Home Blog Page 13

Empty Holster Protest 2010


Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is proudly announcing our fourth annual Empty Holster Protest.

The protest – the fourth of its kind since SCCC’s inception in 2007 – will take place during the week of April 5-9, 2010.

The event will involve SCCC members and supporters everywhere across the United States donning empty holsters once again while attending classes as an act of silent protest against laws and policies that discriminate against legally armed citizens.

SCCC members firmly believe that students, faculty, staff and visitors who are legally authorized to carry concealed firearms for protection have no compelling reason to be denied this right on a college campus and that laws against armed citizens protect only criminals.

Participants can sign up on the event’s Facebook page, which has already attracted hundreds of participants.

Posters, tip sheets, form letters, protest guidelines and further tools will be made available to participants in the weeks leading up to the protest.

For inquiries, please contact David Burnett or visit SCCC’s State-by-State page to contact your Regional Director.

Status Quo and the Double Standard of Exploitation


Unfortunately for Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, we receive the most attention after a sickened murderer goes on a rampage. It’s the tragedy of “trigger points.” Grave events or dire circumstances are necessary before the public recognizes the need for significant changes to status quo. In a nutshell, blood translates to action.

There’s nothing SCCC hates worse.

Because of this, we have a policy of not immediately politicizing, co-opting or capitalizing on tragedy to score political points. While SCCC feels that gun-free zones empower murderers to carry out their shootings with confidence, we wish to preserve respect for the dead and the grieving.

This approach didn’t stop at least one newspaper from claiming the shooting at the University of Alabama – Huntsville would be exploited for political gain on both sides.

It’s true; our opponents do not share our respect for sensitive events, or anniversaries of such events. They base “lie-ins” and other staged political activities around anniversaries of events like Virginia Tech – days which should be set aside for memory, prayer and healing, not heated rhetorical discussion.

Now, just 3 days after Dr. Amy Bishop used an illegal weapon to murder three of her colleagues and injure three more, the Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus published a news release, claiming “this tragic incident shows once again that an angry individual with access to a deadly handgun can commit mass murder wherever people gather…”

“Grassroots” groups such as this, funded by the larger anti-gun lobby, have undertaken a very easy chore: lobby for status quo. They do so by standing on the caskets of the dead to propagate their confusing arguments and mindless appeals to emotion.

They claim the shooting at UAH bolsters their cause. In truth, it’s an illustration of the deadly consequences of a gun-free zone. Was Dr. Bishop at all dissuaded from her murderous intent by a piece of paper taped to the door stating that carrying guns was against the rules? Was she deterred by laws against carrying a concealed handgun without a permit, any more than she was deterred by the laws against premeditated murder? Wasn’t Dr. Bishop actually secure in the knowledge that not one of her University-compliant colleagues would be armed or capable of resisting her execution-style rampage?

Reports indicate that Dr. Bishop’s gun malfunctioned, cutting short her cold-blooded rampage. Her colleagues, whose only recourse had been to duck and cover, rushed her and pushed her out the door. (This counters claims of critics who say that citizen intervention in a mass shooting is not only dangerous, but unlikely.)

It is difficult to understand the mindset of a psychopathic killer, especially when it’s a Harvard-trained, highly-educated biology professor, but it does illustrate that a criminal can look like anyone, that a shooting can happen anywhere, and that there is no such thing as “safe” especially when it comes to unenforceable gun-free zones.

Again, while SCCC feels that events such as Dr. Bishop’s spree are a tragic consequence of “on your honor” gun-free zones, and provide a clarion example of why these deadly policies must be changed, we seek to pursue a peaceful change to these policies through conventional channels. We seek this change not just in defense of the right to be armed, or for extra gun-fondling time during class, but to preempt the further spilling of blood.

We respectfully submit that all parties in this debate must exercise great discretion and sensitivity by not capitalizing on heartbreak to further their goals.

No Surprises – CSU Bans Concealed Carry


In a move which surprised very few, Colorado State University’s Board of Governors went against the request of students and law enforcement, handing down a new campus policy which banned firearms from the college campus.

The decision, which sparked national and even international media attention, demonstrates the complete disregard by the administration towards the expressed will of law enforcement, the consensus of the student body, the factual evidence, and the state concealed carry law.

The policy states in part, “All Colorado State University Employees, including faculty and staff, Students, and Visitors/Guests are prohibited from possessing, using, or displaying Weapons on Campus without written authorization from the Colorado State University Police Chief, whether or not a federal or state permit to possess or conceal the Weapon has been issued to the possessor.” (Click here to read the full document.)

In an interview with the Colorado Springs Gazette, Sheriff Jim Alderden emphatically stated his opposition to the ban, even refusing to allow CSU police to use his jail for arrests of students, faculty or staff caught in violation of the policy. “If anyone with one of my permits gets arrested for concealed carry at CSU,” said Alderden, “I will refuse to book that person into my jail. Furthermore, I will show up at court and testify on that person’s behalf, and I will do whatever I can to discourage a conviction. I will not be a party to this very poor decision.”

The CSU Police website still provides instructions to students on how to check firearms with college authorities, but an article in the Pueblo Chieftain notes that this applies only to the Fort Collins campus, given the absence of any police force on the Pueblo campus. The article also notes that firearms in cars may still be permitted.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus harshly condemns the ban, and the Board of Directors for enacting it. This ban is a sheer insult to the law-abiding populace at CSU, who before now have not been subject to the arbitrary and unenforceable “gun-free zones” which become target-rich zones for the sick and murderous persons waiting to become the next unthinkable headline. By depriving law-abiding citizens of the right to effective protection – the same right they’ve held and safely kept for nearly seven years – they have insured the vulnerability of students, faculty and staff on campus for years to come.

This ban effectively protects only criminals, who may now assail their victims with confidence, secure in the knowledge that would-be victims have been deprived of the tools for resistance and cannot pose a threat.

Given the rapid decline in crime over the nearly 7 years of concealed carry at the college, safety of students is clearly not a priority for the college. The fact that the ban does not go into effect until August further confirms that fact.

To contact Colorado State University about this outrageous infringement on self-defense write to:

CSU President Tony Frank
102 Administration Building
Fort Collins, CO 80523

CSU Board of Directors

Colorado State University System
Office of the Chancellor
410 17th Street, Suite 2440
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 534-6290 (main)
(303) 376-2606 / (970) 297-3606 (direct)

Students Petition Against Senseless Concealed Carry Ban


FORT COLLINS – Members of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus at Colorado State University will deliver a petition to CSU President Tony Frank on Friday, Feb. 19. The petition, which has more than 1,300 signatures, was organized on Facebook by CSU students, and will be delivered page by page to college officials to affirm support for the university’s current policy allowing licensed concealed carry on campus.

“Students have shown tremendous support for concealed carry at CSU in the student government, in the university’s newspaper, and through the petition drive,” said Tim Campbell, SCCC Campus Leader at CSU. “The Board of Governors should honor the will of the students.”

The petition is being delivered just four days prior to a CSU Board of Governors meeting, where it is expected they will approve a ban on licensed concealed carry—a change from the university’s currently policy, which has been in place for nearly seven years.

Click here to read the press release sent to Colorado news agencies.


David Burnett – SCCC Director of Public Relations

Jim Manley – SCCC Colorado State Director

SCCC Offers Condolences to Victims at UAH


Students for Concealed Carry on Campus strongly condemns the senseless shootings that occurred at the University of Alabama – Huntsville today. While details are still sketchy, and readers are urged to maintain caution until the facts emerge, reports indicate a professor violated UAH’s rules regarding firearms on campus and shot 6 people, killing 3. At least 3 of the shooting victims are faculty.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and everyone at UAH.

Colorado State’s Outrageous Campaign Against Firearms


FORT COLLINS – Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is responding to claims that Colorado State University’s new proposed gun ban would improve safety for students, faculty and staff at the school.

“Students, faculty and staff of the University have every reason to expect that sweeping changes to current policy are backed up by reason and logic, and that when public safety experts issue an endorsement of such a ban, they are using solid research and statistics, and acting in good faith to preserve the safety of their campus population,” SCCC wrote in a letter to Colorado State University’s President Anthony Frank. “No greater disparity between fact and expectation could be imagined.”

Officials released a copy of the proposed gun ban on January 20, and solicited feedback with a deadline of January 29. (Click here to read CSU’s proposed weapons policy.)

“We were only too happy to offer our feedback,” said David Burnett, a spokesman for SCCC. “This ban makes zero sense when you look at the crime rates since concealed carry began. No thinking person looking at the facts can conclude a gun ban would improve safety. Either they’re not looking at the facts, or they’re not thinking.”

“CSU has followed state law and allowed licensed concealed carry on campus since statewide concealed carry reform was enacted in 2003,” said Jim Manley, SCCC Colorado State Director. “Over the last seven years, the 25,000 students at CSU have grown comfortable with the idea that self-defense on campus is no less important, and no more threatening, than self-defense off-campus. Not a single incident of gun theft or gun misuse by a licensee has been reported since concealed carry became an everyday occurrence at CSU in 2003.”

CSU’s Board of Governors is expected to enact the policy at its February 23 meeting according to the Denver Post, despite student leaders voting twice to keep the current policy of allowing concealed carry on campus by licensed permit holders.

Meanwhile the pro-gun group Rocky Mountain Gun Owners is threatening to sue if CSU follows through with its gun ban. In a February 1 press conference, attorney Terry Ryan vowed a lawsuit “sooner and not later,” stating that the Board of Governors is not elected and has no authority to suspend rights granted by the state of Colorado.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is already involved in pending litigation against Colorado University for enforcing a firearms ban on campus. Oral arguments on the case are scheduled to take place on March 23, 2010. (Click here to read SCCC’s Notice of Appeal on CU lawsuit.)

SCCC’s full letter is available in PDF format here.

For media inquiries, contact David Burnett or Jim Manley

Statement on Kentucky Student’s Lawsuit


LEXINGTON – A graduate student at the University of Kentucky is suing the college after being fired for having a firearm locked in his car. Michael Mitchell, a member of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, is currently pursuing a masters degree in epidemiology at the University. Mitchell was employed by the University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, working as an anesthesia technician in the operating room and assisting with thousands of surgeries in his 7 months of employment.

In April 2009, Mitchell was approached by campus police who received an anonymous tip about a firearm allegedly in his possession. Mitchell cooperated with authorities for a search of his locker to prove he had no firearm in his possession. He then explained to police that he had a firearm locked in his car, parked more than a mile away in a lot maintained by the college.

“At first they called me into the supervisor’s office and told me I was being suspended without pay, pending an investigation,” Mitchell told SCCC. “I thought it was good because then they could investigate and hear both sides.”

An officer escorted Mitchell to his car, where he cooperated with the officer in locating the firearm to lock it in the trunk. The officer’s superior directed him to confiscate the firearm. “If I had known they were going to confiscate it, I wouldn’t have given them permission to get the gun and lock it in the trunk,” Mitchell stated. “They wouldn’t have had a reason to search my car over a simple suspension.”

Less than a week later, Mitchell was asked to come to the hospital, where supervisors informed him that he had been terminated.

“I was distraught. I refused to sign statements because I had done nothing wrong. I didn’t have the gun on me, and still don’t understand. If anyone else had been on campus property and legally armed, they wouldn’t be penalized.”

The University even tried to deny Mitchel unemployment benefits but lost.

Kentucky law states, “No person or organization, public or private, shall prohibit a person licensed to carry a concealed deadly weapon from possessing a firearm, ammunition, or both, or other deadly weapon in his or her vehicle in compliance with the provisions of [Kentucky concealed carry statutes]. Any attempt by a person or organization, public or private, to violate the provisions of this subsection may be the subject of an action for appropriate relief or for damages in a Circuit Court or District Court of competent jurisdiction.”

“I was heartbroken to lose the job. I loved the job and loved working with the physicians. I want to go to medical school, and UK is a teaching hospital where you can learn from the doctors.”

The complaint, filed in Fayette County Circuit Court, quotes the law and seeks unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. (Click here to read the complaint)

“Mr. Mitchell was involved in thousands of surgeries, and entrusted with the lives of everyone from minor procedure patients to major trauma patients,” said David Burnett, a spokesman for SCCC. “The fact that the University used his ignorance of campus policy and his willingness to cooperate with authorities to make him an example for anyone who knowingly or unknowingly violates their rules shows how vindictive and out of control the college is, and how far they will go to deny the right to self-defense.”

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus strongly condemns a campus policy that denies students, faculty and staff the same right to defensive carry of firearms that they have off-campus. The gun-free policies enforced only by signs and a few thinly-spread security officers serve only to stack the odds in favor of criminals and deny citizens the right to defend themselves.

Stay tuned to the website for further updates on this vital case.

For media inquiries, contact David Burnett

Opponents of Self Defense Recycle Old Lies


Special interests hostile to armed citizens and self-defense are once again spreading tired lies about Students for Concealed Carry on Campus and its mission. In press releases published mainly by anti-gun websites and blogs, groups such as the Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus and the Brady Campaign claim that all efforts to rescind defense-free zones on college campuses in 2009 failed. Echoing similarly loaded and inaccurate allegations made earlier in the year, the notoriously anti-gun groups claimed failure in every state that considered concealed carry on campus legislation, calling such bills “dangerous,” “radical” and “extremist.”

These allegations come on the heels of legislation announced in three states (Georgia, Arizona and Virginia) which would remove arbitrary bans of concealed firearms on campus.

Furthermore, the critical eye of anti-defense groups somehow overlooked legislation passed in Arizona and South Carolina, which permits lawfully-armed citizens to keep firearms locked in their cars while on campus. They neglected to mention that legislation in Maryland, which would have criminalized concealed carry on campus, failed. They overlooked a Texas court siding with SCCC members wishing to protest concealed carry bans, and they ignored Michigan State University’s policy revision to allow concealed carry outside dorms and classrooms. In fact, far from being defeated, two bills introduced in Michigan in 2009 are still alive and pending.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus has lobbied for bills in more than 20 states since 2007, and expects more legislation across the United States in 2010. SCCC advocates allowing concealed carry of firearms on campus only by residents already authorized by their state government to carry elsewhere.

Anti-defense groups such as the Brady Campaign claim to represent students in the fight to keep colleges gun-free. Yet they remain silent when Colorado State University’s student government voted 21-3 in favor of keeping the concealed carry policy. They likewise enjoy propping up the opinions of anti-gun law enforcement only when convenient, ignoring local police who oppose the still-unenforced Colorado State gun ban, or who support Michigan concealed carry on campus legislation. They invoke safety as their chief goal, even though select colleges in Colorado, Michigan and Virginia, and all public universities in Utah, have successfully permitted concealed carry on campus, or that CSU’s crime rate plummeted upon the passage of concealed carry.

SCCC wants your feedback


Would you be interested in a voluntary magazine subscription produced by SCCC? Is this an expansion you think would be a positive direction for SCCC? How much would you pay for such a subscription? We want your feedback! Please take this survey and then share it with any other SCCC supporters you know.


Michigan: Hearing on Bill Decriminalizing Self-Defense on Campus


Senate Bill 747, sponsored by Senator Richardville (R-Monroe) will be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, December 8th at 1:00 PM.

The bill, which would remove dormitories and classrooms from the no-carry zones of Michigan law, bears the full endorsement of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. SCCC resoundingly supports removing arbitrary “gun-free zones” that affect only those law-abiding citizens already authorized to carry a concealed handgun. SB 747 proposed by Sen. Richardville will go far towards allowing meaningful self-defense on campus.

Committee meeting details are here.

Please take a moment to voice your support for decriminalizing self-defense on campus. Contact the Judiciary Committee Clerk, Marnie Wills, by e-mail or by calling (517) 373-6920.

Or contact Sen. Kuipers (Chair), Sen. Cropsey, Sen. Sanborn, Sen. Patterson, Sen. Stamas, Sen. Whitmer Sen. Clarke and Sen. Basham.

Tell them you don’t support ANY Michigan citizen authorized to carry a concealed weapon being deprived of the right to self-defense.

For further information, contact David Burnett or Reid Smith.