A&M System's ethics policy -Faculty letter

[OldCannon]

I can't hardly read that with all the colors and size changes.

It was painful, for sure. For a while, I thought it was some kind of eye chart

I cleaned it up a bit, it was a little bright ... sorry about that.

Yeah, I recommend going very easy on color changes. It is actually painful to readability (and here's an accompanying link, with far more information than most mortals would care to know: http://www.writer2001.com/colwebcontrast.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). Stick with black and, if you must, use a color change for a headline (better still, use bold or italics).

And let me close by apologizing for the thread hijacking. I now return you to Aggie-land

[The Annoyed Man]

Not commenting on the issue itself, because I stand firmly in support of Campus Carry, but I wouldn't want to deny a UT professor his or her constitutional right to political speech - even if I disagree with that person. The question for me isn't that they are exercising that right; it is that they are doing it on the job. There is a REASON that they have a code of ethics to which they are required to adhere. It is part of their terms of employment.

As a state employee, this same law applies to me. It was made very clear to us in ethics classes we are required to take. I always have my rights to freedom of speech and to express political opinions. I just cannot use any state property (including pay meaning not on state time) to do so. Nor can I use my title in such a way as to give any impression of it being an official opinion.

So, Where the professors went wrong is using their position to make the opinion look official, not in expressing their opinion. The professors who just said that they were professors and would be afraid of students carrying concealed stayed within the law.

I think we agree. My parents were professors, and they violated this principle fairly regularly - but it was at a private institution (Caltech) and perhaps the university had no problem with it - when they protested on campus during "business hours" against our involvement in Vietnam. In my mind, if a a public teaching employee (or administrator) casually answers a political question in passing that's fine. But when the answer turns into a discussion/speech/call to action/etc., that is where the bus loses a wheel and veers off the education road and into the advocacy swamp - which is not what they are getting paid for. Professors do not get paid to instill their own political biases into their students.

The other thing I wanted to address is this: regarding that TAMU "referendum" where 57% of student respondents were against campus carry, how many of them were answering in the negative because they were afraid of their professors and didn't want to affect their grades? How many previously had no opinion one way or the other and simply parroted the professor's viewpoint because "the teacher must know what they are talking about?" ....versus how many actually had a preconceived opinion, arrived at on their own, against campus carry? The very fact that some of the professors were so vocal about the issue polluted the process of what is supposed to be a STUDENT referendum.

[aggiedev]

The other thing I wanted to address is this: regarding that TAMU "referendum" where 57% of student respondents were against campus carry, how many of them were answering in the negative because they were afraid of their professors and didn't want to affect their grades? How many previously had no opinion one way or the other and simply parroted the professor's viewpoint because "the teacher must know what they are talking about?" ....versus how many actually had a preconceived opinion, arrived at on their own, against campus carry? The very fact that some of the professors were so vocal about the issue polluted the process of what is supposed to be a STUDENT referendum.

The whole referendum is a joke. And the fact that Representative Brown's office told me that he is supporting an amendment to the current campus carry bills based on that 57% number is maddening.

In addition to the questions you raise, one has to wonder if the respondents were as informed as some of the faculty members. From what I read the two choices were:

Yes, I support concealed carry on campus.
No, I do not support concealed carry on campus.

If I was unfamiliar with the bills, unfamiliar with the current laws, and unaware that this solely applied to CHL holders, I would probably say "No." as well. I don't support criminals that have illegally obtained firearms carrying them concealed or otherwise on campus.

Considering most of the faculty believe the bills are worded such to allow any student to carry any firearm on campus and then to subsequently exempt them from all other laws--such as brandishing, threatening violence, discharging a firearm, and even murder!--I don't have much faith in the validity of the referendum.

In addition to that, some 13,624 students voted on this referendum. There are well over 40,000 students enrolled in the current term at Texas A&M. So 57% of 30% of the students chose the "No" option. Not very convincing to me.

[RPB]

Yes, I support concealed carry on campus.
No, I do not support concealed carry on campus.

If I was unfamiliar with the bills, unfamiliar with the current laws, and unaware that this solely applied to CHL holders, I would probably say "No." as well. I don't support criminals that have illegally obtained firearms carrying them concealed or otherwise on campus.

Yeah on one comment, I forgot where a woman said something like

"The bill must not pass. I understand that CHLs are law abiding, over 21 and they are ok, but we aren't talking about CHLs, I do NOT want the 17-20 year old kids carrying at college so do NOT pass these laws allowing students to ..

It was followed by a bunch of other comments from people trying to educate her.


Can't expect them to all know requirements for a CHL, but they should at least understand what the bills are about first