Last Thursday, 1 October, an evil person went to a peaceful place and made it into an evil place by his action. By his action alone.
At Umpqua Community College, as at all Oregon institutes of higher learning, the educators tried to ban the possession of firearms outright, but Oregon's permitted-carry law says that lesser jurisdictions than the State may NOT pre-empt the law, which allows permitted carry in all public places except courthouses, and libraries if the library boards want to ban firearms. The institutions of higher education have developed a work-around. They deny the Second Amendment and the Oregon Concealed Carry licensing law as follows:
All the Oregon colleges and Universities have adopted an in-your-face gun ban. The gun ban works like this: the institution admits that they have no power to ban the firearms de jure, but instead, they de facto ban them by saying that all institution participants may not: earn grades/credits for classes, be considered for rehiring if already hired or sell anything to the institution (bans vendors carrying). The institutions claim to be exercising their lawful administrative authority by doing this. This rule has been in effect for several years since a Western Oregon State University student successfully sued that institution for preventing his lawful permitted carry.
For some reason, none of 2A-protecting orgs in Oregon have seen fit to challenge this obvious "if it walks like a duck" rule, or if they have, I haven't heard about their work.
Comes then the massacre. I am waiting, with bated breath, for the first lawsuit filed for the tort of failing the "in loco parentis" duty that all schools have. That duty, an absolute legal mandate, says that when schools have custody of minor children (some of UCC's students are not of legal age), they have a duty to act in the place of the parents. Such duty extends to protecting the children from obvious evils such as murder and grievous wounding by gunfire. A lesser duty extends in favor of the adult clients of such institutions.
When that lawsuit is filed, the UCC's answer will be to say that they had the administrative ban on firearms in place to "protect" the students. Of course, that won't fly as a defense, nor should it.
Umpqua Community College could have fulfilled their in loco parentis duty simply by allowing permitted concealed carry, or they could have fulfilled it by having an adequate (but expensive) campus security system. The UCC did neither, so now they have been exposed to huge financial liability, and should be. As a result of the obvious lawsuit, the de facto firearms ban will have to go away.
What a shame that nine good people had to lose their lives and a goodly number more will survive their wounds, but be scarred mentally forever by their brush with evil, just so the wisdom of the Founders could be demonstrated yet again. Self-defense is a Natural Right, and while the Second Amendment to our Constitution encodes it firmly into our law, it doesn't have to be so encoded. I urge all Oregon college students to consider total rebellion against the "administrative" gun ban.
Protect yourself, students, no one else will, or even can.