Was UNC Chapel Hill Chancellor Holden Thorp a bit heavy-handed in dismissing a retired faculty member who made a bit of an off-color comment related to a controversial student group he'd signed on to advise?

That's the topic N&O staffer Matthew Eisley is pondering today in a point/counterpoint. Offering up a different view this week is Domenic Powell, a columnist for the Daily Tar Heel.

The brief summary: the student group in question is Youth for Western Civilization, a right-wing organization at the center of controversy last semester when it attempted to bring former U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo to campus.

Tancredo, a vocal opponent of illegal immigration, wasn't able to conclude his speech because it was interrupted by protesters. The YWC group subseqently lost its faculty advisor and Elliot Cramer, a retired professor, stepped in.

But then, in an e-mail, he made what seemed an off-hand remark about owning and using a gun, and Thorp promptly asked him to resign.

Here's the background.

UPDATE - The student group Youth for Western Civilization is back in business, having found three new faculty advisors.

The faculty advisor for a controversial student group at UNC Chapel Hill was relieved of his volunteer duties last week after an ill-advised remark about a gun.

But in insisting that retired professor Elliot Cramer step down as advisor for Youth for Western Civilization, UNC-CH Chancellor Holden Thorp has empowered campus radicals who now pledge to disrupt any event that group presents on campus.

So says Jay Schalin, writing this week for the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy.

In asking for Cramer to step down, Thorp in essence hamstrung the student group's ability to exist, since the clock is now ticking towards a deadline before which it must have a new faculty advisor.

Schalin writes in part:

Thorp can amend this error by making bold statements that he will not let legitimate opinions on his campus be harassed into silence. One thing he could do is to sponsor the YWC himself, at least for this year. That would send a powerful message to the radicals that his campus is a place for free expression of ideas, not group intimidation and violence.

Additionally, he must make it clear that attempts to intimidate and silence others on campus will be met with expulsion and prosecution. For without a very clear no-tolerance policy of such behavior, the radicals will grow continually more aggressive until they get their way or until somebody gets hurt. And if they get their way, they will use the same methods to silence other voices that disagree with them.

What do you think? Did the chancellor overstep in asking Cramer to step down for a remark that appears to be made in jest?