second amendment

Ladies: Be wary if your consort states that he’s a fan of the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment. For, he might think that it allows him to legally annoy, troll, and intimidate others, especially on the ‘net.

So says Samantha Allen, a doctoral fellow in the Department of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Emory University. (But of course.)

First (Amendment): This could be a huge warning sign. Trolls cite the First Amendment as frequently as college application essays cite “The Road Not Taken.” They think that it gives them the right to verbally harass, stalk, and threaten whomever they want without any consequences. If your man picks the First Amendment, just ask him to explain what it means. If he thinks it means that “it’s a free country” and “people can say whatever they want,” tell him to go back to the playground he learned his politics from and find a new boyfriend.

In addition, here’s what Allen has to offer up about potential boyfriends and other amendments:

Tenth: Your man is passionate about states’ rights. Racists and homophobes love states’ rights. Be afraid.

Third: If he picks an amendment this useless, you should just dump him anyway even if he’s not a troll.

Second: Run. Seriously, just run! Your man might not be an asshole to people on the Internet because he’s too busy being an open-carrying asshole in real life.

As you might expect, Allen notes that guys who dig the Ninth (abortion rights!) and Eighth (he’s against cruel and unusual punishment!) Amendments are keepers.

Read the full article here.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Andy Rennie/Flickr

In a victory for the First Amendment – and a demonstration of the power of a well-timed pressure campaign – a libertarian group at Boise State University that hosted an on-campus event will be refunded a “security fee” charged by the university.

It’s not clear whether the activist groups that warned Boise State will follow up with legal action or further demands on the school, which said it’s not changing its policies on the fees. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, one of those groups, told The College Fix it expects future “unconstitutional fees” to be charged to student groups by the university.

In May, Boise State’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter hosted Dick Heller, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court’s landmark Heller decision that overturned Washington, D.C.’s gun ban, as a speaker on the Second Amendment.

The university originally charged the chapter a security fee because it said a community member had implied he would bring a gun to campus, despite the event organizers’ explicit no-gun policy, as The College Fix previously reported.

heller.bsu-yal.screenshot

The university has now backtracked and returned the fee, the Associated Press reported.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education applauded the university’s decision in an emailed statement to The College Fix.

But Boise State still has in place policies which can lead to imposition of a security fee and has given no indication it plans to change them, said Peter Bonilla, the director of FIRE’s Individual Rights Defense Program.

Despite the rescinded fee, “the issue is far from moot” because Boise State’s continued policies “make it all but certain that other student organizations will be charged such unconstitutional fees in the future,” Bonilla said.

Though Bonilla declined to say what legal action may follow from FIRE – which launched a nationwide litigation campaign against speech codes this summer – he said the group remains “ready and willing to help Boise State revise its policies to bring them fully in line with the Constitution.”

Other groups pressuring the school to drop the fee include the ACLU of Idaho and Idaho Freedom Foundation.

In a letter to the university prior to the fee being rescinded, the ACLU of Idaho called on the university to not only return the fee, but also change its policies for on-campus events. The letter references several portions of the policy that the ACLU says appear to be unconstitutional.

For example, last year a federal judge in Idaho ruled in Watters v. Otter that charging entities for services like security are unconstitutional if applied arbitrarily, the ACLU said. Additionally, the ACLU argued that Boise State’s policies discriminate against different viewpoints.

Boise State’s Conference Services page states that groups that want to have on-campus events must follow certain rules, including: “University Conference Services may require uniformed security officers to be present for events at the sponsoring organization’s expense.”

The page continues: “University Conference Services’ staff will make arrangements to hire security officers through the University’s contracted law enforcement service. The cost will be passed on to the sponsoring organization as part of the event cost.”

Neither the ACLU nor the Young Americans for Liberty chapter at Boise State responded to requests for comment.

Student speech on campus got a boost from a recent Supreme Court decision in Driehaus v. SBA concerning a “false statements” law in Ohio, which also made it easier for groups to challenge free-speech restrictions before they are punished for violations, as The College Fix previously reported.

FIRE’s Bonilla told The College Fix it was hard to say how the Driehaus ruling “might play out” regarding the imposition of security fees.

But the Driehaus decision was encouraging for anyone whose speech was threatened before being punished, Bonilla added: “People whose First Amendment rights stand to suffer under unconstitutional policies should not have to wait until their rights have been violated for the right to challenge such policies to kick in.”

College Fix contributor Matt Lamb is a student at Loyola University-Chicago.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGES: Steve Rhodes/Flickr, Facebook screenshot

Robby Soave at Reason has the story on how one university trampled students’ Constitutional rights, and now they’re fighting back:

Students for Concealed Carry, a gun rights group, is suing Ohio State University for maintaining an illegally broad anti-gun policy that prevents students from carrying guns even when they aren’t on campus property—a violation of state law, according to the group.

State law prohibits students from carrying guns on college campuses. SFCC isn’t fighting that. But the law specifically permits students to bring their guns onto campus as long as they leave them locked in their cars. OSU’s student handbook, however, forbids students from bringing guns onto campus at all, even if the weapons are left behind in locked cars, and even “if otherwise permitted by state law.”

Lawyers representing the two groups, SFCC and Ohioans for Concealed Carry, say public universities can’t trump state law and establish even stricter anti-gun policies.

Read the full article.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

A university is under fire for its decision to deny a student the right to form a Second Amendment club on campus.

ECPI University, which is not a traditional university (it has campuses in Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina and offers 2- and 4-year degrees as well as online degrees), says it has done nothing wrong, but its decision has prompted a firestorm of controversy.

A local news station interviewed the Virginia Beach student who tried to form the club, as well as campus officials:

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

OPINION

A report put out by a White House task force on sexual assault on campuses, released in April, includes a sensible recommendation that could bridge partisan divides on how to protect students from assailants. But it’s unlikely President Obama or his task force even recognized it – or would embrace it if they understood the implications.

Halfway through the report, the task force recommends “bystander intervention” – teaching those who witness a potential incident “to intervene if someone is at risk of being assaulted.” That’s a variant of the “good Samaritan” policy that some schools already practice, which encourages students to aid in potentially dangerous situations, such as a friend’s intoxication, by granting immunity to the student who reports it.

Colleges can play a crucial role in enabling good Samaritans: They can expand concealed carry on campus.

There’s solid research underlying the safety benefits of a concealed-carry expansion. States with restrictive concealed-carry laws had “gun-related murder rates that were 10 percent higher” than those without, according to a paper published this year in Applied Economics Letters. Additionally, a Secret Service report on school shootings published in 2002 found that about one-third of school-based incidents were ended by school employees or students. Allowing an armed college populace could reduce sexual assaults and other crimes on campus.

Colorado State University’s decision to allow firearms on campus in 2003 provides one example of how concealed carry can transform safety on campus. Students for Concealed Carry, a group that advocates for the policy on college campuses, said the number of sexual assaults on that campus dropped from 40 in 2002 to just two in 2008.

Even critics of concealed carry are hard-pressed to show how it would worsen campus safety. In a column last year for ThinkProgress, a project of the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, Tara Culp-Pressler argued that because most assaults occur between two people who know each other, no one is going to shoot their friend. That begs the question: Should a student in that situation just let the assault happen?

Allowing students to carry guns would reduce assaults by both discouraging potential assaults and ending assaults when they occur. An assailant who knows someone is carrying or might be carrying – a potential victim or a bystander — will think twice before trying to assault a student walking back to her apartment late at night, or a student walking to work early in the morning.

An armed bystander who can safely intervene in an attempted assault and, if need be, shoot the assailant so the victim can escape, is a powerful deterrent against sexual assault. If President Obama is sincere about fighting this problem, which is as serious as any facing college students, he should encourage his fellow Democrats at the state level to repeal prohibitions on concealed carry on college campuses.

College Fix contributor Matt Lamb is a student at Loyola University-Chicago.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: zombieite/Wikimedia Commons

InfoWars.com reports:

Media analyst Mark Dice has once again documented how many young Americans are completely disconnected from reality, capturing California college students signing a fake petition to imprison all legal gun owners in concentration camps and even to have them executed.

“We just want to make sure we disarm the citizens. We can trust the government to be the only ones with guns,” Dice said to students on campus in San Diego, while they unquestioningly signed the petition to “repeal the Second Amendment.”

“These peasants don’t need guns,” Dice stated, adding “we want to put all registered gun owners in prison,” prompting one student to reply “Yes, it’s too dangerous” for people to own guns.

“It’s just a simple repeal of the Second Amendment and we’ll be terminating and executing all of the gun owners,” Dice told another signatory who replied “OK, thank you,” and walked off.

Read more.

Via: Drudge