Another tragedy. I couldn’t turn on the TV news for days. I was sickened at the thought of what had happened. What would be the ramifications? I thought of the preparedness of our local schools. It could be much better, on multiple levels.
When I finally relented and turned on the TV, I heard countless morons talking about how only principles have the ability to call for a lock down at schools, how classroom doors open the wrong way, and how the principles should have MP5’s issued to them.
Gun Control, the NRA, the Second Amendment, mental health and the degradation of social values have been passionately expressed in recent weeks by all sides. Solutions offered include tougher gun control laws, reviving the assault weapons ban and police officers in every school. I agree that we need more gun control, a lot more, but not what you might think.
We need a new federal law that licenses gun users. Such license would only be issued after substantial training and certification. This would be ground-breaking legislation, requiring a new thought process regarding a registry of permitted guns and gun owners. It would be voluntary, of course, but carry with it, significant responsibility.
This is an immediate solution to stop the gun violence in our society. The legislation that I am advocating for is the passage of a national right to carry. Permit holders would have the ability to carry a concealed weapon where ever they go, regardless of local laws or firearm free zones. Schools, universities, churches and other public places would no longer be targets for lunatics and evil acts. Imagine if a federal agency had the ability to screen, interview and train ordinary citizens to act in a manner and with means that could stop people.
This new gun legislation would create a citizenry who is armed and allowed to carry arms wherever they go with the explicit purpose of protecting themselves and the public around them. It is a cornerstone argument for our Second Amendment, an armed citizenry.
We mostly have this today and generally it works well. When it works, it is not well publicized or well reported because the story generally goes against the national “all guns are bad” agenda. Most States have right-to-carry laws allowing private citizens to carry a concealed firearm and at times, and these firearms are used by citizens to stop or prevent crime. Most people that carry concealed weapons carry for their own protection and might be hesitant in acting for someone else’s behalf. Fear of prosecution or civil liability also contributes to the flaw of local carry rights. Am I in the right place? Am I going to be sued? Am I legal?
Without going into excessive detail, this would be how the program would basically work: Candidates would be screened and backgrounds meticulously evaluated. Testing would need to include substance abuse and a psychological exam. Training would include classroom time, range time and shoot/no-shoot scenarios. Lastly, certification would be based on the ability to demonstrate knowledge proficiency and of course being able to hit what you are shooting at—that’s right, range qualification.
The permit holders would need to file monthly reports on how often they carry and in what locations. They would also report the use of their weapon in any manner to prevent, detain, or intercede in any event. The use of deadly force would be reviewed by a shooting board to determine whether the use of such force was justified.
These permit holders could be teachers, pilots, law enforcement, bankers, shop owners, private security guards, and the list goes on. The thought of putting armed citizens in the places that are most vulnerable will thwart the intentions of evil persons that have seen such places as defenseless targets.
The cost of such a program would be significantly less than a police officer or paid armed security guard in every school or other public place.
In addition to the “National Right to Carry” legislation, we should also pass a total gun ban. It would be a total gun ban for criminals. We should pass legislation that calls for the immediate confiscation of those guns possessed by criminals, so those guns could be redistributed to law abiding citizens, to be used in defense of themselves, others and of course, the protection of liberty. Of course this is ridiculous, most felons are not allowed to have a firearm, but it brings into question the lack of anyone talking about how effective mandatory sentencing is for criminals who choose to use a firearm to commit crimes. These programs are one of the reasons that violent crime rates have been trending downward in the past decade.
The Second Amendment, or the “right to keep and bear arms” has never been about protecting the ability to hunt or shoot for sporting reasons; it was about self-protection and protection against a tyrannical government. If this argument is constitutionally correct, the framers of the constitution thought that an arms race between the government and its citizenry would be a good thing in order to keep both in check. The use of the word “militia” suggested that the citizenry would always be armed to a certain degree to defend itself. I don’t want to limit the imagination of the Founding Fathers, but my thought is that they not only feared a tyrannical government or a foreign invasion, but they also thought that it would be good if someone had the ability to stop evil acts such as those that have taken so many lives recently.
The argument that each state’s National Guard is essentially fulfilling the militia criteria is easily thwarted by the following question: Will these institutions act at the direction of the government or by the will of the citizenry from which they came?
As various federal government agencies mass enormous amount of ammunition, and just about all regulatory divisions of the various branches of the federal government are armed to some degree, do you feel safer? For what purpose is the government arming itself? Is there some sort of threat that exists that we are not aware of? Are they concerned about a revolt, invasion, and social unrest?
Should an appropriate response and a minimal right of the citizenry therefore be the possession of large capacity magazines and semi automatic firearms?
I am calling for increased control over people willing to carry firearms and act in defense of others, while liberating their ability to carry into places otherwise prohibited, and maintaining existing right to carry laws, which are set forth by state and local governments. Get tough on criminals that use guns to commit crimes and confiscate guns from criminals who are not allowed to possess them. And finally, maintain the arms race between the citizenry and the government. It will protect liberty and keep both from harming the other.
Photo credit: Evil Erin (Creative Commons)
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
I like your declaration analogy. It would be interesting for the States to invent a private owner declaration and agreement to become a State Militia member or charter and to agree to help and render aid to any person under dire threat or to band together in a State or National emergency. I suppose Switzerland already has a document of some kind that may be copied or assisting. If nothing else it would help owners to understand the protection intent of the law, the public to better understand the protection intent and the criminal to understand that the citizenship is now standing ready to protect itself.
I don’t have a problem with registration but we have already witnessed the abuse of that will the posting of gun owners in a publication. I hope the guy that did that gets robbed!
Thanks for your comments. I agree that each state should have a militia in addition to the national guard. It would come in handy in the event of a natural disaster. Militia members could be immediately deputized to protect the public. Similar to what Sheriff Joe is doing in Arizona. But we still need armed citizens protecting the public and they just can’t do that with the concealed carry restrictions and gun free zones that are in place today.
What ALL schools should have built and it wouldnt cost much either….(the glass would be the most expensive) is in each entrance of the buildings…. they need a buzzer which would be located in the Principal’s office… like the Jeweler’s who sell gold and diamonds…. . they have an extra small glassed in room they must enter before allowing someone to come inside. First.. is the outside door… which is through bullet proof glass.. a customer rings a bell which rings in the Main office… the person inside… looks to see who is standing there wanting in.. cause it’s ALL GLASS…. they allow them in the second SMALL room … which can be very small and can see EVERYTHING they have on them… and if they can get past that second small room.. they can enter the gold and diamond area to buy.
So if that guy who shot up the window glass to gain entry of the school… the bullet proof glass would have prevented him even if those inside KNEW who he was.. he would not be allowed to enter.. Go to some Gold and High class jewelry and see how that is made up.. I went with a friend of mine a couple of times to this Gold Exchange building.. and that;s the only way one can enter…. this can be done at the schools… and no matter how many guns he has.. he can’t gain entry… then the police can come and get him out of the enclosed smaller room.
Here in part is a response to a local TV reporter’s Op-Ed piece opposing arming teachers:
Dear Jose – Your argument against teachers being armed has some merit. A couple of thoughts:
1. Given the terrible demonstration of irresponsibility of union teachers in Wisconsin, I guess it would be best to keep them from sharp objects, much less guns.
2. The safety of our children has already been compromised by political correctness and Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” I hear is being promoted as the new Luciferian bible of the NEA.
3. I think it’s a bad idea for cops to have more than a visible presence at schools – largely a waste of time, but more importantly the Obama Administration will be pushing to fund their salaries – another nail in the American coffin as they strive to apply Agenda 21, further endangering our largely innocent children while destroying our Constitutional Republic.
4. Since Federal funding of security cops would be likely, and union teachers probably cannot be trusted with weapons of any sort, I propose we train and arm non-union teachers. These are most likely more level-headed, already gun owners and trained in their proper use and storage (where you can get to them well before the cops can arrive to save you. All due respect for our local city and county officers who do a darned good job under difficult politically correct conditions).
I have a cautionary like for this bill. What I find wrong with it is that this is already allowed in the 2nd amendment in which it is declared that an American citizen is to be part of an armed militia. All we need to do is to declare, as the constitution declares and with no government intervention , all citizens a member of such militia and some form of comment on the effect of using your arms to protect your free rights without you yourself going to jail . The other part is the government being appointed to determine who is qualified to be in the militia. Under such control,l as the will of the people, there will be an initial burst of gun originated killings, but once it is determined that a militia member will not go to jail or loose his property for executing his right to exercise the dictates of the militia; After we kill enough individuals trying to take mine or our property or life, it will settle down with great respect for those left in society.
Thanks for your comments. I agree with you about the 2nd Amendment. However a variety of laws have been passed that infringe on this right. If you look beyond the satire in the article, advocating for national right to carry legislation is a reasonable response to stem the violence. In today’s climate, they are not going to allow just anyone to obtain a permit to do so. The left is going to come after our guns, no question about it, I am proposing the opposite, put more guns on the street in the hands of trained citizens, how ever it looks in the end, I think its the right thing to do.
The only thing we have to fear is the fear of the government which is completely out of control. The FEDS need to stand down to states rights. NO more foreign Aid as we simply cannot afford it. Not only do we have free loaders in this country but we are funding foreign free loaders too. And the govt wants to take our only means of defending ourselves away? Not gonna happen without a fight. Hold on folks as Obama has not even been sworn in as the next president but he’s on the move to destroy the American way of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
“We Need An Armed Citizenry As Protection Against Lunatics & Criminals”, LIKE mARXISTS, mUSLIMS, nAZI’S, tYRANTS, jACKBOOTED THUGS, AND THE REST OF THYE ILK THAT PROLIFERATE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF GENOCIDAL MANICS, SEEKING ONLY THEIR OWN CONTROL AND PRESERVATION IN THE DARK HALLS OF HELL.
AMEN!
The last paragraph, “I am calling for increased control over people willing to carry firearms and act in defense of others, while liberating their ability to carry into places otherwise prohibited, and maintaining existing right to carry laws, which are set forth by state and local governments.” Increased control is too much control. When I carry or how I carry is my business as long as I do no harm. Sometime I carry openly and other times concealed. When carrying openly, no one questions me and some even give a sigh of relief that says, “Thanks for the protection.”
Thanks for your comment. Sorry i was a little heavy on the satire in the article. Glad to hear that you carry, i just wish you could carry more places and act to protect others without fear of civil or criminal liability. Imagine being able to carry across state lines and into public places where firearms are banned. My intent was to start a discussion on the expansion of citizens carrying firearms legally, in places that are restricted now. Do you think 911 would have happened if three or four people on each of those planes had a right to carry concealed where ever they went?
i am generally with the writer with a few reservations about how in school security is implemented ( police presence should be sufficient) and the funding could be found in scrutiny of all the sudden epidemic of disabled americans —-and number of ineligle illegal aliens (prove me wrong by making an HONEST investigation)——-the one item that troubles me most is the almost throw away reference to the monumental storage of anti personnel ammunition in government faclities and the mention of fema camps reminiscent of the infamous and disgraceful internment camps for japanese american citizens (i severved in the pacific in WW2 against the japanese) i hope my fears about this administrations plans are unfounded——–as an aside if you want to see how easy it is to get disability look at your tv ads by ambulance chasers who assure if you are denied see them
Thanks for your comment. Police presence in schools in not sufficient. Because the federal government has made them all “gun free zones” it has elevated them to a target of choice. A police officer in every school would not be sufficient security, they can’t be everywhere and see everything at all times. Universities are in the same category, even though most have police departments protecting the campus. One of the responses to 911 was to put air marshals on planes.
I can’t agree at all with the author of this article. Has more that 230 years since the beginning of our freedom taught us that ANY CONTROL by government ALWAYS becomes corrupted! Perhaps if we had a local malitia at each town with a few appointed (not elected) leaders it would work. These men would be ones trusted by the militia and they would be willing to follow them. They could be easily replaced. NO POLITICIANS! Even our city councils and county commissions become politicians – BEWARE! It is said that almost all men, given a little authority, will begin to exercise unrighteous dominion over others.
Thanks for your comment. I agree with you that a local citizenry, protecting the public, with local control would work the best, if no gun laws existed. Sheriff Joe is putting just such a posse in place to protect his schools. As much as people travel today, we need the ability to cross over into and through geo-political boundaries that may have locally imposed gun restrictions. The ability of armed citizens to do this without fear of breaking some local law is the point of the article.
All the American people need to be armed to protect our country from our corrupt government
That’s right, berneemc. We all need to be armed because the biggest criminals in our country are in our government. They have NO respect for human life even though they lie and say they do. Their motives to disarm us after the Sandy Hook shooting are not sincere. They’re using this as an excuse to disarm the honest, law-abiding citizens of America so they can commit crimes against us and get away with it and if we don’t cooperate they will slaughter us just like Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tesung did after they disarmed their citizens. Their respect for human life is nil, after all they slaughter millions upon millions of innocent, unborn Americans, America’s future, in their child-killing(abortion) mills every year. What do we expect from child-killers?
How about we get rid of all the Democrats that are in Congress, after all they follow the worst Racist Prejudice American Hating Bigot that there ever was. And then maybe we can also get rid of all their friends who happens to also be our enemies.
It is our American society that’s in the ‘Toilet’! If citizens were as concerned today as thay were 50-60 years ago we would not have a problem. The mind set of Americans today is a do nothing, dont get envolved, I dont have time, and many just dont give a damm! Therefor we get what we deserve!
I got an eamil the other day, said let Homo’s marry Homo’s, and vote for legal abortions and in three decades there will be no Democrats.
We do not need the Federal Government to license gun owners. The Constitution gives the citizens the right to bear arms but it does not give the federal government control over the bearing. Specific things are listed for the Federal Government and all other is left to the States and the people.
Allowing the FG to license guns is just another way to get all the guns registered with the federal government so they can confiscate them at the first opportunity. Only “Wanna Be” Dictators want the capability to confiscate guns because the 2nd Amendment was added to provide the citizenry protection from Tyranny by the federal government whether by Congress, Judges or the Executive.
The schools can appoint people to be Safety Monitors and get them trained to use the weapon/gun.
Front Sight, a fire arm training school in Nevada, has offered to train up to 3 such designated people, Free, for every school, college and University IF they have the common sense to designate the people.
More Info? email info@frontsight.com.
It would do a great deal of good just to remove the “Gun free zone” designation for schools…that just tells the would be murderer that he can kill to his hearts content because there will be on one to shoot back.
Gun control laws, i.e. outlawing guns, will do absolutely no good. Connecticut has some of the toughest gun laws in the states and the murderer of the children broke all kinds of laws because he did not believe in any law that applied to him. That is the mindset of all would be murderers so they will break the law and get guns even if every law-abiding citizen is forbidden to own one.
Personally I think the Constitution is all that is needed for citizens to own and carry a gun although my state, most free states require a license to carry but not to own. The job of the States is to attempt to keep anyone who is a felon, mentally deranged, or insane from getting one but they will not stop everyone – that is the job of the armed law-abiding citizen if one needs to be stopped.
I know a small town in Georgia that, several years ago, decided there was to much breaking and entering by possible killers. They passed a law that every home in the city, except those housing a felon, must have a gun in their home. Crimes went to near zero immediately!
I will sum up Ogayone’s proposal for gun registration: WE WILL NOT COMPLY!
We must resist/ignore any “law” that says we must. READ THE 2nd AMENDMENT. There is no mention of registration (illegal tracking).
Hitting correct target is essential, seems simple enough? Yet, this article aims at the inanimate (guns) while the animate (mental health) gets no focus. It’s a question of investigation, do we judge by statistics, or by political agenda. I prefer statistics, a more reliable source.
Statistics say, “The Four Amigos,” psychiatry, psychology, psychoanalysis, and Big Pharma, are the enablers and masters of mass-destruction. Their ‘treatments’ can be summed up in one word, DEVASTATION, shared by all. They betray help! Target the ‘real why’ of down-statistics, handle, up-statistics return…Semper Fi
Lots of thoughts here, some are nonsense. The only really sensible thing I have read in this forum is the assertion that any registration by the Feds will eventually be abused. I don’t know how so many forget the absolute obvious truth in this. In Texas I can carry concealed in my home, in my automobiles and on the premises of my place of business. I would prefer to carry at all times but in order to do this I would have to admit to local authorities that I own firearms. It’s probably assumed in our small town that most everyone is armed but there’s no proof unless you admit it. So, I’ve made a decision to be unarmed when I really would rather be in order to “stay under the radar” with the authorities. The way our country is progressing I think that may turn out to be a wise course.
NO MORE laws that circumvent the 2nd Amendment! If everyone who wants to be armed is, the rest of us will mostly be grateful whether the situation is a common thug or our common government. The right to bear arms shall NOT be infringed. NO LICENSING. It is just another way to tax and control us. I will carry as I see fit and fire only when necessary. Population reduction and gun control should occur by attrition not submission!
Beyond individuals asserting their 2nd amendment rights… one other bright spot is to rally around the office of Sheriff… make sure you have a good local Sheriff who is well aware of his constitutional powers… and make sure his department is well funded, well armed, and well staffed. Make sure he understands just how much power he has over his jurisdiction in relationship to federal power. AND… if gun control REALLY goes berserk… apply some rather generous deputizing of many armed local citizens. THAT is a good “backup plan” should federal powers get out of control… and this would provide a good “end run around” draconian gun control.
Gun Free Zones are killer zones. Get rid of Gun Free Pie in the sky, thinking that because it is a gun free zone no one will have a gun in this zone. This is where the killers go because it is easy to get in and out. No one can save us but us, be armed and be ready. All teachers should go armed to school, but their brain washing in college and everywhere else say guns are bad, no the gun isn’t bad it is people who are bad and we need to protect ourselves against them. Where there are guns crime is down, where there are no guns in cities and States are where the Demo-rats are in full charge, they protect all the criminals, who commit murder of any kind, any crime you can think of, is protected by the Demo-rats. But not the people.
Do we really want the same government who brought us Fast and Furious to have any control regarding firearms regulation? The theory might have some merit, but the implementation of the author’s ideas are very flawed. How about we just support the Second Amendment as it stands?
I am totally against any registration of any kind of gun! We are at a critical point where we can not trust our own government. We already have a perfect gun law. You need to read the Second Amendment!
Our government is trying to take our guns away and you want to trust these traitors to make another gun law. WHAT KIND OF STUPID IT THIS?
Flies create garbage the same as guns create crime.
To control crime via the method of depriving the tools of crime, we better start banning from civilian use not only firearms but: vehicles, bats, golf clubs, fireplace pokers, crowbars, 2 X 4′s, bricks, hammers, mallots, screwdrivers and other tools, eating utinsels, toothbrushes, pipes, anything glass, knick knacks, statues, bird baths, knitting/crochet needles and any other strikable or stabable object – to name just a few …
The truth is that NO law, act, bill, declaration, directive, executive order or treaty has EVER PREVENTED a crime. We will NEVER EVER be able to keep the tools of a criminals trade away from them by outlawing them. Remember Prohibition, it didn’t work to reduce drunkeness or crime; in fact it increased it.
It is the sicko and criminal that commits crime, not the tool of the person commiting the crime. If we want to reduce crime; we must reduce the sickos and criminals; to do that we need to identify them and put them where they cannot be a threat to the rest of us law abiding and Creator loving people.
Our country was founded on the principle that each and every one of us have ‘inalienable rights’ given to us by God the Creator and they cannot be taken away from us by ANY human-made government.
All of our founding documents have one common theme: The freedom of choice within the constriants of the 10 Commandments. Because of this I will defend any US citizen’s right to NOT own a firearm, as strongly as I will defend any US citizen’s right TO own a firearm. I will defend this inalienable right of personal choice with my last breath.
Since 2009 (according to the FBI crime stats, CDC, WHO & Census stats) each year suicide now ‘kills’ more US citizens than vehicle accidents. Homicides (including ones without firearms) are NOT even in the top 10 causes of mortality of US citizens.
So yes, let us remember those taken from us by sickos and criminals and start attacking the root cause – the sickos and criminals!
PS – Since 1974 I have been a non-designated voter. I will NOT support the Democrats or Republicans with monies or my vote. They are flip sides of the same coin and have highjacked our representative government, debased the dollar, increased government, increased debt and inflation and pass laws for a federal dictatorship! My tax dollars should go to NO political party!!! Belonging to and supporting a political party is a CHOICE and should not be dictated!
Yes, concealed carry for defence is a good idea. We should have the right to own assault weapons with high capacity mags for defence against mobs. Gun free zones are a very bad idea because it openly tells everyone that no defence will be possible by those in the zone. It is the mentally unstable and criminals causing the problems and there is no gun law that will stop that. In fact, it will make a black market for real assault weapons of real full automatic capability by the same means as drugs being brought into America. Ask yourself, how much success has the police had in stopping illegal cocaine from entering the USA? This is about disarming the people for political purposes. Like an old slogan said, if guns are made criminal, then only criminals will have guns. We have already tried an assault weapons ban and it did not work. Feinstein proved her ideals are a failure, but this seems to be the administration of accepted failure and then placing the blame elsewhere.
Dont even mention registration of the Indivuduals because it is the first step to disarming the People, Hilter was the first to do this and the goal was to find out who had weapons and who didnt. The other Issue is who will be the administrators of the new system. I hope you didnt think that it should be the Government because they all are Lunatics & Criminals if you havent been watching how they all voted to raise taxes at the time our nation can lest afford to do so and at the same time voted themselves raises. We the People need to standup and get rid of any Government officials who have talked about or have voted against the Constitution or the Freedoms we all have been given by God.