Good news for the Gonazaga Seniors who defended themselves against home invader: No expulsion

Probation

As you may have read earlier here, a pair of Gonzaga seniors were facing expulsion after they used a firearm to repel a home invader who was a 6 time convicted felon.

You can read the about the details here:  Gonzaga moves to expel students who stopped felon from murdering them – despite living off campus

Good news has finally come to Fagan and McIntosh as the school has decided (no doubt from the onslaught of bad press they were receiving) not to expel them.

Though the pair did not get off Scot free either.

The duo will be allowed to finish their final year at Gonzaga under probation.

Nor did Gonzaga get away unscathed in their asinine ruling in the matter.  Namely what Fagan and McIntosh were actually found in violation of the following policies:

  • possessing weapons on school grounds (questionable since the building was off campus and administered by proxy and not advertised as being owned by the University)
  • putting others in danger by the use of weapons

It is the second violation that just goes to show how ludicrous this whole farce is.

Fagan and McIntosh were found in violation of endangering THE FELON HOME INVADER!!!

Well golly gee, ya think?  Basically, the discipline board has ruled that endangering the person trying to break into your house and do you harm is a punishable offense.  Not even actually shooting the 6 time felon but putting HIM in a position to get hurt by scaring him off with a gun is a policy violation.

Gonzaga, even when doing the right thing by not expelling the two victims of a home invasion, still manages to put it’s foot in its metaphorical mouth and make a mockery of the whole idea of justice within its halls.

This is the worst kind of radical liberal ideology that puts the welfare of the criminals over the welfare of the victims and it makes the idea of fairness at Gonzaga a sham.

McIntosh and Fagan both plan to appeal the probation stating opinions that they were unfairly railroaded:

McIntosh: “That information is going to be on our educational record, and anytime we go for a job interview and show them our transcripts, that information will be on there”

Fagan: “We don’t feel like we should be punished just for defending ourselves.”

To McIntosh’s concern, if he gets the chance to explain during an interview the circumstances behind the probation I am pretty sure there are a number of companies in which it would improve his chances of getting the job.  But Fagan is right, these two men shouldn’t be railroaded by an anti-gun disciplinary board simply for defending themselves from a violent criminal.

I hope their appeal is successful and that any black mark or retaliatory action that the University attempts to levy upon them is wiped away.

Shame on Gonzaga for putting it there in the first place.

Enhanced by Zemanta

  • Pingback: Gonzaga college puts the welfare of criminals over the welfare of the victims - Liberty Crier()

  • raysmithson1

    Too many commies in the whole system/////

  • Jim Morrison

    The ironic part of this is — if Gonzaga has its way and these students are forced to divest themselves of their self-defense firearms, then all the criminals in town will know exactly which the best home in town is to stick up.

    No firearms = no threat to violent criminals. It’s that simple.

    How ironic would it be if the SAME felon came back and tried to rob these kids again? Of course, after being the victims of one attempted violent robbery, I would expect them to continue to possess those forbidden but still lawfully owned and carried firearms, and to put a permanent end to the felon.