A Short Reply to Ramiro Martinez, Regarding Campus Carry

Police Support Concealed Carry
Police Support Concealed Carry
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

AUSTIN, TX – -(Ammoland.com)- In a recent interview with USA Today, Ramiro Martinez, one of the two police officers credited with shooting and killing the perpetrator of the August 1, 1966, tower shooting at the University of Texas at Austin, offered an unfounded criticism of campus carry.

Journalist Rick Jervis quotes Ramirez as saying, “[Campus carry is] going to open up a Pandora’s box of problems in the future…We now have well-trained police departments to cope with these problems. Someone running around trying to be a hero will only complicate things.”

It's worth noting that, during his 31 years as a Texas police officer, Martinez never dealt with licensed concealed carry or concealed handgun license holders. He retired in 1991, five years before Texas' concealed handgun licensing law took effect. When the Texas Legislature debated the law in 1995, it was widely opposed by law enforcement; however, those attitudes soon changed, both in Texas and across the nation.

A 2013 poll of almost 13,000 current and retired U.S. police officers found more than 91% in favor of concealed carry. Those officers understand that license holders are significantly less likely to commit a violent crime (or a crime of any kind) and pose much less threat to the safety of police than do unlicensed citizens.

Two years after Texas' concealed handgun licensing law took effect, Glenn White, then president of the Dallas Police Association, told The Dallas Morning News;

“I lobbied against the law in 1993 and 1995 because I thought it would lead to wholesale armed conflict. That hasn't happened. All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn't happen. No bogeyman. I think it's worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I'm a convert.”

Unfortunately, Ramiro Martinez, who heaped praise on the armed citizens who pinned down the UT tower shooter, never had a chance to become a convert, because he never had the pleasure of interacting—in a law enforcement capacity—with Texas concealed handgun license (CHL)/license to carry (LTC) holders.

If he had, he'd understand that license holders are preempted—by their training, by an innate sense of self-preservation, and by laws requiring license holders on college campuses to keep their handguns concealed unless and until they encounter an immediate threat—from “running around trying to be a hero.

Antonia Okafor, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented, “The people of Texas and the University of Texas will always owe Mr. Martinez a debt of gratitude for his heroic actions on August 1, 1966, but his views on campus carry are rooted in ideas that are a quarter-century out of date.”

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRYStudents for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com.

  • One thought on “A Short Reply to Ramiro Martinez, Regarding Campus Carry

    1. I spent twelve years on a university campus, most of them I (reluctantly) left my carry gun in my car, in the parking lot, five minutes away from my work station.

      The last few years, I decided: “I can live with being fired for carrying a gun in my briefcase; I can’t live with being shot because I can’t defend myself.:

      Call me paranoid, but I brought my pistol onto campus, carried it in my briefcase (it would have been painfully obvious if I carried it on my person). When I retired, I thought: “Whew, I was SO paranoid, I never needed the damn gun, not a single day I sweated carrying it!:

      In retrospect …. it didn’t make a difference, and I was never accosted on campus. Had I been in a place where an attack occurred, I would have been damn glad I was able to defend myself, and my co-workers.

      The cost of carrying on campus? Potentially, I would have lost my job. (I later learned that my department head also carried a weapon.)

      The benefit of carrying? Not a damn thing, except I did my day of work without looking over my shoulder at every loud noice in my office.

      The cost of NOT carrying? Just concerns about some bozo rampaging through the campus … which never happened, for which I am eternally thankful. But if it had happened, I would have been forced to defend myself and my co-workers with a stapler; not a caliber that begins in .4*.

      I’m glad I decided to ignore shoddy regulations which precluded Concealed Carry on campus; State Law wouldn’t let my employer from convicting me for carrying, but it would have allowed the University to fire me .. if cought. Funny, nobody seemed to much care about it.

      I resented the angst I felt, carrying against Company Policy. It didn’t have to be that way .. I didn’t change my practices because of their policy, but they never reviewed their police in 12 years.

      I learned one thing: “Concealed Carry” means ‘nobody knows’. I think my section leader knew I carried, based on conversations we had. But she never confronted me. (( think she must have carried, also .. hope so, because I retired before she did.)

    Comments are closed.