• Twitter
  • Facebook
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.

Reply to comment

Gun crazy

Today's Journal Gazette editorial is one of their typical hysterical anti-gun editorials in which lawmkers are chastised for giving in to those evil "paid gun lobbyists" from the National Rifle Association instead of serving the interests of the public:

How else to explain their vote to prohibit local government from banning guns in many government properties, including libraries and parks? Or to explain their decision to set up new and costly roadblocks to banning guns in city halls and city council chambers?

Lawmakers heard plenty of concerns from local officials worried about the prospect of permitting gun-toting citizens who may be upset with local decisions into council meetings and mayor's offices. What they didn't hear was a groundswell of public demand for Hoosiers to be able to carry their TEC 9 semi-automatic weapons with a 32-round magazine or their .44 Magnum revolvers into libraries, zoning board meetings and parks.

Oh, boy. Now we're going to have hordes of crazies bringing their semi-automatics with 32-round magazines into the library. Same old argument -- what outlaws do is justification for the limits we place on the law-abiding. Let's just ban driving to get the drunken drivers off the road.

But the editorial does make a valid point about the lawmakers' "do as we say, not as we do" hypocrisy:

But state representatives and senators did not show similar concern about Hoosiers' Second Amendment rights when it comes to protecting themselves. They did not give licensed Hoosiers the same ability to carry weapons into the Statehouse, where the lawmakers and governor work. Legislators can carry weapons into the building but not other citizens.

If the argument is that citizens sometimes get so mad at government officials that they might give in to sudden murderous impulses if they're armed, why is that valid at the state level but not the local level? If, as one bill supporter says, the issue is that "we all have a right to self-preservation wherever we go in the state," why is that valid at the local level but not the state level?

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Quantcast