Texas Senate approves guns on campus:

[rl6214]

Texas Senate approves guns on campus: House has 13 days to make measure into law.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_12407268

Would this be the first one?

[DonP]

1. Nope, schools in Utah and Colorado allow it as well I believe.

That's assuming the people carrying are at least 21, already have a concealed carry permit, have passed the FBI background checks and the requisite training.

I think there are a couple of other instances too.

Now lets all wait for the official screamer and hand wringers decrying "give every kid a gun" and "guns at frat beer parties" etc.

[paulsby]

13. WA is legal too on college campuses nt

[MichaelHarris]

19. Not true

I'm at WSU

[paulsby]

27. yes true. you are wrong

there is no LAW against it.

you may have a campus POLICY against it, but that has zero to do with legality.

i'm a cop in WA state. i know the law regarding carry, where legal.

it is legal on college campuses.

hth

[MichaelHarris]

30. I don't care who you

are, it's not legal for a student to carry a concealed weapon on the WSU campus.

[paulsby]

31. it is legal. you are wrong

please cite the law that makes it illegal.

here's a hint for you. campus policy is not law, and does not say what is illegal or legal, only what is against POLICY.

you cannot be criminally punished for carrying on college campuses in WA state, because there is no law against it.

i repeat.

so cite the LAW that CRIMINALIZES it. if you can't, i will take that as a concession that you are wrong.

and don't understand what the word "illegal" means.

[MichaelHarris]

33. cite me the law cop

[Euromutt]

38. Paulsby's more or less right

He can't cite you the law, because there is no law. Or, more correctly, there's no law in the Revised Code of Washington. Prohibitions on students, faculty and staff carrying in state-run institutions of higher learning are covered by the Washington Administrative Code, and they are disciplinary offenses, not criminal offenses. The school can expel or fire you, but they can't have you arrested.

[paulsby]

42. exactly correct.

also note that the area of whether a student can be expelled from a PUBLIC campus for carrying (assuming he is doing it legally - ie 21 or over and with a permit), is still an unsettled area of law.

iow, it has never been challenged.

but yes, we are both understanding that it is LEGAL, which was my claim.

i suggest, based on my knowledge of WA supreme court jurisprudence, and case law, that *if* a student was expelled for carrying concealed on campus, and it was a public university, that he would win in a suit. but that's still unsettled.

regardless, one thing is painfully clear to both of us. it is ENTIRELY and indisputably legal to carry on college campuses here.

[MichaelHarris]

45. Answer this genius

Will you be teaching us the history of the UT sniper shooting, you know, the one where you said students held him at bay? If as you say, there is no law and a student is expelled for carrying a gun on campus then he would have a civil recourse. How come it has never been tested in the courts? If it has been tested in the courts then a precedent would have been set and students could carry. Has a case gone to trial and what was the outcome genius?

I also have a background in Law.

[paulsby]

49. until you cite the alleged law

criminalizing carry on college campuses in WA state,

which i challenged you to do several posts ago, and you have yet to admit you are wrong, i am not hopping down your bunny trails...

cite it here:....

you made the claim. you said it was illegal.

back it up.

or be a coward and slink away.

[MichaelHarris]

53. hahahahah

going nowhere, still waiting on my link about students holding off the UT sniper.

[paulsby]

54. again, you made the claim

back it up.

cite the law that criminalizes carry on college campuses in WA state.

you can't do it.

you lose. hth

[MichaelHarris]

60. Got that

Whitman link yet genius?

[rl6214]

64. found one here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

"Once Whitman began facing return gunfire from the authorities and civilians who had brought out their personal firearms to assist police"

[MichaelHarris]

72. completely not true

I grew up in Texas. Those "civilians" were Texas Rangers. Notice how Wiki had no citation for that?

[Euromutt]

84. Nope, not all

From the Wikipedia entry on Whitman:

Ramiro Martinez, an officer who confronted Whitman, later stated in his book that the civilian shooters should be credited, as they made it difficult for Whitman to take careful aim without being hit.

In addition, while the people who made their way up the tower to take on Whitman at close quarters where mostly law enforcement officers, they included Allen Crum, "first-floor supervisor of UT Co-op." I do recall reading somewhere that Crum had been "hastily deputized" before commencing the assault, but up to that point, he was a private citizen.

[MichaelHarris]

88. you saw that in the movie

played by Ned Beatty.

[Euromutt]

92. I didn't know there was a movie

And I certainly didn't see it. Point stands, though; Crum was not a law enforcement officer.

[MichaelHarris]

94. name one

"armed student" at the UT tower shooting. The poster said armed students held off the sniper. Name one of them

[Spoonman]

135. Alan Crum

an assistant manager at the University Co-op.

Look it up smart ass.

[rl6214]

87. This story lying as well?

http://www.news8austin.com/content/news_8_explores/ut_tower_shooting/?ArID=167519&SecID=552

"I was running toward the South Mall, and while running, once in a while somebody would shoot, and I'd look to see if I could recognize if it was an officer, and actually it was a civilian who had a deer rifle or some type of weapon shooting up at the Tower," Martinez said.

[inkool]

59. I said nothing about...

Charles Whitman. Now could you please site the law for my education.

[MichaelHarris]

62. not you

the scholar paulsby said, "it already happened in texas. guy climbed into a tower and started shooting. armed students kept him @ bay.

know your history. need a link?"

I'm still waiting on his link since he's so knowledgeable on Texas history.

[inkool]

68. So you can not...

cite the law that makes it illegal to carry on a collage or university campus.

[paulsby]

83. of course he can't.

and he knows this now, but he simply won't admit he was wrong to make that claim.

he apparently confused administrative policy with criminal law.

and can't simpyl admit it.

another poster cited the relevant RCW (that i referenced as well)

carry is prohibited in elementary and secondary school campuses, but NOT college campuses in WA state.

[inkool]

90. I know that he can't,

but I would like him to admit it.

[MichaelHarris]

129. I'll admit it

I'm right http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213


ahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[krispos42]

163. That's from the Washington Administrative Code, not the Washington Revised Code

WAC is regulations issued by the governor or state agencies.


The WRC is laws passed by the Legislature or ballot measures.



I'll note that the WAC section you cite contains no declaration of the type of offence (misdemeanor, felony) or any fine, jail sentence, or other punishment.

Now, in the WRC relevent to where you can and can't carry a weapon, they do mention conditions and punishments.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300



I also checked the whole section (section 9.41). Nothing comes up in a search for the words "university" or "campus", and "school" just finds references to primary and secondary schools.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41&full=true

[inkool]

166. That is policy...

not a law.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

179. So what is the criminal penalty for violating the linked administrative code?

[MichaelHarris]

99. really?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

[paulsby]

103. that doesn't make your case

it is still not a CRIME to carry on college campuses.

and that article does not support your claim that it is.

will you ever just say "i was wrong. it's not a crime"

probably not, because the internet, anonymity and intellectual dishonesty go together like dill, salmon, and vodka.

it's really sad that you simply can't say "my bad".

but at least you learned something today, even if you won't admit it on DU.

you thought it was a crime to carry on campus. you now realize that it isn't.

i did my good deed

[MichaelHarris]

107. hahahahahahahahah

you're actually denying that the University is backed by Washington law. HAhahahahahaha and you're in law enforcement? God help us!

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

177. The immature college freshman makes fun of a law enforcement officer. Gotta love the internet.

[paulsby]

66. are you asking me

or the harris poster who is ignorant of WA law?

hard to follow at this point.

fwiw, most "place" firearms restrictions are under RCW 9.41.300

there is no prohibition ANYWHERE in the RCW (revised code of WA) that makes it a crime to carry on college campuses.

which is why it is legal.

that's why he needs to provide a cite. i can't provide a cite to prove it's legal, any more than i can cite a law making it legal to wear blue shirts on the sidewalk.

the WA constitution, case law, and the RCW reference the legality of carry openly in WA w/o a permit and concealed with a permit.

although you don't need a permit to carry concealed on your own property fwiw.

there is no law in WA state criminalizing carry on college campus.

there IS a law prohibiting carry on elementary and high school campuses.

so, this harris person should be able to find a law analogous to the elementary/high school restriction IF it was illegal

which it aint.

[inkool]

73. I was asking MichaelHarris.

Sorry if I was not clear.

[paulsby]

np nt

[X_Digger]

74. Here ya go..

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41

Carry Restrictions
Washington defines a number of places you cannot carry:
• Any place where carrying firearms is prohibited by federal law
• Public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas/facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools (CRW 9.41.280)
• On the site of an "outdoor music festival" (CRW 70.108.150)
• Restricted access areas of a jail, or of a law enforcement facility, or any place used for the confinement of a person (CRW 9.41.300)
• Areas in any building which are used in connection with court proceedings, including courtrooms, jury rooms, judge's chambers, offices, etc. (CRW 9.41.300)
• The restricted access areas of a public mental health facility certified by the department of social and health services for inpatient hospital care and state institutions for the care of the mentally ill, excluding those facilities solely for evaluation and treatment (CRW 9.41.300)
• Any portion of an establishment classified by the state liquor control board as off-limits to persons under twenty-one years of age (CRW 9.41.300)
Please see CRW 9.41.300 for additional areas and more detailed descriptions of the restricted carry areas above.

[paulsby]

81. exactly. thank you

i already referenced RCW 9.41

(9.41.030 specifically)

note that it refers to ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOL PREMISES

but NOT colleges/universities.

which is why it is legal to carry on college campuses. no such place restriction under the RCW

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rl6214]

63. Qwik google search found this

"Once Whitman began facing return gunfire from the authorities and civilians who had brought out their personal firearms to assist police"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

The original post said said nothing about handguns.

[MichaelHarris]

75. sweet Jesus

you gun guys are nuts, read my previous post on this, notice how Wiki has no citation for this?

[rl6214]

89. Numerous posts showing you are wrong

Show proof/cite where it says the civilians were actually LEO.

[MichaelHarris]

93. prove to me

any of those people were "armed students" as the poster stated. I'll wait.

[rl6214]

159. Can't back up your assertion

So all you can do istry to send it off in another direction.

[rl6214]

160. Show me where he said

they were armed students. I believe all he said was that they were armed civilians.

[MichaelHarris]

105. name

one who was an armed student. I'll wait

[Tim01]

95. Can't site the law, huh? This hasn't gone very well for you.

And you are the one who started with the insults. I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about so you went with a personal attack.

[MichaelHarris]

101. gone very well

proves you gun guys are blithering idiots http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

[Tim01]

104. You have been stomped. Somebody else found the correct info for you.

[MichaelHarris]

106. Not at all

I just showed you the law. Refute it.

[Spoonman]

119. Wake up

your not showing anything of the sort, that applies to housing, get it?, lease agreement, get it?

No you don't get it, but then again you would have a hard time seeing the difference between an apple and an orange too!

[MichaelHarris]

121. hahahahahahah

and I suppose University owned housing is different from University owned classrooms? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH man I love you guys!

[Spoonman]

127. you are funny,

but not too bright.

[MichaelHarris]

131. incredibly bright

name one armed student at the UT tower.

[Spoonman]

145. Your childish debate tactics

show a transparent indication of your lack of historical knowledge.

It has already been demonstrated on this thread, and by media coverage of the event.
Armed civilians participated in the returned fire allowing the officers to get into range.

Will I name one, no.
Do I need to name one, no.

History has already spoken, and the facts are clear for all to see, except those too ignorant to see them.

Good by blind man

[MichaelHarris]

148. now that I've shown you the laws

you attack personally. Cool move man. Name one student on the UT campus, as the original poster stated, who fought back with a firearm.

[Katya Mullethov]

183. There was a rooo-meeerr ..........about a too-meeeerr

Nestled at the base ..
of his bu-raaaaaainnnnn !!!!!


1966 was like a zillion years ago dude ,
like , who really knows WHAT happened ..

ahahahaha this is great ! Seriously .

[rl6214]

161. Never said

Armed student. He said armed civilians.

[Euromutt]

118. Read that RCW provision again...

It says:

The regents of Washington State University, in addition to other duties prescribed by law, shall:

(1) Have full control of the university and its property of various kinds, except as otherwise provided by law.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=28B.30.150

Italics mine; "as otherwise provided by law." Which law are we talking about in this context? I've already mentioned Article I, Section 24 of the state constitution (http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm), which states that "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, <...>" but there's also RCW 9.41.290, which states:

The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.290

Now, this mainly applies to county and city governments, but arguably, the regents or trustees of any public college or university do not possess the authority to create criminal law on their respective campi, as in doing so, they would usurping the function of the state legislature.

So we're back to square one: sure, the regents and trustees can pass all the rules they want, and even get them incorporated into the Washington Administrative Code, but whether such rules wil stand up to judicial scrutiny is a different, and at present unresolved, matter.

[paulsby]

124. correct

and even IF upheld, they are still not CRIMINAL law and thus harris is still wrong, and still denyin'

[MichaelHarris]

128. this one cop

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213

Shouldn't you have known this cop?

[Euromutt]

162. It took you over an hour to notice I'd already posted that?

And, moreover, you completely failed to notice my repeated explanations that that's from the Washington Administrative Code. And no, paulsby did not need to know that, any more than he needs to know what the powers of the state Dairy Products Commission is, or what the conditions are under which the Dept. of Natural Resources can grant a lease to mine coal, or what the equipment standards for the State Patrol are (unless he's in the state patrol). None of this stuff is criminal law, which is usually what we're referring to when we say something is "against the law"; you cannot be arrested, let alone prosecuted, for carrying a firearm on a public college campus.

Really. I used to be on the Evergreen State College police review board, and I asked both the grievance officer and the chief of police services about this. These are disciplinary infractions, not criminal offenses, and of no concern to law enforcement.

[Euromutt]

80. Probably because nobody's opted to make an issue of it

I'll cut to the chase first: the law we're talking about is WAC 504-26-213:

No student may carry, possess, or use any firearm, explosive (including fireworks), dangerous chemical, or any dangerous weapon on university property or in university-approved housing. Airsoft guns and other items that shoot projectiles are not permitted in university-approved housing. Students wishing to maintain a firearm on campus for hunting or sporting activities must store the firearm with the Washington State University department of public safety.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213

That's specifically WSU; other provisions exist in the WAC covering the various community colleges, UW, CWU, WWU, TESC, etc. But even though the WAC is law, it's not criminal law. And as paulsby points out, it's untested, but I'd say that prima facie, such agency regulations are in violation of Article I, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution:

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

Public institutions of tertiary education, being public, have to comply with the law. Note that it's not illegal to carry a firearm on private property in WA either, even in say, malls that post rules prohibiting firearms. The most they can have you charged with is trespassing, and usually only then after they ask you to leave and you refuse.

So why have these agency rules never been challenged in court? Probably because nobody's had the inclination to make themselves a test case. What student has the time and the money to invest in that endeavor? Moreover, concealed firearms are, well, concealed; if you do it right, how is anyone ever going to know?

[paulsby]

82. this is entirely correct

thank you. great post.

this is an area of law i deal with on occasion.

as you correctly point out, WAC's are administrative NOT criminal.

and i agree that said WAC is almost certainly going to be found unconstitutional (but that's a tangential prediction). the reality is still clear, it's not illegal to carry on college campus in WA.

your last point is also well put. i carried concealed in grad school in WA state, and nobody ever knew. was i violating the law? of course not. was i violating (private college) campus policy?

yes

could they expel me from the PRIVATE college for violating that rule? imo, probably.

but there could be no criminal charge.

your point about trespass is also correct.

any private store/property can (and does) call police when they want somebody to leave.

*if* they refuse to leave, they can be arrested for trespassing.

these situations contrast with, for example, somebody caught in a liquor establishment carrying. that's a misdemeanor.

per 9.41.030.

except us cops. we can carry in liquor establishments :)

[Tim01]

96. Thanks.

[paulsby]

40. i already did

and explained to you that activity that is not prohibited by law, is ipso facto LEGAL.

you make the claim that it is illegal to carry on WA college campuses. if that was the case, there would be a law. there is NO SUCH LAW because it is legal.

there are laws prohibiting carry in liquor establishments, in courthouses, etc.

but NOT on COLLEGE campuses.

so, CITE THE FRIGGING LAW THAT CRIMINALIZES IT.

you can't.

you are thus, ignorant

you are demonstrating your ignorance of the law.

there is no law saying walking with a blue shirt is legal either.

but here's a hint. it is . why? because there is no law PROHIBITING it.

the idiocy is astounding.

and you are demonstrating it to everybody who has the slightest understanding of criminal law and basic jurisprudence.

[MichaelHarris]

98. OK once again

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

178. So what is the criminal penalty for violating the ban?

[Oregone]

2. This is great news!!!!!

I always believed I would be safer during finals week if I had a gun, because it made everyone (including me) abso-fucking-lutely nuts. The insomnia and stress is like a death sentence. Arming students will protect them against other such armed students in these conditions.

[villager]

4. you're right -- you can't beat the combination of insomnia, stress, and guns!

n/t

[tridim]

7. It's also a good thing college students don't drink alcohol is mass quantities.

Phewww!

[Oregone]

18. LOL. How could I have left that out?

[rl6214]

56. Anyone can drink alcohol in mass quantities

I have found among the concealed weapon holders that I know though, that they are much more responsible as a group, much more law abiding and more respectful.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that in order to have a CCL you must be 21 so you will not be talking about most of the students at a college but are talking about the more mature students who are close to graduation.

[TwilightZone]

9. ...

:think:


followed by:


:yoiks:





(Sorry for resorting to smilies, but they seemed to fit appropriately.)

[TheWraith]

17. Because, you know, every college student can afford a gun.

And because being such a law-abiding bunch, college students would never even THINK of doing something that was illegal.

[Oregone]

20. No, students are upstanding...

If this law was around when I was in college, I would of stayed up all night studying, taking Ritlin and coke, drinking shots for the stress, masturbating to Bay Watch and Price is Right, and then plotting how to break in and steal a gun to protect myself from the really fucked up college kids.

[TheWraith]

23. In which case I'm sure the law would have stopped you.

:eyes:

[MADem]

3. Maybe that'll discourage the odd nut who thinks about climbing into the tower and picking folks off?

[Believing Is Art]

5. Yeah right

And then when people start inexpertly shooting at him, it'll cause more casualties and make it harder for the police to get control of the situation. Way to go, Texas.

[texastoast]

6. Ain't we just something?

I'll tell you, the Lege is completely inbred.

[MADem]

11. Well, hard to say. My experience with people who carry concealed weapons is limited.

I've noticed it's either people who are terrified for whatever reason, who carry the weapon because they are afraid and feel that they are in danger.... and can't shoot, and those who just have a particular attitude about personal protection, who are not fearful, and who can shoot.

I don't know which type is more prevalent. I don't carry a weapon and, like I said, I have limited interaction with those who do (outside of their jobs--e.g. law enforcement.

[paulsby]

15. i have plenty of contact with concealed weapons carriers

and i know the stats, as well as my experience.

they are exceptionally law abiding and statistically speaking, far less likely to assault (let alone shoot) me ( a cop) than the average citizen.

[MADem]

43. Well, there ya go. I'm not upset if people vote for this, but I'm also not

upset if people vote against it. States' rights used to be nothing but a code for discrimination, but it's a two-edged sword. Some states find "packing heat" to be useful for their citizenry. Others don't go for it.

Let the people who live in the states decide.

[paulsby]

14. you got played

it already happened in texas. guy climbed into a tower and started shooting. armed students kept him @ bay.

know your history. need a link?

[TwilightZone]

16. "armed students kept him at bay"? - - What?

Are you serious? Whitman killed 14 people and wounded 32 more. He was shot and killed by the Austin PD.

Or were you being sarcastic?

So hard to tell anymore....

[MichaelHarris]

22. You already blew

your guess on a Washington campus carry policy and now you say Whitman was held at bay by students with handguns? Man you need some edumacation. You claim to be a cop?

[paulsby]

29. you are wrong

i didn't reference "carry policy". i referenced LEGALITY.

it is (i repeat) legal to carry on college campuses in WA state.

it may or may not, depending on POLICY (which is administrative NOT criminal) be prohibited by campus policy. the only penalty is administrative NOT criminal, assuming there is such a policy.

i went to grad school at a private campus near seattle.

carry (of any kind) and firearms period (even in cars) was against POLICY.

it was not illegal.

i chose to carry. i violated POLICY. i did not violate the law.

i said it was LEGAL.

please cite the LAW that makes it ILLEGAL.

note: i said illegal, not against campus policy.

keeerist.

can't even understand the difference between legal and against campus policy.

[MichaelHarris]

32. OK

Mr Wizard you're a cop, show me the law allowing students to carry at WSU, and the link where Charles Whitman was held at bay by students with handguns. I'm glad you not a cop where I live, sheesh!

[X_Digger]

36. Show me a law allowing you to breathe..

What? Then it MUST BE ILLEGAL!!

*shakes head*

If there is no law prohibiting an action, then it is legal. You don't make laws to make things legal, merely to carve out exceptions to another law. If WA never said that carry on a campus was illegal, there'd be no law specifically carving out the exception.

[paulsby]

37. there is no law (and you are still wrong and making yourself look ridiculous)

ALLOWING people to chew gum on campus either. therefore, by your logic (lol) it is illegal to chew gum on campus.

here's a little hint, genius.

the law prohibits behaviors.

if the law does not prohibit an action, it is ipso facto LEGAL.

keeerist. again, cite the law that makes it illegal. hint, there isn't one.

i'll give you a hint. RCW 9.41.300

this lists specific places that firearms are prohibited by the LAW, iow ILLEGAL.

this idiocy is amazing.

by your logic, i could arrest somebody for walking with a blue shirt on the sidewalk. after all, there is no law ALLOWING it.

keerist, the ignorance.

[MichaelHarris]

41. Ignorance LOL

from the guy who believed Whitman was held at bay by students with handguns. That truly puts in a whole new league of ignorance. If you're a student and you carry on the WSU campus you get arrested. Students at every Washington campus, once a year strap an empty holster on in protest. If as you say, it's legal, when they are arrested on campus where do they go to trial? And genius is a state university sovereign? Does it make it's own laws? You're not the brightest buld in the box are you?

[paulsby]

46. if a student gets arrested for not violating the law

the proper course of action is to sue.

you have already been schooled.

there is no law criminalizing carry on college campuses.

a state university does not make its own laws.


it cannot

it can make its own policies, but those are subject to review, if they are found to be violative of constitutional protections.

a public university could not, for example, criminalize sex between unmarried students.

a private college could.

again, cite the law criminalizing carry on WSU (or campuses in general).

you can't

you are wrong, and too cowardly to admit it.

feel free to contact your local WSU campus cop, and ask him if there is any law prohibiting carry on the campus.

[MichaelHarris]

52. Me schooled?

hahahahahahaha this from the guy who though Charles Whitman was held at bay by students with handguns. Did you know students in the dorms at WSU must keep even their hunting rifles locked up with the campus police? You really are ignorant.

[paulsby]

55. you are lying

i never said "handguns" btw.

again, you can't cite the law criminalizing carry on college campuses in WA state, yet you claim it was illegal.

simply put, you are wrong, and too cowardly to admit it.

hth

every time i ask you to cite the law , you change the subject

because you apparently now realize you made a false statement and are too much of a coward to simply admit the truth.

it is legal to carry on college campuses in WA state

[MichaelHarris]

67. Keep trying

paulsby said, "it already happened in texas. guy climbed into a tower and started shooting. armed students kept him @ bay.

know your history. need a link?"


That's the stupidest thing I've ever read at DU!

[paulsby]

71. nice evasion. still can't provide the

alleged law criminalizing carry on college campuses, can you?

thought not

[MichaelHarris]

85. sure can

and you should have been able to if you were a cop:

The local judicial authority shall designate and clearly mark those areas where weapons are prohibited, and shall post notices at each entrance to the building of the prohibition against weapons in the restricted areas;
Do you understand that sentence or do I need to interpret for you? WSU being the authority has the right to ban concealed weapons based on this one sentence. http://law.justia.com/washington/codes/title9/9.41.300.html

(2) Cities, towns, counties, and other municipalities may enact laws and ordinances:

(b) Restricting the possession of firearms in any stadium or convention center, operated by a city, town, county, or other municipality,

Now I know you're not going to accept this but I expect nothing less from someone who thought the UT sniper was held at bay by citizens, I'm still laughing my ass off over that one.

[Spoonman]

115. It is clear your not studying law.......

Please learn what a "judicial authority" is.

As for the UT sniper, it is WELL documented by video footage that CW was held at bay by armed civilians.
That footage has been view by MILLIONS of people around the world.

You are really starting to look ignorant.

[MichaelHarris]

130. OK

name one armed student at the UT tower. Now tell me again how it's OK to carry on the WSU campus: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213

[pipoman]

79. Wow, I was thinking the EXACT same thing about your posts in this thread...n/t

"That's the stupidest thing I've ever read at DU!"

[MichaelHarris]

69. you're the cop

if a student is arrested on campus with a concealed handgun what court will he be tried in? What's the rule cop?

[paulsby]

77. depends on the specific charge

if he is arrested for VUFA (a felony) he will be tried in superior court. it would be VUFA if, for instance, he was a convicted felon or prohibited to carry because of a prior domestic violence crime conviction.

there is no court to try him in if he is carrying concealed on a college campus WITH a permit, because that is legal behavior.

if he was carrying concealed w/o a permit w/o aggravating factors (not a convicted felon, etc.), it would be a misdemeanor

RCW 9.41.050.

that would be tried in whatever misdemeanor jurisdiction encompasses the campus.

so, for example, if it was Seattle University, it would be tried in Seattle Municipal Court.

[pipoman]

76. Dude you can't really be this thick can you?

Really unbelievable...you're as goofy as your avi.

[MichaelHarris]

102. can you?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

refute that idiot

[pipoman]

111. That is meaningless

idiot. Only a complete idiot could equate that to illegality.

[MichaelHarris]

112. Hahahahahahaha

it's meaningless now, after I refuted all the claims. You guys are priceless, thank you so much for tonights entertainment!

[pipoman]

133. Except you failed completely

to prove your statement after numerous requests and your bullheaded refusal to acknowledge that you misspoke or intended to state that ccw on WA campuses is a policy violation and isn't actually illegal. Read the article in the OP for chris' sake, this distinction is even made there.

..."it's not legal for a student to carry a concealed weapon on the WSU campus." Post #30

You are obviously not a law student, nor do you have any understanding at all of the legal system...you sir, are a moron.

[MichaelHarris]

136. Jesus man!

read! WAC 504-26-213
Agency filings affecting this section
Firearms and dangerous weapons.

No student may carry, possess, or use any firearm, explosive (including fireworks), dangerous chemical, or any dangerous weapon on university property or in university-approved housing. Airsoft guns and other items that shoot projectiles are not permitted in university-approved housing. Students wishing to maintain a firearm on campus for hunting or sporting activities must store the firearm with the Washington State University department of public safety.



Statutory Authority: RCW 28B.30.150. 08-05-001, § 504-26-213, filed 2/6/08, effective 3/8/08; 06-23-159, § 504-26-213, filed 11/22/06, effective 12/23/06.

See the bolded stuff that's State Law giving WSU the right to enact it's laws. Seriously you can't be that stupid.

[pipoman]

140. Again, and for the last time,

WAC is civil code not criminal code....tell ya what, you go on believing what you will, I really don't give a gram of shit either way...I and everyone else with any legal sense knows the truth.

[MichaelHarris]

142. hahahahahahaha

I have a legal sense. What is this: RCW 28B.30.150. It supports the WAC. Man you are really stupid. Tell you what bright boy,, walk down the WSU campus with a gun and let me know what happens. I'll be waiting.

[MichaelHarris]

126. It's only meaningless when you

Lose! http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213

[pipoman]

137. WAC = Washington Administrative Code

has absolutely not one shit to do with criminal law, i.e. legality vs. illegality. It is CIVIL CODE...DA

[MichaelHarris]

138. dammit man

you can't be that ignorant,
Statutory Authority: RCW 28B.30.150. 08-05-001, § 504-26-213, filed 2/6/08, effective 3/8/08; 06-23-159, § 504-26-213, filed 11/22/06, effective 12/23/06that gives WSU the right to enact it's laws. Damn I thought DU had smarter members in the gun forum.

[pipoman]

143. Last post

gives WSU the right to enact it's laws., no it gives them the AUTHORITY to enact it's own CODE...Sign up for Con. Law 101 next fall, then come back.

[MichaelHarris]

147. hahahahahah

already took it, at WSU. Made a B. Put your money where your mouth is, take a gun to WSU.

[Spoonman]

170. I highly doubt you took it

or made a B in basket weaving.

[MichaelHarris]

44. I can't believe you even

got through the Academy. Will you be teaching us the history of the UT sniper shooting, you know, the one where you said students held him at bay? If as you say, there is no law and a student is expelled for carrying a gun on campus then he would a civil recourse. How come it has never been tested in the courts? If it has been tested in the courts then a precedent would have been set and students could carry. Has a case gone to trial and what was the outcome genius?

[krispos42]

164. The fact that it's not outlawed means that it's legal.

Everything is legal until and unless it's made illegal.

The WAC you cite is not law, otherwise there would be a punishment assigned to the crime.



Presumebly, if somebody was found on campus with a licenced concealed pistol, that person would be asked to leave the grounds. If that person refused, THEN he would be in violation of state or local laws regarding trespassing.

[Believing Is Art]

34. One time doesn't make a pattern

And how would armed students help in a more isolated building, where it's much harder to tell who the nutjob is? For both students and the police.

Need a brain?

[DonP]

39. You're wrong - Google Charles Whitman

Citizens with rifles kept Whitman, a former marine marksman, pinned down in the Texas Tower shootings. That allowed the police and a civilian to approach the base of the tower and ultimately kill him and stop the carnage. The well aimed deer rifles at 100+ yards kept him below the parapet and unable to zero in on other victims.

The police credited the armed citizens with helping them stop him before he killed others.

But I'm sure your imagination is more real and credible than the actual history of an incident.

[Believing Is Art]

47. I'm familiar with Charles Whitman

He kept shooting after the civilians AND police returned fire. It was not just civilians and civilians didn't stop him. He managed to keep shooting.

What would armed students have accomplished at say Columbine? If more kids than just the perpetrators are armed, it's harder to tell who to target - for other armed students and the authorities. It would result in more casualties and more confusion for the police.

But I'm sure it's just nicer to imagine life is like some action movie.

[TwilightZone]

51. Correct. The civilian shooters made it more difficult, but didn't stop him.

He just moved to the waterspouts for cover. He was still largely protected, but his choice of targets was reduced.

They also distracted him with a plane at one point.

[Believing Is Art]

70. Yeah the plane thing is kind of bizarre

While his choice of targets was reduced, he was an indiscriminate killer so any target was as "good" as the next.

The incident at Texas is different from many other shootings in that people were not trapped in a building with the shooter and it was easy to mark him as the killer. The latter point is problematic for concealed carry on campus. In such a chaotic situation, untrained shooters and even the authorities are likely to suspect anyone with a gun as the killer. When there are more shooters, even if most have good intentions, it takes longer for the police to enter and they'd likely have to wait for SWAT. Some of the good intentioned carriers may be mistakenly hurt by SWAT or the police as well. Since it would take longer to distinguish the actual killer(s) and stop them, it would take longer for EMTs to arrive. Some who could have survived with injuries will likely die while waiting for help.

[TwilightZone]

108. A couple of reasons why they sent the plane in:

1) They thought they'd have a better vantage point to pick him off (they tried, but turbulence made it impossible.)

2) They wanted to determine the number of shooters.

I agree with the rest of your post. I can imagine that it would difficult to quickly determine which kids with guns are the threat and which ones aren't, especially from afar. Police snipers are trained to look at body language, etc., but in a chaotic situation, it may not be that easy.

[Believing Is Art]

114. I can see the surveillance benefits

But the campus architecture made it really difficult to do any more than that, as they found out. I think they were very lucky that he wasn't able to significantly damage the plane though he did shoot it.

Thankfully, mass shootings at schools are rare. From the available data, it's impossible to say in which situations concealed carry would be beneficial vs. in which it wouldn't be. I've only attended large public schools and can see a lot of logistical problems to concealed carry.

But since they are rare, we should think about the implications of guns on campus in everyday situations. Students in romantic triangles, students pissed off about grades, students stressed to the breaking point, rampant binge drinking . . . there are a lot of bad situations where guns can only make things worse. Those things happen all the time; rampages don't. And while I disagree with the value of concealed carry for the mass shootings, I think the ramifications of guns in everyday college situations is probably a more valid argument.

[TwilightZone]

116. School shootings are indeed rare.

When Virginia Tech first starting talking about arming students, I couldn't help but think of how reactive the decision was. Would it have helped that particular situation? Possibly.

But what about the rest of the time? For exactly the reasons you stated, I don't think it's worth the tradeoff.

[Believing Is Art]

123. From what some friends who were there told me

someone else in Norris did have a gun, but he locked himself in his office. I don't know firsthand that that is true. Pragmatically, I am doubtful that it would have helped. For one, Cho had semi-auto weapons and no hesitation to kill. Getting off a round that stopped him would have taken a lot of training, a lot of luck, or both. Second, Norris is a weird building. The classrooms aren't all located together and the largest one is mostly separate from the main building. You can get to it without going outside through an isolated mini-stairwell, but it's pretty much detached. Tracking him down, cornering him, and stopping him without putting many others at huge risk would be very difficult.

[pipoman]

109. There are incidents

where concealed carry permit holders have assisted police and stopped armed gunmen. Can you link to a single incident where the scenario you describe has happened?

You mentioned Columbine in your previous post. Columbine was a high school, this is about colleges. There is at least 1 state which expressly allows concealed carry on their state campuses, there have thus far been none of the scenarios described by people in this thread. Further there are 46 states with concealed carry on the books with literally millions of people carrying concealed every day including college students. Crime among CCW holders is extremely rare. What we have been doing isn't working (disallowing lawful CCW holders from carrying on college campuses in states with CCW laws on the books), maybe it's time to try something different.

[Believing Is Art]

117. Straw man

since the vast majority of campuses don't allow carry on campus.

So Columbine is high school, it was still a mass shooting on a school campus. It is one of the two most talked about shootings and I don't like pulling the Virginia Tech card.

[pipoman]

149. All of your assertions and absolute claims

of the results of allowing ccw by licensed ccw on campuses are the only strawman. Your claims are completely unsubstantiated and are the exact claims made by the gun control crowd when ccw was enacted in the individual states, yet it has not played out that way at all....why would you think this would be any different?

[Believing Is Art]

153. I didn't make absolute claims

It's speculation just as the "claims" of those in support of CCW on campus are speculation. As I said in another post, campus shootings are very rare and we don't have enough data to posit what would happen one way or the other. I said it could happen that way just as the pro-CCW crowd claims it could happen some other way. Their claims are just as unsubstantiated in mine. In non-campus related shootings, sometimes concealed carriers have taken down an assailant and sometimes people get caught in the crossfire.

As for the Texas shooting, the role of civilians is being overplayed in this thread. They didn't stop him from shooting and authorities were necessary to take him out. It hasn't played out the way the pro-CCW crowd would like us to believe, either.

[pipoman]

154. I haven't studied the Texas incident

so I have no comment.

Where have people been caught in the crossfire? I have never heard of a single incident where this has happened with a ccw holder.

[Believing Is Art]

158. When I talked about deaths in crossfire

I was speaking of any gun-related activity and not just the mass shootings. I just googled it and there are many instances where this has happened.

[pipoman]

167. And my point is

that yes, there are 'crossfire deaths', usually related to gang shootings and sometimes police shootings. I have never heard of a 'crossfire death' associated with a licensed concealed carry shooting even though there have been many concealed carry defensive shootings and millions of ccw holders carrying guns legally every day in some 46 states.

[Believing Is Art]

169. If you're asking me to dig through

every new article about a shooting death and see if it is mentioned that the shooter had a concealed carry permit, that's ridiculous. Plus I forgot to bookmark the link I found yesterday and don't want to search for it again . . .

I simply do not understand the pedestal on which you are placing CCW holders. My point is not that they are all idiots; rather, the proportion of idiots with a concealed carry permit is similar to that of the general population. I know several people with CCW permits. Nice enough people, but they didn't have to put much effort into get those permits and some of them are, in fact, idiots.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

180. Because that has happened in so many cases with concealed permit holders. Miserable fail.

[Oregone]

21. Yeah, because Id gun their ass down from 100 yards with my concealed pistol.

[MADem]

57. I think it was people with rifles who kept him from killing even more people.

They'd plink at him every time he stuck his head up.

[Oregone]

58. Yes, I realize that...

How many students are going to class with a rifle slung over their shoulder? I reckon, none.

[MADem]

61. They probably had one under their bed for deer season or range practice. nt

[TwilightZone]

65. There are several non-campus neighborhoods nearby.

My guess is that most of the civilian shooters weren't students. Not positive, though.

[Oregone]

78. Yes, and what I am saying, is that a student with a pistol (enabled by this law)

isn't going to be able to stop any sniper in a library tower, as was earlier alluded to. The presence of students with guns is in no way a deterrent to snipers. Thats a ridiculous assertion. And by the way, do snipers think coherently enough to be deterred anyway?!?

[TwilightZone]

97. Oh, I agree.

Arming students isn't going to stop someone from doing something like this.

[TwilightZone]

24. It's pretty much inaccessible at the moment, at least for that purpose.

Access is only available through tours, and security is pretty tight.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. I wonder if average grade points go up

once students get concealed carry.

[tridim]

26. Innocent bystander deaths will go up. nt

[rl6214]

48. Proof?

Or just more blow hard talking points?

Concealed carry has not caused "innocent bystander deaths" to go up, anywhere.

[KansDem]

10. Can you still pack heat inside the Texas statehouse?

Can you still carry a gat when you attend sessions of the Texas Senate?

[paulsby]

12. of course not. here in WA it's legal

good for texas. makes perfect sense.

[MichaelHarris]

25. you know

by saying it over and over won't make it true. It's NOT legal to carry on the WSU campus.

[paulsby]

28. it IS legal. you are wrong.

it may be against campus POLICY.

that is entirely different thing.

please cite the law (RCW) that criminalizes carry on college campuses, and/or WSU.

i'll stand by (rolls eyes)

[MichaelHarris]

35. seriously

you're a cop? Campus policy trumps students rights if they legally can carry on campus? Where are all the cases testing this? Cite them. I have a lot of trouble believing you're a cop.

[X_Digger]

50. Here, read link..

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41

Carry Restrictions
Washington defines a number of places you cannot carry:
• Any place where carrying firearms is prohibited by federal law
• Public or private elementary or secondary school premises, school-provided transportation, or areas/facilities while being used exclusively by public or private schools (CRW 9.41.280)
• On the site of an "outdoor music festival" (CRW 70.108.150)
• Restricted access areas of a jail, or of a law enforcement facility, or any place used for the confinement of a person (CRW 9.41.300)
• Areas in any building which are used in connection with court proceedings, including courtrooms, jury rooms, judge's chambers, offices, etc. (CRW 9.41.300)
• The restricted access areas of a public mental health facility certified by the department of social and health services for inpatient hospital care and state institutions for the care of the mentally ill, excluding those facilities solely for evaluation and treatment (CRW 9.41.300)
• Any portion of an establishment classified by the state liquor control board as off-limits to persons under twenty-one years of age (CRW 9.41.300)
Please see CRW 9.41.300 for additional areas and more detailed descriptions of the restricted carry areas above.

[MichaelHarris]

100. once again

you're wrong http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

[ManiacJoe]

110. You just showed that paulsby is correct.

The rules that the university places on its students and staff are NOT laws. If your legal behavior violates the rules of the university, you can be expelled or fired but you cannot be arrested.

[MichaelHarris]

113. tell you what genius

carry a handgun on the WSU campus and let me know what happens.

[ManiacJoe]

120. You would seem to be suggesting

that the cops at WSU might be as ignorant of the gun laws of WA state as many of the Seattle cops are. Be that as it may, that does not change the fact about what is and is not legal.

If you honestly believe what you are saying, why not put in the marginal effort to show us what leads you to that conclusion. All the RCW, WAC, and university rules are online. Just point out the one(s) you are referring to.

[MichaelHarris]

122. I just did

you must have missed it. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_Washington_State_University_legally_ban_firearms_in_university_owned_apartments

[ManiacJoe]

132. You tried that already.

You failed last time. You again fail this time.

University rules do not equate to laws in any stretch of the imagination. If you violate the rules of the university, the most they can do to a student is expel him. If at that point the student refuses to leave campus, the university can have the cops arrest him for trespass, which has nothing to do with being armed or not.

Again, if you can point us to the RCW or WAC that you think indicates that CCW at WSU is illegal -- not a rule violation, but illegal -- we will see if we can clear up your misunderstanding.

[MichaelHarris]

134. Listen Joe

you guys are really beginning to look incredibly stupid. Here's the law again:

WAC 504-26-213
Agency filings affecting this section
Firearms and dangerous weapons.

No student may carry, possess, or use any firearm, explosive (including fireworks), dangerous chemical, or any dangerous weapon on university property or in university-approved housing. Airsoft guns and other items that shoot projectiles are not permitted in university-approved housing. Students wishing to maintain a firearm on campus for hunting or sporting activities must store the firearm with the Washington State University department of public safety.



Statutory Authority: RCW 28B.30.150. 08-05-001, § 504-26-213, filed 2/6/08, effective 3/8/08; 06-23-159, § 504-26-213, filed 11/22/06, effective 12/23/06.

See all that bolded stuff? That's what makes it illegal.

[ManiacJoe]

141. You are confused.

Your bolded text is what gives the university the legal right to create a "rules of conduct". The university does not get to create its own laws, at least not real laws with legal punishments.

If you violate the university's rules, they can ask you to leave. That is it.

[MichaelHarris]

144. OK Joe

go walking through the WSU campus with your gun and tell me what happens.

[ManiacJoe]

150. What do you think is going to happen?

Assuming for the sake of debate I do so with my gun and someone does notice, and that someone now notifies the police (campus cops or city cops).

Since I am on university property, I am subject to the universities rules. I have now violated those rules. According to the rules, the university can now at most ask me to leave campus.

If I peacefully leave campus, nothing happens; we are done. No laws have been broken, the cops bid me a "Have a nice day."

If I do not leave when ordered to do so, the cops can arrest me for trespass. This has nothing to do with being armed or otherwise violating any university rules. I can be arrested for trespass because I have violated the law regarding unauthorized access to property.

If the cops I meet with are ignorant of the law, which is not uncommon, I might be take down to the police station. There their ignorance will be corrected by their superiors. I will get an apology and be released. Or a lawsuit gets filed for wrongful arrest, and my attorney and I get richer at the expense of the tax payers.

[MichaelHarris]

151. now

tell me the difference between being arrested for trespass and arrested for carrying a firearm? If you truly don't think they can arrest you for a firearm then what makes you think you will be arrested for other transgressions? If you had read the state code you would have seen WSU has the right to enact and enforce a concealed weapon ban. Violation of that code or law, whichever you choose, heck why not statute, will get you in jail. You are blinded by your forceful application of you gun rights. WSU has the right to make this campus law and the right to enforce. Try it, go on campus with your gun, let the campus police see it. Make an issue, will you go to jail? Try it.

[ManiacJoe]

152. That is very simple.

I can be arrested for trespass because I refused to leave campus when legally ordered to do so. This is a violation of WA state law (the RCW, the statutes).

Carrying a firearm is not illegal, even on campus; therefore I cannot be arrested for doing so. When on WSU campus, I am subject to WSU rules of conduct. If I violate those rules by carrying a firearm, or any other way, the most the university can do is order me to leave campus. I then leave campus, with my firearm, and continue life without further hassle from the police.

It really is that simple.

Students are in a bind because the university can withhold transcripts and diplomas as punishment for rule violations by the students. The RCW gives them the authority to do that withholding. Still the student cannot be arrested since they have violated no laws.

University rules are not laws/statutes. Not even close.

[MichaelHarris]

155. then

why would you leave if it's perfectly legal, as you presume, if they asked you to leave and take your gun with you. Why are students all across Washington trying to get the law changed, a law you say doesn't exist. Why don't they just start carrying their guns. Apples and oranges. You call them rules, the RCW that I posted earlier calls them laws and gives WSU the right to enforce them.

On one hand write WAC 504-26-213, the code WSU has. Now on your other hand write RCW 28B.30.150. 08-05-001, § 504-26-213. that's the statutory authority given to WSU from the Washington legislature. Now clasp your hands together, they work together. I really can't make it any simpler than that. You may want to continue arguing apples and oranges, codes and laws, but I'm here to tell you, the Washington legislature gave WSU the authority to enact these rules or laws, whatever word you want to use. Break them and you will go to jail. Once again, try it, push it, see what happens.

[ManiacJoe]

157. I am required to leave their property

when ordered to do so because the law (RCW) says they get to choose who stays and who does not. They can use any, or no, reason to ask me to leave. The reason they give, if they give one, is not relevant to the order to leave. The university has a list of rules because they want to control the behavior of those on campus, beyond what is legally allowed behavior. The RCW does not give the university the authority to make laws, it gives the university the ability to make rules/guidelines. Violation of these rules carry no legal penalties; only laws have those.

Their campus, their rules. Just like my house, my rules. The only reason the university requires special laws to give them that authority to make rules is that by default, as subdivisions of the state, they cannot make arbitrary rules.

You keep confusing laws and rules. The RCW, the laws, allow the university to enact all the rules they want and have whatever "punishments" they so choose to go with those rules. The students are at the disadvantage of the university because they want a diploma from the university. Don't follow the rules, don't get the prize. Since non-students do not care about the diploma, the university has almost no control over them except for asking them to leave the campus.

The students want the laws changed so that the rule against firearms is removed from the list of rules. If the university had a rule banning pictures of Mom on the students' desks, the students would probably be fighting to get the laws to prohibit that rule, too.

[paulsby]

172. and to be more precise

much of the university's code of conduct applies only to students. Not to non-students who happen to be on campus.

i would LOVE for some university apparatchnik to try to ban me from campus for carrying concealed. it would never happen, but they'd lose in court.

regardless, i'm not a student.

also, a PRIVATE campus can pretty much set very discriminatory rules. it can prohibit, for example, premarital dating. a public campus can't.

the UW, as a PUBLIC institution cannot prohibit their students from copulating, for instance, or prohibit any sort of conduct that is protected conduct in the state of WA.

i have yet to see any student punished for CCW on campus (note that most students are under 21, and are thus already prohibited. only a 21 yr old with a valid CCW would be legal), but i strongly suspect if he took his appeal to a court, he would win. iow, since right to carry is extremely well protected in WA state(read our constitution) that no public university can prohibit it. but again, that's unsettled law.

but i say again, i don't think the university has any authority (public) to expel somebody carrying concealed from their campus, if that;'s the sole reason, and i would love to see if that has ever happened, and if it was challenged.

i suspect the reason why these rules survive is that they have yet to be challenged.

regardless, they hold no force of law, iow they don't define, as you correctly note, criminal acts, only violation of administrative rules.

[MichaelHarris]

125. I'm honest

here it is http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26-213

Any of those guys could have found it but gun blindness took over

[ManiacJoe]

139. That will work.

You are confusing "university code of conduct" with real laws.

Here are the "punishments" for violating the university rules:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=504-26&full=true#504-26-405

You will note that the most that can happen from a legal point of view is that the student gets charged with trespass if he refuses to leave campus after being ordered to do so.

[MichaelHarris]

146. keep trying

protest, put your money where your mouth is. Take your gun to campus.

[paulsby]

171. he keeps doing that

my initial claim was that it was legal to carry on college campuses in WA.

he claimed it wasn't.

he doesn't understand (or didn't) that a university code of conduct does not define legality.

also note, as others have pointed out, these prohibitions on student conduct have yet to be challenged.

has any student ever been expelled/suspended/seriously punished (but not criminally of course. cause these aren't LAWS) for carrying concealed on WSU campus?

regardless, harris is still wrong. it is legal to carry on college campuses in WA state.

[jro154]

182. Agreed

Please correct me if im wrong in any part of my interpretations, but RCW 9.41.290 which addresses State Preemption states:

"The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality."
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.290

In short: Local government cannot enforce stricter laws regulating firearms. Definition of Preemption.

Only possible way for guns to be illegal to carry, as stated above, on University property would be due to:
RCW 9.41.300
"Weapons prohibited in certain places — Local laws and ordinances — Exceptions — Penalty."

In short: No weapons in mental health institutes, jails/court rooms, liquor stores, airports. (Read the Link).
Link: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300

NOWHERE does it say universities. Federal law addresses k-12 schools public and private, not colleges.

WAC 504-26-213 claims statutory authority from RCW 28B.30.150 and my assumption part 1 which states:
"(1) Have full control of the university and its property of various kinds, except as otherwise provided by law."
This sentence alone gives the university a great deal of power over its property, which allows for many WACs to be valid.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=28B.30.150

It seems to me university and or government officials got a little greedy and prohibited the carry of firearms by RCW 28B.30.150 but seem to have forgotten the "except as otherwise provided by law" part which is addressed in RCW 9.41.290 State Preemption of Firearms.

In conclusion, WAC 504-26-213 should be repealed and found to be in violation of state law RCW 9.41.290 by this sentence:

"Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality."

I feel no one currently has had the time and money to fight this. As a student attending WSU with one year remaining, I do not want to jeopardize my degree and future over fighting this law by carrying on campus, which I feel is my constitutional right to do so. If I was found carrying, I would for sure be expelled (but not criminally punished) and spend years and a lot of money fighting this before I feel I would see an inevitable victory. Similar cases are occurring or have occurred in Oregon as to which I am not as familiar with the law or cases.

Paulsby seems to be very knowledgeable and informed, please comment on anything that seems to be misunderstood. Thank you all for this conversation and I look forward to some responses.

[Euromutt]

165. I posted that over an hour before you did (post #80)

And I pointed out it's from the WAC, not the RCW, but hey, don't let that fact get in the way of your smug self-righteousness.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

181. Answer this genius, what could happen if he did? How much jail time could he face?

[X_Digger]

86. There are many states that..

either explicitly allow college carry or do not prohibit it. They are:

AK
AL
CA
CO
CT
DE
HI
IA
ID
IN
KY
MT
NH
OR
PA
RI
SD
UT
VA
WA
WV

from the article in the OP: "Currently, 23 states that allow people to carry concealed weapons do not prohibit handguns on college campuses, according to an analysis by the House Research Organization. Twelve colleges and universities in the country specifically allow concealed handguns on campus."

[Hoopla Phil]

156. Great news!

[Xela]

168. Great news for public institutions...

...not so good for private.

Xela

[Israfel4]

173. Good for TX, other states should get in on this.

Police snipers are only useful when they have a target in their sights! Someone shooting college students in a classroom will NEVER be in a snipers crosshairs unless he/she goes outside or looks through a window long enough for the sniper to get a shot off. Not to mention most windows are thick/sturdy/tough where a shot might not have enough energy to neutralize the threat, after it goes through the window, or the round will deflect and miss and MIGHT hit someone else.

If YOU were a gunman would you enter a classroom that has an armed student in it? Or several armed students?

[Paladin]

174. I Think You've Given This A Lot Of Thought.

Too much thought, as a matter of fact. Kindly stay the fuck out of my neighborhood.....

[Israfel4]

175. Did I say something wrong?????

I've been doing ALOT of reading!!!! LOL.

[rl6214]

176. And you have given NO reasonable thought to this

and I would like you to kindly stay the fuck out of my neighborhood.