Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 November 2020
When the Texas legislature in August 2016 allowed concealed handguns on campuses, the implementation of the legislation assumed a spatial meaning. At issue was not so much what the impact of firearms in educational establishments would be but where concealed guns could be carried and which specific locations were to be determined as exclusion zones. The decision-making process boiled down to a negotiation of rights by the federal government, state legislature, university, and members of the campus community. In particular, the question of gun rights was interpreted through notions of space, freedom, and privacy, as understood through amendments to the US Constitution.
1 Public Forum 1, The University of Texas at Austin, 30 Sept. 2015, notes in possession of author.
2 Second Amendment, Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment, accessed 4 April 2020.
3 In 1939, the US Supreme Court in United States v. Miller interpreted the issue as not an individual but a collective right, which was connected to a citizen militia and one that the federal government was in a position to regulate. This precedent was overturned by District of Columbia v. Heller.
4 Public Forum 1.
5 Public Forum 2, The University of Texas at Austin, 5 Oct. 2015, notes in possession of author.
6 Internet survey, The University of Texas at Austin, 5 Oct. 2015, copy in possession of author.
7 Ibid.
8 Public Forum 1.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Public Forum 2.
12 Interview with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 27 March 2018, notes in possession of author.
13 For general information as well as policy and implementation guidelines of Campus Carry at The University of Texas at Austin, see https://campuscarry.utexas.edu/, accessed 10 March 2020.
14 For a detailed discussion of the spatial zoning of the Campus Carry legislation see Heiskanen, Benita, “Un/Seeing Campus Carry: Experiencing Gun Culture in Texas,” European Journal for American Studies, 5, 2 (Summer 2020)Google Scholar, at https://journals.openedition.org/ejas/15817, accessed 10 Aug. 2020.
15 First Amendment, Legal Information Institute, www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment, accessed 4 April 2020.
16 Public Forum 1.
17 Ibid.
18 Interview, 27 March 2018.
19 Public Forum 1.
20 Ibid.
21 Public Forum 2.
22 Students for Concealed Carry, “Common Arguments against Campus Carry,” https://concealedcampus.org/common-arguments/#3, accessed 2 April 2020, emphasis in the original.
23 Heiskanen.
24 Students for Concealed Carry, “Common Arguments against Campus Carry,” https://concealedcampus.org/common-arguments/#23, accessed 2 April 2020.
25 Public Forum 2.
26 Email correspondence with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 29 March 2018, original in possession of author.
27 Students for Concealed Carry, “Common Arguments against Campus Carry,” https://concealedcampus.org/common-arguments/#9, accessed 2 April 2020.
28 Interview with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 28 March 2018, notes in possession of author.
29 Fourth Amendment, Legal Information Institute, www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment, accessed 4 April 2020.
30 Interview with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 26 April 2018, notes in possession of author.
31 See “Handbook of Operating Procedures 8–1060: Campus Concealed Carry,” The University of Texas, 1 Aug. 2016, https://policies.utexas.edu/policies/campus-concealed-carry, accessed 4 April 2020.
32 Interview, 27 March 2018.
33 Interview with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 19 April 2018, notes in possession of author.
34 Ibid.
35 The University of Texas was the site of a mass shooting already in 1966, when 17 died and 31 were injured at the hands of a sniper.
36 Interview with author, The University of Texas at Austin, 24 April 2018, notes in possession of author.
37 Interview, 27 March 2018.
38 Interview with research team, The University of Texas at Austin, 18 April 2018, notes in possession of author.