NY College Summons Student To A Meeting For Holding Unloaded Guns In Off-Campus Video

Anand Venigalla
Anand Venigalla

BROOKVILLE, N.Y, – -(AmmoLand.com)- He held a gun. Then his college held a meeting.

In another shot to individual rights on college campuses, administrators at Long Island University Post called a student to a mandatory meeting after he posted photos and videos to Facebook showing him legally holding unloaded firearms at an off-campus event hosted by Cabela’s, the popular outdoor sporting goods chain.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education today is calling on LIU to acknowledge that mandatory administrative meetings about non-threatening social media posts chill individual rights.

“By calling in a student for a mandatory meeting about photos of his participation in a recreational gun event, Long Island University has sent a message to its entire student body: Watch what you say,” said FIRE Senior Program Officer Sarah McLaughlin. “Universities that promise to protect free speech should not hold mandatory meetings for students who engage in it.”

TAKE ACTION: TELL LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY TO RESPECT STUDENT EXPRESSION

According to LIU, another student complained that junior Anand Venigalla “might have violent intentions,” seemingly due to his participation in the Cabela’s event. LIU’s director of student engagement contacted Venigalla on Aug. 7, saying it was “imperative” they meet as soon as possible. The administrator later told FIRE that the meeting was not an investigation, but warned Venigalla that it was mandatory.

FIRE first wrote to LIU on Aug. 31 to express its concerns about the school’s violation of its commitment to free expression, pointing out that “students cannot be summoned for questioning every time they post a photo of themselves engaging in recreational firearm use.”

During Venigalla’s meeting with LIU, the director also brought up an essay he wrote for a class on war, terrorism, and justice in November 2017. Venigalla mentioned in the essay that political violence against authorities, but not civilians, can be justified in certain situations, citing the Boston Tea Party as an example. It is not clear how the administration obtained the essay. The director also questioned Venigalla about a Facebook comment expressing disappointment over losing an election for a student government position, in which Venigalla said the Greek life system wields too much political power on campus. For LIU administrators, apparently three examples of constitutionally-protected speech somehow warrant a mandatory meeting with administrators.

“Free expression matters because it is through the unrestricted expression of ideas that we learn and grow in wisdom,” Venigalla said.

LIU, apparently realizing that their case against Venigalla was meritless, declined to investigate further. However, campus inquiries like this chill expression. Though LIU is private and not bound by the First Amendment, it is legally and morally bound to honor the promises it makes to students.

TAKE ACTION: TELL LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY TO RESPECT STUDENT EXPRESSION


Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)
Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)

Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of students and faculty members at America’s colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience — the essential qualities of liberty.

  • 28 thoughts on “NY College Summons Student To A Meeting For Holding Unloaded Guns In Off-Campus Video

    1. It’s New York – they are raising a generation of sissies. Intimidation if you step out of the liberal line. Sadly it will get worse – not better.

    2. I am going to take a different route here as many have stated the rights under the constitution well enough. What I do NOT agree with are a few things. One is the use of citizenship law’s or lawful immigrant laws that then afford non U.S nationals to utilize the protections of the constitution, to commit crimes.

      The obtaining of LEGAL arms by becoming a “U.S citizen” is one way we get un-needed and unwanted characters that now own guns and avoid the radar of the FBI and HLS because they took a path to citizenship, and now they can buy arms for their Islamic or other terror sleeper cells without threat of arrest.

      The lottery still exists as I truly hoped Trump was going to put the nail in that coffin, didn’t happen. The travel ban should have been by all means a Muslim ban, but I digress. The Democrat party is not democratic, they haven’t been since around the 1930s. Once the Republican party gains the majority to a point dem votes have zero impact, the U.S remains under threat.

      The gun laws can be reworked to make sense and be effective again, the constitution will be the law which we abide by and criminals will no longer be protected by the socialist courts. California will take years to reset back to a working order as well as NY, NJ etc.

      1. Dave: Come on, I enjoy a long read if it’s good. Note the “if”. This was not. It was a boring intellectual piece that I had to slog through. I’d wager a full 3/4 of the people who click on it and start it gave up after the first paragraph. I could sum it up in less than two paragraphs but I’ll give you a shot at it first. 🙂

      2. As a PS: My own personal opinion, this guy is somewhat of a wack job and would gut portions of the Constitution to achieve his ends. I, therefore reject him and his “most” of his numbered ideas.

    3. “Though LIU is private and not bound by the First Amendment . . . ” umm, excuse me but they DO accept federal benefits – in the form of Pell Grants, SEOG, Federal SDS Grants, etc. They are also a 501(c)(3) organization. As soon as you accept ONE DOLLAR in federal benefits, you are their boy, and have to follow the US Constitution. They are also a corporation, and therefor must abide by New York’s applicable statutes, rules, regulations, policies and procedures. And, since all the States have incorporated themselves as legislative extensions of the District of Columbia, Inc. (otherwise known as the United States corporation), federal rules apply. That’s why Title IX applies to private as well as public schools.

    4. The Boston Tea Party prompted King George to send about 10,000 British soldiers to occupy Boston. The City of Boston’s population increased 40% and the British soldiers were assigned to the homes of each resident.
      Not only did the British sleep and eat, the services a soldier needs were provided by the home owners. Laundry, cooking, were demanded.
      The people of the Boston area were trapped with one escape. The British had required the people to serve in the King’s Militia to defend against the French and the Indians. So the people formed their own private militia that the King and his Generals did not know about. They called themselves Minutemen.
      In 1775 the Minutemen and their spies learned that the British Army was going to take the short march to Concord and Lexington to confiscate the arms, which included muskets, gun powder, swords and even flints, to prevent further resistance to the King’s orders.
      The Minutemen met the British Army along the roads to protect the arms the people would need to resist the King. The war was on April 19, 1775.
      A year later the people wrote The Declaration of Independence, listing the grievances that caused the rebellion. The reason and need for “Arms” was included as a right and a duty of citizenship as a final resort when politics failed to preserve rights and freedom.
      It took until 1787 for the people to get around to creating the United States of America with a new Constitution.
      Not everybody was satisfied with the new Constitution, in particular Patrick Henry. Henry said that the protections of the people’s rights was inadequate because the militia was in control of the Congress since the Congress would appoint officers and provide arms for the militia. Henry pointed out that if Congress or the President became tyrannical the check and balance of a militia on tyrants would not work if the right to keep and bear arms was ultimately the governments.
      A Bill of Rights was demanded and the Congress set to work writing a Bill of Rights which included most of the grievances listed in the Declaration of Independence.
      Soldiers could not be housed in private homes and the people were in control of the arms that might be needed to prevent a tyrant from destroying the country.
      So the Second Amendment says that the people get to keep militarily useful arms, ammunition and such items in order to preserve freedom and the Constitution.
      Beginning around 1930 government began restricting the rights of the people to have military type arms.
      It sounded good, reduce crime which had increased and become organized providing alcohol and augmented by Ford motor cars.
      Beginning in the 1960s Arms that were not “sporting” were attacked.
      Are politicians trying to prevent crime or enable a tyrant to fundamentally change America?

      Schools are usually “agents of the government” and the Bill of Rights applies. But schools allow private groups to censor free speech, to drive away public speakers all in the name of “diversity.”

      The People think the Constitution protects their Rights.
      Government sees the Constitution as an Obstacle to be Overcome.

      A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state ? [well yes, therefore]
      “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    5. Wait a second here. We have been touting increased scrutiny of individuals who may have expressed ideas, or taken actions that may be precursors to violent action. We have been pushing for increased screening of individuals who may be either mentally ill, or inclined by some experience to commit violent acts. In many of the mass shootings we have experienced we are able, always in hindsight, to point to statements or acts which might have been indicators of future bad acts. We talk about how school administrators or law enforcement “should have seen” or “should have taken action” given some of these precursors like making angry, anti-school or government statements. So now LIU has done exactly what we have been asking for and we are labeling their actions as anti-gun rather than pro-active preventive investigations. We can’t have it both ways. If people say or post things that we would look back on and say were pre-indicators we can not then say they should not be doing that. If LIU had taken no action, and this person had committed a violent act, we would be screaming at the school for not recognizing and investigating those very statements or actions.

      1. It sounds like a plea for indications of mental health issues and violent intent is being abused to stigmatize & chill the exercise of 1A & 2A Rights.

      2. DO learn that the people and those rights are in regard to keeping a tyrannical government under control; It IS NOT about protecting the supposed “rights” of the mentally deranged who are intent upon killing other INNOCENT Americans.

    6. Some paleface east coaster clearly saw the photos and thought, ” oh this guy is obviously a terrorist in the making” and “reported” him. Had he been white, or even better , female and white I would guess it would not have been reported. On face value looks like a case of double speak from the university. I am sure they talk about equality, diversity and acceptance; but still cross to the other side of the street when a person of color walks by. Having said that… another example of why social media accounts are dangerous and you probably shouldn’t have one.

    7. Wow, so you can’t even hold a gun off campus. Talk about regulating behavior. This has nothing to do with education of the students and everything to do with indoctrination.

    8. I would say the person who reported him is a racist because the student looks like he isn’t from the U.S. all based on is picture holding the rifle, shame on the school for going forward with their anti gun agenda.
      Where has the freedom gone that universities are supposed to promote.

      1. The schools and the freedom they used to support have made a hard LEFT turn… Schools, universties, colleges are nothing but LEFTIST recruitment and training centers now…. Factories pumping out brainwashed Dem/lib assholes…

    9. As usual, the NAMES of individual who complained and the college administrators who initiated the “mandatory” meeting are absent from this story. Sloppy reporting. They say sunlight is the best disinfectant, and routinely identifying the culprits – shining a light on them – would be a good first step toward curbing these abuses.

      1. This appears to be a case of holding a gun while black/Asian. Liberals engage in profiling just as much as they insist that conservatives do. 2A is color blind, as are the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

        Once the complaint was made the University would have been required to check by state and federal law.

        Most universities have a confidentiality clause for reporting concerns. Actually, in some cases it’s tied to federal law to protect against retaliation and to encourage – if you see, tell. The names of complainants are divulged to law enforcement or attorneys directly involved with an investigation/case but not to the general public or the media. Since this went no further — as far as the university is concerned — they aren’t going to divulge that information short of a court order. Had this gone to adjudication the information might have been more accessible. If nothing else, the defense might have outed it.

        As always, if we don’t stand for all entitled people to exercise their rights – none of us have our rights.

      2. Absolutely. One of the reasons we on the right constantly lose is our own media is pretty poor and ineffective.

        The vile communist Alinsky was clever enough to write a very good set of tactical rules, one of which is: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

        We can’t personalize a target whose name we do not know.

        What these administrators need is to be picketed at their homes, to be sued personally and to be reported to their superiors and/or professional organizations. Even if we lose on those, the process is the punishment. They knew that when they went after this student. They knew they could not actually win in their actions but their achieved intent was to terrify and torment him.

    10. Sure reminds me of the 70’s USSR. No such thing as free speech at college anymore. Didn’t the Russian’s do this exact same thing?
      Where did all the commies go? College!

      1. For what, exactly? All you can do is vote with your wallet. The BOR limits the GOVERNMENT’s actions, it does not affect private institutions.

        1. The BOR limits the GOVERNMENT’s actions, it does not affect private institutions.

          Unless, of course, you are a college student who happens to spend some off campus time looking at some firearms, or you are a baker who decided his artistic creative talents oughtn’t be used to support/promote certain practices he holds to be abominable. Or you are on a sidewalk talking to people, who voluntarily engage with you, about an action they seem to be seriously considering that happens to involve a third party.. a very SMALL third party, but human none the less……

          These cawlidge fokes ought to mind their OWN bidniss, and what a student does on HIS dime and HIS time is no concern of theirs. Their job is NOT to monitor them iike little kindergarten kiddies. They don’t run a daycare.

        2. If the college accepts federal student loan dollars, or other federal monies, then it’s bound by civil rights laws like Title IX. Why wouldn’t it also be Boyd by the First Amendment?

        3. the second that school got government permission to open its doors, the first dime of taxpayer money that school accepted It ceased to be a private institution.
          this has become a farce that government can hide behind.
          farcebook,Google, twitter all claim to be private entities yet the further government intrusion and censorship. and work with the NSA, FBI, CIA, ATF to limit your rights. wake up man

    Leave a Comment 28 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *