I’m in Arizona for a couple of days, so I feel totally justified in posting yet again on the bill in the state Senate which would allow people with concealed carry permits to carry their gun on school property. Today we have a letter to the editor in the Arizona Republic from a teacher which includes
Just because concealed-carry permit holders must pass a criminal-background check and take a gun-safety course, as I did for my hunting license, even though I knew considerable about it beforehand, does not mean that I or anyone else should be carrying a weapon on a school campus unless he or she is a law-enforcement officer performing his or her duties.
Before lawmakers pass this bill, they should see how teachers feel about it and not go off half-cocked and get someone shot because of this inane idea.
Certainly, lawmakers should get feedback from teachers on this issue. But as for “getting someone shot,” I think the idea is to get the right people shot instead of the innocent people hoping that the police get there soon. Or, even better, keep everyone from getting shot by deterring would-be murderers by the mere threat of armed people on campus.
Meanwhile, the lunatics are still haunting the comments section of the paper’s articles on this issue. Here’s a good one:
The “gun nuts” don’t think like the rest of the populations. This is obvious by their stance on this issue, wanting to place weapons that kill in the hands of immature and developing students. What is this insanity and mentality that we are facing?
Someone who doesn’t realize that “immature and developing students” can’t get concealed carry permits (and, therefore, couldn’t legally carry on campus even if the bill becomes law) is calling names? Typical.
And then there’s this one, which I believe to be a taste of things to come:
Keep your guns !! Even buy more !
We need to STOP PRODUCING ammunition and the materials to reload, particularly the explosives. That will drive ammo to the black market where it will become exceedingly expensive and most often defective.
A different commenter responds
Of course you amended our constitution and it was ratified by all states frist right? Because until then that alternative is not valid.
To which the first commenters replies
The Constitution, I think, left out the phrase “and ammunition” following the phrase “bear arms”. The hair-splitters will have to tackle that one.
Gun afficianados can certainly go back to black powder (easily home-made, as you may or may not know) and muzzle loaders — so citizen rights to bear arms will NOT have been infringed upon. The Constitution does NOT guarantee the right to bear arms of the most modern and deadly character that modern technology can provide — if you think otherwise, show us where that guarantee lies in the Constitution.
Ironic, of course, is the fact that this guy posted his comment about the Constitution not meaning modern guns using a computer connected to the internet. Why he didn’t use a hand-operated printing press or maybe a town crier to exercise his free speech, I don’t know.
Anyway, I suspect that we’ll be seeing more of the “ban the ammunition” plan in the near future.