Texas Professors Fail to Stop Campus Carry

Court ruled they didn’t demonstrate they were likely to succeed on the merits. They hilariously claimed it was a First Amendment violation. Even the University of Texas thought that was ludicrous, and the judge didn’t buy it either. Look, stupid people with PhDs: when a student sticks a gun in your face and tells you to shut up, that’s a violation of your First Amendment rights. It’s also a violation of a number of other laws as well, most of which are quite serious, as I’m sure most people with an 6th grade education can tell you. Someone merely having a gun is a violation of nothing, except in your apparently vibrant, child-like imagination.

The Texas university system being a taxpayer funded, state chartered institution, is ultimately controlled by the Texas legislature, who said gun on campus are fine. That’s pretty much the last word unless you can convince them to change their minds.

10 thoughts on “Texas Professors Fail to Stop Campus Carry”

  1. Just more proof that for some (especially among the professor and academic class) the more education obtained the stupider the person.

  2. “Fools and cowards always vilify competence as imagined aggression.”

  3. I feel compelled to call BS on WB above. Education isn’t the bellwether of stupidity any more than a lack of education is the bellwether of wisdom.

    At any rate, I am very pleased that their request for injunction was denied. Repealing prohibition of carry at colleges and other schools is one of the remaining areas that needs work.

    1. Carl,

      Well you need to work on your reading comprehension as I qualified my statement with “some” and so in no way implied getting an education makes one stupid or that lack of education makes one smart so don’t try to put words in my mouth.

      However, most of what passes for education these days in our “institutes of higher learning” has absolutely nothing to do with education. For example, see More Leftist Attempts to Destroy Hard Sciences and More Evidence States Should Be Reducing Funding to State Universities Until Adults Take Over.

      As one who both attended universities and worked at one I found plenty of educated fools and also some smart ones who weren’t fools. I’ve also known high school dropouts who were smarter than many PhD’s. I once had a professor friend with several earned PhD’s complain to me about how many stupid and psychologically messed up professors he knew.

      At any rate, I’m left to wonder if you are a professor. Not that I’m accusing you of being stupid or messed up, just that calling BS on me seems to indicate hostility of the sort an academic might have.

      In any case, we are in agreement that PhD’s with lengthy CV’s should not be able to subvert the 2nd Amendment through either academic propaganda or legal chicanery.


  4. “When a student sticks a gun in your face and tells you to shut up, that’s a violation of your First Amendment rights.”
    Sir, if I may respectfully disagree, the First Amendment only applies to laws of Congress (“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.”), and not to students. “Incorporation” only extends that application to State and lower governments. A student can never violate the First Amendment. In your scenario above, he may be guilty of assault and extortion, but not of violatong the Constitution. I think it’s important we maintain that distinction.

    1. Agreed. He’s certainly violating your common law right to free speech, but not your First Amendment right. Only the government can violate your First Amendment right.

      1. Maybe ideally, but that’s not the law. It’s both a civil and criminal act to violate someone’s civil rights, or to conspire to do so.

        1. I think there is a distinction though. In my home, where I have sovereign authority, I can outlaw certain speech and punish it with consequences (e.g., disciplining my children for subversive speech, or removing and banning access to a neighbor for bad-mouthing my faith or politics, or even removing a salesman for trumpeting a product I hate). But the government, which is sovereign over the public streets and airwaves, cannot constitutionally discipline, punish, or exile me for publicly, yet responsibly, berating them with my honest personal opinions of their performance. The Constitution specifically protects my right to speak against their policies even in their sovereign domain. It does not recognize a person’s right to criticize a private head of household within his sovereign domain (home).

          Perhaps an example is your right to delete comments on your blog that you find simply disagreeable. You are in authority here and no one has a “right” to make their views heard in your domain. But the Constitution forbids that same sovereign prerogative to the government.

          Am I making any sense here?

          Sincerely and with respect, Arnie

  5. I don’t understand how this Professor could have lost his case! There are several states (Utah among them) that have recognized the rights of students to carry weapons on campus. Surely there are plenty of examples, now, showing how debate has been stifled, and professors and fellow students threatened, by peaceable citizens who manage to obey the law enough to be able to qualify for government-issued permits, to justify the banning of guns on campus!


Comments are closed.