Liberty University to stay gun free, trustees decide
Liberty University chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. said officials heard both sides of a debate about whether to allow concealed weapons on campus before deciding against it.
Liberty University police officers will remain the only people allowed to carry firearms on campus, but that could change in the future, LU’s board of trustees decided Tuesday.
Board members, at Liberty for a regularly scheduled meeting, decided to continue to not allow people with concealed handgun permits to carry weapons on campus.
Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. had brought the matter before the board after members of Liberty’s chapter of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus requested a change in policy.
“The feeling was that, unlike most private property owners, we have our own police force,” Falwell said after the meeting. “So the decision was made, since crime has not really been a problem at LU, not to make any changes to the policy at this time.
“The board did express a willingness to look at, especially faculty and staff being allowed to carry concealed weapons in the future, should they determine that it was needed for enhanced security.”
Currently, the university does not allow those with concealed weapons permits to carry a gun on campus.
Prior to the meeting Tuesday, Clint Armstrong, a Liberty student and campus leader for the school’s chapter of SCCC, delivered a formal petition to Falwell with 597 signatures from students, parents and alumni in support of allowing concealed carry on campus.
The local student group has about 700 members, while the organization boasts more than 37,000 members nationally, according to the official Web site.
After the board’s decision, Armstrong said the group remains convinced that allowing permitted concealed carry “is the best decision to keep the campus safe.”
“Criminals are there to commit some other heinous crime,” he said. “They aren’t concerned about breaking a university law that doesn’t allow concealed carry.”
Falwell said the board considered both that perspective and opinions from other students and faculty.
“We’ve received a lot of feedback, and I’d say the majority of the community probably does not support (concealed carry on campus),” Falwell said. “The ones who do support it are very, very committed. And the ones who are against it feel just as strongly.”
He said those against allowing concealed carry “probably outnumber those who do two-to-one.”
“Some of the faculty had commented that they couldn’t imagine anything worse than students packing heat while they were handing out grades,” Falwell said.
He said that most board members also came to the meeting Tuesday with an opinion.
“I’ve never seen the board so engaged in discussing any other issue,” he said.
“The biggest concern was, I think, 21-year-old permit holders. If they live in the dorm, they (would) still have to keep the gun in the dorm, and the chances of it falling into the wrong hands was a concern of the board members.”
The board of trustees has 38 members, but “we didn’t have that many today because of the weather,” Falwell said. The board includes Falwell and his brother Jonathan, pastor of Thomas Road Baptist Church.
Although board members did not take an official vote, Falwell said, they did reach a consensus to continue the current policy.
Neal Askew, a member of the executive committee of the board of trustees, supported that decision when reached for comment Tuesday evening.
“My background is law enforcement with the Houston police department for many years,” he said. “I personally feel like it has to be controlled, and the right people trained (to carry firearms),” he said.
“At this point in time, we feel very comfortable with our police department,” he said.
Utah is the only state that does not allow any of its nine public universities to restrict people from carrying concealed weapons on campus.
Currently, Texas lawmakers also are considering allowing people with handgun permits to carry firearms on college campuses.
Reader Reactions
Wait a minute LynchburgRes, I thought Christians were supposed to be the rude, intolerant bigots?
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.
Like the bumper sticker says,“If Jesus is your co-pilot, then move over”. Heck, I’d rather him ride “shotgun”. He don’t need a permit and his aim is true. Nahhh… LU doesn’t need guns.
Hey, wasn’t the mountain beautiful the last few days! Heck I couldn’t hardly see the big LU letters. Too bad the snow is melting.
I am a resident of Virginia, an LU MBA student, and do hold a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Thank you to both Chancellor Falwell and the Board of Trustees for addressing the issue intelligently.
From the News & Advance article:
“The feeling was that, unlike most private property owners, we have our own police force,” Falwell said after the meeting. “So the decision was made, since crime has not really been a problem at LU, not to make any changes to the policy at this time.“
I am also a member of the Virginia Citizens Defense League. One of their sayings is that, “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away”. When there is a potentially life threatening situation, the police often are not close enough to deter the crime. They merely investigate afterwards and pick up the pieces.
Thankfully, LU, has a low crime rate. I sincerely hope that continues as I plan to send my son to LU in 4 more years. However, this is not a reason to limit a Constitutional right.
Virginia’s laws for issues concealed handgun permits changed many years ago. It used to be that an applicant had to show cause in order to carry a concealed handgun. The laws were changed. Virginia is now a state that recognizes every law abiding citizen’s right as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Virginia shall issue a permit unless there is reason not to.
LU’s policy follows the same logic as the outdated Virginia law. As LU’s policy would state, since there is low crime, there is no need to have a firearm. If a student felt threatened, would LU allow the student to carry a firearm?
Allowing firearms should not be based on need but based on an inalienable right. No one should have to provide a reason to carry. Instead, restrictions should only be for those who have shown reason NOT to be allowed to carrya firearm. Carrying on LU’s campus should be allowed by any law abiding citizen, including students.
**********************
And by the way, for Dr. Mink: You are incorrect about the process for obtaining a permit to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. Every applicant must show evidence of training. This may be a NRA certified training course, military, law enforcement training, etc. I teach the NRA courses. They require shooting proficiency and a written test. Then the applicant must go to the Clerk of the Circuit Court for their jurisdiction. They pay the appropriate fee, which I believe is usually $55. Then they are directed to theit local law enforcement agency to be fingerpritned for a criminal background check. If there is anything in their record to prevent issuance, they are denied.
You certainly need a good education in the Second Amendment. It’s obvious you cannot address the issue intelligently and with authority. I urge you to research more thoroughly.
Troyywr:
I’m noticing you’re using a whole lot of words in the future tense. That means you’re constructing a whole lot of hypothetical situations, i.e., your own subjective opinion of what *would* happen if _________. See, I like to use words in the past tense, like “have” and “shown”. Such as, “studies *have shown*________”. That means I state a whole lot of facts. Do you see the difference between you and me?
Facts usually mean much more than hypotheticals. Studies *have shown* that more [legal] guns does not equal more violence. On the contrary, in the vast majority of cases, more legally owned and carried guns equals *less* violence. Another fact: 9 state Universities in Utah have allowed concealed carry on campus for a combined total of eighty (80) semesters, and not one (1) of your “hypotheticals” has come true. So my *facts* trump your *hypotheticals*.
Using hypothetical situations in a debate isn’t always a bad thing. Some hypotheticals can be logically inferred from previous experiences or pre-existing data. Some, like yours, cannot. Your hypotheticals are fueled by media-driven paranoia and emotion. Your statement “do you realize that a gun puts everyone other than the person with the gun in danger” reveals this. FYI, my gun cannot put you in danger. It’s an inanimate piece of metal. Now, you can put yourself in danger. Someone else can put your life in danger. But a gun cannot put you in danger. You do that every morning when you put the key in your car’s ignition.
Another FYI: you really need to read up on relevant laws before you enter a political/legal debate. There is no way under Virginia law for a criminal to obtain a CCW. I mean, sure, criminals may be able to forge CCW’s like they would a fake ID, but what’s the point? I’ve had my CCW for almost a year and have had to present it once. When you present your CCW to a police officer, the officer has to run it to make sure it’s valid. If it’s not, you get taken to jail for illegal possession of a firearm. If it’s a forged CCW, it will be totally useless. So what’s the point?
Just to set the record straight, the board didn’t turn down the petition. They simply delayed the review. That means there has been NO vote of either yes or no, so this entire article really isn’t valid. The board will reconvene at a later date to determine the OFFICIAL fate of the petition, whatever that may be.
Liberty University hasnt had an incident where someone needed a gun to protect themselves…EVER…There have been fights..arguments..skirmishes..disagreements..arguements..bad calls during intramural basketball..kids kicked out for illegal drugs..but there hasnt EVER been a reason where someone would have needed a FIREARM…so why bring it to school?? Just a simple question..im sure you will say because I can..do you realize that a gun puts everyone other than the person with the gun in danger. And if you think that Criminals cant get CCW permits..your delusional wake up to the REAL WORLD. To actually allow students to have a firearm on campus is wrong..no long would you have to worry about the guy on the other team just talking trash to you after a hard foul..no longer would you have to just worry about the guy who you caught in your room stealing your ipod as just being reported to campus police…no longer would so many simple incidents be simple anymore..am I the only one that realizes that..I totally feel the Professors who say giving grades to students with firearms wouldnt be attractive. All it takes is one mistake with a firearm..Ive seen them dropped by professionals..what if that happend in Demoss hall…instead of dropping his books or book bag..Tommy drops his loaded glock or 44 magnum..ok even a small 22 caliber..is that not a dangerous enviroment for everyone..Why would you need a firearm on liberty campus for protection..from what?? This petetion is just the latest fad..it will go away soon.
dama, it was beautiful, just lovely, too bad it doesn’t snow much.
DrMink:
Not to be rude, but your *subjective* opinion means nothing in the face of objective, well established fact. The *facts* (pay attention to the words in asterisks—they’re important!) are that nearly every state and/or city with reasonable gun control laws enjoys significantly less violent crime than states/cities like New Jersey and Chicago, where it’s next to impossible to legally carry or own a gun. From 2001 to 2008, Michigan revoked about 1% of the CCW’s granted to the applicants. This was almost exclusively due to the commission of a non-violent crime (i.e., failure to pay child support, DUI, etc). In 2001, Michigan became a “shall-issue” state. Since 2001, Michigan has reported a steady decline in gun-related violence.
Such is the story with virtually every other state that has a “shall-issue” permit (2/3 of studies on this issue show a negative correlation between CCW’s granted and violent crime in their respective states and counties; the other 1/3 showed no effect, however not one (1) study has ever found a positive correlation between CCW’s granted and violent crime.). Granted, correlation does not absolutely *prove* causation, but any rational individual can see what’s going on.
And no DrMink, I am not scared of the world. I have no reason to be since I got my Glock and my CCW 
. If you choose to abandon your responsibility to protect your own life, that’s your prerogative. Don’t force that on me with your shoddy logic and emotion-driven opinion. Sure, it’s probable that you’ll never be the victim of violent crime, but I’ll bet this guy never thought this could happen to him either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q2A31TJ_PA
If putting a small chunk of metal in my waistband can save me from something like this, why not?
Damalama:
First of all, regardless of whether or not Liberty allows me to carry my weapon on campus, I still carry it everywhere else—in other words, I’m still armed. Second, I find it ironic that you are “scared” of us “gun-totin’ Bible-thumpin’ Christians” when you are the one hurling vitriol and hatred for us and our beliefs. Has any Christian on this forum called you “mentally challenged” or implied that you’re a backwards hick? If anyone should be scared by someone, it should be me of you.
I’m a senior biology major with a minor in philosophy. Shoot, I don’t even have a southern accent. But, I guess since I’m a Christian who believes in the Constitution and reasonable gun laws I must want to force you to go to church every Sunday at gun-point. Your mind is small. Open it up. Your idea of a Christian is a fabricated patch-work cliché built on out-dated stereotypes and negative media characterizations.
Besides, what does LU policy have to do with you? You obviously don’t go to school there, so it shouldn’t matter whether or not they allow legally carried guns on campus.
actually the point that you are trying to make has no bearing on this conversation. you are comparing two completely different review processes that work completely different. Had you any knowledge of the American system of government and how these two areas are completely separate you would not have made the comparison.
Actually, I never said that the 9-11 terrorist applied for a CCW permit. I simply said they hadn’t committed any crimes, the same criteria used to issue a CCW permit. My position has been and will continue to be that even the most hardcore criminal was an innocent at some point. Making that the sole criteria for issuing a permit is just silly.
Advertisement