The Liberal Gun Club Forum

Man Gawker couldn't even make it one sentence with multiple errors

Very first sentence with this hit piece:

Beginning Aug. 1, Texans who legally own guns (so, all of them) will be able to carry their concealed weapons on the campuses of the state’s public universities.

Sighs

If it wasn't accurate they couldn't put it out on the world wide web.

Yes, actual number of potential legal carriers is so small it wouldn't ruffle any feathers.

An error in the first sentances out of the dozen or so posted there? You know its amazing that people think Texas is some dangerous place with all there guns while they sit in California basking in there smugness.

Of the 3703 murders in TX from 2005-2014, 23 were committed by CHL holders. That's 0.62%.

4% of Texans have their CHL.

So by my math, CHL holders in Texas are about 6 1/2 times less likely to murder you than the average guy on the street.

It's not the guy who takes the time to get a license to legally carry that scares me.

Gun prohibitionists cannot resist being melodramatic about this non-issue.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tex ... te-n525096

The law does not go into effect until Aug. 1, but professors at the University of Houston have started preparing guidelines for dealing with gun-toting students that include warning faculty to steer clear of "sensitive topics" and dropping hot button issues from their curricula, according to a UH Faculty Senate.

http://fs.uh.edu/documents/events/Campu ... 132703.ppt

-Be careful discussing sensitive topics
-Drop certain topics from your curriculum
-Not “go there” if you sense anger
-Limit student access off hours
-Go to appointment-only office hours
-Only meet “that student” in controlled circumstances

Because carrying a gun literally makes you want to shoot people when they don't agree with you 100%...

modernhamlet wrote:Because carrying a gun literally makes you want to shoot people when they don't agree with you 100%...

Yes. It is known that the mere presence of a gun will cause an otherwise sane and rational person to immediately misplace their excrement and kill the nearest available 12 people.

PiratePenguin wrote:Of the 3703 murders in TX from 2005-2014, 23 were committed by CHL holders. That's 0.62%.

4% of Texans have their CHL.

So by my math, CHL holders in Texas are about 6 1/2 times less likely to murder you than the average guy on the street.

It's not the guy who takes the time to get a license to legally carry that scares me.

And not many will be 21. A large percent of Texas CHL holders are over forty. This media blitz on this disgusts me. The news this morning made it sound like anyone with a gun could start carrying on campus in the fall. Truth matters.

That and I don't know many college-age people with the discretion money to acquire an LTC. I know I certainly couldn't afford it back in the day

Cost breakdown for TX License to Carry:

Department of Public Safety Background Check: $140+tax
Fingerprints: $10
LTC Class: Ranges anywhere from $65-$100

SmokeFan wrote:

modernhamlet wrote:Because carrying a gun literally makes you want to shoot people when they don't agree with you 100%...

Yes. It is known that the mere presence of a gun will cause an otherwise sane and rational person to immediately misplace their excrement and kill the nearest available 12 people.

The mere presence of a gun as causation argument has been made even here in the past.

DispositionMatrix wrote:

SmokeFan wrote:

modernhamlet wrote:Because carrying a gun literally makes you want to shoot people when they don't agree with you 100%...

Yes. It is known that the mere presence of a gun will cause an otherwise sane and rational person to immediately misplace their excrement and kill the nearest available 12 people.

The mere presence of a gun as causation argument has been made even here in the past.

By select people. And clearly not a universal opinion "even here"

atxgunguy wrote:That and I don't know many college-age people with the discretion money to acquire an LTC. I know I certainly couldn't afford it back in the day

Cost breakdown for TX License to Carry:

Department of Public Safety Background Check: $140+tax
Fingerprints: $10
LTC Class: Ranges anywhere from $65-$100

I said the same thing this morning to my wife. I also included an approximate cost of $400 to $600 in a handgun. Plus there is the holster cost. I said there is no way I could have afforded the cost in my days at University of Houston. She was skeptical saying that was in the early 1980s not now. But I still think cost to students matter.

The last two press releases in this document address the anti-campus carry hysteria at the University of Houston: http://is.gd/pqWGth

Douva wrote:The last two press releases in this document address the anti-campus carry hysteria at the University of Houston: http://is.gd/pqWGth

Thanks. It amazes me to hear the hysteria being created over this.

To put this into perspective, who is it that's putting out all these "helpful" suggestions on how to avoid conflict with CCW holders? That's right, the same people who are against CCW on campus. It's in their best interests to create a climate of fear and make people believe that heated discussions and grades are going to turn into multiple-casualty gunfights. They're the same kind of people who predict blood in the streets when states go from "may issue" to "shall issue" for CCW and then go silent when the bloodbath never comes.

TheHunterOfSkulls wrote:To put this into perspective, who is it that's putting out all these "helpful" suggestions on how to avoid conflict with CCW holders? That's right, the same people who are against CCW on campus. It's in their best interests to create a climate of fear and make people believe that heated discussions and grades are going to turn into multiple-casualty gunfights. They're the same kind of people who predict blood in the streets when states go from "may issue" to "shall issue" for CCW and then go silent when the bloodbath never comes.

That includes the local media. The first thing I hear out of a reporters mouth is that anyone with a gun will now carry on campus. Completely ignoring that there are requirements and licensing involved. Which as mentioned above very few people get. As for illegal carry, anyone with a gun could now illegally carry on campus and in class and that professor would never know.

sikacz wrote:

TheHunterOfSkulls wrote:To put this into perspective, who is it that's putting out all these "helpful" suggestions on how to avoid conflict with CCW holders? That's right, the same people who are against CCW on campus. It's in their best interests to create a climate of fear and make people believe that heated discussions and grades are going to turn into multiple-casualty gunfights. They're the same kind of people who predict blood in the streets when states go from "may issue" to "shall issue" for CCW and then go silent when the bloodbath never comes.

That includes the local media. The first thing I hear out of a reporters mouth is that anyone with a gun will now carry on campus. Completely ignoring that there are requirements and licensing involved. Which as mentioned above very few people get. As for illegal carry, anyone with a gun could now illegally carry on campus and in class and that professor would never know.

Too bad an op-ed clearly pointing out the absurdity of all this drama among UH staff and the media would make no difference. It would have been good PR for the Texas chapter, though. Unfortunately, the first time there is a gun-related incident on campus having nothing to do with concealed carry, the campus carry law will be blamed.

sikacz wrote:

TheHunterOfSkulls wrote:To put this into perspective, who is it that's putting out all these "helpful" suggestions on how to avoid conflict with CCW holders? That's right, the same people who are against CCW on campus. It's in their best interests to create a climate of fear and make people believe that heated discussions and grades are going to turn into multiple-casualty gunfights. They're the same kind of people who predict blood in the streets when states go from "may issue" to "shall issue" for CCW and then go silent when the bloodbath never comes.

That includes the local media. The first thing I hear out of a reporters mouth is that anyone with a gun will now carry on campus. Completely ignoring that there are requirements and licensing involved. Which as mentioned above very few people get. As for illegal carry, anyone with a gun could now illegally carry on campus and in class and that professor would never know.

My wife agrees. She said that she knew of students carrying guns in class some long before we even had CHL. A good conceal carry means nobody but the person carrying the gun knows it is there. As it should be. Just like no guns in hospitals. I can't tell you how many Nurses I know that carried a gun in their purses especially those working evenings or nights.

Looks like they have created enough of a patchwork of "Exclusion Zones" to make carry unmanageable.
http://www.uh.edu/police/campus-carry/C ... 1.2016.pdf

• 1. Existing state and federal laws prohibiting weapons in certain areas.
  • a. Campus areas used for day care and school activities, including areas frequently used by minor children. Texas Penal Code §46.03(a)(1).
    b. Health care facilities similar to hospitals used for patient care, counseling and mental health services. Texas Penal Code §46.035(b)(4).
    c. Areas used for sporting or interscholastic events. Texas Penal Code §46.035(b)(2).
    d. Established places of religious worship. Texas Penal Code §46.035(b)(6).
    e. Polling places. Texas Penal Code §46.03(a)(2).
  2. Laboratory areas where dangerous materials and equipment or research animals are present.
  3. University housing other than Calhoun Lofts.
  4. University-owned, rented, or leased vehicles used to transport students other than University shuttles.
  5. Spaces used for discussions of grievances or disciplinary hearings. (These exclusions may be permanent or temporary based on usage of the spaces.)
  6. Areas containing critical university infrastructure.
  7. Areas where contractual or licensing obligations require the exclusion of firearms.

I don't get the science lab restriction. Just what do they thing a firearm will do exposed to science - instantaneous combustion. I'd be more worried about the lithium batteries in some handheld devices. I suppose someone may take the university to court if the restrictions nullify campus carry. Some of those functions could occur in any building.

sikacz wrote:Some of those functions could occur in any building.

Some of those functions could be made to occur in just about every building.

sikacz wrote:I don't get the science lab restriction. Just what do they thing a firearm will do exposed to science - instantaneous combustion. I'd be more worried about the lithium batteries in some handheld devices. I suppose someone may take the university to court if the restrictions nullify campus carry. Some of those functions could occur in any building.

The Working Group recommendations are available and contain some of the thought process behind many of these. The original recommendation was:

"Areas where the discharge of a firearm might cause great harm, such as laboratories with extremely dangerous chemicals, biologic agents, or explosive agents, and areas with equipment that is incompatible with metallic objects, such as magnetic resonance imaging machines."

If that's the actual criteria they use to determine what constitutes "Laboratory areas where dangerous materials and equipment or research animals are present" then I don't see a big problem with it. I wouldn't want some yutz carrying his gun into an MRI room either.

PiratePenguin wrote:

sikacz wrote:I don't get the science lab restriction. Just what do they thing a firearm will do exposed to science - instantaneous combustion. I'd be more worried about the lithium batteries in some handheld devices. I suppose someone may take the university to court if the restrictions nullify campus carry. Some of those functions could occur in any building.

The Working Group recommendations are available and contain some of the thought process behind many of these. The original recommendation was:

"Areas where the discharge of a firearm might cause great harm, such as laboratories with extremely dangerous chemicals, biologic agents, or explosive agents, and areas with equipment that is incompatible with metallic objects, such as magnetic resonance imaging machines."

If that's the actual criteria they use to determine what constitutes "Laboratory areas where dangerous materials and equipment or research animals are present" then I don't see a big problem with it. I wouldn't want some yutz carrying his gun into an MRI room either.

That's not how the article qoute is worded. I'm sure it was all discussed in a workgroup with concern; however, the wording chosen can include many buildings that would not fit in that category. Sounds to me like it's an effort at a clever work around the law. And as I wrote earlier some function like counceling occur in many buildings or could deem to be in any building including a classroom. This effort could mean it's legal for a CHL to carry from the parking lot and walk around the campus but not legally carry into a building. Or making it so difficult to determine which building that it's not worth doing.