October 23, 2015
To President Gregory L. Fenves and Campus Carry Working Group:

The Executive Committee of the Teresa Lozano Long Institute of Latin American Studies (LLILAS) of the University of Texas at Austin, strongly objects to the campus carry legislation that will take effect next year. We enthusiastically endorse the recently issued statement of the Latin American Studies Association, the major association of Latin Americanists, opposing campus carry on the grounds of free speech and security.

As faculty, we are dedicated to researching and educating about a region that has long been plagued by violence, war, and social inequities. Many of us have also lived in this region and thus have experienced firsthand the effects of such violence on individuals, families, and communities. In contexts where violence is a major problem, experience has demonstrated that adding easier access to weapons, even with the intent of protection, makes things worse, rather than better. Having seen firsthand the effects of the presence of guns and other weapons in the region we study, we are deeply distressed that this is what is currently envisioned for the University of Texas at Austin.
More specifically, our faculty, staff, and students are fearful because on a daily basis, we teach, research, and discuss topics that are by their very nature emotionally and ideologically charged. Increasing the number of guns in our classes, libraries, labs, lounges, dormitories, and offices, promises either to shut down such difficult dialogues altogether, or worse, to increase the chances of them turning deadly. In order to preserve the ability of students, staff, and faculty members to freely express their opinions and collectively explore the complex nature of the contemporary and historical Latin America, everyone participating in academic discourse must feel safe from political or physical pressure to conform to any one line of thinking. Legally permitting weapons in campus buildings can only negatively affect academic freedom.

This law will also adversely affect UT Austin’s competitiveness. Since many faculty and students both inside and outside the university have a negative view of this law, it will become significantly more difficult to recruit and retain the best faculty and students nationally and from around the world. We are particularly concerned about the effect of the law on the recruitment and retention of minority faculty and students from the United States and from the Latin America. They would understandably feel that their safety could be compromised in settings where they may be viewed – rightly or wrongly – as representatives of the sensitive viewpoints that are the object of our study.

For all these reasons, we strenuously object to this law and to the presence of concealed guns in campus buildings. Continue reading The Executive Committee of the Teresa Lozano Long Institute of Latin American Studies (LLILAS) →

The undersigned faculty, emeriti and staff of the Department of French and Italian at The University of Texas at Austin strongly oppose “campus carry” legislation, Senate Bill 11. The presence of firearms in classrooms, dormitories, offices, auditoriums and other campus spaces puts members of the UT community at risk of physical and emotional harm. The possibility of gun violence will inhibit the free exchange of ideas and information that is essential to the mission of an American university. The law is certain to undermine recruitment and retention of outstanding students, faculty, and staff. Continue reading Department of French and Italian Statement on Campus Carry →

Normalizing the presence of guns normalizes their use. For this reason among many others the following faculty and staff of the Department of Classics are opposed to ‘campus carry’. Continue reading Department of Classics Statement on Campus Carry →

16 October 2015

Dear President Fenves:

We represent a group of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows in the University of Texas at Austin’s History Department who are deeply concerned by the implementation next August of “campus carry” law S. B. 11. We oppose its implementation on a number of grounds, not least of which is that it is our belief that it will endanger the lives of the students and employees—as M.A. and Ph.D. candidates we often represent both groups—that the university is bound to protect.

We believe that this is not a fight about second amendment rights, but about the right of our staff and students to work, teach, and learn, without fear. In the Supreme Court case DC v. Heller (2008), which has been widely interpreted as protecting an individual’s right to possess a firearms, including handguns, for lawful self-defense, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, noted that the “Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding … laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings…” We recognize that the Texas Legislature disagrees, and allows concealed weapons inside the Capitol. But it is our belief that the majority of the campus community disproportionately affected by this law would agree with Scalia; Chancellor William H. McRaven expressed those wishes clearly earlier this year, when he spoke to the legislature opposing concealed campus carry, in UT’s best interests.

We believe that allowing weapons of any kind in the classroom will cause a chilling effect upon our students’ ability to grapple un-self-consciously with the complexities of history, and hamstring our ability to teach them. As Teaching Assistants, the ‘front line’ of the history department, we engage with UT’s student body in ways that blur the line between teachers and peers. We direct discussions in sections and seminars, and meet with students one-on-one; to guide our students in their intellectual pursuits, we must also navigate their disappointments. Introducing concealed firearms into classrooms and academic buildings, settings of extraordinarily emotional educational interactions, will make us less safe, despite the best intentions of those hoping to carry them.

The subjects we teach are contentious. For example, will we continue to lead discussions on why some scholars have linked the open carrying of weapons to the rolling back of black rights during Jim Crow, in a class where we know that some students have concealed weapons? When we teach classes on institutional racism, prejudice, and violence towards non-white bodies in recent US and global history, will our students—especially those who identify as the victims of such forms of discrimination—feel safe discussing such matters in our classrooms when they know that classmates might be armed? It is awful, sad, and dehumanizing, to anticipate the fear that we and our students might then bring to those interactions. Some of us are ready to commit to gun-free office hours, to guarantee our safety, and our students’ freedom of discussion.

We also believe that this will be a much larger and more dangerous challenge than the UT system has been led to believe. Perhaps a “smaller” number of students will be eligible concealed carry permit holders, as we have been told. But there are 5,500 licensed carriers in the immediate vicinity of UT. If the law’s intention is to make us safer by encouraging the spread of concealed carry onto campus, to guard against school shooting situations and others, then the thought of 5,500 licensed carriers descending on UT in case of an emergency must give us pause. History supports these suspicions. It might be claimed by S. B. 11 supporters that on Aug. 1, 1966, when Charles Whitman killed 16 people on and off UT’s campus, that he was stopped from killing more by armed civilians, who returned fire. To that, we must respond that those civilians were shooting with hunting rifles, and guided by police officers who, at that point, lacked SWAT training. And it should also be noted that Ruth Heide Claire James, formerly Claire Wilson, told lawmakers in February that civilian gunfire prevented first responders from getting to her after she had been shot in the abdomen by Whitman: she then lost her unborn child. Individuals watching the shooting on TV in the old San Jacinto Café south of campus also saw a man carrying a deer rifle rush in, buy a six-pack of beer, and rush back out. A proliferation of handguns in the hands of individuals untrained in mass shooting scenarios would make it harder for UTPD and Austin’s police—whose chief testified against S.B. 11 during the legislative session—to do the job that they have been trained to do; that Austin specifically learned from in 1966.

On a day to day basis, will those of us in the University community who represent and ally with ethnic minorities be safe from split second decisions to shoot made by men and women whose training involves a four hour course? As the #BlackLivesMatter movement illustrated last year, even highly trained police officers whose jobs involve protecting society on a daily basis fall victim to racial prejudices or mistakes in split second decisions. How are we to feel about concealed permit holders? At what point does the believed need for self-defense at a University become an attack on rights to freedom of expression and movement, without fear of causing someone to feel threatened?

Finally, we are troubled by the effect that S. B. 11 will have upon the University of Texas’s national and international reputation as a place to work and study, and our department’s ability to attract graduate students. We are some of the best budding historians in our respective fields, and we came to Texas to from all over the nation—Maine, Washington, Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin—and even further beyond—Australia, Colombia, Canada, China, Greece, Nigeria, Peru, the UK, and more—to study, safely, at UT’s top-ranked History Department. Some of us would have thought twice before coming; others cannot in good conscience encourage other students to come before they think hard about the activist law S. B. 11 and the climate of fear it means to promote on campus.
We therefore ask that you, President Fenves, Chancellor William H. McRaven, and the members of the Campus Carry Working Group, oppose the implementation of S. B. 11; that you make clear to the state how much it will cost to increase campus security—money better spent improving educational opportunities for Texas’s students; and that you represent our views—as students, staff, and in our particular case, experts on history—as believing that this law will endanger the wider UT community.
We thank you for courageously supporting us in our endeavor to educate Texas’s students on the ideal of a civil society, in which open debate can neither be open, nor a debate, when enforced by thousands of handguns. Continue reading History Grad students on Campus Carry →

MPSA Statement in Opposition to “Campus Concealed Carry Laws”

October 21, 2015 – Since 2011, states including Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Texas and Wisconsin have enacted “Campus Concealed Carry Laws” that allow licensed handgun owners to bring concealed weapons onto college campuses. The
specifics vary substantially from state to state. For example, Arkansas allows universities to “opt out” of the law, and so far every school in Arkansas has done so. On the other hand, Texas law allows all licensed handgun carriers to bring concealed handguns on campus, as well as into campus buildings, and includes criminal penalties if university administration does not comply with the state law.

The free expression and exchange of ideas is a central part of a student’s educationalexperience and the MPSA leadership believes it will be harmed by these laws. Moreover, the laws prevent universities from taking reasonable measures to ensure the personal safety of faculty, staff and students. These laws have met with opposition from manywithin the academic community and the law enforcement community.

As such, the MPSA opposes “Campus Concealed Carry Laws” and urges the repeal of the state laws to allow Institutions of Higher Education the latitude to determine the bestmethods to protect their campuses, classrooms and dorms.

# # #

The MPSA was founded in 1939 and is dedicated to the advancement of scholarship in all areas of political science. The purposes of the MPSA are to promote the professional
study and teaching of political science, to facilitate communications between those engaged in such study, and to develop standards for and encourage research in theoretical and practical political problems. As such, MPSA is a nonpartisan association.
It does not support political parties or candidates.

This document can be found here.

Click here for reprint permissions.

To: State of Texas and University of Texas officials has voted unanimously in support of the following statement:

The Society for Ethnomusicology voices its deep concern about the impact of Texas’s new “Campus Carry” law on freedom of expression in Texas universities. The law, which was passed earlier this year and takes effect in 2016, allows licensed handgun carriers to bring concealed handguns into buildings on Texas campuses. We are opposed to the Campus Carry law and similar laws in other states, as these laws introduce serious safety threats on college campuses with a resulting harmful effect on professors and students and the free expression of ideas.

Beverley Diamond, SEM 2013-15, President

Click here for reprint permissions.

We, the forty-eight undersigned members of the faculty of the Department of Government at the University of Texas, strongly object to the campus carry legislation that will take effect next year.  We enthusiastically endorse the recently-issued statement of the American Political Science Association, the major association of political scientists in the US, opposing campus carry on the grounds of free speech and security, and calling out the Texas law in particular.

Recognizing that the law is now in its implementation stage, we ask the President of the University to establish broad exclusionary zones in which guns are banned on campus, including classrooms and faculty/TA offices, all dorms (or at least allow students to have gun-free dorm options), on-campus daycare and other child education centers, buildings that include health services, sport venues, and any building where alcohol is served.  We do so for the following reasons:

1. The campus carry law as passed offers sufficient discretion to university officials to establish broad exclusionary zones.  Speaker of the Texas House Joe Straus recently commented that the legislature gave “a lot of authority and flexibility to design a plan” to university presidents.
2. The Campus Carry Law would have a detrimental effect on academic freedom and freedom of expression, which could be mitigated by broad exclusionary zones.  Universities are dedicated to open and frank discussions and debates over fundamental issues.  Possession of concealed handguns in this context will threaten the free discussion required for university personnel to carry out our teaching mission, particularly classroom conduct negatively.  It also has the potential of affecting the grades given by faculty due to implied threats from permit holders.
3. Many faculty, students and staff are concerned that the Law would negatively affect campus safety, but broad exclusionary zones could offset some of those concerns. Campus police do not support campus carry based on safety concerns.   The law stipulates that exclusionary zones can be established for campus safety.  An accidental or intentional discharge of a concealed handgun could result in serious injury or death not only from the gunshot but also the resulting panic. This can happen in classes as well as hallways and offices.

Continue reading Statement of Government Department Faculty on Campus Carry →

We, the faculty and staff of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies are dedicated to researching and educating about a region that is today plagued by violence, war, and extremism. Many of us have also lived in this region and thus have experienced firsthand the effects of such violence on individuals, families, and communities. In a context in which violence is a major problem, adding easier access to weapons, even with the intent of protection, makes things worse, rather than better. Having seen firsthand the effects of the presence of guns and other weapons in the region we study, we are deeply distressed that this is what is currently envisioned for the University of Texas at Austin.
More specifically, our faculty, staff, and students are fearful because on a daily basis, we teach, research and discuss topics that are by their very nature emotionally and ideologically charged. We teach about religion, including Islam, Judaism and Christianity. We also deal with conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Sunni-Shi’i sectarian relations, the civil war in Syria, the Armenian Genocide issue, human rights, gender and sexuality, religious and ethnic minorities, the Iraq and Afghan wars, violent extremism, and terrorism. Increasing the number of guns in our classes, libraries, labs, lounges, dormitories, and offices, promises either to shut down such difficult dialogues altogether, or worse, to increase the chances of them turning deadly. Preserving the ability of students, staff, and faculty members to express their opinions and collectively explore the complex nature of the contemporary and historical Middle East, requires that everyone participating in academic discourse feel safe from political or physical pressure to conform to any one line of thinking. Legally permitting weapons in campus buildings can only negatively affect academic freedom.

This law will also adversely affect UT Austin’s competitiveness. Since many faculty and students both inside and outside the university have a negative view of this law, it will make it significantly more difficult to recruit and retain the best faculty and students nationally and from around the world. We are particularly concerned about the effect of the law on the recruitment and retention of minority faculty and students from the United States and from the Middle East. They would understandably feel that their safety could be compromised in settings where they may be viewed –rightly or wrongly – as representatives of the sensitive viewpoints that are the object of our study.

The Texas Legislature has imposed this law on our university community against the majority’s very explicit opposition to it. For all these reasons, we strenuously object to this law and to the presence of concealed guns in campus buildings. Continue reading Department of Middle Eastern Studies on Campus Carry →

Media studies scholars and film production faculty teach students how to analyze and create film and media representations. We study the role of media and movies including their societal effects.

The undersigned members of the Radio-TV-Film Department at the University of Texas at Austin are deeply concerned about how the university will implement the “campus carry” bill Senate Bill 11, and we consider any interpretation of the law that allows weapons in the classroom to be in direct violation of the university¹s core values, which emphasize learning in a caring community and freedom to seek and express the truth.

RTF faculty do not want guns in our classrooms. We believe, based on our collective teaching experience, that their presence will diminish students’ abilities to engage in sensitive discussions in studies classes and in peer critiques of work in production classes. Our film production facilities have strict rules about the use of fake guns and simulated violence on film sets and on locations.  Allowing concealed loaded guns in proximity to these settings presents far greater safety risk than is tolerable.

For decades Hollywood has fueled good guy/bad guy myths often invoked by gun advocates and news commentators as if they were accurate depictions of how and why gun violence occurs. In our department we distinguish between fiction and real life. We submit that there is no scenario under which the presence of guns in classrooms does not harm the learning environment, or under which guns in the classroom is either necessary or desirable.  Continue reading Radio-TV-Film Department Statement on the Campus Carry Law →

This past weekend the Executive Committee of the Texas Conference of the AAUP issued the following statement:

The Executive Committee of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors continues to oppose the ‘campus carry’ laws. College campuses are marketplaces of ideas, and a rigorous academic exchange of ideas is chilled by weapons on campus. The Executive Committee of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors strongly supports faculty efforts to make college campuses as safe and weapon-free as possible for students, faculty, staff, parents, and community members.

Click here for reprint permissions