October 10, 2007 7:56 PM PDT

Grad student suspended after pro-gun-rights e-mail

A Minnesota university has suspended one of its graduate students who sent two e-mail messages to school officials supporting gun rights.

Hamline University also said that master's student Troy Scheffler, who owns a firearm, would be barred from campus and must receive a mandatory "mental health evaluation" after he sent an e-mail message arguing that law-abiding students should be able to carry firearms on campus for self-defense.

Hamline spokesman Jacqueline Getty declined on Wednesday to answer questions about the suspension, saying that federal privacy laws prohibited the school from commenting. Scheffler had previously waived his privacy rights in a letter to Hamline University President Linda Hanson.

Hamline University President Linda Hanson, who said the school "acted carefully" in suspending its pro-gun rights student

The nonpartisan civil liberties group FIRE, which stands for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has taken up Scheffler's case, but with no luck so far. In a letter to FIRE on September 28, Hamline's attorneys said the school would not reconsider Scheffler's punishment.

Scheffler had sent the pair of e-mail messages after Hamline offered students counseling after the Virginia Tech shooting in April, which took place half a continent away. His response was that, if administrators were truly concerned about safety on campus, they should "lift a ridiculous conceal carry campus ban and let the students worry about their own 'security.'"

Scheffler is licensed under Minnesota law to carry a concealed sidearm, which requires a background check and specific training.

In May, after word got out about Scheffler's punishment but before FIRE became involved, conservative blogs rallied to his defense. A psychologist in Tennessee called it a case of university officials learning that "a conservative is on the loose on campus." Captain's Quarters interviewed Scheffler about so-called gun-free zones and concluded he was a "nice guy caught up in the academic manifestations of political correctness."

That's the high-level summary. Some of the details are important, though.

Angry e-mails: One point is that while Scheffler's e-mails were not threatening, they were angry and had sexist and racist overtones. Read them for yourself: The first, to Vice President of Student Affairs David Stern, said: "I myself am tired of having to pay my own extremely overpriced tuition to make up for minorities not paying theirs. On top of that, I am sick of seeing them held to a different standard than the white students (Of course its a lower and more lenient standard)."

The second message, to President Linda Hanson, said: "For a 'Christian' university, I am very disappointed in Hamline. With the motif of the curriculum, the atheist professors, jewish and other non-Christian staff, I would charge the school with wanton misrepresentation...3 out of 3 students just in my class that are 'minorities' are planning on returning to Africa and all 3 are getting a free education ON MY DOLLAR." (Hamline is affiliated with the United Methodist Church and claims to promote "the ethics and values of the United Methodist tradition.")

Even some libertarians who think Scheffler was ill-treated have criticized his grammar and approach. A professor at Brooklyn College who believes the suspension was unjustified said he was nevertheless "dismayed that (Scheffler) has progressed to the master's degree level without having mastered some aspects of basic grammar."

"Privacy" rights: What's odd is that Hamline initially claimed the e-mail messages were "threatening" and placed Scheffler on an indefinite suspension that required him to undergo a mental health evaluation, a possible "treatment plan," an interview with the dean of students, and so on. The possibility of "further" internal discipline was also mentioned.

But then, after FIRE pointed out being suspended for expressing political views violated the school's freedom of expression policy, President Hanson retreated to a fallback position. Hanson said that the suspension was also based on "critical input from various members of the Hamline community."

The bizarre thing is that to this day, Hamline has never informed Scheffler what those anonymous allegations were (or who his anonymous accusers are). It claims that Scheffler's formal waiver of his rights under federal privacy law is insufficient because it has to "protect the privacy rights and interests of these other individuals."

FIRE's Harvey Silverglate quipped: "Confidentiality is so protected at American colleges and universities that they don't even let the students know what the charges are!"

Hamline's response: I spoke with Hamline spokesman Jacqueline Getty on the phone on Wednesday and exchanged six e-mail messages with her, but never actually got an answer to why the school wouldn't answer general questions about student free speech rights and due process.

All she gave me was this statement:

Hamline has never suspended a student for advocating for gun rights, nor for advocating for any other rights...As we have already informed FIRE, federal privacy laws that protect the rights of that student actually prevent the university from correcting each item of misinformation on FIRE's press release and from articulating in detail what may have transpired with this student.

This misses the point. If there are serious allegations against Scheffler, he has a right under the student code to hear them and be able to respond. It's hardly appropriate to base a suspension and mandatory psychological evaluation on anonymous and undefined allegations that may not even exist.

It's also inappropriate, especially in light of the Cleveland shooting on Wednesday, to try to squelch discussion of whether holders of concealed carry permits should be able to bring their sidearms on campus. It's already legal at the University of Utah and other states are considering the idea of eliminating victim disarmament zones. That may be a good idea; it may not. But universities should try to encourage debate rather than punish students for poorly written rants broaching the topic.

Recent posts from News - Politics and Law
Google and 'Vanity Fair' party with the GOP
Video: Republican convention, day 4 recap
What you can--and can't--find about Palin on the Internet
McCain talks up oil drilling, green energy
Comcast appeals FCC traffic-blocking ruling
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 109 comments (Showing first 20 comments)
Not surprised
by ecubes October 10, 2007 8:46 PM PDT
If he had written an e-mail bashing Bush, he would have been given a permanent position at the university. Political correctness is killing us.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
More than just University of Utah
by billmosby October 10, 2007 9:09 PM PDT
If I remember correctly, the Utah concealed carry law was held to
apply pretty much everywhere in the state, except for private
property (such as Trolley Square which, ironically, prohibits
firearms on its premises, unless you are a crazed shooter
ignoring the law, of course). So probably the other academic
institutions in the state can't prohibit concealed carry, either. It
is important to note, though, that you have to be at least 21 to
get a concealed carry permit in Utah, so not all that many
undergraduates will have them. And of course no high schoolers
or younger students. So far, so good. Keeping fingers crossed.
Reply to this comment
Go ahead and carry
by lcmslutheran October 10, 2007 9:12 PM PDT
Why doesn't he just go ahead and carry? That's what a perp would
do that was bent on shooting someone. He could save some lives
and worry about the repercussions later.
Reply to this comment View reply
Bush Admin's legacy = lots of overreactions
by menotbug October 10, 2007 9:26 PM PDT
the fearmongers in the neocon movement have given us this.
everyone's a suspect, when terror is around

I'm sick of hysterical ******* everywhere. Grow up, and let's all get
on with life. We have a lot of work to do to fix this place up!
Reply to this comment View reply
Secret Evidence, Secret Trials
by Xenu7 October 10, 2007 10:39 PM PDT
It's McCarthyism all over again.
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
he had a point, until he regressed
by this1! October 11, 2007 12:34 AM PDT
i personally think that people who have gone through the trouble of legally owning a firearm should be allowed to
Reply to this comment View reply
Troubled student doesn't deserve hasty suspension
by joe_bloggs_who October 11, 2007 3:35 AM PDT
In this age where school shootings have a nauseating habit of making the headlines ? Cleveland being the latest ? it is somewhat hard to fault school administrators for being overly cautious these days. However, the university was wrong to suspend Scheffler. Given that he was denied both the opportunity to rebut allegations made against him as well as face his accusers, he has no means to defend himself. Yes, it's a similar situation that faces captives held at Guantanamo and other secret prisons, but that's another story to be discussed elsewhere.

Scheffler's emails paint a worrying picture of an angry man. He constantly rails against the perceived injustice against white males in favour of minorities and foreigners. He also bemoans the under-representation of people of European ancestry in pictures on the university website. Furthermore, he complains about the curriculum as well as the presence of atheists, Jews and other non-Christians on the university staff. Hamline may be affiliated to the Methodist Church, but it is a traditional liberal arts university. So, it's rather strange that Scheffler expects it to operate like a bible college.

The contents of Scheffler's emails suggest possible racist, xenophobic and religious fundamentalist tendencies. His grievances seem to echo those of white-supremacist groups. In any case, he is entitled to his views. However, when he claims that there are "people on the edge ready to snap" over the racial issues that he has mentioned and that he doesn't blame them for it, it's hard not to imagine alarm bells being set off within the university administration. Surely, the last thing the university wants is for an angry man like Scheffler to carry arms on campus.

All said, Scheffler should never have been suspended without a fair hearing.

As an aside, it's rather astonishing that Scheffler wrote to top officials of his university using such atrocious spelling and grammar. They must certainly be wondering how he got through admissions in the first place.

To all posters: Please read Scheffler's emails before responding.
Reply to this comment View reply
concealed carry
by Lsavagejt October 11, 2007 5:02 AM PDT
As one whose brother and only living sibling was murdered with a gun, I would say that Mr. Scheffler contradicts himself. Who the hell does he think he is? He should know that essentially, 'concealed carry' gun ownership demands such owners keep their mouths shut about their love of guns, especially on a college campus.

And as far as Mr. Scheffler's Fourth Amendment rights, he must know there are plenty of other outlets for his violent and racist views: bathroom stalls, vacant tenement buildings, his local news paper, etc.
Reply to this comment View reply
Welcome to Stalinism
by meh130 October 11, 2007 5:07 AM PDT
This should not surprise anyone.

While many compare the extreme left to Trotskism, in many cases, it is more correctly Stalinism. Criminalize thought. Ban anyone who dares disagree with politburo.

The mixture of the political left and academia creates environments similar to what happened when the ideology of communism met the absolute power of dictatorships. The ideology of the political left, so prevalent on America's campuses, meets the disproportionate power structure of the students versus the faculty of the modern university.

The bit about requiring a mental health evaluation is truly frightening. Perhaps Hamline can open its own Psikhushka.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Only in the US
by devnull01 October 11, 2007 5:31 AM PDT
would anyone get the idea to bring a gun to school.

No wonder you have such a high mortality rate by fire arms in your educational system.

What a stone age mentality.
Reply to this comment View reply
Gee George Orwell here we come!
by thomaso mirodin October 11, 2007 5:36 AM PDT
If you believe in something that isn't in line with the main stream you must be crazy? That sounds like a lot of dystopia society novels >.> I vote we boycott this college, plain and simple. If you disagree with its policy don?t give it your money, if you are student looking at them send them a letter saying "because of you actions in this case I will have to remove you from my college interest list" or if you are an alumni stop sending them money... It?s the only way to hurt these people.
Reply to this comment View reply
Stalinism? Or Fascism?
by afterhours October 11, 2007 6:53 AM PDT
Bashing the left is so... 90s. Sounding like a Rush dittohead
suggests much of this kind of thought is regurgitated neocon
crap. Let's see what government has repealed the most
freedoms our country offered. Hmmm, that would be the
current president and the last three Congresses. Review the
Patriot Act and tell me what party is becoming the Party.

If the school protects students by forcing one of its own who has
epxressed anger and the desire to be armed in the same breath,
you claim it's communist control. And when he goes on a
shooting rampage to rid the school of what his misinformed
mind believes to be tax leeches to fit his Aryan mindset, you'll
be complaining about how the liberal lefty policies of the school
could have permitted such... pick a position, will you? You are
absolutely no better than those you cast stones against.
Reply to this comment View reply
A Clarification
by Renegade Knight October 11, 2007 7:29 AM PDT
Discussion of racism, is not racism.

Clearly the guy was hitting a wall in some aspect of his life with the U. It shows. Not all of us deal with institutional stonewalling well.

From the emails the guy was aware of clear and present issues in society.
Reply to this comment
No smoking gun
by frankly0 October 11, 2007 7:52 AM PDT
Having looked at the emails and other evidence offered up by the school so far, I just don't see anything that takes this case out of a standard one of what should be permissible free speech.

While I vehemently disagree with the sentiments the student has expressed, I see nothing that takes them past legitimate political disagreement. I am fairly astonished if others can find anything there that would be grounds for suspension. I see absolutely NOTHING that would seem to constitute a direct or indirect threat. If he thinks that the minority students in his class who intend to go to Africa shouldn't be allowed to be educated via government funds, how do you turn that into a threat? How do you turn it even into true hate speech? Why is that a political opinion that can't be expressed?
Reply to this comment View reply
School violated student's rights
by Dr_Zinj October 11, 2007 8:14 AM PDT
Student had a right to his opinions, and the right to express them.
The charge of racism is a weak, grasping at straws tactic of hypersensitivity and is a sign of greater intolerance by the administration than it is a sign of racism in the student.
At no time did the student utter a threat or provoking words or gestures.
This university owes the student an apology, restored access to all programs, and free life-time tuition as compensation.
Reply to this comment View reply
ReEducation
by USDecliningDollar October 11, 2007 8:56 AM PDT
"Citizen, report to the Patriot Center for Re-Education"
Reply to this comment
I don't agree with any of Troy Scheffler's opinions
by ColdMast October 11, 2007 8:58 AM PDT
his personals views are protected by the United States Bill of Rights.

Even though I don't want him walking around with a gun, I don't think he was suspending for his pro gun rights e-mails. It was for his harassing e-mails and other incidents to which "federal privacy laws that protect the rights of that student actually prevent the university from correcting each item of misinformation".

I agree partly with the actions of University, though I don't agree with their approach or the severity of punishment: maybe an anger management course would benefit Scheffler from sending hasty anger filled e-mails in the future, hopefully keeping the logical fallacies to a nill as well.
Reply to this comment
Pathetic extension of supression of 1st. Amendment Rights!
by jimmyhoops October 11, 2007 9:46 AM PDT
It seems like this Country no longer cares about upholding the
supreme law of the land...The Constitution of the United States.
Although I don't agree with the grad student's opinions. I do,
however, believe in the freedom of speech. Has this country lost
it's marbles? And from a place of 'higher education' at that...

I find it irreprehensible that Universities would actively seek to
supress freedom of speech. It's time for America to wake up
and to realize what a dangerous plank we are walking.

Welcome to the Fourth Reich!
Reply to this comment
I guess Anger is now Illegal too...
by chash360 October 11, 2007 10:49 AM PDT
Regardless of the allegations on either side it appears the University is overreacting and abusing this student for his views. When I see our government and universities behaving like this, I am not allowed to be angry? I can't send even a proorly written complaint about it, without persecution, and potential legal actions against me? Putting complaints in writting sounds a lot better than having another shooting. Perhaps if they would address these concerns in a more constructive way, rather than try to silence the students, or bury the problems, maybe there wouldn't be so many angry trigger happy people. Instead what they are saying is 'we will not even acknowledge your issues, and we will punish you for even sugguesting that there is a problem'.
Reply to this comment View reply
rights vs safety
by PaulM October 11, 2007 11:41 AM PDT
To an outsider looking in, the demand that many US citizens express for the right to bear arms is bizarre. You want the right to carry a gun on campus to defend yourself against the crazies who want to bring guns onto campus. That's clearly an insane philosophy but you can't recognise it because you're blinded by the "free speech" and "right to bear arms" chants. Your newspapers are full of stories about how the signs were all there before a massacre - angry guy, owns a gun, sent threatening emails to people. So when this latest guy explodes in a month or two, and kills a bunch of people at the university that is "doing him wrong", you'll defend his right to own his gun, to bring it onto campus, and to send angry emails. That is bizarre. Here's what really happens when everyone brings their gun onto campus to "defend" themselves. Somebody gets concerned about one of the people carrying a gun and challenges him. A passer-by sees someone with a gun drawn, and immediately draws his gun. But he doesn't know which of the other guys is a good guy or a bad pone. Shouting ensues - "He's the nutcase" "No HE'S the crazy". More worried people come by, drawing their guns. Someone shoots, and everybody starts shooting. Nobody knows who is good and who is bad. Innocent bystanders get caught up in the hail of bullets. When the cops come by, how do they sort out who among all the people wandering around with guns is a killer and who is a good guy? That's the certain result of everyone bringing their guns onto campus. That whole "wild west" legacy is what got you mired in Iraq.
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
 See all 109 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

About News - Politics and Law

Lead contributor Declan McCullagh has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this."

Add this feed to your online news reader

News - Politics and Law topics

Featured blogs

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right
  • News - Business Tech

    Chrome's JavaScript challenge to Silverlight

    The advent of Google's Chrome browser, software pros say, should spur a big speedup for JavaScript, which would raise its standing against Microsoft's Silverlight technology.

  • Gallery

    Photos: Top 10 reviews of the week

    Here are CNET Reviews' 10 favorite items from the past week, including the TiVo HD XL, Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H50, and the Dish Network's newest digital TV converter box.

  • News - Apple

    Apple watchers spot 'iPod Nano' photos

    The rumor mill has long been predicting a longer, leaner new version of the iPod Nano, and now it's conjuring up some pictures.

  • Outside the Lines

    EIC Squared: Chrome, iPods, and a Dell-Salesforce union

    On this week's EIC Squared podcast CNET's Dan Farber and ZDNet's Larry Dignan discuss Google's latest rocket launch--the Chrome browser--as well as Apple's iPod event next week and a Dell-Salesforce.com union.

  • Video

    Katie Couric reflects on first Webcast

    The political conventions are over and so are CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric's first series of Webcasts. CNET's Kara Tsuboi sat down with Couric on the final night of the Republican National Convention to discuss what she liked about Webcasting, some of her most memorable guests, and whether TV news will still be around by the next round of conventions.

  • News - Digital Media

    At 10 years old, whither Google?

    Daniel Sieberg of CBS News looks at how the company grew exponentially from start-up to superstar and part of our culture, but what's ahead?

  • Video

    YouTube plays party politics

    During the presidential campaigning four years ago, YouTube didn't even exist. Now it's a tool candidates must master to get their message across. CNET's Kara Tsuboi stops by the YouTube upload booths at the Democratic and Republican conventions to find out why Google's video site has such a big presence in Denver and St. Paul, Minn.

  • News - Gaming and Culture

    Are Demo and TechCrunch50 fragmenting their audiences?

    With both events scheduled to start Monday, many press, as well as venture capitalists and others are having to choose which one to attend.

  • News - Cutting Edge

    Execs predict next Google-like tech

    On eve of company's 10-year anniversary, researchers and business pundits speculate about what technologies might someday have as much impact as Google.

  • Gallery

    Images: The art of 'Spore' prototypes

    Will Wright and his Maxis team worked on dozens of prototypes to test the elements of their soon-to-be-released evolution game. Here's a sampling.

  • Webware

    Mozilla releases second Firefox 3.1 alpha

    Added features include support for a new video tag element introduced with the HTML 5 standard, along with some speed enhancements.

  • Green Tech

    Duke Energy to invest in mini solar power plants

    Can hundreds of rooftop solar panels collectively operate like a central power plant? Duke Energy launches $100 million distributed solar program to find out.