In Texas, TCU Opts Out of Campus Carry–Others May Follow

What if teachers could carry their guns with them?

Parents nationwide who love the 2nd Amendment and are trying to decide which college to pay for should know that, despite a new Texas law that takes effect in August 2016, their CHL-equipped college-age children will not be allowed to carry concealed weapons on the grounds of Texas Christian University, based in Fort Worth.

Texas Law Shield and U.S. Law Shield reported that the TCU Board of Trustees voted Friday, November 13, to reject the new campus-carry law, which takes effect August 2016, and only applies to concealed weapon license-holders. Public universities can’t opt out, but the public entities can designate “gun free” zones on campus. Private universities can opt-out altogether.

The presidents of Rice and SMU have said their schools would also seek to restrict the exercise of campus carry on their grounds using the opt-out process.

Baylor University President Ken Starr recently said he had “little doubt” they would also opt out.

“My own view is that it is a very unwise public policy, with all due respect to those who feel strongly (and) very, very rooted in constitutional values as they see them,” Starr said. “We’re here as seats of learning, and I do not think this is helpful.” Here’s the Nov. 13 statement from TCU’s Board of Trustees: Texas Christian University’s Board of Trustees met today to discuss and implement strategies that further strengthen the innovations and global initiatives of the institution. One item of discussion was Senate Bill 11, commonly known as “campus carry.” The bill amends the Government and Penal Code to allow handgun license owners to carry a concealed gun on college and university campuses. As stipulated in the legislation, private universities may choose to opt out following input from the campus community. To insure all constituents had an opportunity to register their opinions, TCU conducted a host of debates, open forums and surveys and requested input from its governance groups to determine the community’s desired outcome regarding SB 11. Based on this feedback, the Board of Trustees voted today to opt out of participation in SB 11. As a result of this vote, the University’s policy prohibiting guns on campus remains in effect. The University will now begin the process of defining all strategies and policies associated with this Board decision. Kathy Cavins-Tull, vice chancellor for student affairs, said, “It was quite clear that no matter which side of the issue each person felt was best, all cared deeply about the safety of the community.”

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (54)

  1. You’d think the carnage at the Oregon school would be a wake up call for academicians. As one who worked at two universities, and one was in Texas, I found that most Liberals are not clear thinkers. The “let’s bury our head in the sand” mentally is prolific on every campus regardless of the home state’s political ideology. God help the children at TCU, SMU and Baylor. Fortunately my last child just finished her degree in Dallas and it wasn’t from SMU. I thought the Methodists had more sense. Guess not.

  2. Different times, and completely different people; can’t extrapolate into the future. Current social culture is the dominant force in politics (look at how the so-called conservative party [Republican] touts themselves as Democrat-lite, and gets huffy if the mob doesn’t come along).

    The Supreme Court rules the nation significantly more than not. Gun rights are not assured by a 5-4 split. The salient lesson is that the court reflects the public on 2A. All it takes is one justice replaced, and somehow the SC will find it imperative that previous 2A decisions must be re-visited, right now. A case will move quickly through the courts. Take a look at how many district judges are ignoring Heller. The intent is to establish that there is conflict in the districts, and require the SC to “clarify”.

    When this country is split nearly 50-50 on gun rights, we can be assured the same type people who populated the colonies are no longer the majority.(One can almost imagine that given the number of “mass shootings” that have occurred this year alone, there must be a coordinator somewhere acting as agent provocateur).

    Watch closely the president. He will issue executive orders soon, restricting gun rights even more because….guns. He can use the power of the commerce clause to regulate interstate commerce to completely shut down the gun industry. The commerce clause has done some good regulating trucking and railroads, and ending segregation (US vs. Heart Of Dixie Motel pivoted on a toothpick). The commerce clause also has a reputation for abuse, where the SC declared that refusal to participate in commerce was/is unconstitutional. Twisting the clause to allow complete gun registration, establishing a gun owner database, requiring “good cause”, mandating gun confiscation (because people who own guns do not have a permit), you name it. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) is in the executive branch, subject to executive orders.

    These are grievous times, and slogans and shouting are ineffective in overcoming a determined government. And that government will not forget Bundy ranch. An embarrassed government is like a wounded bear; rogue.

  3. Places of worship and religious affiliated locations such as a “Christian” college are soft targets and more than likely at the head of the heap when terroristic acts or acts by a lone wolf gunmen occur because they are less likely to have armed members, colleagues, students and a very limited police department when it comes to resources to combat evil acts. I see NO PURPOSE in publicly “outting” themselves that this is the case at TCU. I do NOT agree with their stand on this issue, but I do respect their right to “opt out”. Let us all desire TCU to be a safe place to learn, work and give praise to the One who gave us free will. God Bless Texas!

  4. when you have a president and a political party hell-bent on subjugating the US to international rule, a UN peace keeping mission in the US, using US assets will be much more efficient than any other UN mission to date. do not put too much faith that the US military and LEO members will be all that resistant. there will be court cases trying to overturn the decision by the US to allow UN supremacy, but the SC already ruled several times that treaties can be used to override state laws that devolve (by 14th amendment) from the central government. prior to this president, the UN did not have a willing partner in subjugation of the US.

  5. In the 9120s, the Supreme Court began ruling that the 14th Amendment stretched the constitution to the states, with some small exceptions. With that ruling, the union moved from a federation of sovereign states to a nation with a powerful central government served by political sub-divisions called “states”. The once-sovereign states became provinces.

  6. You should put it in context for ignorant liberal journalist.
    Let’s say California passed a state law that said slavery is illegal except on certain large plantations. Then those people that live or work on these large plantations, just like on these private universities could be denied their freedom.

  7. College campus’s are not noted for especially mature individuals from either its “Educators” or students , but by standards of most Southern public college and University TCU is a very successful buisness
    TCU has a highly recognized Campus Policing System that does not rely upon dildo headed roided cops on the prowl to maintain a very safe campus.
    Odd how the Constitution spouting are so fn willing to ignore the other 9 Articles of Bill of Rights in order to save what is but a half assed 1/2 of 2nd permission to buy a gun to protect your ass.
    Forget Freedom of Assembly, Religion, Right to private papers of sarch and siezure and Freedom of Speech and Rights to Associate and own property.
    TCU has a very good record of its students being far more scholasticly capable than majority of Texas college entrants, hell they do not let high school seniors f’off for 2/3 senior yeR just because the got accepted uh ah ya gotta hold those grades till graduation day.

    1. Have a look:

      Specifically,second page, second paragraph.

      Why else would there be so much sturm and drang about the UN treaty on small arms control overriding 2A, or the climate change treaty requiring the US to cut emmissions by 30% in 20yrs?

      Feelings, emotions and notions do not have force of law. The Supreme Court rules supreme in the land, not Congress, not States, not people.

    2. MYTH : “The Supreme Court rules supreme in the land”.
      No the Supreme Court rules supreme in the land. The Supreme Court rules supreme is one of three co-equal branches of government.
      Historically the president and the congress can and have ignored, threatened and over-ruled the supreme court on many issues.
      Also, States can amend the Constitution itself. This requires approval by three-quarters of the state legislatures — no easy feat. However, it has happened several times.
      Enter Andrew Jackson. Two years prior to the Worcester decision, he successfully convinced Congress to pass the Indian Removal Act. The Act created a scheme giving the president the power to grant land west of the Mississippi River to Native Americans following negotiations with Native Americans for their removal. As president, Jackson successfully negotiated many treaties with Native Americans for their removal, though he was a states rights advocate who believed tribal land was under the jurisdiction of the state and therefore states could act freely in governing such land. Jackson, accordingly, wasn’t too pleased with the ruling of the Supreme Court.

      “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” Though President Jackson’s exact words were a bit different, the sentiment remained. Enforcing the ruling meant not only deviating from his own ideology, but alienating a state that shared his core beliefs. So he decided to undermine the system of checks and balances and ignore the ruling. Without the President to enforce the ruling of the Supreme Court, the opinion largely meant nothing.

  8. New here, so this may not be completely on point. Some time ago, one of the networks did a two part feature on the prudence of having college students have guns on campus. There was quite a bit of unrealistic setup, yet the programs did point out something important (certainly unintentionally). The case the network was making was that when faced with armed intruders, students failed every time to properly analyze the threat and respond appropriately. The important take away was that the failures were all, each and everyone, all unschooled in firearms (beyond video games or paintball) and self defense. While the intent was to prove the futility of armed students, the network made a huge endorsement of being a truly armed student, trained and prepared. Rather doubt the network would be willing to repeat the project using trained and prepared students.

  9. Have some business cards printed, take them to Starbucks (or anywhere for that matter), put on on the counter and see how much it is worth against a cup of coffee, or whatever. Likewise, if you are ever in contact with any law enforcement agency regarding use or carry of a firearm, give each one a business card explaining the facts of law to them. In doing so, you will present a trump card to them, which acts as Kryptonite against any attempt to infringe on your 2A rights.

    1. You better hope the God of the sky and seas protects you because no one else has that job description.

  10. Genocide is only possible on an unarmed populace. That will be the consequence of decisions like this. Ultimately when the people of America refuse to disarm our government will allow the UN to send troops to disarm us.

    1. @JD

      I understand the concern, but having worked with UN troops in Africa, I can tell you they are really not much of a threat.

    2. you misunderstand the way the UN and US are intertwined. once the UN determines that the gun culture of the US is a threat to (pick you favorite sluggard), they will ask the president of the US to assign soldiers to the “peace keeping” mission to disarm and make safe the nation. can’t happen? treaties are superior to national laws….including the US constitution. posse commutator (or whatever) will not apply.

    3. I understand your sincere desire to get your point across, but having worked with UN forces for years, i really do understand how they function . . and the bottom line is that they don’t function. UN posts are granted on the basis of political factors, not on competence.

      Second, the Posse Comitatus Act forbids the use of military forces on US soil against civilians., Now, having said that, i am sure the government cannot be trusted not to invoke a violation, but once they do they are in violation of the US Constitution and I’m sure there will be a large body of civilians and military and even LEOs who will have an issue with this, and they know it, so they will be vary careful about invoking anything that might lead to civil war.

      In the end, it’s up up to you and me and others of like minds. We can go quietly into the night, or stand up for our rights and trust the American people to do the same.

    1. Chickenhawk, You forget that the states have authority over the Federal government according to our Constitution. The several sovereign states that form this county’s union are not under Federal authority. They are the ones who granted the authority to be given to allow the Federal government to be created and to exist for the sovereign states own mutual benefit and defense. F.D.R. is one of the primary examples of Federal government officials who got it wrong…way wrong. F.D.R. was certainly not the first, but has been resoundingly used as the precedent by many who turned away from the Constitution as the law of the land.

      I hope one day the sovereign states will remember their power as states in the U.S. Constitution and they will remind the Supreme Court that the Constitution says the States are SUPREME, NOT THE COURT.

      So, I’ve gone through the history lesson to say that the Second Amendment has no authority over sovereign state law. It, by the Constitution, only applies to Federal law and actions. That’s good, because our Congress is far more liberal than the majority of our states. And, no, I’m not against the Second Amendment, I’m simply a constitutional scholar coming from a Jeffersonian Strict Constructionist point of view. That is the view of our founding fathers and constitutional framers. It is not the view of John Marshall and liberal jurisdiction prudence.

    2. The states do not have any authority to disregard the constitution and you are a fool for trying to push such nonsense and a stupid lie.

  11. Notice the sophistry in the term “college-age children”? College is attended primarily by legal adults, because most people are over 18 by the time they graduate high school. Perhaps the VERY few minors who are young prodigies need oversight, but it is purely a diversion to pretend that college is attended by “children”.

  12. It makes me very said that the private schools will leave there schools listed as a gun free killing zone , if they had just went along with there state and not advertised that they are a gun free zone all I can says is may the good Lord watch out for your students because there will be crazys that will be attracted to your school!

  13. People and private businesses have the right to control conduct on their premises. Friends who ask me not to carry when visiting their homes are perfectly within their rights to control and protect their castles. I nod, agree, smile and carry concealed anyway. Chances are nil, but in case there is a home invasion, they will likely be glad I disregarded their requests. Or not. Will be an interesting situation all around.

    1. @AnyMouse

      That is the very best way to do it. Yes, respect people’s feelings and be cooperative, then go ahead and do as your conscience dictates. Rather had a friend pissed at me than for all of us to be dead because of their stupidity.

  14. I personally do not care if anyone chooses to not allow Conceal and Carry. They create these killing zones free of infringement to get mass counts of dead.
    Sick bastages will do bad things and its according to when will it be important to allow the Students the ability to protect themselves from the evil.

  15. I would (and did, during my college years) still carry one anyway. As long as students aren’t completely careless and allow someone to see it, nobody will ever know, assuming there are no incidents that require them to actually use it. And in a case where a firearm has to be used, I’d MUCH rather use it, and get in “trouble” with the school, but still be alive, rather than obeying the school’s ultra-liberal, anti-American rules, and ending up dead. So, even though their disobedience regarding federal and state laws is ridiculous, and I hope they pay for it, the students should still carry anyway– f the over-reaching, communist, “progressive” fools.

  16. Of course, they are idiots if they think stopping law abiding people from carrying guns will stop criminals from carrying guns on their campuses!

    This article is not enough. Someone should make a web page with these schools idiotic pro-criminal-gun policies highlighted, so prospective students can’t miss knowing that they are going to an easy prey environment!

  17. I would not attend or pay for my kids to attend any university that chooses or dictates that law abiding students or others with ccw’s license or permits can’t carry on campus , when a state law says they can. I hope that the universities and colleges that ban carry on campus and set up gun free zones experience a large drop in enrollment and profits.

  18. The Constitution’s 2nd amendment states that the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Yet they continue to do so. The legislators and their body guards must be subject to the same new rules they make to disarm legal citizens. Every time they pass new restrictions on guns they disarm the law abiding voters. Criminals just take advantage of all of them.

  19. Being a Life Member of the NRA, this is the exact problem I have with the NRA.. No compremise ever! Well, this one they got wrong… Everyone has the right to refuse or accept guns on their property… To attack a Religous School for not allowing guns is misdirected and misplaced… The Constitution supports and protects everyone, gun owners and non-owners included….

    1. @Duane

      I guess I’m surprised to hear you say the NRA never compromises, because i sure read a lot of complaining on this blog in general that the NRA compromises too much when compared to groups like the GOA and NAGR, but that isn’t really relevant here.

      First, you can’t compromise much with these people because every issue to them is just another step toward confiscation and disarmament, as we have watched happen for decades. They don’t see a compromise as a part of a fair give and take process, they see it as a weakness to be exploited on the road to destroying the 2A. Years ago, people said we were crazy and that confiscation would never take place . . . but it is in many states.

      Second, they may be a private school and do indeed have rights over their own property, but the concern here is that they are foolish and shortsighted, and are setting up a lot of people’s kids to be targets in an uncontested shooting gallery. In which case, they are going beyond simple control of their property and into the realm of making other people’s decisions for them. Something Liberals love to do.

  20. Any entity that denies people their civil rights, especially the right to self defense must be sued vigorously when a shootingboccurs on their premises. The premise of safety is a nebulous thing at best. As history shows quite clearly, shootings occur, and minutes later people are dead or injured and then the police arrive. Denying responsible, concealed carry permitted people to carry removes the one thing these gym free zone victims need at the moment of dying, or threat of dying – a gun to protect themselves. I wonder how many victims, looking death in the face, thought to themselves, ” I’m glad I am unarmed.”

  21. It’s been common knowledge for as long as I can remember that TCU degrees are paid for, to the tune of 20k a semester,not earned.”Opting out” has always been the prudent financial choice and now by democratic vote
    “… about the safety of the community”. Who can argue with that?

    1. Not surprising the leftist fascist controlled universities would “opt out” … they like their victims dumb, ignorant and helpless.

    2. Agreed.

      Universities are not about learning any more, they are about indoctrinating young people into the Liberal mindset.

      Long ago when I left active duty to go to college so I could get my commission, I was a Sr. ROTC member on a campus that was the Liberal bastion in a Conservative state. We had a military requirement to wear our uniform every Thursday, so I did. Being prior Special Forces (SOCOM didn’t even exist then) I was allowed to wear BDUs instead of Dress Greens, and I always wore my uniform every Thursday no matter what. I was proud of it.

      It was amazing how much differently you got treated in class by the “professor” when in uniform compared to when you weren’t. And yet, all these Liberal fascists owed their freedom to people who were willing to wear a uniform when they themselves weren’t.

      I carried every day and no one knew it, and went on to graduate with a 3.8 and was listed as a Distinguished Military Graduate in spite of their efforts to make me feel like a Second Class Citizen because I had Conservative values.

      But now, if I had to help my kids choose a college, it would never be one of the Liberal Ivy League schools. That may have mattered 20 years ago, but not now. When you apply for most jobs, all they care about is your education level not where you went to school. I would steer my kids to a school that at least had some Conservative values. State universities in places like Utah and Wyoming, not places like Georgetown or Yale. Most of all, I teach my kids and family to be strong and always defend yourself, so any school they would go to would have to have the same values.

  22. Not surprising the leftist fascist controlled universities would “opt out” … they like their victims dumb, ignorant and helpless.

    1. The right of a private person or entity to control their own property is an important one.

      If a visitor to your house, church or private school has silly ideas, you want to have the right to tell them to get off your property, don’t you?

  23. I for one would not let my children attend a university that denies civil rights. As a paying customer I use my dollars as much as possible to ensure I dont support companies that don’t support civil rights so the universities that do the same wont be getting my childs college tuition.

  24. TCU is a private school; expensive and now deadly; go somewhere else. Start out at your local community college and then transfer into a larger school your Junior year. It’s not ‘tuition, fees and books’ that are expensive; its living expenses….room, board, beer and girls….LOL

  25. Concealed means just that . . . concealed. There is no way I would send any member of my family into this world unarmed. I would not send my kids to public school where they can be preyed upon by Liberal indoctrination, nor would I send them to a university that refuses them the natural right to protect themselves. Too many universities stopped being seats of education a long time ago and became soapboxes for ultra Left Wing liberal “professors” who stopped being educators a long time ago.

    And before anyone starts ranting about uneducated Right Wing crazies, I left public school at the age of 17 and joined the military. While in I got my GED and left active duty to attend college. I got my bachelor’s degree and Commission as an officer, then went back on active duty. After leaving the military, I went back to college and got my Masters. I found good schools in solid Conservative states where both students and professors regularly carried, and I can’t recall a single incident of campus violence related to a legally carried firearm.

  26. so glad i ignored all those alumni requests all these years. children’s education there was mediocre, and nothing christian about it.

    but, private entities are free to do what private entities think benefits them.


    don’t send your kids there.

    1. Exactly. They have the right to control what happens on their property, but we have the right to determine whether we, or our loved ones, ever set foot there.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

Discover more from The Shooter's Log

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading