It's a individual decison!

On Monday, February 22, 2016 the Statesman Newspaper published an opinion article by the Editorial Board, named “Lawmakers need torevisit campus carry opt-out for state colleges.” In this article the author believes that public university officials should have the same authority as private campuses do, which is to opt-out from allowing student to carry guns in campuses.

More than 20 private campuses have already declined this law. On a Texas Tribune conference, Baylor University’s Ken Starr said, “We’re here as seats of learning, and I do not think this is helpful,” in which I agree with. Public or private, universities should serve as a seat of learning and no more. Even though there is some of who think that this measure is to ensure safety, guns should not be allowed inside campus. I am not against of allowing certified civilians to carry guns, but I do believe there should be a strict definition of where and when they should be allowed.

In this article it also mentions the repercussions that this law has already cause in the University of Texas. After having no other choice than to accept this law President Gregory L. Fenves has already expressed his discontent with this law. Last week he said, “I do not believe handguns belong on a university campus, so this decision has been the greatest challenge of my presidency to date,” however, the discontent has not only been expressed by the president himself, but by a large number of faculty members. Some of the current faculty member have already indicated that they will continue to fight against this rule, others have already said that if there is no changes they will resign from teaching.

The last that the author points out and which one I agree with also is that, “No one has a better grasp of the real security needs at a specific campuses more than the leaders of those institutions.” As the president of any institution they know what’s best for them and into what level they need to adopt this safety measure. This decision should be left to the decision of the presidents of all Universities to decide whether it is need or not, because like the author of this article said they are the ones responsible for the universities therefore they know whether they need to implement that law and to what extent.

Going against their OFFICIAL OATH!

The Texas Tribune, released a article called "State Bar Will Investigate Paxton for Conduct After Marriage Ruling." According to this article Attorney General Paxton is being investigated for possible of professional conduct. As it follows to explain, Paxton who already faces three felony charges for claims that he mislead investigators in business dealing he took office is now is being accused for violating his oath. This so because after the ruling that same-sex marriage had been legalized nation wide Paxton issued his opinion in telling the county clerks that if this had any objection with their religious beliefs they could opt issuing same-sex marriage licenses. Even though the original complaint was dismissed by the Chief Disciplinary Counsel's, a group f attorneys to strongly believe that Paxton violated his own official oath to "‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state..." have appealed to the Board of Disciplinary Appeal. It's amazing to read things like this, where people try to find their way to not enforce the law, what is funny to me, is that like this article says, some people go against their oath to stop a law from going through completely. This does not only happen with same-sex marriage, it happened with a lot of cases.