Evaluating the legal requirements of Second Amendment rights on campus
The freedom issue is aside and clear: the Second Amendment applies to adults on the University campus.
I started researching this issue after students at SUNY New Paltz decided to form a student militia. Personally, I think they're not quite right in the head, as does the NRA. Perhaps people would understand that the term "militia" in a civilian context is not threatening if they didn't mention terms to the effect of "first lieutenant", "warrant officer", "platoons." These guys need to get their act together and simply lobby for individual rights, not an anti-police brouhaha.
Back when I was sending out questions to ASUA candidates, incumbent senatorial candidate Matthew Boepple noted "I believe a state law would have to be changed in order for students to be able to carry weapons on campus. Arizona Law prohibits the unauthorized possession of weapons in state buildings, which includes all university buildings." I was unable to find such a law, including within CCW certification publications. If somebody knows of such a specific law governing all state buildings, please let me know.
With that said, here is the law as it stands. ARS §13-3102 sets forth rules against bringing firearms onto school grounds. School is defined as "a public or nonpublic kindergarten program, common school, or high school." Notice that this does not apply to universities.
ARS §13-2911 requires that "The appropriate governing board of every educational institution shall adopt rules pursuant to title 41, chapter 6 for the maintenance of public order on all property of any educational institution under its jurisdiction that is used for educational purposes and shall provide a program for the enforcement of its rules." The appropriate governing board in our case is the Arizona Board of Regents.
ABOR Policy 5-303 states that "Unauthorized use, possession or storage of any weapon, explosive device or fireworks on the university campus or at a university-sponsored activity" is "misconduct...subject to disciplinary action." A "weapon" according to Policy 5-302 is "any object or substance designed to inflict a wound, cause injury, or incapacitate, including, without limitation, all firearms, pellet guns, switchblade knives, knives with blades five or more inches in length, and chemicals such as 'mace' or tear-gas, but excluding normally available over-the-counter self-defense chemical repellents." UAPD's "Weapons on Campus" policy parallels the Board of Regents.
It seems fairly clear to me that the only two obstacles barring weapons on campus are ABOR policy and any action the University of Arizona itself might take if ABOR was to lift such a policy. Seems like a long shot, but it may be worth going for.
Citation: I found significant help with finding the ARS codes involved inside The Arizona Gun Owner's Guide by Alan Korwin (Phoenix: Bloomfield Press, 1998).
NCLB sets strict, unconstitutional, unrealistic food standards
Don’t get me wrong, I hate the No Child Left Behind act just as much as the NEA, but for a more principled reason: the federal government has no business meddling in state affairs such as these. Such a law might be appropriate at the school district or state level. The Federal law looks to be more strict than the state law.
If you want to go multiculturalist on this one, it makes no room for anything to the effect of “World Food day,” or for that matter, any parent bringing in cupcakes for the kids’ birthdays. We must have some happy image of the kids obediently and happily eating the same processed bread, processed cheese, processed meat, and processed broccoli. So in a sense, everybody should have been against this law, but our oh-so “conservative” Republicans got it done
Of course, there’s always Laura’s idea of, get this, privatizing the schools, which would entirely eliminate this and other debates concerning “under God”, creationism/evolutionism, and Ritalin. Imagine that.
Update: Turns out that the measure had bipartisan support from both the House and Senate. I guess that makes it worse.
Historical perspective on today's MEChA
O'Reilly interviews Tucson High School radical speaker
I was justifyingly expecting something better out of the interview, but Huerta fails to answer O'Reilly's more pointed questions.
As of 7:30 this morning, I am now noticing the Wildcat's new format. It's still via CollegePublisher, but it's a good improvement. Now to get rid of the ad banners on the right and reclaim the screen space I paid good money for (okay, my parents paid it, but still).
While today's online mailbag contains letters from both yours truly and friend Jacob White, it also has three letters not found in today's print edition, including but not limited to a critical letter from former Matt Van Horn campaign manager Aaron Rottenstein regarding lack of coverage of his campaign.
Jake Lacey / Arizona Daily Wildcat
Of course the Wildcat didn't cover Van Horn. He didn't have any campaign staff dress up like a rapper. How do you expect to gain political office without having a campaign staffer dress like a rapper?
:bangs head on wall:
Clarification: One reader noted to me that I, in fact, did not pay for that screen space occupied by advertisements on the Wildcat website. What I mean is that my computer screen is being occupied by advertisements instead of content, not that I'm paying something to the Wildcat. Thankfully, the Wildcat is financially and editorially independent of the University, which means that it would be very difficult for UA to do anything to the paper if they felt like censoring it, and it's not trying to suck student money in a Union-esque fashion. I'll take the hit for that and make my thoughts more clear next time.
Bernsen guilty (according to letters given to Wildcat by accusers)
The Arizona Daily Wildcat reports this morning that former ASUA President Cade Bernsen is, in fact, guilty, now that they've seen letters from the Dean of Students Office to the four (not two!) women. Bernsen can no longer be impeached as he is no longer an elected official as of two days ago, and I don't have enough experience to know whether the newly-inaugurated ASUA Senate might "censure" him post-term.
They published some good letters in the mailbag today, including that of yours truly.
Wildcat website down this morning
I told you CollegePublisher was a bad idea...
Okay, not directly, but this is a consequence. The university is typically really good about keeping web servers up. CollegePublisher's main site, The Daily Texan (Texas at Austin), and The Daily Trojan (USC) are all down. Those are the student papers I know that run on CollegePublisher, so it looks like a system-wide issue.
And to think I could be reading my own letter...
Update: No letter today.
Update II: Back up. The formatting was rather unpolished for a while, but it looks to be back to normal now.