LovesHisXD45
Regular Member
imported post
Maybe everyone is just missing my point. The law says clearly "for the purpose..." There has to be intent to satisfy the requirement of the statute. So, even if they interpret the law the way they want to, it still requires intent in order to be enforced. If the case were brought before a judge, they still have to prove that the student open carried and remained on campus for the sole purpose and intent of causing a disruption, according to the way it is currently written, and to satisfy the requirements of criminal conduct and responsibility (76-2-101), or the charge would be dropped. What is so unclear about that? If they are unable to show intent, then the charge should be thrown out.
However, it is possible that a jacked up jury or biased judge could twist the interpretation around if they really wanted to. That is the part that is messed up the most in our justice system if you ask me. Biased interpretations can put innocent people behind bars or cause negative criminal history to be tacked onto their records when it ought not to be.
Maybe the colleges should conduct a poll among their whole entire student bodies to see if the other students would consider open carry on their campuses a "disruptive" condition for them. This kind of feedback would help a lot in relieving the unfounded concerns of administrators and faculty. It may swing one way, or the other, but at least there would be factual information for them to base their attitudes on rather than personal disapproval of open carry on campus.
Kevin
Maybe everyone is just missing my point. The law says clearly "for the purpose..." There has to be intent to satisfy the requirement of the statute. So, even if they interpret the law the way they want to, it still requires intent in order to be enforced. If the case were brought before a judge, they still have to prove that the student open carried and remained on campus for the sole purpose and intent of causing a disruption, according to the way it is currently written, and to satisfy the requirements of criminal conduct and responsibility (76-2-101), or the charge would be dropped. What is so unclear about that? If they are unable to show intent, then the charge should be thrown out.
However, it is possible that a jacked up jury or biased judge could twist the interpretation around if they really wanted to. That is the part that is messed up the most in our justice system if you ask me. Biased interpretations can put innocent people behind bars or cause negative criminal history to be tacked onto their records when it ought not to be.
Maybe the colleges should conduct a poll among their whole entire student bodies to see if the other students would consider open carry on their campuses a "disruptive" condition for them. This kind of feedback would help a lot in relieving the unfounded concerns of administrators and faculty. It may swing one way, or the other, but at least there would be factual information for them to base their attitudes on rather than personal disapproval of open carry on campus.
Kevin
