<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt;color:#000000;"><br><div>Somehow, he'd be more persuasive if his business wasn't dependent on getting more people to carry:<br><br><div style="border-width: 1pt medium medium; border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;">From:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> phillip nelsen [mailto:<a href="mailto:phillipnelsen@gmail.com" target="_blank">phillipnelsen@gmail.<wbr>com</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 21, 2011 4:05 PM<br><b>To:</b> faculty senate<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: HB 222, Faculty Senate Meeting</span></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;">To Whom it May Concern,</span></p><p
class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">My
name is Phil Nelsen. I am a second year law student at the University
of Idaho College of Law and I attended the Faculty Senate meeting that
was held on 03/08/11, this is the purpose for my email today. I realize
that tomorrow the Senate will meet again to discuss the passage of HB
222 in the Idaho House, and the University’s response to as much.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">I'd
like to address some inconsistencies I felt were promulgated at that
meeting, in the hopes that it will spark a more informed debate at the
next meeting. To preface my comments, I’d like to note that aside from
law school I also own a firearm training company that currently
qualifies more people to obtain concealed firearm permits than anyone
else in the nation. My company has 5 instructors on staff, most of which
are attorneys, and we teach roughly 2,000 people each month in five
states and 24 retail locations. We have also certified many thousands of
the permit holders in the state of Idaho as well as Washington. I note
this only to clarify that I have spent years speaking with many thousand
Idaho residents, who fund the University of Idaho with their taxes, and
I would not hesitate to say that my comments reflect many, if not all,
of their opinions as well. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">I
recognize that a lot of decisions involving firearms are made on a
purely emotional level, and emotional decisions are often difficult to
refute even with empirical data. However, I had hoped that a faculty
senate meeting, consisting in a large part of very highly educated
individuals, would be different. After attending the meeting I feel
extremely disappointed in that regard. I was very much surprised by,
what I feel to be, a unilateral unfamiliarity with not only the
empirical data regarding firearms on school campuses, but also the
statutory structure for such laws in the state of Idaho. Considering the
purpose of the vote, and what appeared to be an absolute lack of
familiarity on what those in attendance where/are pledging their names
to, I’d like to offer three points for your consideration. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><b><span style="font-size: 13pt;">1: Permitted Firearms on Campuses Nationwide</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Several
times during the meeting members of the senate noted how
"unprecedented" such a policy (i.e. allowing firearms on school
campuses) would be. The question was proffered whether any other
universities nationwide currently allow firearms to be carried by
students or faculty. After the senate's apparent inability to answer
that question (as demonstrated by an extended silence) a colleague of
mine, who was attending as a spectator, raised his hand and noted that
the state of Utah is one state that not only permits firearms to be
carried on university campuses, but also prohibits any public school
(including K-12 schools) statewide from promulgating firearm bans like
that currently in place at the University of Idaho. <u>It should be
noted that Utah absolutely does not stand-alone in this regard, and
seventy-one colleges nationwide permit firearms to be carried by
licensed students, some of which have permitted as much for over a
decade.</u> (Read: <a href="http://connecticutlawreview.org/documents/Kopel.pdf" target="_blank">http://<wbr>connecticutlawreview.org/<wbr>documents/Kopel.pdf</a>).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">It
is also interesting to note that there is a gun range located below the
Memorial Gym on the University of Idaho campus and a couple of weeks
ago we held a concealed firearm permit class at the University of Idaho
College of Law that had roughly 200 people in attendance. Firearms being
carried onto college campuses is not a new thing, prohibiting them from
campus is.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 48pt;" align="center"><b><span style="font-size: 13pt;">2: Student’s Ability to Safely Carry Firearms on Campus</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Several
of the comments made by Senate members expressed a concern that
permitting firearms on campus would ultimately lead to students choosing
violence over deliberation, murder over cogitation. I don’t know if
this was your intention, or a legitimate concern of yours, but it
appeared to be as much based on your comments. I would hope that someone
in your position would base such a concern off of actual documented
data, and not theories or fear/scaremongering. The truth is, not only is
there no empirical data to support such a claim, but the overwhelming
majority of the data suggests exactly the opposite. <u>Every day roughly
10,000 firearms are carried onto school campuses in Utah alone. Never,
not a single time, has a permit holder been involved in any sort of
firearm related incident at any school campus. This does not only apply
to Utah, but all seventy-one colleges nationwide. There is not a single
documented incident of any permit holder acting unlawfully, reverting to
impish violence after failing a test, or using a firearm to hurt/injure
anyone on a school campus, ever.</u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">This
data appears to run parallel with common sense when one considers
instances of students using other permitted weapons (desks, vehicles,
etc.) to injure their classmates are also relatively non-existent. To
surmise that a student would suddenly lose his mind (after failing a
test, breaking up with a girlfriend, etc.) and use a firearm to injure
others, but not use his vehicle to inflict the same harm, not only lacks
any shroud of evidentiary support, but also cannot support logical
consideration from even the most imaginative mind.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Not
surprisingly, the lack of harm inflicted by permit holders does not
only apply to school campuses, but to their day-to-day lives as well. As
national expert John Lott points out:</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><i><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><i><span style="font-size: 13pt;">“Over
two decades, from October 1, 1987 to February 28, 2011, Florida has
issued permits to over 1.96 million people, with the average person
having a permit for more than a decade. Few -- 168 (about 0.001%) --
have had their permits revoked for any type of firearms related
violation, the most common was accidentally carrying a concealed handgun
into a gun-free zone such as a school or an airport, not threats or
acts of violence. </span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><i><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Over
the last 38 months, only four permit holders have had their permit
revoked for a firearms related violation -- an annual revocation rate of
0.0003%. The numbers are similarly small in Texas. In 2009, there were
402,914 active license holders. 101 were convicted of either a
misdemeanor or a felony, a rate of 0.025 percent, with only few of these
crimes involving a gun.” </span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">An
interesting comparison would be to evaluate the .001% of permit holders
who act in a way that justifies the revocation of their permits, and
compare it to the percentage of law enforcement officers who engage in
similar conduct. I will not be so bold as to offer a guarantee that the
percentage of law enforcement officers engaging in lascivious conduct is
much higher than the concealed firearm permit populace (as that data is
not readily available like that of permit holders), but I will say I
would be very surprised if it is not. Perhaps we should reconsider
allowing police officers to bring firearms onto campus?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">My
point is that your concern that students, because of their age and
stress level, would not be able to exercise the control necessary to
safely carry a concealed firearm not only lacks merit, but also appears
to be based solely on an emotional response. Emotional responses by
school boards, as history has shown, also lead to strong opposition to
desegregation and women’s suffrage as well as support for redlining. I
compare those atrocities with the current issue not because the
substance of their argument is comparable, but because the logic used by
the opposition is identical. A logic that is not only flawed but also
fundamentally opposed to what an institution of higher learning should
strive after. If you are going to vote in opposition of HB 222 I would
ask you support your opposition with something more than hypotheticals
and unsubstantiated fears.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><b><span style="font-size: 13pt;">3: The University’s Ability to Prohibit Firearms</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Finally,
there were several comments made by members of the Senate that they
felt it was imperative that the University of Idaho retain the ability
to prohibit firearms on campus. I was somewhat surprised to find that
the Senate (some of which consists of law faculty) felt that this was a
power that the University has ever possessed, not to mention one it
stood to lose. I submit this point not to initiate a legal debate, but
merely to ask a question. Where is the authority to prohibit firearms
given to the University? My reading of I.C. §18-3302J clearly gives that
authority to the Board of Regents (or the Idaho State Board of
Education), and only gives the authority to <u>regulate</u>, not
prohibit. “Regulate” and “prohibit” are two entirely different legal
grants of authority, at least according to Idaho common law. (see<u> In re Brickey</u>, 8 Idaho 597, <u>State v. Woodward</u>, 58 Idaho 385).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">I
hope that my comments are not taken as offensive or disrespectful in
any way, that was not my intention. You all have the very difficult job
of balancing your own personal opinions and biases (which we all
possess) against your position as a member of the Faculty Senate. I
have premised my comments for this email on several presumptions, if I
am in any way incorrect I would welcome any comments or corrections. I
would also welcome you discussing my comments with any other members of
the Senate and asking them to correct me as to their reasoning if they
would like to do so. As I mentioned earlier, a state agency making
decisions purely on emotional inclinations, without researching what
they are voting on, is extremely dangerous. For this reason I sincerely
hope I’m not correct in my assumption that this is what took place at
the last Senate meeting.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 24pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 48pt;"><span style="font-size: 13pt;">I
would invite you to read the article referenced at the bottom of this
email. It was written by an associate of mine named John Lott. Not only
is Mr. Lott an expert in this area, he is also much more articulate than
myself.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Thank you for your time,</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Phil Nelsen</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 13pt;">Read more: <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/09/bans-carrying-concealed-weapons-lifted-college-campuses/#ixzz1G8v4kUaG" target="_blank"><span style="color: rgb(19, 41, 108); text-decoration: none;">http://www.foxnews.com/<wbr>opinion/2011/03/09/bans-<wbr>carrying-concealed-weapons-<wbr>lifted-college-campuses/#<wbr>ixzz1G8v4kUaG</span></a></span><span style="font-size: 17pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><br><font color="#888888">-- <br>Phillip Nelsen<br><a href="tel:801-389-4907"
target="_blank">801-389-4907</a><br><a href="http://www.utahlegalheat.com/" target="_blank">www.mylegalheat.com</a></font></p><br></div></div><br>
</body></html>