search
top

Bemoaning Carry Restrictions

Democrats are starting to use the fact that most concealed carry bills in them contain certain exceptions, such as for schools and courthouses, using this as proof that carrying is just plain dangerous. From Wisconsin:

Some Democrats pointed to the exemptions as proof that allowing concealed carry does introduce a new set of dangers.

“If this bill helps make Wisconsin safer, then why are there any exceptions?” said Sen. Tim Cullen, D-Janesville.

You really want to make this argument? We’d be happy to introduce a bill that contained no exceptions. Careful what you argue.

4 Responses to “Bemoaning Carry Restrictions”

  1. Todd says:

    I;ve answered that question in commitee. It usually goes like in order to secure the required votes, negotiations take place. and the product of those talks is sometimes changes to the legislation. We don’t always agree, but half a loaf is better than no loaf and at this time, we are willing to make a compromise in order to pass a bill.

    That how the game works. We sometimes have to make concessions to pass a bill. And then we will come back and work on making it better later. that’s just how it works. the other side is disingenious about the bans or carry restricts. I shut them up this year by pointing across the tabel and saying these are the same people who went to the US Supreme Court to keep Otis McDonald, a 71 year old black man from even keeping a gun in his house. They supported a complete handgun ban for the city of Chicago, and are down here seeking bans on semi-auto rifles, shotguns, pistols and bolt action rifles. They were the ones who didn’t even want to acknowaldge the right to keep a gun in your own home and were dragged kicking and screaming in to the 21st century of gun rights.

    I would wager that most groups sitting across the table at committee hearings could be found on an amicu brief in either Heller or McDonald and you can make the charge stick.

  2. Wes says:

    From the comments there:
    “Wisconsin has taken a giant step in the right direction to encourage criminals to move to Chicago where they will always be safe.” hahaha

    This is a bipartisan bill. Even a Milwaukee Senator voted for it. What sucks is that it will probably help reduce crime in Milwaukee but then gun-grabber police chief Flynn will get the credit. It wasn’t until recently that I read he was previously chief in Massachusetts. His wanting restrictive gun laws made more sense after that.

    The exclusion of guns from certain large events, (Summerfest, Packer games), could be an argument about “why are there any exceptions,” but those events have so many people and so much security that it should be rare an individual needs a gun there. And courthouses tend to be full of cops and metal detectors. The same can’t be said of most other places.

    The strange one to me is why so many people are for prohibiting guns on school grounds when that is where most of the big gun murder sprees have taken place. If a “no guns” sign will stop a bad guy from having a gun there, why not just put up a “no bad guys allowed” sign.

  3. Sage Thrasher says:

    Funny how the majority of mass shootings happen in “gun free safety zones.” Sigh…

  4. Steven says:

    @Wes &Sage – It takes a certain bit of insight to realize that people intent on break laws and go on shooting sprees are most likely going to break other laws like “don’t take guns here.” I’m afraid most of the opposition don’t have this ability of insight or to connect these closely related dots.

    What’s worse, is if they do have the ability to make that connection then they are willing to wager your life, your families lives, and the lives of other innocent teachers and students against the odds of it not happening in their backyard. Yes, “in their backyard” as unfortunately shooting sprees aren’t likely to go away. They know it will happen again, but they aren’t willing to give you or your loved ones the right to protect themselves against those that would seek to harm them.

    Also, forget the fact that gun free zones have any sort of protection. Most schools don’t have any police or security protection. This means very little since police and security protection mostly means they pick up after the bad guys after the deed as been done and your child, your wife, your husband or your friends are dead.

    Chew on this for a while. The thought of this happening again is horrible, but what leaves a bad taste in my mouth is the thought of the victims being left defenseless for no reason.

top