to the rest of the school. You can argue they won't, but is it worth flushing thousands down the drain... plus a black mark on her record if she tries to transfer to another school??

I would sincerely hope that they do so, since:

1. You will get the satisfaction of introducing a school administrator to the protections of the Fourth Amendment.

or

2. The school police will perform an illegal search of her person for a mere violation of policy and not a violation of law, and will be introduced to the concepts of the civil tort and punitive damages (AKA "how many zeros do we put on that check?").

Really, as long as you're not violating the law, what can they do? The most is to kick her out if she refuses to be searched, and even that sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Game on.

Mike

PS Make darned sure you're NOT violating state law FIRST.

 

[Intune]

I don't feel that "safety" as a giant blanket term is reason enough, no. Others may have whatever opinions that keep them warm at night, I just ask that they allow me the same.

As long as that which keeps them "warm" is not a gun? They have to be under a specific threat before you would "allow" a firearm? Wow...

 

[Walkalong]

Get her to call for an escort every time she moves from one place to another. Spread the word. Get everyone to do so. They will figure out, and it will show it to all, that they cannot watch out for everyone.

And I would carry anyway.

 

[Feud]

As long as that which keeps them "warm" is not a gun? They have to be under a specific threat before you would "allow" a firearm? Wow...

If you mean to own or carry in a legal manner, then no, that is not what I mean.

I have said repeatedly that I don't' agree with the firearms policy, and that it should be changed through legal means (like Utah). I will say, however, that if someone promises not to do something (in this case carry a firearm on campus) then I expect them to have a very good reason before breaking it. To me, that would include a direct threat that the school ignores.

You're trying to frame the argument as a gun grabber vs. gun owner, which couldn't be further from the truth. When you go onto property that is not yours you are expected to obey their rules, and when that property is owned by the state if you don't like the rules you can have your state legislature change them.

 

[Old Fuff]

... if you don't like the rules you can have your state legislature change them.

Hopefully you understand that many, if not most state legislatures don't see this issue in the same light that the one in Utah does. What has happened in Utah is commendable from the Old Fuff's point of view, but it is the exception, not the rule.

It is unfortunate, and outrageous, that the lady in question, and others as well, need to place themselves at risk to get an education from the university of their choice.

In previous years I lived in a state that for all practical purposes prohibited concealed carry. They did have a discretionary system of permits, but they were seldom issued, and only to those with economic or political connections. Given that it was my neck that was at risk I chose to ignore the law. One might say it was a case of civil disobedience on my part. Although I was not involved in any shooting the presence of a handgun prevented a probable mugging on two occasions. These experiences convinced me that breaking a stupid law was much better then being a victim. If anyone chooses to illegally protect themselves against an illegal assault they won't catch any flack from me.

Authorities who place others at risk unnecessarily are not moral in my book, and I see no reason or obligation to follow their rules, regulations or laws.

 

[Intune]

So, in your mind, Feud, it's kosher to break the law if a certain "threshold" is met? Hmm... Remind me again which school/mall shootings had prior warning...

Random violence is what most ccw'ers prepare for. Hell, targeted threats are a whole different animal.

I'm not trying to "frame" your argument whatsoever. I am merely trying to fathom it. Own 0 or 100 firearms, it affects your perspective not a whit.

I'm with Old Fuff on this one. I carried before there was such a thing as ccw. I'm such a lawbreaker...

 

[Old Fuff]

Not sure what you mean, but both of the incidents I mentioned were random acts of potential or probable violence against me. If I had not been armed I would have likely been a victim.

So, in your mind, it's kosher to break the law if a certain "threshold" is met?

You bet, and I don't need any threshold," if it's my life and limb that's at stake. I couldn't get a CCW from a board where the members either had permits themselves, or were law enforcement officers, because I didn't have in their view, “satisfactory or sufficient reasons," and you know when I could have used a little protection none of them were around.

As it is said, “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away…”

 

[gym]

Like a couple guys said, it's too late now, you posted your intentions. If they even think she is carrying, they probablly have the right to have an officer search her, at which point she will be expelled. You are better off asking an attorney who specializes in gun laws and state policys, on what your options are. You could always sue the school to change the policy, or ask them to gaurantee your wife's saftey, which they aren't going to so because it's impossible to gaurantee anyones saftey, which could get you an exception if you promise them to keep it quiet

 

[Hokkmike]

If i thought it was a dangerous situation I would not allow my wife to be in it. I would personally pick her up at the door, or insist that campus security personally escort her to the car and see her drive off. Breaking their rules are not option unless your wife is ready to end her college work there. By the way, what does SHE think?

 

[Blackbeard]

How about you drop her off and pick her up every night, with your CCW. They can't expel you -- you're not enrolled.

 

[springmom]

If i thought it was a dangerous situation I would not allow my wife to be in it. I would personally pick her up at the door, or insist that campus security personally escort her to the car and see her drive off. Breaking their rules are not option unless your wife is ready to end her college work there. By the way, what does SHE think?

My question exactly. We have here four pages of men proclaiming what they would and would not let their wife do, have her do, or what they think the OP ought to do.

What does SHE want to do? It is her choice. I assume she is not a minor.

Myself, if my husband decided for me what my security setup was going to be and implemented it unilaterally, he'd be in for a very unpleasant evening. He wouldn't do that, of course, because he's perfectly well aware that as an adult who has her own CHL, I can make my own decisions. And if my decision is "I need help with my safety; can you escort me?" he'd do it in a heartbeat. But not unless I ask. The OP's wife deserves the same respect.

How about you drop her off and pick her up every night, with your CCW. They can't expel you -- you're not enrolled.

IF she is interested in this level of assistance, you are likely correct. If you are simply dropping off/picking up someone, you should be ok. Again, though, it's up to HER.

Springmom