I don't get it, why Campus Carry?

[Randy45]

If we can't even agree amongst ourselves...how do we expect the antis to ever be persuaded to our side.....after reading this thread you can't tell what the pro gun side even believes.....

 

[Shuutr]

I think we all agree more than we disagree. Especially if questions are asked in a survey.

"Do you think people should be allowed to carry on campus?" Yes

"Do you think people should be allowed to open carry?" Yes)

 

[Renegade]

If we can't even agree amongst ourselves...how do we expect the antis to ever be persuaded to our side.....after reading this thread you can't tell what the pro gun side even believes.....

I do not see any disagreement in this thread. A few questions on how the order of the priority list is done, but nobody suggests anything on the list shouldn't be.

 

[TexasCajun]

It's not the 'what' that we disagree on, it's the 'how'. There is a way to go about getting things done, but some folks can't or won't take a step back in order to gain a little perspective. For my money, I'll side with the folks who are able to see the big picture.

It makes no difference that you have the best, most sophisticated ladder ever built if you're trying to climb the wrong wall.

Sent from my GS 3 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Whiskey_Rocka_Rolla]

It's sacrilege to question the sagacity of the Censor-in-Chief on a certain other site, so of course I got no rational answer there.

Can someone rationally explain to me why Campus Carry is the pet project of the TSRA? Upon what factual basis did someone conclude that the relative gain toward liberty represented by permitting CCW by CHLs on a subset of college campuses was the most effective and expedient use of people's energy? Who used what math, considering the relative crime level on the college campuses that would actually be affected by this and the number of enrolled students and faculty with any inclination to obtain a CHL and then also carry concealed, to determine that the greatest gain in gun liberty for the greatest number of Texans would be what keeps being misnamed "Campus Carry" (since it doesn't affect all campuses)?

Don't get me wrong (although those who champion Campus Carry surely already have), I think anyone should be able to carry a weapon however they please on any public property. In that regard, I'm all in favor of Campus Carry. But why specifically Campus Carry right now? Why is it the most important thing in Texas gun legislation for so many people?

Before you answer, please make some vague effort to have a factual basis for any claims you make, and answer the questions I've actually asked. I know the TSRA's party line, and no one will benefit from it being hawked yet again. If you're just going to say, "There are a lot of students who can't carry a gun in self defense," then kindly demure from participating, as that's no answer to anything I've asked.

If you went to college, sometimes walking through campus VERY late at night, on a campus in one of the nation's most dangerous neighborhoods, where 6 armed robberies have happened, 1 rape, and 1 attempted rape, plus a few other lesser offenses, just in the last 2 semesters, you'd understand. Especially if you knew you were a CHL holderr but had to leave your gun in your car because of the law. But in all honesty, even a suburban college in a low crime area would be a prime target for criminal activity, because colleges in general, are vulnerable. They are damn sure not nearly as secure as some of our legislators would have us believe.

I am all for open carry (and believe it should have never been forbidden to begin with), but right now we are trying to reverse Texas's track towards being a "less than pro gun" state (meaning we shouldn't come in #15 on a list of pro gun states we should be in the top 5), and removing the criminal penalty for a CHL holder carrying his/her gun to school, would be a higher priority in my opinion..not much higher, but if I had to pick one piece of legislation to be signed into law today, it would be the campus carry bill.

I honestly think some of the less aware people in our society still haven't gotten over the shock that now a person carrying a gun on them for protection has become such a common thing. That is really the only reason open carry is illegal, to keep people from getting all freaked out. So it's basically like, "you can carry a gun, but nobody can know...". I don't understand that and I know some libtard was behind it. In Louisiana, you don't even need a carry permit to openly carry a firearm, only for concealed carry.

The arguments I've heard against campus carry are even more ridiculous.

 

[M. Sage]

Oh, the paranoia.

Also, I asked people to refrain from posting rhetorical platitudes. I never demanded validation of my expectation bias. You're dodging, and if you don't have a useful offering for this conversation, why inject yourself?

Why did you take a condescending and hostile tone when you asked your question?

 

[DubiousDan]

It's one less target rich environment. Chip away at them one after another.

Grad students and adult employees of the institutions have already been mentioned but I don't know if anyone else has mentioned that there are a number of veterans returning to school that are >21

 

[Shorts]

From reading the OP I think the below reply came closest to answering the question.

Since you're clearly new to the rodeo, I'll explain how this works. Campus carry didn't start out as TSRA's pet project. In 2009 and 2011, it took a backseat to the employee protection ("parking lot") bill, which predates the campus carry issue. After the parking lot bill passed in 2011, campus carry (which came close to passing in both 2009 and 2011 but failed to overcome a few procedural hurdles) moved up the list. It's now TSRA's pet project because the people fighting for it have EARNED that privilege through multiple sessions of hard work and several near misses in which the bill barely came up short.

Open carry has now moved up to take the secondary position previously held by campus carry. Once campus carry passes and open carry shows some forward progress (e.g., getting out of committee), open carry will likely move into the top spot. With that said, it's important to keep in mind that the TSRA seems to place more emphasis on WHERE people can carry than on HOW they can carry.

He's asking a valid question.

Simply, "why should Campus Carry be prioritized over other pro gun bills?"

He even said that he supports Campus Carry. I think there's a little culture clash that's clouding your judgment.

I read the OP as you are. "Why CC instead of ___?" I think Douva's reply gave a reasonable explanation. The rest of the arguing in this thread is just noise. The griping about who should take priority is a pissing match that divides the pro-gun community. It always has been. And everyone falls for it every single time.

Every proposal is important to someone. And we won't get it all in one session. That is reality. We all need to realize this. It is not easy waiting on 'your' favorite bill, I get it. But don't fire shots in camp.

 

[J. Fred]

It's one less target rich environment. Chip away at them one after another.

Grad students and adult employees of the institutions have already been mentioned but I don't know if anyone else has mentioned that there are a number of veterans returning to school that are >21

^

Most Seniors are 21 & 22 y/o. Most turn 21 while they are Juniors too. That is a good percentage of the undergrads that can get their CHL and carry on campus. My son attends Texas Tech and took his class while 20 to be able to send it in on his 21st b-day. Most of his friends at Tech have their CHL's as well.

 

[M. Sage]

^

Most Seniors are 21 & 22 y/o. Most turn 21 while they are Juniors too. That is a good percentage of the undergrads that can get their CHL and carry on campus. My son attends Texas Tech and took his class while 20 to be able to send it in on his 21st b-day. Most of his friends at Tech have their CHL's as well.

Lots of veterans going through on GI Bill now, too. Be pretty funny if a combat vet with a CHL was around when some nutjob thought it might be fun to go on a spree.

Shortest. Spree. Ever.

I have a question for the OP: Have you tried asking the TSRA about their strategy? Or are you just going to grouse about it on forums?

 

[TexasRedneck]

The OP has NO interest in engaging in a meaningful dialogue - or even getting on going. It was, IMO, intended to create disharmony at all costs - all his responses have been antagonistic and confrontational - this string isn't worth the electrons it uses, IMO.

 

[MPA1988]

Allow me to serve as a mediator and say campus carry is a priority simply due to recent school violence.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Allow me to serve as a mediator and say campus carry is a priority simply due to recent school violence.

ummmm........

No. Not needed. Thanks anyway - that's what we have mods for....<G>

 

[stdreb27]

Lots of veterans going through on GI Bill now, too. Be pretty funny if a combat vet with a CHL was around when some nutjob thought it might be fun to go on a spree.

Shortest. Spree. Ever.

I have a question for the OP: Have you tried asking the TSRA about their strategy? Or are you just going to grouse about it on forums?

A few years back at the jr college I took some classes at. They had an officer in class as a student concealed carrying.

Anyway, some abusive ex boyfriend stopped by class to make a little visit with the ex. One thing led to another and the off duty officer, held him at gun point till the cops arrived and hauled him off.

That stupid professor still had the balls to say, he was against campus carry.

 

[Wabbit69]

If I read the OP correctly, he is asking why certain organizations placed a higher priority on Campus Carry legislation than other legislation. My answer would have to be he should ask those organizations directly, not a general firearms forum. If he disagrees with that organziation, well, he should start his own lobbying campaign for his pet legislation.

However, I agree with campus carry as a priority for several reasons already mentioned above: 1) An active shooter would be a nightmare at UT Austin. Do you guys remember the bomb-threat response last fall? The response by the UT administration and UTPD left a mental picture of three monkeys trying to procreate with a football. Thirty thousand kids crammed into 40 acres is a great target for either a derranged lunatic or Little Johny Jihad. As it stands right now, if somebody wanted to pull it off, it would probably be much worse that VT, unless a civillian can intervene.
2) In light of the other incidents in "gun-free-zones" across the nation, the debate is already on nationally, so it's the low-hanging fruit.

However, in all fairness, I must disclose that I am a staff member at a major institution of higher education located somewhere in Austin.

 

[()pen(arry]

I appreciate the few people who read my question objectively and gave objective answers. While I don't think it's the best policy for determining legislative priority, the argument that Campus Carry has seniority of cause for the TSRA is the only argument that strikes me as rational, and not founded in supposition, assumption, or assertion. I respect the seniority explanation, even if I wouldn't personally back an organization that made decisions based on it. As I made clear, and as a few people observed, I am entirely in favor of people being armed on campus, where not properly restricted by private property limitations.

I find it disheartening that so many supposed supporters of gun rights and liberty chose to take such reflexive, hostile stances in this discussion, revealing that they are far more loyal to their associates than they are to reason, liberty, or gun rights. The paranoiacs who assumed I was on an anti-gun or anti-TSRA fishing expedition really ought not be taken seriously by anyone.

On the other hand, it's good to see that you can ask a tough question on this forum and not have your thread deleted and your account banned.

 

[TexasRedneck]

See, that's the point - you didn't so much ask a tough question as you came in with a very hostile 'tude and demanded folks discuss things YOUR way. That's NEVER going to result in an overall meaningful dialogue. But....you knew that, didn't ya?

 

[Shuutr]

Nevermind.

 

[M. Sage]

See, that's the point - you didn't so much ask a tough question as you came in with a very hostile 'tude and demanded folks discuss things YOUR way. That's NEVER going to result in an overall meaningful dialogue. But....you knew that, didn't ya?

I still want to know what he asked us and not TSRA. They've been open and helpful every time I approach them.

I kind of wonder if I'm one of the paranoiacs he called out since his post sounded like a troll targeting TSRA. I sure hope that's the case.

 

[TexasRedneck]

You know why, Mike - as do I.