[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Bang / Guns Title: VETOED: Michigan Governor Rejects Bill That Would Allow Conceal-Carry In Schools, Churches and Sports Stadiums On December 14, the very day twenty children and seven adults were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, the Michigan State legislature enacted a bill that would have allowed the concealed carrying of firearms in traditionally gun-free zones:
That bill, which is by far one of the most sensible legislative actions this year, made its way to the desk of Michigan Governor Rick Snyder. Ironically, after citing the Sandy Hook school shooting, the Republican governor promptly vetoed the legislation.
Safety and security? Had a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a student at Virgina Tech, a movie goer in Aurora, Colorado, or a pilot on one of the four planes downed on September 11th been armed, scores of lives could have been saved. The Michigan legislature took an important first step towards introducing Constitution-friendly legislation that puts the power of self defense and personal preservation back into the hands of law abiding American citizens. However, instead of embracing legislation that could prevent, or at the very least minimize, mass-murder incidents in the future, Michigan’s governor, and a host of other political figures and foreign governments that would disarm the citizenry, are taking exactly the opposite approach. Amid all of the emotionally driven rhetoric surrounding the perceived dangers of owning firearms, few have considered a realistic approach to stopping violent criminals and psychopaths who have no regard for the law or human life. With nearly one gun in America for every person, the task of executing a ban would be daunting, not to mention dangerous for law enforcement officials given that what we’re talking about here is disarming Americans, arguably the most heavily armed citizenry in the history of the world. Gun bans, as we’ve seen in Australia and the UK, do not work, despite what the communist Chinese suggest we do (speaking of China, has anyone considered that maybe there’s a reason the Chinese want the American people disarmed?) Does anyone realistically think that a gun ban will remove every one of the nearly 300 million guns in America? Or that mass murders will somehow be prevented once law abiding citizens no longer have access to ‘assault rifles’ ? Do those supporting executive action to supplant the Second Amendment by banning assault rifles actually believe this is the solution? Are we to believe that once guns are banned, that the other 750 million weapons throughout the world won’t make their way to America’s shores via the black market? We need to be realistic here and understand that guns are not going away, and neither are criminals and those with mental health issues. Legislation allowing concealed carry in public venues, especially schools, sports stadiums and other high-priority terrorist targets at least gives us a fighting chance. The alternative is sheep being led to slaughter, just as we saw last Friday. Poster Comment: A genuine full-strength anti-2A Republican like Semiauto ban Mitt, Juan Triggerlock McCain, and George W. Loophole Bush. IOW, a MitTard progressive neocon gungrabber! Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2. Had a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a student at Virgina Tech, a movie goer in Aurora, Colorado, or a pilot on one of the four planes downed on September 11th been armed, scores of lives could have been saved. The author seems to think that a concealed carry permit means that the gun owner has taken Swat or hours of defensive training, in using a concealable gun against much more efficient methods such as that AR 15 which had already taken on an offensive ambush position. This is more like bringing a knife to a gunfight, requiring the user to make up the difference in firing capabilities by having superior knowledge of defensive tactics not to mention quick reflexes, raw courage and superior analytical and critical thinking skills, versus just plain dumb luck. As an example, a basic course in firearms safety and law plus possibly a little range time is all that's required in California if one's "Good Cause" is approved.
Replies to Comment # 2. #4. To: mininggold (#2) (Edited) What makes you think that pinning a badge on a person makes them a tactical whiz? These "pros" often take multiple hi-cap mags worth of shooting to hit a suspect if they ever do. If they're even at the right house, and even have a reason to start shooting in the first place. They figure the police union can get them out of trouble, so they just start spraying and praying.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 2. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|