Boy, talk about the loss of Constitutional Rights . . .
Our subject story tells us of an Institution Of Learning in which you would expect your Constitutional Rights to be upheld at all times, that actually not only requires your acceptance of loss of those rights, but also punishes you if the need arises to exercise those rights.
I am discussing the right to bear arms, which at the very least is a very heated topic. In this case a six time convicted felon tries to force himself into the home of a couple college kids. Because the kids live in “campus housing” although in this case off campus, the fact they they even possessed weapons is enough to get them kicked out of school.
One of the students even had a license to carry a concealed weapon. Both students had never had any form of disciplinary action against them and were model students. Regardless, it is the school’s intent to take disciplinary action against them for having possession of the weapons while residing on campus property.
One of the reasons given was because Campus Security patrolled the area on a regular basis. But, where was Security when the guy was at the door?
Not only does the school fail to honor our right to bear arms, but it also does not respect a person’s right to self defense. In this case the situation could have been much more severe. What if the bad guy was at that location because he was aware of the no weapons policy? What if it had been a couple young girls living in the apartment? What if the students had not of defended themselves?
It makes me curious what other rights the school has taken from students. Does the school’s rules exceed the State’s license to carry a concealed weapon? What if the student worked as a Security Guard while putting himself through school?
I do not like the idea of students “packing heat” on campus, but in this case neither was using their weapons unlawfully. I feel the idea of a school which should be demonstrating compliance with every one of our Constitutional Rights not doing so should be against the law and the fact that the location of the incident was not physically within the campus but a campus property outside, subject to the laws of the City and State, that the laws of that City should be the legality in question. Does the school’s ruling mean that Landlords all over the State can require their renters surrender Constitutional Rights as a matter of obtaining housing?
As to the matter of jurisdiction. The location although patrolled by Campus Security was also the jurisdiction of the local community. The students did not violate the laws of the City or State in their act of self-defense. Had they of violated any laws in their defense, the local authorities would have had taken jurisdiction of the case.
It appears as though two students that acted within the confines of the law are about to have their futures destroyed by a school that does not respect neither the laws of the State or the Constitution of the United States because a “six time loser criminal” came uninvited to their door. And, this is the real crime. No citizen should ever fear defending themselves. No State Agency at all should be allowed to disregard the laws of the State including schools. And, no school should ever have the ability to cause harm to a persons future less criminal act committed by the student. Anything added to these students scholastic records could and probably will impact the future of these students long after they leave the school.
I do not challenge the School’s authority within the confines of the campus. But, property outside the campus owned by the State is still under the jurisdiction of the local community. Local laws should apply. The School does not have the right to restrict the students conduct any more than a Landlord does over any other Renter in the community. And, I feel the day we allow our Landlords to regulate our Constitutional Rights we will see the end of freedom within the United States. If the State/School cannot confine their rulings to conform to the laws of the State, they need to sell the property in question to somebody that can.