dale blanker wrote:E10 wrote:LucasMcCain wrote:Just because they don't like a law doesn't mean they get to ignore it.
Why not? The President has been ignoring laws he doesn't like for more than seven years. They're just following his example. In this case, I sincerely hope the legislature doesn't follow the example of the Congress by letting them get away with it.
Well, obviously UH is not ignoring it, given the policy documentation that's been generated.
Isn't local control the kind we prefer over dictates from feds or state??? I suspect UH is more concerned about the abstraction that might occur with open carry. I would not compare this policy with that of the local fast food joint - let's assume these folks are thoughtful and well informed in all administrative actions.
1966 Engineering Alumnus of UH
I respectfully disagree on your words that I highlighted in red above. Local control is all well and good with things like speed limits and school board policies, etc. But with criminal things (i.e. things that can get you a nice prison term), I prefer a more consistent interpretation across the state. For instance, I don't want to have a perfectly legal knife in Houston suddenly make me a criminal if I have it in San Antonio. I don't want my right to CC to be OK in Uvalde, but be a criminal activity in San Saba.
That's why we don't let local laws pre-empt our gun laws in this state. Local people in cities, counties, or other municipalities should NOT be empowered to make tighter gun laws than the state has already put in place. The same logic can be applied in our publicly funded colleges and universities as well.
