A
Minnesota college student was suspended and ordered to undergo "mental
health evaluation" for his response to campuswide e-mails from school
officials concerning the Virginia Tech massacre.
The college, Hamline University, a private, liberal-arts institution
affiliated with the Methodist Church, has a policy on "Freedom of
Expression and Inquiry" that guarantees that Hamline students will be
"free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to
express opinions publicly or privately."
With such a strong guarantee on students' "freedom from censorship
and control" by the university, student Troy Scheffler's e-mail must
have been horrifically bad to warrant such a crackdown. Right?
Wrong. What Scheffler did was make a gun-rights case for
concealed-carry permits on campus to help ward off potential Cho
Seung-Huis before they strike Hamline. This was no monstrous act; in
fact, it was in line with public debate across the nation following
Cho's rampage, not to mention an issue of perennial debate in America.
Many researchers, most notably John R. Lott Jr., have shown
conclusively that gun ownership itself wards off crime while laws
banning guns lead to increases in crimes. Criminals are less likely to
strike if they have reason to believe their prospective victims could
be armed.
Scheffler had written in his April 17 e-mail reply to David Stern,
Hamline vice president of student affairs, that "Considering this
university also pushes 'diversity' initiatives like VA Tech, maybe its
'leadership' will reconsider [Hamline's] ban on conceal carry law
abiding gun owners... Ironically, according to a few VA Tech forums,
there are plenty of students complaining that this wouldnt have
happened if the school wouldnt have banned their permits a few months
ago."
He added, "I just dont understand why leftists dont understand that
criminals dont care about laws; that is why they’re criminals... Maybe
this school will reconsider its repression of law abiding citizens
rights."
Two days later, Hamline President Linda Hanson e-mailed the campus
about Virginia Tech. Scheffler replied to that e-mail also, expanding
upon his comments to Stern.
In both messages, Scheffler made it clear to all but the most
hysterically inclined person that his advocacy of concealed-carry
permits was to protect the students from criminals. Scheffler
recognized that this protection would be afforded primarily by
predators' foreknowledge that any one of the students at Hamline could
shoot back, but also – given that the administrators had both brought
up the VT massacre – by students being able to stop a killing rampage
before it got started
In short, what Scheffler wrote was no preamble to a blood-lusty
explosion of violence. At worst it was crude criticism of the
university administration combined with a stark assessment of the true
risk of a concealed-carry society like Virginia Tech's: total
defenselessness against a Columbine-inspired mass murderer. Regardless,
it should have been protected by the university's stated policy
guaranteeing free expression.
Nevertheless, on April 23 Scheffler received a hand-delivered letter
from Dean of Students Alan Sickbert that informed him his e-mails were
"deemed to be threatening and thus an alleged violation of the Hamline
University Judicial Code" and that he was placed on "interim
suspension" to be lifted only after he agreed to a psychological
evaluation by a licensed mental health professional.
Scheffler contacted the Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education, whose service in the cause of liberty in opposition to the
petty tyrants populating American academe is invaluable. The history of
the case, including the offending e-mails, are viewable on the FIRE's
web site (www.thefire.org). Hamline officials say they moved to suspend
after Scheffler failed to meet with university officials over his
e-mails (he was given less than one full business day to do so) and
that he is also the subject of "critical input from various members of
the Hamline community" (which was news to Scheffler, nor has he been
told of their identities nor given a chance to defend himself against
their allegations, whatever they are – if those people exist at all).
The Soviet Union was notorious for psychiatric abuse, the use of
psychiatric hospitals for the incarceration of political dissidents.
Human Rights Watch accuses the government of China of psychiatric abuse
of political activists, whistleblowers, various individuals and
especially members of Falun Gong. Declaring dissidence a sign of mental
instability is one of the lesser-known tools of the despot.
Psychiatric abuse is not something one expects in America, but it
happens. For example, in June, the assistant director of the North
Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles, Joey Gardner, was suspended
without pay and ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after
blowing the whistle on DMV Commissioner George Tatum for allegedly
seeking help to get his friend a vintage vehicle title for a replica
(Tatum later resigned). In 2001, a Temple University student, Michael
Marcavage, was involuntarily committed by his university for protesting
a campus production of "Corpus Christi," a play that depicts Jesus
Christ as a homosexual having carnal relations with his disciples.
In his April 19 e-mail, Scheffler wrote pessimistically, "Im sure
this plea of common sense will fall on deaf ears." While the fault
wasn't with the ears, as he had predicted, Scheffler's plea did indeed
fall on disabled faculties.
About
the Author: Jon Sanders is a policy analyst and research editor at the John Locke Foundation in Raleigh, N.C.
Townhall.com
Posted on
Saturday, June 28, 2008
by Jon Sanders