« December 2008 | Main | February 2009 »
January 2009
Making arms in the Khyber Pass
An interesting video on how Afghans make firearms by taking blanks of steel and filing away everything that doesn't look like a gun. Looks like they achieve high quality. And they have better gun handling techniques than the US interviewer.
Also shown are their other inventories. Lewis guns, Lugers, British muskets. They could probably make a better living selling those (apart from the Lewis) to American collectors. I suspect the shop owner, if told that those old muskets could bring a thousand on the American market, and the Lugers that much or several times it, wouldn't hesitate very long.
Hat tip to reader Alice Beard...
Permalink · non-US · Comments (8)
Dominquez case in CA
Sensibly Progressive has the story. Earlier post here.
Basically, Mr. Dominguez is a law abiding fellow who had the misfortune to live in California (everything he was doing would be completely legal in AZ). On the way to a shooting range, he stopped at the LA airport to pick up a friend who would go to the range with him. He had his firearms and ammo in locked cases in a locked cover to his pickup's bed. Airport security pulled him over for an inspection. All his guns were legal, including an assault rifle which he had registered in accord with the law.
But he was charged with a felony, anyway, because the CA law on assault rifles says they may be transported only between specific locations. Home to shooting range is OK, BUT the prosecution contends that since he stopped at the airport on the way to the range, his is guilty of felony transportation. They also seized and may forfeit his truck.
Sensibly Progressive also notes the media coverage, portraying him as a "knucklehead: who brought an "arsenal" to an airport.
Permalink · arms law victims · Comments (40)
Howard Nemerov now writes for the DC Examiner
His first article analyses the elections in terms of NRA vs. Brady endorsed wins.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
OSHA opines on OKL law on workplace parking lot storage
Here's a pdf of a new OSHA opinion that the Oklahoma law protecting employees who have firearms in their locked cars, on employer-owned parking lots, are protected against firing.
[Corrected, thanks to comment. I rec'd this from someone in FLA and assumed it related to the similar law there. Understand, when I'm preparing for a big trial, I don't have a lot of time to post]
More reason to be glad I'm in Arizona
A Phoenix area Justice of the Peace just ruled speed camera tickets unconstitutional. He found a violation of Equal Protection, since (1) tickets issued by officers have variable fines depending upon how fast the driver was going, whereas camera issued tickets all have one fine ($181.50) and (2) officer-issued citations carry 3 points, whereas camera-issued ones carry none, all for the same offense.
Understand, I'm no lead foot. Been driving 40+ years and have gotten exactly one speeding citation. But the idea of the cameras is irritating. It's so blatantly an attempt to make money, and a good chunk of that goes to the private contractors who lease out the cameras and mail out the citations.
Chicago 14th A appeal -- opening brief filed
Right here.
Alan Gura was in Tucson tonight, and we caught dinner at Casa Molina. He is quite optimistic. The court announce argument date sometime after the answering brief is filed (if I remember that correctly). The earliest possible argument date would be in April, no idea if it'll come then, or later.
Permalink · Chicago gun case · Comments (3)
Len Savage's gun arrested
David Codrea has the story. Background: Savage designs NFA-related items. This one enables the owner of a lawful NFA firearm to convert it to a different caliber. BATFE originally ruled that the item was not a firearm, let alone an NFA one; it was a conversion kit. After Len gave some expert testimony in several cases against the agency, it reversed its ruling and held that the kit was an NFA firearm. Now it's pursuing forfeiture of it.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (15)
Summary of economic stimulus package
This Q & A, from reader Spiker, is the best I have seen. It sums up the economics concisely:
This year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. Here is a brief explanation:
Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.
Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only part of it.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.
Continue reading "Summary of economic stimulus package"
Traced guns vs. crime guns
An interesting story in the DC Examiner:
"“Officer, I am carrying a firearm in compliance with North Carolina law.” So began my exchange during a traffic stop. (Sorry, I have a lead foot.) He replied, “May I have it, sir?” Since this was before I knew enough to say “no,” I complied. The officer then took my gun to his car, traced it and, finding nothing amiss, returned it to me. MAIG’s report would have you believe my gun is a “crime gun” because it would be included in the gun trace reports on which its study is based.
Therein lies the scam: Although gun control advocates call gun tracing a measure of crime, traced guns are not necessarily “crime guns.” Says the Congressional Research Service: “Trace requests are not accurate indicators of specified crimes…traces may be requested for a variety of reasons not necessarily related to criminal incidents.” Indeed, BATFE encourages police to trace all guns encountered."
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (13)
National CCW reciprocity bill
Alphecca notes it's been introduced. I'd share his doubts it's going anywhere soon.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (6)
Another reason I'm happy to be in Arizona
A poll of New Yorkers on their newly appointed US Senator finds generally favorable opinions, but
"Because of Gillibrand's pro-gun position and her backing by the National Rifle Assn., 36 percent of New York State voter, including 50 percent of Democrats, are less likely to vote for her when she runs for election next year, while 17 percent are more likely to vote for her. Another 41 percent say this doesn't make a difference."
David E. Young moves into blogging!
David E. Young is author of several incredibly comprehensive books on the Second Amendment, including The Origins of the Second Amendment, which the Fifth Circuit cited over a hundred times in the Emerson decision.
I'm happy to note that he's begun a blog, On Second Opinion. His first post takes aim at the Historians' Brief for DC's side in Heller.
Staples case and malfunctioning semiautos
Snowflakes in Hell has a post on the issue of whether a malfunctioning semiauto can leave the owner guilty of an NFA violation if it doubles.
I'd agree with his assessment that the Staples case largely settles the issue. The National Firearms Act defines "firearm" to be an NFA arm, not any firearm (Congress can define things any way it wants). The question in Staples was a split in lower courts. They agreed that the defendant must be proven to know that he had a firearm, but split on whether that meant the NFA definition or just anything that went bang. Supreme Court said the NFA definition applies.
UPDATE: it was, I think, a core issue at Olofson's trial. Problem from defense side was that the prosecution could call the guy he loaned the gun to (to test before buying), and that guy (true or false) claimed that Olofson told him not to put the selector switch in a certain position (in which the gun began firing full auto). From this the government could argue that he knew the gun was malfunctioning and had so for sufficient time without getting it repaired. That's why I say, if it happens, go straight to a gunsmith.
So if a semi doubles by surprise, the possessor didn't have the required knowledge. Now, this might leave open the question of whether he violates the law by continuing to possess after he knows it will do so. So it's clearly time for a quick rush to the gunsmith for repair.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (18)
David Codrea on Holder nomination
David Codrea weighs in on Holder's testimony, at the DC Examiner.
GeorgiaCarry.org gets good press for CCW
Video link here.
It's a lesson in how to win PR battles. (1) A local group will attract more and more favorable media interest than a national group can and (2) if you actually work with reporters, they may just like it.
Hat tip to reader Ed Stone...
Steve Halbrook's video testimony against Holder
The Independent Institute has it online.
New admin. and guns in Parks rule
I'd agree with this assessment that the new Administration, even if it wanted to mess with the issue, will have to undertake a new rulemaking to overturn the rule allowing firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. It's already past its effective date, and thus is binding. The ESA rulemaking I'm not sure about. Understand that a final rule has certain stages:
1) A signed version is delivered to the Federal Register.
2) The Register prints it, usually 1-3 days later.
3) It has an "effective date," usually 30 days later (at least when I was at Interior).
If I recall from my days as a GS-14, the rule becomes a binding agency decision at (1), delivery to the Register, not at (2), its printing. (3) just governs when it goes into effect, and represents a delay so that the public can learn of it and be expected to comply.
A pro-gun US Senator from NY?
NY Gov. Paterson has picked Kirsten Gillibrand to replace Hillary Clinton as US Senator. The NY Times reports:
"If Mr. Paterson was hoping to quiet the tumult over the selection process by picking Ms. Gillibrand, there were indications that he may not get his wish. Ms. Gillibrand, who has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, is controversial among some of the party’s more liberal leaders downstate.
Representative Carolyn McCarthy, a Long Island Democrat and ardent gun control activist, said Thursday that if Ms. Gillibrand got the job, she was prepared to run against her in a primary in 2010. "
[Blogging will be light today, as I'll be in court]
Nice being in AZ
The legislature authorized speed cameras for State highways. People circulated petitions against them. The Pinal County Sheriff was among the first to sign. He told a reporter that we all know this is about raising money, not about law enforcement, and he's never yet seen a speed camera stop a drunk driver, or execute an arrest warrant, or "just give directions" to a lost driver.
Interesting constitutional question re nominations
A friend mentioned this. The Constitution says the President shall nominate Cabinet officers.
Barack Obama nominated Hillary Clinton for Sec. of State on on December 2, 2008.
On December 2, 2008, the President was George W. Bush. The same can be said of the other Cabinet officers nominated before noon on January 20, 2009.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (15)
Strange situation in Texas
Story here.
Woman comes into office with a hunting bow, shoots a guy with an arrow, draws a (fake) gun, and points it at two other employees.
Who happen to be CCW holders, and packing. She takes several hits and retreats. An officer comes in to evacuate the guy with the arrow in him, and she starts drawing the bow for a shot at the officer, who fires on her.
While in other Texas news, two guys with revolvers kick in an apartment door. Only to find two guys with shotguns inside.
Hat tip to reader six-gun Sally....
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (13)
Militia and State powers
Was inspired to a separate post by a comment from J. Norman Heath, who indeed wrote "the" article on the issue, "Exposing the Second Amendment" 79 U.Det. Mercy L.R. 39 (2001). He examines early Supreme Court decisions, and concludes that the Court left the States with very little in the way of power. Maybe some, if Congress did absolutely nothing. But once Congress acted, no matter how inadequately, its power became near-absolute, with States able at most to enforce the Federal legislation (and some Justices thought even that was too much).
Remember that historically the militia was to be the mainstay of national defense. As Madison said in Federalist 46, we'd have 25,000 troops at absolute max (in practice, we had more like a thousand or two), and 600,000 militiamen. The standing army would hold off an invader until the militia could rally and do the real fighting. You wouldn't want part of your main defense establishment carrying .65 muskets and others .75 caliber, or one part trained to one drill book and the other trained to another that had different orders, one organized into 1600 man regiments with two battalions and another with 1000 man regiments and no battalions (OK, so they had that in the Civil War, regular vs. volunteer regiments).
Question: might the unorganized militia today be in the state that the Court mentioned when it said that a different case would be presented if Congress entirely failed to act? At the moment, Federal legislation defines who is in the unorganized militia, and as I recall provides for its calling out, but gives it no standards for armament, officers, organization, or training.
Permalink · militia · Comments (10)
NY trial ct rules against incorporation of the 2A
Opinion in extended entry, below. Not too surprising. Lower courts can be expected to "pass the buck" upstairs on the issue. It's good that both the Chicago action and Nordyke are so far along in the process, because criminal defense attorneys have a duty to raise the issue, and generally we wouldn't want those cases to go first.
Continue reading "NY trial ct rules against incorporation of the 2A"
Permalink · 14th Amendment · Comments (7)
ballistic Ipod app
Story here.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (7)
What if Heller had turned out the other way?
Prof. Nick Johnson asks the question, in the Wake Forest Law Review. His points are practical rather than legal ones. (1) The only supply-side gun control that would have a chance of affecting crime is a ban and confiscation, all this toying around with assault weapons and similar issues is mere symbolism that affects nothing. (2) Anyone who thinks a ban and confiscation would work is delusional.
Some really interesting figures at pp. 854-55: gist of them is that, looking at the question worldwide, no one -- Indians, French, Mexicans, Germans -- complies even with modest controls.
Hat tip to Don Kates....
Interesting Georgia case
Pdf here. The gun owner was convicted of a drug offense in 1969, and received a full pardon in 1995. When he tried to purchase a firearm, the NICS staff called a local judge and asked him to revoke the fellow's pistol permit (which I suspect is a BIG violation of the Privacy Act). Basis was a Georgia statute that says persons convicted of a drug offense are forever ineligible to get a pistol permit.
Initially he surrendered his permit, then got new counsel, John Monroe and Douglas King, and they put up a fight. The judge ultimately rules for them. A pardon is an executive act, authorized by the state Constitution. The Legislature cannot change its effect.
He then sued for an injunction against Federal authorities stopping his purchase and seeking an injunction against them prosecuting him. Here's the GeorgiaPacking.org webpage on the pleadings. Word is that the government caved in, and provided him with a certification that he is not prohibited to purchase and possess.
Hat tip to reader Ed Stone...
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (8)
Debate on shall issue's effect on crime continues
A summary of a recent article, over at the Volokh Conspiracy. It's an answer to an earlier article arguing that shall-issue increases crime rates. I'm not statistician, but the gist of it is that the earlier article got its results only by considering crime rates in the first five years after enactment; if it had extended to six or more years, it would show crime rate reductions.
(For me, this is further proof of the inadequacies of statistical work in the gun law arena. I could understand a conclusion that shall-issue is followed by crime rate increases, or reductions, or no change. I cannot understand a conclusion that it is followed by crime rate increases followed by crime rate reductions. To be precise, I can understand that pattern, provided it is divorced from any concept of causation -- that is, the pattern is pure coincidence, perhaps the product of when the laws were enacted in relation to the predictable crime rate cycles).
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (11)
Oral argument in Nordyke v. King
Audio here, in Windows Media Format. Great line by one of the judges, when the County advocate argued that while you can't physically have guns at a gun show, you still could offer to sell them, then consummate the sale off the county fairgrounds:
"I just have trouble with the concept that you can have a gun show so long as you don't show guns."
Hard to judge the three-judge panel's inclinations from the argument (although their handling of the appeal suggests they are at least open to 14th Amendment incorporation). Not a lot of questions. They ask the appellant's counsel, Don Kilmer, whether they are bound by the previous 9th Circuit ruling in Fresno Rifle, refusing to incorporate. On the other hand, a judge does tell the county advocate that he should discuss incorporation when he tries to sidestep it. And then the judge suggests that, while Heller does not decide incorporation, it argues at great length that the right to arms is fundamental, is deeply rooted in American history, etc.. County advocate dodges with argument that the Heller right to possess in the home may be fundamental, but here we deal with possession on government land. Judge comes back with, what if this gun show were in D.C., so incorporation isn't at issue, would the result be different? County advocate gets tripped up. (No time meter showing, but this is about 90% thru the argument). County advocate argues Heller sez the reason right to arms was codified was fear of federal tyranny, hence it should not apply to States.
Side questions as to whether, if they incorporate, they should rule on the ordinance in question, or send it back to the trial court to determine the ultimate question.
Permalink · Nordyke v. King · Comments (10)
Steve Halbrook testifies on Eric Holder nomination
Summary here.
If you want to order Steve's new book, here is where to do it.
More on San Fran Housing authority settling out
The San Francisco Housing Authority settled its suit with NRA (and I've been told the terms did include attorneys' fees). Now, to put a position spin on it, the Authority is contending its rules really weren't intended to ban guns:
"Tim Larsen, a lawyer for the Housing Authority, said Tuesday the agency never intended to enforce its 2005 ban against law-abiding gun owners and has never done so, even though the lease provision covered legal as well as illegal weapons.
"Our intention was to go after people who were engaged in criminal activity," Larsen said."
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (8)
DC targeting real criminals?
Naw, it'd rather bring felony gun charges against a Marine double amputee on his way to Walter Reed. Story here. And sounds like it pushed hard, retrying him a third time after two deadlocked juries. The last jury walked him on the felony, but convicted him on misdemeanor possession of ammunition.
Hat tip to reader Chris Caserta...
Bloomberg's Mayors Group loses yet another
It's becoming a tidal wave! Now Racine Mayor Gary Becker is booked for attempted child molestation and other offenses. Is getting arrested on felony raps a fad in Mayors Against Illegal Guns? This makes two in a single week.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
T-Shirts that can get you a quarter of million bucks?
Who knows, it might just work.
Gun salesman of the year....
The title goes to guess who?
Sullivan resigns as acting ATFE director
Story here. Pretty much inevitable -- he was a Repub. nominee who couldn't get confirmed.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (11)
Debate on Chicago cases
Tonight, at 5:30, hosted by the Federalist Society's Chicago Chapter.
Hat tip to reader Carl in Chicago....
Permalink · Chicago gun case · Comments (1)
Battle with DC motor vehicle licensing
NRA's General Counsel's Office just won it. (pdf). Motor Vehicles refused a custom plate of "TRIGGER" because it "may" offend certain people. They wound up backing down.
A busy time for Heller commentary
First, Nelson Lund of Geo. Mason U. Law School has posted a paper, "The Second Amendment, Heller, and Originalist Jurisprudence." While he agrees with the majority's conclusion, he is disappointed in, for example, its dicta regarding how certain laws would still pass muster, which is given without any explanation derived from original understanding.
At the Volokh Conspiracy, Randy Barnett seconds most of the criticisms, while feeling it was a bit harsh on Scalia.
Over at Legal Theory Blog, Larry Solum of U. of Ill. has Barnett on Lund on Scalia: The Construction Zone and District of Columbia v. Heller. He suggests the answer is in the distinction between interpretation ("the Second Amendment means we have an individual right to keep and bear arms") and construction (outside of 100% clear cases, "that doctrine, as applied to this law, yields this result"). Randy Barnett seconds his view.
UPDATE: Nelson Lund is VERY strongly individual rights, and always has been. Or at least for the decades that I've known him.
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (16)
Crime fighting's Future Is a Man with a Gun
So says this column in the Orlando Sentinel. A good piece of writing.
Hat tip to Dan Gifford...
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (5)
Eric Holder nomination
Here is a pdf of NRA's letter to Judiciary Committee.
Magistrate holds statute unconstitutional under Heller
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Gene Volokh notes a magistrate ruling. The magistrate refuses to follow a federal statute providing that giving up all guns shall be a condition of pre-trial release in child porn cases. Magistrate concludes that under Heller, disarming a person merely accused of an offense, and a nonviolent one at that, without an individualized finding of dangerousness, is deprivation of liberty w/o due process.
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (1)
ANOTHER Bloomberg mayor goes down
Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon is on the receiving end of a 12 count felony indictment relating to receiving tens of thousands in "gifts" from a land developer and ripping off donations meant to help the homeless.
UPDATE: The two comments in Russian were spam. The website given (not in the body of the comment) were to a Russian porn site.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (13)
Honoring Ugo Beretta
Snowflakes in Hell has the story. An interesting firearm manufacturer, BTW, in that it's been in operation since the 1500s and is still owned and run by the same family after nearly half a millenium.
Spelling corrected, thanks. Was very tired.
Nordyke v. King dinner
Nordyke v. King is the 9th Cir. case that, after percolating forever, is now ready to be argued. A key issue is whether the 14th Amendment incorporates the 2A and binds the States. Argument is set for January 15, and afterward the CalGuns Foundation is hosting a dinner at the Hotel Whitcomb, about two blocks from the Courthouse. You can order tickets here.
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (2)
Carnival of Homeschooling
The Carnival of Homeschooling is celebrating its third anniversary.
FLA CCW holder stops robbery
Story here.
Hat tip to reader Carl in Chicago...
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (2)
Response to kidnapping in Pakistan
Issue the victim a bunch of AK-47s. Sounds like a worthwhile approach under the conditions.
Hat tip to reader John Higi,,,
Permalink · non-US · Comments (0)
Debate between Prof. Volokh & Chas. Blek of Brady Campaign
Podcast here. BTW, it was hosted by the Los Angeles chapter of Federalist Society and the Libertarian Law Society. Their next event involves a presentation by Judge Alex Kozinski and David Lat (of the Above the Law blog) on Jan. 13. RSVP to [email protected].
San Francisco backing down
In the wake of Heller, Chuck Michel and others filed an action against San Francisco Housing Authority, over its ban on firearms in public housing. It looks as if San Francisco is surrendering.
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (8)
New Obama picks for DoJ
For Deputy AG: David W. Ogden -- his background: under the Clinton Admin, was Ass't Atty General for Civil Division, and Chief of Staff to the Attorney General.
For Solicitor General: Elena Kagan. Her background: dean of Harvard law, taught at Chicago, clerked for Abner Mikva on DC Circuit and then for Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court.
For Associate AG: Tom Perrelli. His background: longtime private practitioner, mostly representing the entertainment industry. Under Clinton Admin., was Deputy AG, and counselor to the AG.
Hat tip to reader David Adams.
Webpage for recovering stolen guns
Very interesting idea. If a gun is stolen, the victim sends in the data. It is not posted online, and in the database is encrypted with 256-bit encryption. If someone wants to sell you a gun, you can run it. If there is a match, victim and finder are both notified. There's also a provision for posting a reward.
I know a few FFLs who have "connections" with the local police dep't and, off the record, have them run a gun if it is offered for sale. But you need a special connection, and the NCIC database is terribly unreliable. I'd expect a gun owner to be more precise with the serial number than would be a data entry clerk taking a telephone report.
Brady grades get an F again
The Brady Campaign ranks North Dakota 44th out of 50 States, with only 4 of 100 possible points.
Just in time for the North Dakota Attorney General to announce that in 2008 the State had ZERO gun homicides. And only two homicides at all, both stabbings.
Hat tip to reader Dan Mason....
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (10)
LEO in need of training
Glynn County, GA. Video here. Traffic stop, officer notices a legally-carried gun, draws, aims at driver's head (Using a wierd sideways gangsta hold, two handed) and threatens to kill him.
Discussion over at GeorgiaPacking.org. The Sheriff did send a letter of apology (well, sort of), listed on the thread.
My 14th Amendment paper is online
At SSRN, right here.
It deals with the original public understanding of the 14th Amendment, as distinct from its Congressional history. The question under this standard is -- what did the American people think they were being asked to ratify? Key to that in the legislative history of Sen. Howard's speech upon introducing it in the Senate, where he says one of the purposes is to force the States to obey the US Bill of Rights. The question then becomes did the American public know of this statement?
Pretty clearly. It was carried on the front page of the NY Times and the NY Herald (then the biggest newspaper in the country), in the Philadelphia Inquirer, and in quite a few smaller papers.
The thrust of the 14th was to strike down the "Black Codes," I found those were prominently discussed in newspapers as well. The primary focus was upon laws forbidding blacks to own land, or to enter certain occupations, and upon seizure of their firearms and those of other Unionists.
You can download the pdf by clicking on the button above the title. UPDATE: that takes you to a second page, again with the abstract, then you click on the "SSRN" button to download.
UPDATE: SSRN is undergoing database maintenance for about an hour (it's stated as 8-9 PM, I assume EST) right now.
Permalink · 14th Amendment · Comments (8)
FIRE on 1st *and* 2nd Amendment infractions
Article here:
"In the spring, the South Campus of Tarrant County College (TCC) declared that wearing empty gun holsters, even during an officially sanctioned protest in the school’s tiny free speech zone, was too much for its fragile students to bear in this scary, post–Virginia Tech massacre world. TCC student Brett Poulos had notified administrators that his group would be engaging in an “Empty Holster Protest,” collaborating with Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), a national organization that “supports the legalization of concealed carry by licensed individuals on college campuses.” SCCC promoted a coordinated national protest for April 2008 in which students would peacefully attend class and perform other daily tasks while wearing empty holsters to signify opposition to state laws and school policies denying concealed handgun license holders the same rights on college campuses that they are granted in most other places.
In an April 10 response Juan Garcia, Vice President for Student Development, “granted” Poulos’ request to stage a protest on the South Campus, but he changed the fundamental nature of the protest by banning the protesters from wearing empty holsters anywhere on the South Campus, including in the designated free speech zone. The tiny free speech zone on the South Campus, according to Poulos, is an elevated, circular concrete platform about 12 feet across. Poulos met with Garcia on April 18 and was told that TCC would take adverse action if SCCC members wore empty holsters anywhere, strayed beyond the campus’s free speech zone during their holster-free “empty holster” protest, or even wore t-shirts advocating “violence” or displaying “offensive” material.
Later, in a May 29 radio interview with the National Rifle Association on NRA News, Garcia explained that after the Virginia Tech and Northeastern Illinois shootings, students were “on edge,” so “any kind of equipment for guns” was something that TCC would not accept because it was “threatening” and would “disrupt our learning environment.” Garcia admitted that no students had said they were afraid of empty holsters and also said (seeming to contradict himself) that the VT/NIU incidents had “nothing to do with Brett Poulos.” Nevertheless, Garcia said, corralling the student protesters in the free speech zone was appropriate because “we want students in an area where we can provide security for both sides” and TCC would not allow protests anywhere on campus without knowing about it because that would just create an “open field” for anyone to protest anywhere.
It bears mentioning that TCC was the only public college in the country that banned empty holsters from campus during the nationwide protest.
If you think that case is nuts, take a look at what happened this fall at Lone Star College–Tomball, which used an even crazier rationale for censoring a tongue-in-cheek “Top Ten Gun Safety Tips” flyer during a student activities fair. After college officials banned the Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT) from distributing the flyer, the general counsel for the entire Lone Star College System invoked the specter of the Virginia Tech shootings, suggesting that even a “mention of firearms and weapons” is inherently a “material interference” with the school’s operations. The new group’s status as a student organization was even threatened simply because of the flyer, although recently FIRE learned that the group would be allowed to exist after all. We await word from school administrators, however, about whether the flyers will remain censored."