Grey Area of Guns on Campus

[ZeSpectre]

Grey Area of Guns on Campus

Gray Area of Guns on Campus
Posted: 6:28 PM Mar 3, 2008
Last Updated: 9:55 PM Mar 3, 2008
Reporter: Kelly Creswell
Email Address: [email protected]


Delegate Todd Gilbert's (R - 15th District) bill regarding carrying concealed weapons on campus had its last push Monday.

The bill tries to clear up a gray area in Virginia law about where the state allows individuals with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns, but it leaves open a chance for universities to create their own policies on campus.

One college in the Valley has a unique stance on this issue. According to Gilbert's office, Blue Ridge Community College is the only school in Virginia that has a policy that allows students and faculty who have such permits to carry guns on campus.

With Monday being the last day for bills to reach the General Assembly, Gilbert made one last push for his bill to allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on any campus in the state.

"It is not illegal for them to carry on campus, because of what the General Assembly has already done, and we just want to clarify that universities do not have the authority that which is given to them and basically make laws about firearms when it's ultimately the general assembly that makes those decisions," says Gilbert.

However, most universities in the state, including JMU, have policies banning weapons on campus, claiming it creates a safer environment.

"When students faculty and staff agree to be a part of the JMU community, they're also agreeing to the policies that the university has set forth," says JMU Spokesperson Don Egle. "And they then need to abide by that. That's different than just a citizen coming onto the properties because those individuals haven't signed the agreement with the university to abide by the university policies."

Since it is a second amendment right, BRCC believes the legislature should make a decision about what the policy should be in Virginia.

"We prefer not to have guns in our classes and so we work with students and ask them to comply with that request, but we just don't feel comfortable imposing sanctions on students for activities that are otherwise legal in the state of Virginia," says Dr. John Downey, BRCC's Vice President of Academic Affairs.

Carrying a weapon is allowed but discouraged on BRCC's campus. Downey says there have only been a couple of incidents where the school has had to talk to students about having guns at the school. However, the college would like the General Assembly to decide one way or the other.

Emphasis added is my own. Those who know me would know why the following ... :banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[archigos]

My state (NY) also has some "gray area" but in the reverse sense - a concealed carry permit holder can carry legally on campuses with the written permission of the administrator. I'm attempting to get my college to outline a procedure for obtaining that written permission (as they currently don't issue those).
Regarding the situation in Virginia, I'll never claim that private entities (businesses, homeowners, colleges, etc) do not have the ability to ban guns on their premises - under trespass law - however ignorant the policy is. However, when state operated entities impose these restrictions, its a clear violation of second amendment rights. Likewise, its a clear violation of second amendment rights for government to impose additional laws besides trespass law that specifically target firearms - regardless of whether the final decision is left up to the college or the legislature.

 

[svtruth]

RI,

IIRC, prohibits carrying on school grounds, but stipulates that colleges are not considered "school grounds".

 

[ZeSpectre]

Yeah JMU is a state funded institution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison_University

Personally I feel that if your business throws open it's doors to the public, for the purpose of making a profit, most of the private property rules go right out the window.

 

[MrChristian]

And Virginia has preemption, so no locality is allowed to make gun law. It would seem as a state intitution, they would be preempted from making "laws" contrary to state law.

 

[ZeSpectre]

Oh but it's not a "law" it's a regulation...and one voluntarily agreed to if you sign the conditions of employment or attend as a student. Fair enough but I truly thought they were considering changing their minds.

 

[langenc]

Semantics

 

[mekender]

I'll never claim that private entities (businesses, homeowners, colleges, etc) do not have the ability to ban guns on their premises - under trespass law - however ignorant the policy is.

"private" entities cease being private once they allow the public to enter... that said, it would be illegal for them to ban wheelchairs, or to ban clothing, or to ban eyeglasses... it would likewise be illegal for them to require everyone that enters to smoke pot, or to disrobe... but the one material item guaranteed by the constitution is ok to ban?

 

[Ed Ames]

Why do you think it would be illegal to ban clothing? There is no problem at all with saying "No clothes past this point." Heck, the average McDonalds with a playground requires children... KIDS... to partially disrobe to play. They make them remove their shoes.

Even wheelchairs and eyeglasses don't get a blanket pass. The law (A.D.A.) requires reasonable accomodations. That requirement can be met by allowing wheelchairs (and providing ramps, etc) or by anything else that is reasonable. A store could say that, because they don't want to give up on stairs, they have a special handicapped counter where clerks will fetch and display any merchandise a wheelchair bound person wants to see and that would meet the obligations imposed by the ADA.

A private business can and should be able to ask someone to leave for whatever reason they want... including possession of a firearm. Refusal to leave when requested is tresspassing. That's how it should be.

At that point you just keep your gun concealed and they don't have any reason to ask you to leave and everyone is happy. No need for signs or anything else. It just works.

 

[serrano]

Personally I feel that if your business throws open it's doors to the public, for the purpose of making a profit, most of the private property rules go right out the window.

What?!

Sorry, not in my country, not yet anyway.

 

[mekender]

A private business can and should be able to ask someone to leave for whatever reason they want

that was kinda my point, they cant do that now... they cannot discriminate against people based on a number of factors, none of which are covered by the constitution... but they can based on the one material item that is covered in the constitution...

Even wheelchairs and eyeglasses don't get a blanket pass. The law (A.D.A.) requires reasonable accomodations. That requirement can be met by allowing wheelchairs (and providing ramps, etc) or by anything else that is reasonable. A store could say that, because they don't want to give up on stairs, they have a special handicapped counter where clerks will fetch and display any merchandise a wheelchair bound person wants to see and that would meet the obligations imposed by the ADA.

right, but they cant make you leave your wheelchair in the car... and wheelchairs arent guaranteed by the constitution... though you could argue equal protection clause, which i might add should cover gun owners too...

Why do you think it would be illegal to ban clothing? There is no problem at all with saying "No clothes past this point."

have you EVER seen a business that does this? no, because it would be illegal in damn near every jurisdiction... even nudist resorts dont do that...

 

[ZeSpectre]

serrano,
A business opens it's doors and it's subject to all sorts of outside influences from inspections to accesability codes that wouldn't apply to a private residence. What I was trying to say (and admittedly I did it badly) was that private residence laws are not the same as private business laws.

 

[Tribal]

No gray area: if I'm found with a gun where I go to school, I get expelled. That's pretty black-and-white. The posthumous pictures of my classmates and I may be in color, though, if a repeat of Virginia Tech happens.

 

[Ed Ames]

Mekender, you missed the point completely...

1) A business can't force people to leave their wheelchairs in their cars.... nor can they make you leave your gun in your car. All they can say is "don't bring that thing in here." Whether you leave it in your car or chained to a lamp post out front is not their concern. They can and some do refuse to allow the wheelchairs inside. The law says only that the must make reasonable accommodations to people with disabilities. It doesn't require that wheelchairs be allowed inside. Some businesses refuse because there is no reasonable (read: safe for the handicapped person, other patrons, and/or the employees of the business) accommodation possible that includes bringing a wheelchair inside. Reasonable accommodations can include refusing to serve handicapped patrons at all.

Don't believe me? Try getting a skydiving business to take Stephen Hawking skydiving with his wheelchair.

2) A business (or private home) can require you to disrobe to enter. It is not and would not be illegal in any jurisdiction I'm aware of. Heck, go into a hospital and tell them you want to wear your street clothes into the OR while you have a breast job. They won't do it... they'll force you to disrobe as part of doing business with you. Perfectly legal.

You are REALLY reaching and making up false analogies to support something that doesn't make sense.

The only place I know of that prevents businesses from expelling trespassers from public parts of a business is California, and that's specific to parking areas and sidewalks in front of businesses and certain types of protected speech e.g., petition canvassers. Even in California businesses can eject those people from inside the business.

 

[archigos]

"private" entities cease being private once they allow the public to enter... that said, it would be illegal for them to ban wheelchairs, or to ban clothing, or to ban eyeglasses... it would likewise be illegal for them to require everyone that enters to smoke pot, or to disrobe... but the one material item guaranteed by the constitution is ok to ban?

Try walking into a formal restaurant in a bathing suit with a McDonalds bag in hand.
Try walking into a Pyramid owned mall wearing an anti-Bush shirt.
Try using a cell phone while gambling at a casino.
Try running around a pool.
Property owners have the right to govern their property as they see fit, provided they operate within the law. They can prohibit you from entering for no reason whatsover - it is their property, not that of the government, and it will continue to be their property until this nation descends into communism. Unless you're paying taxes for it, it is not public property.
To be clear, I would never support any business that prohibited firearms, but given that I don't own their property, I'm not going to suggest that we should legislate what they can do with it.

 

[mekender]

Property owners have the right to govern their property as they see fit, provided they operate within the law.

and that is my point... the SUPREME law of the land, the US constitution says that i have a right to keep and bear arms... the law stating that is already there... and it specifically says "shall not be infringed"... it does not specify who cannot infringe like some of the other amendments does, it says that it cannot be infringed at all... it also does not specify where i can bear arms... but for some reason a business owners wishes trump the constitution?

 

[cpttango30]

You know I just talked to the Dean of Students for my school yesterday about this very subject.

I look at it like this. I should not have to arm myself to go to school. I do not think having a campus flooded with guns is the answer to the shootings. Too many of the kids today (Which are what is on college campuses) do not understand the consequences of their actions.

The problem is not the school. Schools have been gun free for as long as I remember. They were gun free long before the two kids shot up columbine or the day Cho shot up VT. No one had a problem with it before then did they?

Unfortunately the problem lies within society itself. The parents are not providing stable loving homes and they are not providing discipline. How many times do you see kids in a restaurant playing video games during dinner while the parents ignore the kids and drink and talk. Too many people figured out how to have kids that do not have the higher brain function to actually raise them. To many people have kids to say "LOOK AT ME I HAVE A KID I AM A GOOD PERSON".

We talk about range morons every day on here do we not. I am sorry but if you shoot into the floor or celing of a range you should not be allowed to own a firearm.

I am sure I will take flak over this post. No one is allowed to carry on my campus not even off duty police officers.

Fortunately nothing has ever happened at our campus.

 

[ZeSpectre]

I look at it like this. I should not have to arm myself to go to school. I do not think having a campus flooded with guns is the answer to the shootings. Too many of the kids today (Which are what is on college campuses) do not understand the consequences of their actions.

I -shouldn't- have to arm myself to do anything, nor should I have to worry about drunk drivers, robbers, discrimination, or an unimaginably long list of other things. But this is the real world, bad things happen (almost always with little or no warning), and safety equipment is generally a good idea.

As to "kids". By the time you are 20 you are no longer a "kid" and if you don't understand the consequences of your actions that's a far greater problem that needs to be addressed. You also completely gloss over the other LARGE group on campus, namely faculty and staff. Kids? I think not.

Finally, if you are going to school in Virginia you may want to consider the fact that a lot of the faculty/staff may have firearms that they regularly carry off campus (I do) and probably have been doing so for years (I have). If they haven't caused problems in the past out in the big world why do you assume that coming on to a campus would be any different? Do you think there is something so fundamentally wrong with a college campus that it would make folks go nuts?

The problem is not the school. Schools have been gun free for as long as I remember. They were gun free long before the two kids shot up columbine or the day Cho shot up VT. No one had a problem with it before then did they?

Makes me wonder how old you are because schools have NOT been "gun free" for as long as -I- remember. And also, a LOT of people have had a problem with the way firearms owners get treated in our institutions of higher learning. It's not the firearms, it's the criminals and psychos that need to be addressed and when a blanket policy tries to lump the MILLIONS of law abiding gun owners in with the TINY percent of psychos like Cho I have to call foul and protest the slander.

Unfortunately the problem lies within society itself. The parents are not providing stable loving homes and they are not providing discipline. How many times do you see kids in a restaurant playing video games during dinner while the parents ignore the kids and drink and talk. Too many people figured out how to have kids that do not have the higher brain function to actually raise them. To many people have kids to say "LOOK AT ME I HAVE A KID I AM A GOOD PERSON".

So how, exactly, will placing more restrictions on the law abiding help with this social issue? If the issue is how the kids are being raised and their screwed up values, why aren't you addressing that? I'm not some screwed up kid so why are you so gung-ho on punishing me for something I've never done?

We talk about range morons every day on here do we not. I am sorry but if you shoot into the floor or celing of a range you should not be allowed to own a firearm.

By that measurement anyone who wrecks a car should most certainly never be allowed to drive again nor should anyone who ever bounced a check be allowed to have a bank account. Blanket statement type arguments are always weak as life is full of circumstances that should be considered.

I am sure I will take flak over this post. No one is allowed to carry on my campus not even off duty police officers.

Enjoy your fantasy. I can assure you that SOMEONE on your campus is carrying RIGHT NOW. They might be someone so concerned for their safety that they are willing to risk expulsion or they might be a criminal type who just doesn't care about actual laws (let alone campus "rules") but someone has a firearm and that begs the real question namely, "does this restriction -actually- make me safer or am I just buying into "feeling" safe?" And also the follow up question of "who will protect me if I run afoul of the criminal type and how long will it take that help to arrive?"

Fortunately nothing has ever happened at our campus.

You mean nothing has happened yet, or that you know of.
Seriously that is a pretty stupid argument.
The United States has never suffered a nuclear attack but we spend BILLIONS to try and protect against it. Should we quit because "it's never happened"? My house has never burned down, can I just discard my insurance and smoke detectors? What about my car insurance and seatbelts, I've never been in an accident so why do I need them? Oh and you know, that lawyer I keep on retainer is expensive. Since I've never been involved in litigation I guess he can go as well.

Need I go on?

 

[Tribal]

A football team shouldn't need a punter. Funny how they all have them, though...

 

[cpttango30]

You totally missed my point.

I think the option should be there. I never said you should not be allowed to carry on campus. Did I? NO. So stop talking to me like I am some kind of gun grabbing moron.

One of our biggest problems is this. I was sitting there and the Dean said " Say you are carrying on campus and someone comes up and pushes you" How do you react? I say "I do nothing" The dean says "Well what if you react by shooting the guy for pushing you" I say "Well Sir I know for a fact that I personally would never react with that kind of force for a push. You have to asses the situation and react accordingly"

Non-gun owners think we will shoot someone for no reason what so ever. The Dean says I can see you are a very level headed guy but there are many people out there that would use this as a way to get even. There is just no fighting when they keep using the same stupid and tired argument. I know that no one on THR would ever shoot a person for shoving them. Well at least I think that everyone on here would not do that.

I just think that blaming the schools is not the answer just as blaming the car is for the drunk driver. No one has a complete answer for this.

As for the shooting the floor or ceiling well when you do it once then laugh about it and do it again. Personally no I do not think that person has any right owning a firearm. It is real clear they do not have the higher brain function to operate a gun in a safe manner. If you think they should then you can stand next to them on the range, I will not be in the same buildging as them. The problem is not the schools it is not the guns it is the people.

The problem is with the I am going out in a blaze of glory mentality. They affectively get what they want fame. If we paid no attition other than reporting that a shooting happend. gave no names no body count no race break down no gender break down and no sexual preferance break down. I think it might go away.

I have said for years that the fall of this country will not be from war or food or econimic it will be from the lack of morals and values that is happening all around us.

People in my city were ok with a porn shop 250' from a elementry school, but if you asked them about a gun store in the same place they went nuts. This store also had vibrators and ***** hanging in the window but they were ok with that.

The police let some crazy church group stand on main street not 500' from that same elementry school as bus loads of school kids came buy, the group was holding signs of aborted fetuses. It is their first amentment right to protest and show thoese pictures is what I got told when I called and complained.

I will admit that I have fallen in to this pit. As I think it is ok for men to marry men and women to marry women. I personaly do not see any problem with it. Is this right is this wrong, I do not know i hear medical doctors going both ways on this. the church says it is wrong. Who knows if it is a brain problem or not.



This is what I see happening to the first college to allow CCW. When a person uses that CCW in a rightfull way to defend ones self. The news media will condim the school for allowing this cold blooded killer to be on campus, and the family of the dead punk will sue the school and the person that shot said punk. Watch and see.

 

[BridgeWalker]

never mind. sigh.

 

[Kind of Blued]

I just think that blaming the schools is not the answer just as blaming the car is for the drunk driver. No one has a complete answer for this.

You should definitely have thought that one out some more.

 

[Titan6]

Oh but it's not a "law" it's a regulation...and one voluntarily agreed to if you sign the conditions of employment or attend as a student.

AND

That's different than just a citizen coming onto the properties because those individuals haven't signed the agreement with the university to abide by the university policies.

Ahh, so as a non-employee/ student of their school I can do what I want? And this is better? Although I guess they can always ask me to leave campus or be removed as a tresspasser.

The fascinating part of all this is that the school has more faith in complete strangers, people they have fired and students they have expelled. All of these people can carry on campus but students and current faculty can not. Not that the law would stop a single person who wanted to shoot people anyway.

One college in the Valley has a unique stance on this issue. According to Gilbert's office, Blue Ridge Community College is the only school in Virginia that has a policy that allows students and faculty who have such permits to carry guns on campus.

the way I read it no school has to "allow" it, merely not disallow it.

However, most universities in the state, including JMU, have policies banning weapons on campus, claiming it creates a safer environment.

If 100% of school shootings occur at gun free campuses how is making more campuses gun free making the enviornment safer? I would really like to see some numbers to back up their claim.

 

[ZeSpectre]

I think the option should be there. I never said you should not be allowed to carry on campus. Did I? NO. So stop talking to me like I am some kind of gun grabbing moron.

cpttango30,
I responded to exactly what you wrote, line by line, with quotes so that there would be no misunderstanding as to which sections I was referring to. I didn't make anything up, I responded to what you wrote.

If what you wrote was not what you indended to say then perhaps in the future (and I mean this as constructive criticism, not as a snark or attack upon you) you might want to pause and review your posts once or twice before actually posting to make sure what you think you are saying is what you actually wrote down.

For long posts I often write it in a Word document first so I can review at my leisure and then post when I feel it reflects my intended statement. When I don't do that and just post mind-to-press is when I make misstatements or errors myself so I understand how it happens.

And just so you understand, beginning your post with a typical anti "yellow journalism" line like "Campus flooded with guns" most certainly sets an anti-RKBA tone to your post right from the start.