Campus Carry defeated in Virginia

[Kythas]

I'm working at Radford University in Virginia this week. This school is about 20 miles from Virginia Tech.

The following article was in today's student newspaper "The Tartan". While they did get quotes from a CHL holder, that particular CHL holder said she wouldn't carry on campus even if it were legal.

Note the proposed bill would have only made it legal for FACULTY with CHLs to carry, not students.

https://php.radford.edu/~tartan/wp/?p=803" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Handgun debate lingers on campus
Meta: Justin Ward April 06th 2009 // News

JW Martin
jmartin190@radford.edu
Dr. Tod Burke carried a gun for five years as a policeman.

If the Virginia General Assembly had passed House Bill 1656, he would have been able to carry a gun as a professor.

On Feb. 28, 2009, the regular session of the Virginia General Assembly came to an end, and with it a bill that would have allowed college faculty members with a concealed handgun permit the option of carrying a gun on campus.

But although the bill is dead, the debate isn’t.

Critics claim this type of legislation could turn classrooms into crime scenes. Proponents plead it’s a proactive measure. Both sides believe it’s a matter of safety.

Arguments are abundant, but the answers aren’t. Over 20,000 professors teach at one of the 81 institutions of higher education in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

All have an opinion on the subject. But few have the previous profession of public protection from which to base beliefs.

Dr. Tod Burke does.

Upon graduating from the University of Maryland in May of 1978, Burke put his Bachelor of Arts in Law Enforcement degree to work and joined the force. For five years Burke policed Maryland streets as a patrol officer specializing in crime prevention.

The need to draw a weapon arose weekly at a minimum. And although Burke was never involved in a firefight, the recollections of one particular day still conjure up unsettling memories.

“There was one time I was shot at, but I didn’t find out about that ‘till later,” Burke recalls. “I was doing foot patrol and I heard what I thought was backfire. The next day when I was back in that area the store owners asked me if I was OK I said, ‘why?’ They said, ‘because those guys were shooting at you.’”

But that’s history. Today, Burke teaches criminal justice, specializing in subjects pertaining to law enforcement. For 23 years Burke has served as a professor of police work; he has taught at Radford University since 1995.

If past experience shapes policy, then there is little doubt about why Burke has a disdain for firearms.

“I don’t like ‘em,” Burke admits. “I find them more hazardous than helpful. Unfortunately in today’s law enforcement in America, we kinda need ‘em.”

Burke does not share the same belief when it comes to the issue of House Bill 1656, however.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” said Burke. “Look what goes on in the range; you’re lucky if you can hit the target in the range. And these are police officers who are trained to be marksmen during stressful situations. Obviously, if the professor is going to be pulling out and discharging a weapon, it’s going to be in a stressful situation.”

Burke goes on to explain the contrast between a policeman and a professor.

“Remember, the [assailant] already has the drop. Sometimes police officers, unless they’re ambushed, kind of know- we anticipate each ‘what if.’ I don’t know if a professor’s mindset is set to that; every class period they’re going ‘now, if someone pulls a weapon…’” Burke said.

“Now, maybe that’s not a bad thing. But I think there are way too many variables.”

It was a personal phone call received by Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall that triggered House Bill 1656.

“The origin of the bill was the shooting at Virginia Tech,” explains Marshall. “A campus policeman from George Mason called me up and said we need more firepower on campus for when the next event happens- not if, but when.”

Marshall was deliberating the development of such a bill when a conversation a few weeks later produced the blueprint on how to proceed.

“I was at a social gathering probably a month later and a professor at George Mason suggested that they ought to let professors defend their students,” recalls Marshall.

A short time later, House Bill 1656 was born. The bill called for an amendment to the code of Virginia that would prohibit the governing body of a public institution of higher education to enforce any rule(s) governing the carrying of a concealed handgun on campus property by a full-time faculty member who possessed a valid Virginia concealed handgun permit.

In summary, a professor with a valid concealed/carry permit could carry a gun into the classroom.

Backed by Marshall and Delegate C. Todd Gilbert of the 15th District, the bill was presented on Dec. 15, and on the same day referred to the committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety.

It never left the committee.

“The chairwoman of Militia and Police didn’t call it up for a hearing,” explains Marshall. “We were stymied by the leadership.”

Marshall made one last attempt, hoping the bill would be acknowledged. On page 622, as an amendment to the state budget, the bill reappeared, forcing a vote before the House.

The bill received 17 ‘yeas’ with 80 delegates voting against it.

For Marshall, the defeat was part of a broader plan.

“The amendment lost, but now citizens can see who’s serious about this,” says Marshall.

Marshall defends the bill and will continue to circulate similar legislation in the future. He believes the bill to be a necessary, proactive measure against armed assailants on campus.

“These people would have to think, does this professor have a concealed/carry permit? They might start to think twice about it. And even if they don’t, if somebody has a concealed/carry weapon, they would be more likely to be on the scene faster than the campus police,” Marshall says. “So I think it’s an added safety factor.”

An overwhelming majority agreed with Burke during the 2009 session in Richmond. But not all college professors believe the bill to be inherently illogical.

Enter into evidence Dr. Nicole Hendrix, a Radford University professor and a possessor of a concealed handgun permit.

Hendrix has been teaching for 10 years. She has held a valid concealed/carry permit for 11. Likewise, she doesn’t find firearms necessarily problematic. The concealed handgun permit process is another issue, however.

“It varies dramatically. And this is perhaps one of the reasons that causes so much anxiety and stress related to firearms. Every jurisdiction has a very different perspective on safety and training,” explains Hendrix, whose current research at RU involves the purchasing, storage, and carrying of firearms. “Federal mandates are the only ones that apply to the states. So it’s really hard to talk generally about guns because every state is different.”

In Virginia, concealed handgun permits are issued by the circuit court of the county or city the applicant resides in after he or she has completed the application process, which applies to persons 21 years of age or older.

The purpose of the process is to display competence with a firearm. Thus, the main facet of the procedure revolves around one of the nine ways in which an applicant can demonstrate such competence.

Hunter education and safety courses count, along with any education and safety courses offered to the general public by law enforcement agencies. Hendrix completed a National Rifle Association firearms safety and training course.

“Safety training varies dramatically; it usually involves instruction rather than hands-on, tactical training- although that is available. It’s just usually cost-prohibitive,” Hendrix explains. “And this is probably the biggest criticism some people have- that there is no actual handling training. Usually there will be some display of how to unload or clean, and the instructors will talk about best practices and safe practices. But there isn’t typically the kind of training that especially people who don’t own guns think should happen.”

Upon completion of one of the nine courses, a fee and a waiting period of no more than 45 days is all the applicant has to do in order to obtain a concealed/carry permit. It is valid for five years.

Critics claim the process doesn’t suffice in the context House Bill 1656 calls for. Certain criticisms are noted by Burke.

“Are they taught retention? Are they taught stress in combat shooting? Because that is what this is going to be; this is not shooting at the range. Someone is not gonna be dressed as a silhouette target,” explains Burke. “There will be movement, ricochets. Police officers- they’re trained in combat shooting. I don’t think people who are going for permits are trained in that.”

While not agreeing completely with Burke, the two professors do find common ground when it comes to carrying a concealed weapon on campus.

“I am torn about this,” admits Hendrix. “As someone who could legally carry anywhere else, I’m not sure I see a problem with it. And given the events of April 16, 2007, I think that there is the potential there that something could have changed. But that person would have had to have been extremely well trained and highly skilled, and most gun owners are not that.”

Hendrix says she would probably have voted for House Bill 1656, and she doesn’t think gun-free zones are necessary. To Hendrix, guns are just another tool. But like Burke, it isn’t a tool she would carry on campus, even legally.

“I would not want a student -I typically use a back holster- I wouldn’t want a student to see that and feel uncomfortable. As a faculty member, my role is to be as approachable as possible. I wouldn’t want to do anything that makes students uncomfortable. And I think, unfortunately, firearms do make a good portion of the community uncomfortable.”

Burke agrees.

“This is not the environment for firearms. You want to engage students in conversations, and you want to have an atmosphere where students feel comfortable,” Burke explains.

You and I could go over to Virginia Tech and sit down in a lecture hall, and not one person would say, ‘you don’t belong here,’ because they won’t know the difference. That’s how our universities are designed. We want this free flow of communication, we want this learning atmosphere. We don’t want this to turn into a prison.”