This ^^^^^^^^
Campus carry syllabus post-SB-11
- Thread starter TexasProf
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
This ^^^^^^^^
Mr. Prof,
I'm a 32 year old guy going back to college to pick up some Math so I can pursue a Masters in Economics.
If I were a professor. I'd strongly suggest NOT addressing the topic in a syllabus.
It will bring unwarranted attention to the topic. Im assuming you're being advised by your school administration on how to deal with incidental exposures (NOT ILLEGAL). This is overkill in my opinion. When a "your shirt tail is riding up" will address the topic quickly discreetly and efficiently.
Quite frankly if I had a professor walk out, call the police and detain me. I'd definitely challenge the policy as a whole.
Particularly since math is not subject to professor discretion when it comes to my grade.
As previously stated behavior is clearly enumerated by the Texas legislature. There really is no need to add to it.
I'm a 32 year old guy going back to college to pick up some Math so I can pursue a Masters in Economics.
If I were a professor. I'd strongly suggest NOT addressing the topic in a syllabus.
It will bring unwarranted attention to the topic. Im assuming you're being advised by your school administration on how to deal with incidental exposures (NOT ILLEGAL). This is overkill in my opinion. When a "your shirt tail is riding up" will address the topic quickly discreetly and efficiently.
Quite frankly if I had a professor walk out, call the police and detain me. I'd definitely challenge the policy as a whole.
Particularly since math is not subject to professor discretion when it comes to my grade.
As previously stated behavior is clearly enumerated by the Texas legislature. There really is no need to add to it.
zincwarrior
TGT Addict
Think of it like a 30.06 sign. It's an indication you need to take a different section of the class, taught by someone else.
Starting January 1st everyone with a CHL well be able to open carry on any state campus. They can not go in to a building though. If it's a state school, the property is owned by the state not the school. I have confirmed with my UPD that I could open carry 01/01/2016
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is absolutely, positively untrue. You CAN NOT open carry on an educational institution, period. End of story. Your university police department is WRONG.
DPS's web site (and the law itself) confirm this: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/legal/newlegislation.htm
Read Section 47 of the enrolled law changes here: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/billtext/html/HB00910F.htm
Yup, following that advice, will get you in a lot of trouble.
from an idgit coffeeholic
According to UPD the garages are exempt because of the castle doctrine, then the land that the campus sits on is not the premise of the institution. The premise does not start until you enter a building owned and operated by the university. They maybe wrong. But what they did, is define what the premise of the university is.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here is sone material about it.
http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/exclusive/changes_in_texas_chl_law.html#.VirB_F88KJI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://www.multibriefs.com/briefs/exclusive/changes_in_texas_chl_law.html#.VirB_F88KJI
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They should read the link I posted, Section 47, PC 460.35 (a-1) update. It is a Class A Misdemeanor to open carry there.
Correct. The changes to 46.035 (a-1)(2), however, don't use the word "premises" like the changes to (1) do.
Yes, and mis-understand that the law applies to more than just the premises.
No, this is a much older post about a completely separate law.
I don't take it as argumentative AT ALL! I imagine a LOT of folks will be confused, and that will lead to some interesting interactions. One of the worst things the leg did was push back OC to Jan 1 and then push back CC to late 2016.
LOTS of confusion will abound.
It might be owned by the state, but it's not really considered public property. If any administrator or professor of a university asks you to leave, you have to go or you will be charged with trespassing.
Well, shoot! (so to speak)
I was hoping the prof was for real, but seems maybe not so.
I thought I might be able to chip in a little.
I am an attorney, a CHL holder, retired military and former college and graduate level instructor. I've even written the occasional syllabus. During my time in the Army, you nice people paid your taxes to pay for a crap load of .45 that I sent down range in your honor, so I even know a bit about firearms and firearms safety. We won't discuss that blown-up spotting scope with the conspicuous .45 hole through it.
Were I to address this in a syllabus, and I'll admit I'm of two minds here, the most I would say is something like this: "Given the current environment and the varied student backgrounds, I want to remind CHL holders who carry here of the importance of the "C" part - "Concealed". If you have a CHL and wish to do so, you can tell me privately, so if you inadvertently reveal your weapon, I will know in advance you are licensed and that I have no reason for concern. If you are a student and see another student inadvertently showing a weapon, I would ask that you tell me quietly and privately, and let me determine how to proceed."
That's not without its own problems, but leaving the topic unaddressed also has problems. It's at least a thought.
It's also likely irrelevant.
As an aside, I have enjoyed this thread more than many; I thought almost all of the responses were civil and addressed to the point. For what that's worth.
I was hoping the prof was for real, but seems maybe not so.
I thought I might be able to chip in a little.
I am an attorney, a CHL holder, retired military and former college and graduate level instructor. I've even written the occasional syllabus. During my time in the Army, you nice people paid your taxes to pay for a crap load of .45 that I sent down range in your honor, so I even know a bit about firearms and firearms safety. We won't discuss that blown-up spotting scope with the conspicuous .45 hole through it.
Were I to address this in a syllabus, and I'll admit I'm of two minds here, the most I would say is something like this: "Given the current environment and the varied student backgrounds, I want to remind CHL holders who carry here of the importance of the "C" part - "Concealed". If you have a CHL and wish to do so, you can tell me privately, so if you inadvertently reveal your weapon, I will know in advance you are licensed and that I have no reason for concern. If you are a student and see another student inadvertently showing a weapon, I would ask that you tell me quietly and privately, and let me determine how to proceed."
That's not without its own problems, but leaving the topic unaddressed also has problems. It's at least a thought.
It's also likely irrelevant.
As an aside, I have enjoyed this thread more than many; I thought almost all of the responses were civil and addressed to the point. For what that's worth.
- Status
