October 5, 2022. It started as a normal Wednesday in Tucson. Students were grabbing coffee at the Union, rushing to labs, and dodging the desert sun. Then the emails started hitting phones. At 2:00 PM, the University of Arizona sent out an alert that felt surreal. A shooting had occurred in the John W. Harshbarger Building.
Dr. Thomas Meixner was gone.
He was the head of the Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences. He was a husband, a father, and a beloved mentor. Honestly, he was exactly the kind of person who makes a university feel like a community. He wasn't just a "victim." He was a man who spent his life studying how to keep water clean and accessible for future generations. His death wasn't just a tragedy; it was a systemic failure that still keeps campus administrators awake at night across the country.
What Really Happened With the University of Arizona Shooting?
The details are chilling because they weren't unpredictable. This wasn't a "lone wolf" who appeared out of nowhere with no warning signs. Murad Dervish, a 46-year-old former graduate student, was the shooter. He had been banned from campus. He had a history of making threats. People knew.
Dervish had been expelled from the university and barred from entering the building where the shooting took place. He allegedly walked into the building, targeted Meixner, and fled. He was caught hours later near Gila Bend, about 120 miles away.
Think about that for a second.
The suspect was already on the radar of the University of Arizona Police Department (UAPD). There were months of red flags. The department and the university leadership had been warned repeatedly by faculty members who were legitimately terrified for their lives. This is where the story gets messy. It’s not just about a guy with a gun; it’s about a bureaucracy that didn’t—or couldn't—close the gaps in time to save a life.
📖 Related: Weather Forecast Lockport NY: Why Today’s Snow Isn’t Just Hype
The Warning Signs Nobody Listened To
The Harshbarger building became a site of mourning, but for months before the University of Arizona shooting, it was a site of fear. Faculty members had documented dozens of interactions with Dervish. They described him as aggressive and volatile. They sent emails. They filed reports.
In some ways, the system worked exactly how it was designed, and that’s the problem. The reports were filed. The expulsion happened. The "stay away" orders were issued. But in an open campus environment, how do you actually stop someone determined to do harm? The U of A faculty union later released a report that was pretty scathing. They basically said the university prioritized its reputation over the physical safety of its employees. It’s a heavy accusation. But when you look at the paper trail, it’s hard to ignore the frustration of the staff who felt like sitting ducks.
Why the U of A Shooting Still Matters for Higher Ed
This event changed the conversation about "campus safety." Usually, when we talk about school shootings, we think about mass casualty events in classrooms or dorms. This was different. This was a targeted assassination of a professor. It highlighted a specific vulnerability: workplace violence within academia.
Universities are meant to be open spaces. You can't just put a TSA-style checkpoint at every door of a sprawling campus like the U of A. It’s impossible. So, the security has to be intellectual and procedural.
After the shooting, the university commissioned an independent review by PAX Group LLC. The results weren't pretty. The report found "fragmented" communication. It pointed out that the university’s threat assessment team didn't have the teeth it needed. Basically, the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing, and Dervish slipped through the cracks.
The Pervasive Fear of "What's Next?"
If you talk to students who were there, they’ll tell you the vibe on campus changed instantly. For months, there was this heavy silence in the Harshbarger building. People were looking over their shoulders.
👉 See also: Economics Related News Articles: What the 2026 Headlines Actually Mean for Your Wallet
It’s easy to look at a map and see a crime scene. It’s much harder to live in a space where you know a colleague was killed because a system failed to act on clear threats. The University of Arizona shooting forced a massive overhaul of the UAPD's leadership. Chief Paula Balafas eventually stepped down. The Provost stepped down. The school had to reckon with the fact that "doing your best" isn't enough when lives are on the line.
Misconceptions About the U of A Shooting
Some people think this was a random act of violence. It absolutely wasn't.
- It was targeted. Dervish specifically sought out Dr. Meixner.
- The shooter wasn't a current student. He had been dismissed months prior.
- The weapon was obtained legally. This sparked a whole separate debate about Arizona’s gun laws, which are some of the most permissive in the country.
Another huge misconception is that the university did nothing beforehand. They did some things. They just didn't do the right things. They treated a violent threat like an administrative HR issue. You can't "process" your way out of a physical threat with paperwork. That is the lesson every university in America had to learn from Tucson.
Evolving Safety Protocols: Then and Now
Since 2022, the University of Arizona has spent millions. They’ve installed more locks. They’ve updated their alert systems. They created a "Chief Safety Officer" position to bridge the gap between the police and the administration.
But honestly? Locks only do so much. The real change has been in the "Threat Assessment Management Team." Now, if a student or former student shows signs of escalation, the response is supposed to be immediate and multidisciplinary. It’s not just a police matter anymore; it involves mental health experts, legal counsel, and student affairs.
The tragedy is that it took Dr. Meixner’s life to prove that the old way was broken.
✨ Don't miss: Why a Man Hits Girl for Bullying Incidents Go Viral and What They Reveal About Our Breaking Point
Actionable Steps for Personal and Campus Safety
You can't control a gunman, but you can control your awareness and how you interact with the systems meant to protect you. Whether you’re at the U of A or any other major institution, these steps are actually practical.
Trust the Gut, Not the Bureaucracy
If someone feels "off" or makes a comment that sounds like a threat, don't just assume the authorities are "handling it." Follow up. If you're a faculty member or a student, keep a personal log of interactions that feel unsafe. This sounds paranoid, but in the U of A case, that documentation was what eventually held the administration accountable.
Learn the "Run, Hide, Fight" Protocol
It sounds like a cliché from a training video, but it’s the gold standard for a reason.
- Run: If there’s a path, take it. Don't wait for permission.
- Hide: Lock doors, turn off lights, and stay silent.
- Fight: As an absolute last resort, if your life is at risk, you have to be prepared to disrupt the shooter.
Hold Leadership Accountable
Demand to know what the threat assessment process looks like at your school. Are the police talking to the Dean of Students? Is there a clear path for reporting "concerning behavior" that doesn't just end in a filing cabinet? Safety is a transparency issue.
Participate in Drills (Seriously)
Most people check out during active shooter drills. Don't. Knowing which doors lock and where the "dead zones" in a building are can save your life in those first 60 seconds before police arrive.
The University of Arizona shooting remains a dark chapter in Tucson's history, but the legacy of Thomas Meixner is now tied to a national push for better campus security. The best way to honor his memory isn't just through memorials, but through the constant, nagging demand that universities do better at protecting the people who make them great.