Intel request, slightly off-topic

Hello All. thanks for this site.

I am an adult student (47) at TESC (evergreen). In a critical reasoning program.

Thinking Straight, spring 2011.

Creating a "critical exchange presentation". 4 arguments, 2 pro and 2 con. 30:00.

"Should concealed carry be allowed on TESC's campus by valid CPL holders?"

I have surfed a bit and gathered many of the usual arguments, both pro and con.

I am looking for any non standard angles/arguments. Any input would be great.

Thanks

Also any thoughts on the validity of the firearms ban on school campuses (college

and university) in Washington State? I believe it would not stand a court challenge

due to existing case law. The rule is a WAC

Peace

Hej Captrob:

It is my understanding that only students are barred from CC or OC on any campus in WA, and then only through student rules. If I remember correctly there is one Comunity College that does not have this ban in place, so there it would be proper for licensed students to CC if they hade a CPL in their possesion.

There is no RCW or WAC (that I know of) that totaly bans all carry on higher education state property. At least none listed in RCW 9.41.300. The prohibition in RCW 9.41.280 applies to common schools only (k-12)

Why carry?

Deturrent, if a BG thinks there may be someone that could resist with deadly force, he may think again. This would be especially true in the case of a small person, like a woman, being forceably raped or robbed.

First response on site: Like the VA Tech killings, if there were students/faculity that were CC, they could have taken out the threat as soon as the killer opened fire.

But I think the #1 reason is, BGs do not obey the law. If they want to carry, rob, rape, kill or whatever, no law will hinder their actions...especially if they know the person(s) that are the object of their violence cannot defend themselves.

Of all places in the state, the colleges and universities should be leading and teaching by example that the citizens should obey the laws of the state, and what those laws are. Where, by banning arms at their college, they are doing just the opposite...the law states such, the Washington constitution states such, but we are above the law, we are smarter now, so we can just disreguard the law as written and make our own laws... Is that good education? Do you wonder why some in the LE community think they can be a law unto themselves?

What is the written Law?

WA state Constitution Article 1 section 24. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defence of themselves or the state, shall not be impaired

hermannr said:

Hej Captrob:

It is my understanding that only students are barred from CC or OC on any campus in WA, and then only through student rules. If I remember correctly there is one Comunity College that does not have this ban in place, so there it would be proper for licensed students to CC if they hade a CPL in their possesion.

Click to expand...

It isn't both. College students, are not barred from CC/OC on campus. This OC/CC issue is a Institution issue, and an Institution 'right' to exercise.

Stated another way, to argue in favor of the College is that the College is private property, and has the 'right', to implement policies that ban, or restrict OC/CC on campus.

The opposition may respond that because the College accepts Federal, and state moneys, that the College must follow Federal, and state Law. But, from what I am aware, there is no law, or Law which states that Colleges are required to honor CC permits, or OC on campus in order to receive funds.

There is no RCW or WAC (that I know of) that totaly bans all carry on higher education state property. At least none listed in RCW 9.41.300. The prohibition in RCW 9.41.280 applies to common schools only (k-12)

Click to expand...

Yes, but you may carry onto (k-12) if you have a permit. If you do not have a permit, you cannot carry, but I think that is a Federal thing...someone will correct me if I am wrong. You can carry onto k-12 as long as you do not 'linger', but that is only if you have a CC permit.

Why carry?

Deturrent, if a BG thinks there may be someone that could resist with deadly force, he may think again. This would be especially true in the case of a small person, like a woman, being forceably raped or robbed.

Click to expand...

CC does not act as a deterrent. OC, well, it may. But just like the death penalty being argued to act as a deterrent, well, it doesn't seem to be the case.

Some individuals may quote you statistics on crime dropping significantly following the implementation of CC as "shall issue," OC, or "constitutional carry" somehow being a direct cause for crime dropping in the area of implementation. Read the study carefully, and always be a critic of both sides.

Disparity of force is an interesting concept. People think that only a female would be justified in using a firearm in a self-defense situation against an unarmed attacker - it isn't true. There are plenty of instances where individuals used force against an attacker who was their size, and who was unarmed. It is not as much about disparity of force as it is perception of ability of the attacker.

First response on site: Like the VA Tech killings, if there were students/faculity that were CC, they could have taken out the threat as soon as the killer opened fire.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. One of the issue when Gifford was shot was that the individual did not know who was, and was not the attacker. Shooting unfold quickly, and it takes time for an individual to ascertain who is, and is not the threat.

I will respond later to the rest, if you are interested in reading it.

To "carry" to me is unrestricted carry. In k-12, even with a permit you are not allowed to "carry" into the building except under very specific circumstances. School grounds, parking lots etc are not "into a school" per RCW definitions.

There is no RCW or WAC that says a licensed (or unlicensed for that matter) private individual cannot carry into a building on any college campus in the state of WA. There are student "rules" that say "as a student" you may not, but student rules do not apply to the general public, or even an instructor at that school. If the school is private, (Like PLU) then you may have an argument, put "public" universities and Colleges are on "public" land, not private land. and..

Sorry, last I heard WSU, UW, CWU, WWU, etc... and all the community colleges were owned by the State, and therefore are public property, not private property. There can be no "trespass" in common areas such as a roadway, parking lot, library, museum or any other area that is open to the public. The university/college cannot restrict the public any more than the legislature allows, and the legislature has not specifically allowed the universities to restrict carry on/in any area open to the general public....

hermannr said:

To "carry" to me is unrestricted carry. In k-12, even with a permit you are not allowed to "carry" into the building except under very specific circumstances. School grounds, parking lots etc are not "into a school" per RCW definitions.

There is no RCW or WAC that says a licensed (or unlicensed for that matter) private individual cannot carry into a building on any college campus in the state of WA. There are student "rules" that say "as a student" you may not, but student rules do not apply to the general public, or even an instructor at that school. If the school is private, (Like PLU) then you may have an argument, put "public" universities and Colleges are on "public" land, not private land. and..

Sorry, last I heard WSU, UW, CWU, WWU, etc... and all the community colleges were owned by the State, and therefore are public property, not private property. There can be no "trespass" in common areas such as a roadway, parking lot, library, museum or any other area that is open to the public. The university/college cannot restrict the public any more than the legislature allows, and the legislature has not specifically allowed the universities to restrict carry on/in any area open to the general public....

Click to expand...

Hey hermannr,
Thanks for your time. Check out http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=106-124-700 It is for Central. The way it reads is persons, maybe. Most others define it within student conduct code. They do state "prohibited on campus". The "word" at TESC is they expel students, tell non students leave or face trespass charges. Many student rules are WAC's. Thank you for the input. Peace

Beretta92FSLady said:

It isn't both. College students, are not barred from CC/OC on campus. This OC/CC issue is a Institution issue, and an Institution 'right' to exercise.

Stated another way, to argue in favor of the College is that the College is private property, and has the 'right', to implement policies that ban, or restrict OC/CC on campus.


Disparity of force is an interesting concept. People think that only a female would be justified in using a firearm in a self-defense situation against an unarmed attacker - it isn't true. There are plenty of instances where individuals used force against an attacker who was their size, and who was unarmed. It is not as much about disparity of force as it is perception of ability of the attacker.



I will respond later to the rest, if you are interested in reading it.

Click to expand...

Hello Beretta92FSLady,

Thank you for your words. Well spoke.

I dig the non-state-actor concept. Any idea why the Capital campus does not attempt to restrict OC/CC? Isn't it a separate entity?

Disparity of force, a fine angle, thank you.

The fact most of the relevant arguments, pro and con, are projections, common sense type stuff is proving to be tricky for my project.

Personally I think the firearm "ban" is improper. I do not see enough of a compelling interest to suppress a constitutional right.

I enjoy reading your words and look forward to more. Thank you.
Peace

hermannr said:

To "carry" to me is unrestricted carry. In k-12, even with a permit you are not allowed to "carry" into the building except under very specific circumstances. School grounds, parking lots etc are not "into a school" per RCW definitions.

Click to expand...

What specific circumstances would that be? You are allowed to pick up your child, and drop them off.

"
(e) Any person in possession of a pistol who has been issued a license under RCW 9.41.070, or is exempt from the licensing requirement by RCW 9.41.060, while picking up or dropping off a student;"

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.280

There is no RCW or WAC that says a licensed (or unlicensed for that matter) private individual cannot carry into a building on any college campus in the state of WA. There are student "rules" that say "as a student" you may not, but student rules do not apply to the general public, or even an instructor at that school. If the school is private, (Like PLU) then you may have an argument, put "public" universities and Colleges are on "public" land, not private land. and..

Click to expand...

Yes, if the college you are walking into is not private, and does not have a no-gun policy that includes all individuals, and not just students.

I think the OP should stick with their college specifically since each college has different types, and degrees of policies.

The constitutionality of a no-gun policy for all individuals, including those with a CCP, has not been ruled on by Washington state supreme court, well, I could be wrong about this.

Sorry, last I heard WSU, UW, CWU, WWU, etc... and all the community colleges were owned by the State, and therefore are public property, not private property. There can be no "trespass" in common areas such as a roadway, parking lot, library, museum or any other area that is open to the public. The university/college cannot restrict the public any more than the legislature allows, and the legislature has not specifically allowed the universities to restrict carry on/in any area open to the general public....

Click to expand...

You are right, here is a link to Colleges, and whether or not they are 'private', or 'state'.

http://www.univsource.com/wa.htm

Has the legislature confronted the issue of OC on state college campuses? I was under the impression that you were required to have a CC permit in order to carry on campus whether you are a student or visitor.

captrob said:

"Should concealed carry be allowed on TESC's campus by valid CPL holders?"

Click to expand...

TESC, according to the page I linked is a public school.

Why should a CPL holder not be allowed to carry?

You know, it is hard to make an argument of why an individual should not be allowed to carry LOL. It would be like arguing that a person should not be allowed to wear any particular article of clothing because the college says-so...well, I view wearing a sidearm as wearing an article of clothing.

Ok, I have thought long, and hard about this...

1) Because permitting CC on campus would open the door to individuals arguing that OC should be permitted also.

2) CC/OC has the potential of disrupting the learning process by exposing students to a symbol of danger, which is a firearm that is not in possession of an authority figure, such as an LEO.

3) CC/OC means that the individual carrying is carrying their sidearm for the purposes of self-defense. For an individual to have the ability to, at will, draw their sidearm, and begin to fire, creates an even greater hostile, and dangerous environment, even when engaged in self-defense.

4) The state Institution has a 'right' to regulate, and/or restrict individuals from engaging in certain activities, such as CC/OC, if the safety of the public is at issue. Just as OC/CC individuals may have a 'right' to carry, individuals who do not OC/CC also have a right to not be confronted with the threatening presence of a sidearm in the classroom.

5) (oldie but goody) 'Rights' are not 'rights', they are privileges, and should be treated as such. Until the legislature or Washington state supreme court rules on the legality of restricting, or banning CC/OC on public campuses the Institution has the authority to restrict, and/or ban OC/CC. The purpose for this argument is that the Institution has the authority to implement policies, even if they are perceived as unconstitutional, or unConstitutional, until either the court, or Court freezes the policy, or rules, or Finds on the issue of OC/CC campus restrictions, and/or bans.

I think arguing for a firearm-free policy would require the person to appeal to fears, and misconceptions. You will merely have to create a concept of the firearm presenting a danger to all individuals that are in the presence of the individual OC/CC-ing.

The pro-firearm side of the argument is less philosophical, and has more to do with degrees of firearm 'rights', and not whether or not firearms are a 'right' to bear, and carry.

This issue is more about the constitutional, and Constitutional authority of the Institution to impose firearm policies on students, and visitors of the Institution.

Hej Captrob!

WAC 106 is the student rule book for Central Washington University. 106-124 is for the "general conduct" of students. Can CWU actually restrict a student's ability to carry on their campus? Who knows, it has not been tested in court...RCW 9.41.270 and 9.41.300 do not specifically grant that power to the Regents, and do not list universities and colleges as having any exemption from the state pre-emption of all things related to firearms and weapons.

RCW is LAW, WAC is a subordinate governmental entities administrative rules, supposedly based on a Law that allows them to impliment those self generated rules...RCW will always trump a WAC. There are a whole series of WACs for the colleges and universities, one for each entity, all written (approved) by that entity's Board of Regents

It's like the City Of Seattle passed a local "law" that made it illegal for you to carry in a Seattle City park...you do know how long that lasted? Right?...Just as long as it took someone to take the City Of Seattle to court, and it was gone. That is because a "law" or "Rule" that runs counter to the RCWs, is unenforceable as a law or a rule...just as if it never existed.

The problem is, no student is at college to fight the system, they are there for an education...fight the system, you may get the education too, but you will most likely not have any credit for the time and effort spent (or at least not until you win in court) if you loose, you are hosed. That is why it has never been tested, and because it has never been tested, it is still on the books.

WAC specific to TESC is WAC 174...specifically WAC 174-120-35 is the prohibition on firearms explosives etc.

It is my understanding that the school stands on RCW 28B.40.120 as the Law that enables this restriction. which reads:

The board of Regents.... (12) May promulgate such rules and regulations, and perform all other acts not forbidden by law, as the board of trustees may in its discretion deem necessary or appropriate to the administration of the college.

I have put in bold where I think they have gone wrong, because RCW 9.41.290 totally pre-empts this and the University Regents do not have a special free pass to violate this RCW.

Why are these rules still in place? Because no-one has challenged them.

Beretta lady, you may be correct on K-12...I am not sure where I got my understanding...that is the property was ok, but the building was not. Been wrong before, definately not the first time.

However, as to state universities and colleges, they are public, not private. They are on state land, not private land, has nothing to do with accepting funds from teh feds or the state government. That is why they call them "Public" state colleges and universities. They are owned and governed by the state government. The state has passed on the certain things, but have not made the "private" property, as in owned by the trustees or regents.

They can restrict access to certain areas for mission reasons (otherwise anyone could walk in and disrupt classes) but they cannot restrict access to "common" or "public" areas. They have not been given that power. Read RCW 28B.40 as specific to TESC. Libraries, museums, grounds, parking lots etc are all "public" areas

As I said earlier, PLU is a private and PLU can (and does) do what ever it wants, that is not contrary to State law as concerns private entities.

I would suggest only touching briefly on the ability of students with permits to carry on campus, and instead focus more strongly on non-students who have permits. Think about it--only about 30% of the student body of any given University or college are even old enough to have a permit, but EVERY parent, and EVERY member of the faculty is eligible for a permit (age wise).

Think about all the people who would ordinarily have good reason to be on campus--family, staff, sports fans, researchers, bookworms using the library, adults taking continuing education classes, etc--who can carry just about EVERYWHERE else, but are stripped of their fundamental right to self defense just because they cross some arbitrary property line onto a campus.

Carry on campus is only marginally about students--because students represent only a tiny fraction of all permit holders nationwide.

Focus on all the OTHER people who are barred from carry on campus--even though the State deems them safe to carry in WalMart, in Federal Parks, on the highways, and in grocery stores.

I'm the President of the ECU chapter of SCCC (Students for Concealed Carry on Campus), so I have a vested interest in campus carry. But I think we need to change the focus of the discussion to the segment of the population that is REALLY effected most by these bad laws--non-students--if we're going to gain any traction with the general populace...

When we illustrate how ridiculous these laws REALLY are, and how they effect hundreds of thousands of law-abiding citizens each day, maybe then we can start making some inroads with our Legislators and the Citizens of our nation.

At least that's my strategy on this issue...

hermannr said:

They can restrict access to certain areas for mission reasons (otherwise anyone could walk in and disrupt classes) but they cannot restrict access to "common" or "public" areas. They have not been given that power. Read RCW 28B.40 as specific to TESC. Libraries, museums, grounds, parking lots etc are all "public" areas
.

Click to expand...

Talk about a pickle though. The student can carry every place on campus with the exception of the classroom. Personally, I never ran into an issue on campus, but I CC the whole time, every day, even though the college policy was that you are not allowed to carry. Yea, I'm a rebel.

I just didn't want to be unprepared if some 19 year old received an A- in his course, thought it was the end of the world, and decided to take down some of his/her instructors, and I happen to be in the room.