Should Colleges Buy Ammo for Student Gun Clubs?

A controversy at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill adds heat to the debate over firearms on campus.

Concealed-carry laws are not the only controversy to hit college campuses since the recent wave of mass shootings sparked a national debate about guns. Last week, the student congress of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill passed a bill making it harder for the school’s Tar Heel Rifle and Pistol Club to use student government funds to buy ammunition. The vote prompted a lawsuit within the school’s student supreme court, while the Young America’s Foundation, a national group promoting conservative politics on college campuses, charged that students with liberal views on guns had improperly targeted the gun club.

Some universities explicitly ban funding of both guns and ammunition, but the UNC student code (PDF) is mixed on the issue: It prohibits the use of student funds to purchase firearms (although they “may be rented or leased”), but it exempts ammo. In the wake of the Newtown massacre, that concerned Austin Root, the student representative who wrote the new bill, which puts tighter restrictions on student funding of ammo.

Some university gun clubs leave it up to students to foot the bill for their guns and ammo. At Ohio State University, which last weekend hosted the NCAA Division I rifle championship, the student pistol club is “primarily self-funded and does not purchase either firearms or ammunition using OSU funds due to the large amount of ammo we go through,” according to club treasurer Zak Baer. A new rifle and pistol club at the University of Maryland operates the same way. The Ohio State club, on the other hand, receives grant money from the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation, which provides a total of $300,000 to help universities establish or grow their gun clubs but recommends that students purchase their own guns and ammo (PDF).

Kurt Mueller, PR director of Students for Concealed Carry, said he didn’t know of any university clubs buying ammo with student activity fees, a portion of which go into the coffer for student funds at UNC. “But if a college makes funds generally available for club expenses then it sounds okay to me,” he said. “Mere personal dislike is not sufficient basis to prevent people from engaging in law-abiding activity when they are not causing disruption to campus.”

 

The Young America’s Foundation insists that Root’s actions at UNC amount to “discrimination.” The group posted a Facebook conversation from last October in which Root wrote, “I don’t think [ammo is] an appropriate use of student funds.” Root counters that his goal was to comply with the student code with regard to funding, and to account for safety and liability concerns about the ammo. “It’s stored off-campus at someone’s house, and if someone breaks in and uses it for a mass shooting” people might consider those who approved the funds to be at fault, he explained. (Gun safety has long been a concern of members of the UNC student congress; in 2006, a bill was introduced to ban the funding of guns and ammo because they were said to “constitute a significant potential University liability.”)

That mass shooting hypothetical, said Grant Anastas-King, president of the Tar Heel Rifle and Pistol Club, “is a wild accusation made by these people that disagree with us that say some crazy person is going to come to campus and shoot us.” The rifle and pistol club, Anastas-King added, doesn’t use the assault weapons or high-capacity magazines commonly used by mass shooters. (Apparently that’s despite the semiautomatic rifle shown in the group’s logo.) Instead, he said, they use .22-caliber rifles and pistols and “promote gun education and gun safety before anyone goes out to the range,” where certified instructors offer additional safety training.

Anastas-King has sought ammo funds for his club from student congress for the past three years, but he declined to say how much ammo his group has used or how it was purchased.

Meanwhile, Root has received harassing messages, ostensibly from supporters of the gun club who dislike his bill. “Such disregard for the sanctity of the collegiate justice system will not be tolerated,” one anonymous email warned.


Does your state allow concealed guns on college campuses? Hover over an individual state for further details. (And read more here.)

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate