Last Friday, WATE-TV, Knoxville reported UT guns policy differs for students vs. student-athletes. Reporter Harlow Sumerford spoke with Athletic Director Mike Hamilton, and Hamilton stated,
We have stood in front of all the head coaches and student-athletes and said, 'No guns,'
Statements like this are bound to raise questions, so I emailed Hamilton:
Mike Hamilton, Athletic Director
University of TennesseeDear Mr. Hamilton:
I write for the Examiner online as the Knoxville Gun Rights Examiner, and I understand from the recent WATE report that your new policy is that student athletes may not have guns at all.
Are you saying that 18 year old or older student athletes may not possess guns in a residence that is not on UT property?
Are you saying that adult student athletes with handgun carry permits may not possess a handgun anywhere at any time?
Are you saying that 18 year old or older student athletes are not allowed to hunt, target shoot, or plink, unless accompanied by a parent or guardian?
In your interview with Harlow Sumerford, you stated that student athletes could call on UT police for help. Do you think they or other LEO's can intervene in the case of a serious attack on a student athlete?
Did you, upon taking a job with the State of Tennessee, swear an oath to uphold the Tennessee and United States Constitutions?
I would really appreciate your thoughts on these questions, which I will publish in my Examiner column.
If you would like to discuss this with me, please call any time.
Sincerely,
Liston Matthews
To his credit, Hamilton did reply promptly (Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:25 PM), although with a non-answer:
Thanks for your e-mail. The details of the official policy to be implemented July 1 will obviously be fleshed out by the University's General Counsel office before final implementation. Have a great weekend. Mike
In the absence of his answers, let's explore the questions:
Are you saying that 18 year old or older student-athletes may not possess guns in a residence that is not on UT property?
If this is the case, Hamilton appears to go further than the Tennessee Attorney General, who says a renter doesn't have Second Amendment rights. Hamilton appears to be willing to limit the right when the student is not on property under his (Hamilton's) control.
Are you saying that adult-student athletes with handgun carry permits may not possess a handgun anywhere at any time?
If this is the case, then Hamilton is, at least in spirit, in defiance of the Tennessee Legislature. The Tennessee handgun carry statutes provide that a person of sound mind and who is able to pass a prescribed background check, and takes proper training, shall be issued a handgun carry permit, which entitles the permit holder to carry a handgun anywhere except where it is prohibited. This includes streets, malls, state parks, and beginning February 22, national parks.
Can a bureaucratic diktak make the word anywhere mean nowhere? Are young permit holders to be arbitrarily stripped of a basic civil right in order to play collegiate basketball.
Are you saying that 18 year old or older student-athletes are not allowed to hunt, target shoot, or plink, unless accompanied by a parent or guardian?
Before donning the athletic uniform, many Tennessee youth have enjoyed the lawful sporting use of firearms, and as a result of responsible behavior, have been released by their parents to unsupervised sporting use of firearms. I wonder what those parents will think of an institution that wants to control their children to such an extreme?
In your interview with Harlow Sumerford, you stated that student athletes could call on UT police for help. Do you think they or other LEO's can intervene in the case of a serious attack on a student athlete?
I wonder if Hamilton is aware of the fact that it took officers a quarter of an hour to apprehend the alleged shooter of the disarmed principals at Inskip Elementary, and that it takes, on average, more than ten minutes before officers arrive at the scene of an emergency.
Did you, upon taking a job with the State of Tennessee, swear an oath to uphold the Tennessee and United States Constitutions?
I suppose that one could answer that question without waiting until July and a word from UT General Counsel. It does seem however, that officials at all levels easily swear an oath to the Tennesse and United States Constitutions, yet conveniently ignore that oath in order to expedite an agenda, as Knoxville City Commissioners did last fall.
Perhaps the University of Tennessee Athletic Department should conduct criminal background checks on prospective athletes. They could then use this information and refrain from recruiting those known to be potential troublemakers.
If you enjoyed or learned from this article, here are more you might like:
Home invasions are getting too common - are you prepared? - part 3
Veterans Day, gun free zones, and unarmed citizens
2010 Tennessee gubernatorial candidates rated on gun issues
Near the top of any article, you can SUBSCRIBE (free) (or click here), if you would like to be alerted to my future articles. Try it; you can easily unsubscribe at any time. Share the link with your friends.
Disclaimer: The information and ideas presented in this column are provided for informational purposes only. Firearms, like cars, kitchen knives and life itself all can be dangerous. You should get professional training as part of any plan to use firearms for any purpose. I have made a reasonable, good-faith effort to assure that the content of this column is accurate. I have no control over what you do, and specifically accept no responsibility for anything you do as a result of reading my columns. Any action or lack of action on your part is strictly your responsibility.













Comments
To me, this just shows a pattern of poor judgment made in haste by Hamilton. (Kiffin, anyone?) Besides my constitutional concerns, as a fan, I also have concerns about the image of UT athletics in general. Such a policy may just bring down the full force of an organization like the NRA, which certainly will not have a favorable outcome to the University--regardless of the ruling. It would only highlight the heavy-handed policy making by the AD and discourage potential recruits and student athletes. What student (or parent) wants to be associated with an athletic department that thinks they can limit a student's constitutional rights at will?
Hopefully someone in the University's General Counsel office uses some common sense when the official policy is "fleshed out before final implementation."
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!