- Messages
- 598
- Reactions
- 307
See you are looking at the ruling how you want to look at it. Not what they actually said. They said that the State Board of Education could not criminalize the possession, transfer, etc. of a firearm. They specifically sited the Doe decision in that internal policies that "DO NOT CARRY THE RULE OF LAW" can be enacted by the board. It's exactly like someone said early. By entering University property you are voluntarily agreeing to a set of rules enacted by the State Board of Higher Education that does not have the force of law but, does carry the choice of service. So they can tell you to leave and charge you with trespassing if you refuse but, they can't tell you specifically you will be criminally liable for carrying a firearm on University property.The court SPECIFICALLY said in their decision they were allowed to do this. The court didn't say "No," they said "You messed up. Do it this way instead."
That is why OUS's behavior is important, because what it does is basically set stipulations for students, employees and so forth.
It more or less screws longtime employees who probably have been carrying for a long time, and now they're told if they want to continue with the education or job, they have to stop carrying.
Not everyone lives within walking distance of their job or school, nor does everyone drive. Public safety on some campuses don't even carry firearms themselves, they rely on the police to respond. Obviously the police are everywhere and we have nothing to fear. In reality it will take the police at least 5 minutes to get to a location of a shooter or attacker, so we should hold our breath for 300 seconds or more and eventually the police should come.
The decision of OUS really hurts those who are at higher risk to be targetted by muggers, rapists, etc. because this basically is telling those types of criminals that they have little to fear. Moreover it makes those at higher risk fear even more! "If I carry I could get expelled or lose my job.... But if I don't I could get mugged or raped." Anyone who has ever been raped rarely forgets and there is shame for a long long time.
My MAJOR problem with this policy or rule is that w even open campuses are affected, such as PSU (which is in downtown Portland) and what not. Open campuses means as soon as an employee or student leaves a building, they end up on a public side-walk. It's a joke to think that our streets are safe places at all times every time.
Why do anti-gunners use words like "gun free" and "safe" when the status quo emotional batters and abuses other people who don't fit into the norm?
What kind of double standard is that?
"We won't kill you, but you'll certainly want to die on a daily basis after we tell you how much of an idiot you are for voting for Y or believing in Z."
Whatever happened to universities being a place where you could disagree and it was accepted?
As for most of us on this board who:
A) aren't an employee of a university or a student, or
B) don't have loved ones going to a university, we have nothing to worry about.
But for everyone else who does, certainly it is not a happy time.