This topic has been brought up after every mass shooting, and it is normally always knocked right off the shelf before it even gets a stamp of expiration. Should concealed carry permit holders be allowed to carry their firearms into and around gun-free zones? As a Second Amendment advocate, I say they absolutely should. The element of surprise by someone who goes through a training course is the entire point to concealed carry in the first place.
Now, the question is being brought up in the form of a new bill recently released due to the horrible tragedies in Las Vegas and Texas. The bill would allow for the carry of a firearm onto property of a gun-free zone as long as the carrier held a permit. Those opposed to such a bill are out in force and demanding the bill be killed before it is even fully realized as a proposal on the floor. On the opposite front this bill has major support.
According to Freedom Daily:
Let’s take a moment to just think about the two recent shootings in Sutherland Springs and Las Vegas. Both took place where the intended victims weren’t expected to be armed, and both were wildly successful on the part of the shooter. In the past, we’ve also seen mass shootings happen in theaters and schools which are both places where guns are typically banned. Are you seeing a trend yet? Bullies pick on people they don’t expect to fight back.
If we truly want to prevent mass shootings, we need to give people the ability to fight back just like the founding fathers did.
According to USA Today, the Michigan Senate committee is trying to do just that. They’ve approved a bill that would allow concealed carry of firearms in gun-free zones:
“In the wake of mass shootings in Las Vegas and Texas that left dozens of people dead or injured, a Michigan Senate committee approved bills Tuesday that will allow gun owners to carry concealed weapons in gun-free zones such as schools, churches, day care centers, bars, dorms and stadiums.
The shooting at a Baptist church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on Sunday which left 26 people dead and 20 more injured, makes state Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof, a Republican from West Olive, Mich., more certain that now is the time to take up the gun legislation.
“Some have said it’s insensitive to bring up these issues now, but I feel quite the opposite,” he told a standing room-only crowd in the Senate Government Operations Committee. “The recent events will allow us to look at how we can deter those who want to do harm. And responsible, well-trained, licensed concealed-pistol holders can be one of those deterrents.”
Obviously, most of us have not been the victim of a mass shooting, but we can guess that what those people would want is for no one else to ever have to live through that horror. In the case of the shooting in Texas, the only thing that stopped the gunman from killing even more people was a card-carrying member of the NRA pulling out his legally obtained and well-loved firearm and returning fire.
This bill isn’t out of the woods yet though. While it has had surprising support, it’s not without its opposition either. Some consider any firearms to be bad for business in places like schools.
“The bills taken up in the Senate Government Operations Committee passed on a party-line vote with Republicans supporting the three-bill package and Democrats opposing it. The bills also would close the open-carry loophole, effectively barring gun owners from openly carrying their weapons in gun-free zones.
‘That’s the part that causes the schools to shut down and lose a day of educational experience for students and that’s problematic,’ Meekhof said.
He gained support from gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association and the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners.
‘The idea of having the ability to arm a well-qualified, well-trained individual is tantamount to setting out a scenario where we no longer set up a sheep for the wolf,’ said Robert Rudowski of the gun owners group.
Gun-free zones should be called “mass murderer empowerment zones,” said Steve Dulan, spokesman for the gun owners group.
But far more people were at the committee hearing to speak out against the bill, including school groups and Moms Demand Action, which has been fighting for more gun controls.
‘Tragedies are going to happen. But we’re concerned this change could create more accidental incidents and the additional training doesn’t come close to training an individual for high-intensity situations,’ said Don Wotruba, executive director of the Michigan Association of School Boards. ‘Unless you’re trained for a military or police perspective, you’re not well-trained.’”
We’ve all heard it said that if you want something done right, you’ve got to do it yourself, and the same goes for personal safety. That’s always been the mantra of we Americans who hold the Second Amendment near and dear to our hearts. Personally, I have the utmost respect for my local law enforcement and find their attendance at my local church a great solace, but they just can’t be everywhere at once.
As it was so well said about the recent Texas shooting, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. We can’t all be law enforcement, as adults we can get our concealed carry permits and help protect those near and dear to us.
More from USA Today :
Emily Durbin, Michigan chapter president of Moms Demand Action, said the debate was definitely on the wrong track.
“Two days after the latest shooting, we’re here not having a conversation about keeping guns away from domestic abusers, increasing background checks or banning bump stocks,” she said. “Instead, we’re urgently discussing what the gun lobby wants and that’s a desire to have more guns in more places, no questions asked.”
Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican, vetoed similar legislation in 2012, just four days after a horrific shooting in Newtown, Conn., when a heavily armed man muscled his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and killed 20 first-graders and six adults.
Snyder said that bill had a fatal loophole that didn’t allow for those institutions to opt out of the new legislation and prohibit weapons from their buildings. His spokeswoman, Anna Heaton, said Tuesday that Snyder hasn’t seen the latest version of the concealed- carry bills and hadn’t taken a position on them.
Meekhof said he has talked with Snyder about the new legislation and that he’s “not necessarily” on board with it.
The new legislation would allow schools to prohibit students, both minors and adults, from carrying concealed weapons in schools. The bill also is expected to be amended on the Senate floor, perhaps as soon as Wednesday, to allow schools to prohibit employees from carrying concealed weapons in schools.
The legislation also would allow private businesses, such as bars, to declare themselves gun-free zones.
“We’re not going to pre-empt a private property owner’s right to post for a weapon-free zone,” said Meekhof’s spokeswoman, Amber McCann.
The additional training for the concealed-carry license would be four more hours of classroom sessions and more time on the gun range.
Tom Lambert, president of the Michigan Open Carry organization, opposed the bills because they would bar gun owners from openly carrying their weapons. He supports gun owners being able to carry guns however they want.
“It is asinine to me that we would create an uneven playing field and give mass murderers an advantage,” he said. “I would agree guns should not be in our schools. The problem is we can’t stop somebody who is truly intent on evil.”
But the Michigan Education Association had a different perspective.
“Education and parent groups have joined us in opposing this misguided legislation because they, too, understand that the answer to gun violence is not more guns in schools — in fact, that’s a recipe for disaster,” Michigan Education Association President Paula Herbart said in a statement. “The only people who should be allowed to carry firearms in public schools are police officers and school security personnel, period.”
We shall have to wait and see how this pans out, but a bill to carry in gun-free zones with a permit is absolutely something that should happen. Gun-free needs to mean for those not capable to handle a firearm responsibly. Many like me would rather there be no such thing as a gun-free zone to begin with, but that is another fight altogether.
This bill could stop many potential mass shootings in so many places that are nothing more than ripe targets for the picking of any psychopath with an ax to grind. We do not need more gun control; we need more logic control.