The University of Utah's fight to maintain a long-time policy that bans concealed weapons from its campuses now moves to state court. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball found that the majority of the university's claims are based on state law and should be filed in state court. However, Kimball left open the option of hearing the U.'s First Amendment claims if the case is filed in federal court within 20 days of the state court's resolution of the issue.
Meanwhile, the U.'s gun ban remains in place pending an answer as to whether the institution's 25-year-old prohibition is in violation of state law. Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has contended that only the Utah Legislature can create gun regulations.
Although the U. faces a difficult fight with respect to the Legislature's role in creating gun regulations, it is to be commended for its substantial efforts to protect its long-held policy and its First Amendment right to make its own rules. Although any number of Utah colleges and public schools likewise object to Utah's concealed weapons law, no other entity has sought a solution to the issue through the courts.
The Attorney General's Office is urging the university to work with the Legislature to change the law. While that would be a gentlemanly approach to resolving this issue, history suggests the Legislature has dug in its heels and will not entertain adding schools and college campuses as exemptions to the concealed carry law.
This past legislative session, the public school lobby worked in good faith with legislators to resolve a conflict between the criminal and state education codes with respect to concealed weapons. Instead, they ended up with a law that says concealed weapons are fair game in schools. Not only that, school districts lost the section of the school code they believed made employee restrictions on carrying guns into schools enforceable.
The resulting changes are so confusing that some education attorneys believe the law could be construed to mean students now could legally carry guns in their cars parked in school parking lots.
It is deeply regrettable that the Utah Legislature has turned a blind eye to the wishes of the public on this issue. Public opinion polls on this issue have never wavered ù Utahns don't want concealed weapons in schools. Yet, Utah's concealed weapons law is far more liberal than many states. Texas doesn't permit concealed weapons holders to carry guns onto public school or college campuses. Colorado, which is significantly revamping its concealed weapons laws, likewise excludes schools.
There is always the hope that the Legislature will reconsider its actions next year. In the meantime, we applaud the U. for its efforts to defend a policy that protects students, educators, staff and visitors to the U.'s campuses and helps ensure a free exchange of ideas.
Subject: Granny uses a gun in self defense, but doesn't want to tear up the kit chen
This is from Chuck Muth's News and Views:
Granny Bags a Burglar
"Margaret Summey credits God -- and her .357 Magnum -- with protecting her from a burglar Thursday. Police say Summey, a 64-year-old widow, shot 43-year-old Timothy Doyle Huitt after he broke into her McGill Drive home. After being shot, Huitt fled through Summey's yard, leaving a trail of blood that led from her home to nearby Berry Shoals Road, where he collapsed. 'I did what I had to do. That's what the police told me. I protected myself,' Summey said. . . . "(Upon hearing the burglar) I went straight and got the .357 Magnum,' she said. 'I would have used a shotgun, but I had just had new countertops done and I didn't want to tear up the kitchen.'"
A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from
you.
-- Ramsey Clark
- -
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:07:18 GMT
From: Charles Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com>
Subject: Poll on CCW at UofU
For those who care, there is a new on-line alumni newsletter at the University of Utah. It is currently conducting a poll regarding CCW at the U.
To voice your opinion (including the option to leave comments), go to <http://sh2.alumni.utah.edu/alumni/newsletter.php> and scroll down almost all the way to the bottom of the page. The poll is on the right hand side.
Current results are:
Concealed weapons should not be allowed on college campuses because the dangers outweigh the benefits and they would not deter criminal behavior. 273
Concealed weapons should be allowed on college campuses because they would act as a deterrent to criminal behavior. 194
Concealed weapons should be allowed on college campuses because the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the second amendment. 105
Concealed weapons should not be allowed on college campuses because they would deter free speech and academic freedom. 38
Total votes: 610
Here are some interesting comments someone I know posted:
"The newsletter editor doesn't address an important
nuance of the UofU's policy. As the UofU argued
in federal district court, the university only intends to enforce its
policy against faculty, staff, and students. The UofU argued in court
documents that it does not intend to enforce its policy against
permit holders who do not fall into the aforementioned categories.
"The Utah Attorney General's website is a good resource to read at
least one side's arguments in the case.
"See http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/highprofileissues.htm"
IOW, the U's policy is not only stupid, it is discriminatory in that only university members are left defenseless. Visitors, invited or otherwise, are perfectly free to carry legal weapons.
Subject: U Alumi Online shuts down its poll--Chronicle has one of its own
All,
It seems the UofU online Alumi newsletter did not like the way their poll on CCW on campus was going. Attempting to view results brings up, instead, a page saying the poll was shut down due to "spamming and distorting." Of course, no information on what their evidence is for that claim.
However, the online version of the U's student newspaper, "The Chronicle" has its own poll asking whether the U should keep up its battle to ban guns. Of course, in typical fashion, they have two "No" answers and only one "yes" answer, thus distorting the results a little.
But if you're of a mind to do so, surf over and log your vote. In my experience, if these things go in favor of gun control, they are trumpted as some kind of gospel truth despite the fact that they are not scientific. However, if they go in favor of RKBA, we never hear of them again.
Go to <http://www.utahchronicle.com> and scroll down to the bottom of the page. Poll is on the right hand side.
charles
Current results:
Should the U continue its fight to keep guns off campus?
Yes. The U must do all it can.
(65%; 120 votes)
No. It's a pointless battle. The U should give up.
(27%; 50 votes)
No. Even though it's good to keep guns off campus, the U can't succeed.
Interestingly enough, the poll has been 'frozen due to spamming and
distorting" (their own words). In other words, the numbers don't reflect
what they wanted to see, so they don't want it to be seen anymore.
Waaaaahhh...
- --
Karl L. Pearson
Senior Consulting Systems Analyst
Senior Consulting Database Analyst
karlp@ourldsfamily.com
http://consulting.ourldsfamily.com
My Thoughts on Terrorism In America:
http://www.ourldsfamily.com/wtc.shtml
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Charles Hardy wrote:
>For those who care, there is a new on-line alumni newsletter at the University of Utah. It is currently conducting a poll regarding CCW at the U.
>
>To voice your opinion (including the option to leave comments), go to <http://sh2.alumni.utah.edu/alumni/newsletter.php> and scroll down almost all the way to the bottom of the page. The poll is on the right hand side.
>
>Current results are:
>
>Concealed weapons should not be allowed on college campuses because the dangers outweigh the benefits and they would not deter criminal behavior. 273
>
>Concealed weapons should be allowed on college campuses because they would act as a deterrent to criminal behavior. 194
>
>Concealed weapons should be allowed on college campuses because the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the second amendment. 105
>
>Concealed weapons should not be allowed on college campuses because they would deter free speech and academic freedom. 38
>
>Total votes: 610
>
>Here are some interesting comments someone I know posted:
>
>
>"The newsletter editor doesn't address an important
>nuance of the UofU's policy. As the UofU argued
>in federal district court, the university only intends to enforce its
>policy against faculty, staff, and students. The UofU argued in court
>documents that it does not intend to enforce its policy against
>permit holders who do not fall into the aforementioned categories.
>
>"The Utah Attorney General's website is a good resource to read at
>IOW, the U's policy is not only stupid, it is discriminatory in that only university members are left defenseless. Visitors, invited or otherwise, are perfectly free to carry legal weapons.
One more poll on guns. This one is going in our favor currently so go log your vote and keep it that way. One excuse used by the UofU alumi association for shutting down their poll is that the results were different than those showing up in the Chronicle poll.
Charles
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
The Ogden Stupid-Exaggerator is running a poll about Leavitt's decision to
sign SB108 clarifying a CCW right to carry in schools. Vote YES.
http://www.standard.net/opinion.html
Thanks.
The UofU Alumni pollsters decided, without benefit of cookies, that most the
overwhelming pro-gun votes received yesterday were "duplicates" so they've
Subject: Fw:RE: Legally concealed guns on campus poll
Not sure what kind of explanation Ms. Marion expects when a poll gives results you don't like. Nor do I know how they can tell which votes are multiples if they didn't bother to implement the basic measures to limit multiple votes in the first place.
But if you haven't already, go over to the U of U and vote for the least objectionable option there. Nothing like creating a little mental dissonance in the minds of gun haters.
Charles
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Mr. Hardy,
Thank you for your comments. It became clear this morning that someone had
been "spamming" our poll with multiple opinions because the numbers changed
so dramatically, and without explanation. I informed the newsletter
technical specialist of the situation, and he has stopped the voting in
order to delete all of the multiplications, of which there are many. It's
obvious that someone with an agenda has been undermining the validity of the
poll--something we will try not to allow to happen again.
Unfortunately, there are some out there who lack the integrity to allow the
poll to reflect accurately the opinion of our alumni readers.
If you doubt that the opinion of our poll has been intentionally skewed by
multiple votes, please look at the results of the Daily Utah Chronicle,
which, coincidentally, is conducting a similar poll
(http://www.dailyutahchronicle.com/).
Regards,
Linda Marion
Editor
U-News & Views
- -----Original Message-----
From: Charles Hardy [mailto:utbagpiper@juno.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 3:27 PM
To: lmarion@alumni.utah.edu
Subject: Legally concealed guns on campus poll
Dear Sir or Madam,
I checked your web site today to see what the results of your poll on
legally carried weapons on campus were. When I clicked on the "results"
link, I did not find the results. Instead, I received the following
message:
"We are sorry for the inconvinience. This poll has been frozen due to
spamming and distorting."
If you have some evidence of "spamming and distorting" I would ask you to
post such evidence. I'd also like to see what the last valid results
showed. Certainly if you have evidence of spamming, you have some idea of
when it started and can post data as it stood, prior to that.
If you do not, I can only assume that your evidence amounts to nothing more
than the fact that--at least when I voted--the poll seemed to be going
strongly in favor of allowing legally carried weapons on campus.
I realize these polls are unscientific to begin with. But if you don't like
the results, quite posting the polls and then using them to bolster
positions when you do get answers you like.
Clarification of your position would be most appreciated.
Subject: Re: Fw:RE: Legally concealed guns on campus poll
On 3 Apr 2003 00:12:11 GMT Charles Hardy wrote:
Not sure what kind of explanation Ms. Marion expects when a poll gives results you
don't like. Nor do I know how they can tell which votes are multiples if they
didn't bother to implement the basic measures to limit multiple votes in the first
place.
- -----
What do you expect? At least when I had an account there, their
system was set up to allow facile revoting, despite cookie protection.
All one needed do was exit Lynx and restart a Lynx session, and all
cookies were deleted. Those polls that protected against that tended
to allow only a single vote from all UofU users. Fire Gov. Leavitt
and his change agents (specifically the regents and Bernie Machen).
Shalom,
Scott
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:17:18 GMT
From: Charles Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com>
Subject: FW: Re-Vote U of U Poll
It looks like the UofU alumni site has re-opened their poll. I'll assume they've placed some kind of measures in place to prevent multiple votes from the same machine. Pass this around, surf over, and log your opinion (for the least objectionable option, anyway). Let the gun grabbers see themselves for the tiny minority their are, once again.
Current results are very much in favor of allowing legal CCW. Let's keep it that way.
Thanks to those who took a moment to log an opinion on the Chronicle's web site poll. That poll on guns has now closed--in about the usual time-frame I'd say--and the newest poll is concerning student health insurance benefits. Below are the results from the gun poll.
Those who want to keep guns off campus at all costs ended up with 56%. But hardly the overwhelming support that might otherwise have been manifest at a place like the U.
Charles
Should the U continue its fight to keep guns off campus?
Yes. The U must do all it can.
(56%; 128 votes)
No. It's a pointless battle. The U should give up.
(38%; 87 votes)
No. Even though it's good to keep guns off campus, the U can't succeed.
Thanks to those who took a moment to log an opinion on the Chronicle's web site
poll. That poll on guns has now closed--in about the usual time-frame I'd
say--and the newest poll is concerning student health insurance benefits.
- -----
Really? The gun poll still comes up for me at both
http://sh2.alumni.utah.edu/poll/poll.php
and
http://sh2.alumni.utah.edu/alumni/newsletter.php
even after reloading <g>.
___Charles___
Those who want to keep guns off campus at all costs ended up with 56%.
But hardly the overwhelming support that might otherwise have been
manifest at a place like the U.
- -----
I wondered if they preloaded those polls, or have enough sophomoric
regulars who hit these polls as soon as they are posted. Regardless,
I doubt they took any vote limitation measures. I wonder if John
Halleck still has any connection with the U's computer department.
He'd know how to accomplish that, if anyone were actually interested.
Shalom,
Scott
- -
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:38:35 GMT
From: Charles Hardy <utbagpiper@juno.com>
Subject: UofU gun policy LTEs in today's DesNews
The Deseret News published three letters to the editor today. The first one could use some rebuttals. The other two could use some kudos. Lest anyone get the idea that the DesNews is being evenhanded, they have printed no less than 2 or 3 anti-gun full length editorials in the last couple of months alone, even encouraging the governor to veto SB 108 because it would allow legal CCW in schools by teachers and other adult employees. This, even as the owner of the DesNews, the LDS church, was supporting passage of the bill so as to gain some new options in keeping guns out of churches.
I know many gun owners have very mixed feelings on SB 108, being the "mixed bag" that it was. But the DesNews made clear its reason for opposing the bill was based on pure, anti-gun views.
Charles
http://deseretnews.com/dn/edt/0,1555,4,00.html
Gun rights not absolute
As a student at the University of Utah College of Law, I am deeply interested in the free exchange of ideas on campus. I am also interested in the effect, if any, that guns have in this exchange. I do not own guns myself, but I respect others' rights to bear arms and support the Second Amendment's protections.
I also feel that the right to bear arms, like the other rights in the Bill of Rights, is not absolute and ought to be subject to some reasonable restraints. Just as there is no absolute freedom of speech in schools, it seems reasonable that a similar limit on other rights is warranted. I also commend the university in pursuing this issue in the face of criticism by some government officials. It is important to note that both Texas and Colorado have been witness to horrific school shootings ù Columbine High School and at the University of Texas in Austin. Does a similar tragedy have to occur before a restriction on guns is considered before the Legislature here?
Douglas E. DeVore
Salt Lake City
We are the good guys
I just read your editorial opinion titled: "U's gunfight commendable." I don't understand how your people think. We have the right, guaranteed by our Constitution, to carry our concealed weapons. We are not the bad guys. We are the good guys. We are not the problem. If it is truly the public's wish that there be no guns in schools, why did the petition for "The right to learn, right to worship" fail so miserably?
Marion Mott
Draper
Who is making the rules?
Your editorial,"U.'s gun fight commendable," commended the U. for efforts to protect "its First Amendment right to make its own rules." I've read the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over and over and, although it mentions religion, freedom of speech and the press, and the right to assemble, I don't find any reference at all to an educational institution having the right to make its own laws.
Perhaps the Deseret News Editorial Board has its own constitution to which it is referring.
I'd also like a credible explanation of how disarming all the "good guys" protects everyone from someone who attempts to cause harm (the "bad guy").
The SLTrib published another piece of anti-gun tripe today.
Rebuttals can be sent to letters@sltrib.com. Send as plain text. They delete all email with attachments.
"When submitting letters to the Public Forum, please include your full name, signature, address and daytime telephone numbers. Information other than your name and the city in which you live are kept confidential.
Keep them short. Concise letters developing a single theme are more likely to be published.
For hard copy submissions, please type and double space throughout.
Letters are condensed and edited.
Because of the volume of mail received, not all submissions are published"
The Utah Legislature spent a lot of time last session arguing over reform of the public schools. In the midst of this debate, the lawmakers passed a bill that virtually invites people with concealed-weapons permits to bring their guns to school. Some might call that a reform, but we do not believe most Utahns would.
For openers, it runs counter to common sense, which argues that for the safety of children, the state should do everything it can to discourage people from bringing firearms into schools.
Gov. Mike Leavitt signed the bill last month, giving the excuse that the new legislation wouldn't really change anything. We beg to differ.
A veto would have forced the Legislature to reconsider this dangerous bill, and perhaps to do what it should have done in the first place, namely, to ban all firearms from schools. There could be reasonable exceptions, of course, such as for law enforcement officers, but such exceptions should not include the 52,000 Utahns who currently hold permits to carry concealed weapons.
The proponents of the new law, Senate Bill 108, claim that schoolchildren have nothing to fear from the law-abiding citizens who have passed the criminal background check and rudimentary training course necessary to hold a concealed-carry permit. In fact, the proponents go further, insisting that the presence of these armed people in schools will deter crime.
But the Bureau of Criminal Identification reported last year that not all Utah concealed-carry permit holders are law-abiding citizens. Four people in the past eight years had their permits revoked for committing murder, at least two using the guns they were carrying legally. Another permit was revoked for attempted homicide with a firearm, and yet another was in jeopardy because of a pending homicide case.
Apologists pointed out that the overall crime rate among permit holders was lower than in the general population, but that is small consolation when these people are the only private citizens with carte blanche to carry guns in schools.
The backers of the bill, led by Sen. Mike Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, claimed that it was needed to eliminate a conflict between the concealed-carry law, which says that permit holders may carry guns "throughout the state, without restriction" (except for the secure areas of airports, courts, jails and mental hospitals) and another law that forbade the possession of weapons and explosives in schools.
The lawmakers should have eliminated the conflict by adding schools to the list of places where permit holders may not carry. Sen. Patrice Arent, D-Holladay, proposed such a bill, which was defeated.
It is shocking that lawmakers would open the schoolhouse doors to tens of thousands of people carrying guns. If this is reform, count us out.
