LAX shooting aftermath (courtesy newstalk931.com)

“More than a dozen House Democrats have introduced legislation that would ban people from carrying loaded guns at airports, except for law enforcement officers and Homeland Security employees,” washingtonexaminer.com reports. “Everyone else could still carry a gun, but only if they are unloaded and locked up in clearly marked, locked cases, according to Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., the bill’s sponsor.” Currently, Texas, Georgia and other states allow gun owners to carry their guns up to secure areas. This bill – which stands a snowball in Hell’s chance of passing – would end states’ discretion on the matter. And the reasoning is . . .

“Airports are the gateway to commerce throughout the world and the front door to the communities they connect for millions of passengers who visit the United States each year,” Johnson said Monday. “It defies logic that we would allow anyone other than law enforcement officials to carry a loaded gun within an airport. This bill is simple common sense.”

And the “common sense” reasoning behind the ban is? Nope. That’s it. Well and this [via breitbart.com] . . .

Johnson’s office said the measure is being backed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, The Violence Policy Center, States United to Prevent Gun Violence, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the GunSense Georgia Coalition.

I’m thinking that those groups want “gun-free zones” wherever they can create them, no matter what. Not to coin a phrase, because guns.

I’m also thinking that terrorists thinking about striking at an airport (who wouldn’t care one whit about a federal gun ban in any location) would probably choose an airport where armed Americans dare not tread. Like . . . Los Angeles International Airport. What are the odds?

Recommended For You

71 Responses to Dems Want a Federal Ban On Guns At All Airports

    • Every time an adjective is used in a title, it’s a lie.

      “Common sense” gun control
      “Afforable” healthcare

      • It is systemic subliminal and blatant cultural conditioning sponsored by the anti-gun industrial complex of which Herr Bloomberg is CEO and chairman of the Democrat populated board, their pandering so called “progressive” Democrat politician facilitators, and their allies in the sympathetic, socialist approving liberal media who facilitate the en mass propagation of said deceitful anti-gun ‘brainwashing’.

        Right now, First Amendment protections would also be threatened, except the third element of this axis of dependency subjugation, the media, is not on board with such an effort.

    • Terms like “common sense” and “extreme” are intended to short-circuit the listener’s critical thinking processes by getting them to reflexively agree with the speaker and/or discount the opposing position. Never trust anyone who uses these terms.

        • Extreme Energy Drink!!
          Extreme Reality TV!!
          Extreme Power Battery!!
          Extreme Performance Tires!!
          Extremely Controversial News!!
          Extreme Government Training!!
          Extreme Common Sense Gun Control!!
          Tune in for more extremely extreme coverage!!!!

    • Yes, we need more “No Gun Zones” so that ISIS can attack without the innocents shooting back. The idea of calling such laws “common sense” certainly is a lie.

  1. Why do I suspect these antis have not ensured their offices are located in gun free zones, sans armed security??

    • Their offices are in gun-free zones, the security they hire is exempt because they are above the common peasant.

  2. All Dems want to ban all guns that touch air on Earth, not just at all airports.

    This shouldn’t be done on the bureaucratic federal level, let the states handle this.

    • So now that milsurp rifle you’re drooling over will be legal…so long as you don’t strip the cosmoline off, ever.

    • Democrats want to ban everything. Every single thing you can think of, I garuntee, a democrat had proposed a ban on it. And if they had their way, they would tax the f****ing air we breathe.

    • Not ALL Democrats think this way, but near all buy into the socialist progressive dependency Democrat political platform every time they vote for a “D” politician and consequently reduce our heritage of freedom a little more with each election that brings another Democrat politician to a position of influence and power.

  3. i am soooooo tired of hearing these Democrats kick and scream every time they don’t like something..all it is, is kicking and screaming cause no one is going to move forward on this they are just wasting our tax money i am so electing Trump for prez…

  4. Yes the Dems want a ban on guns at airports, however, the dems also want a ban on all firearms EVERYWHERE. No “public” ownership or possession of firearms at all.

  5. The non-sterile areas of airports are wide open as anywhere else in the country, so making them gun free zones will just give outlaws/terrorists another target rich evironment.

    Hank Johnson, the guy who’s afraid Guam will capsize..

  6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends_Committee_on_National_Legislation

    The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) is a lobbying organization in the public interest founded in 1943 by members of the Religious Society of Friends. FCNL works for social and economic justice, peace, stewardship of the environment, and good government in the United States.

    We seek a world free of war and the threat of war
    We seek a society with equity and justice for all
    We seek a community where every person’s potential may be fulfilled
    We seek an earth restored.

    • 1943, hmm, so while most of the free world is trying to you know, fight evil and all that silly business, these folks were dreaming about unicorns and rainbow pie.

      • …. while most of the free world is trying to you know, fight evil and all that silly business,

        Uhhhh….No.

        As Prager says…..”The Right fights evil, and the Left fights carbon emissions.”

        The countries that are willing to “fight evil” to the degree of possible loss of their sons blood is a VERY short list.

        • Never heard of this Prager Fellow, Dennis Prager? I dont really listen to any talk radio that could be it I suppose.

        • Yep, that would be Dennis Prager.
          You’re missing a lot if you don’t listen or read him…. he clarifies ones positions.

          A snippet from this link… http://www.dennisprager.com/time-fights-carbon-emissions-military-fights-evil/

          The state of the liberal mind is on display on this week’s cover of Time magazine.

          The already notorious cover takes the iconic photograph of U.S. Marines planting the American flag on Iwo Jima and substitutes a tree for the flag. Why Time’s editors did this explains much about contemporary liberalism.

          The first thing it explains is that liberals, not to mention the left as a whole, stopped fighting evil during the Vietnam War. As I wrote in my last column, whereas liberals had led the fight against Nazism before and during World War II, and against Communism after the War, the liberal will to fight Communism, the greatest organized evil of the post-War world, collapsed during the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War did to American liberals what World War I did to most Europeans — it rendered them anti-war rather than anti-evil.

  7. I spent almost 4 decades working in a Canadian International airport, and I guarantee you it’ll gain traction, and lots of it. The U.S. is really the only country anywhere in the world that allows non-LEO’s to possess a firearm on their person in an airport. I’m afraid the long term “risk mitigation” numbers are soundly in the anti’s favor; you have to go a long way back historically to find armed attacks on airports.
    The American stance on weapons in airports has been a huge thorn in ICAO’s side for decades; they’ll almost certainly actively push for this, and encourage their member countries to support it as well.

    • How involved is ICAO in the administrative parts of civil aviation? (Referencing baggage, ticketing, and traffic flow into the sterile area.) I truly don’t know-just have only seen that organization’s footprint on things regarding actual airplanes moving around.

      • ICAO has either a formal policy document, a recommended practice document or a regulation passed by member nations, for almost every condition, application or administrative/operational for almost every aspect of operating civil aircraft, right down the the colors & font’s of way finding signage at an airport. There are policy documents in place to speak to such arcane things as the preferred or suggested toilet paper used and the cleaning products purchased by their member nations.

    • I never thought I would say this but here goes. ICAO is a UN sponsored agency with membership including such bastions of freedom as Afghanistan, Iran (Islamic Republic thereof), and the Democratic People’s Republic of (North) Korea. We should respectfully but forcibly tell them to stick their ideas of what we should do on our own turf in their ears or elsewhere that the sun don’t shine, at least until not a single one of their member countries sponsors terrorism, demonstrated by showing of the live prisoners or dead bodies of said terrorists.

  8. And what’s “unreasonable” about keeping deadly weapons where they shouldn’t belong?

    Doesn’t law enforcement have to deal with enough problems caused by the death worshipping NRA terrorists.

      • And I’ve been waiting for a reasonable response as to why gun nuts should be allowed to walk unfettered into an airport with their penis compensators when law enforcement has enough problems as with NRA terrorists going around causing problems for them and the civilized community.

        But sadly the only idiot solution I’m going to get is “mur gunz so I cun pretoct mysef against the evul gubermint.”

        • Initially I thought you might be a gun owner doing the normal hatefilled ugliness of the usual anti-freedom goverment sycophant as a “satire”.

          But I guess you really are a government sycophant attacking those of us that actually take responsibility for our own self-defense.

          I believe you attack people like us so viciously because you know inside that you have become a slave to your master. That you have sold your birth right as an american as a free human being to become a subject, an object to be used, abused and even killed by your masters if they decide you deserve no useful purpose for an illusory desire for “safety”.

          Stalin called people like yourself “useful idiots” . Me? I wouldn’t have said you were an idiot. I would say you are more a useful pawn in the machinations of those would be tyrants with the sick need of total control of other human beings.

        • That’s not how rights work.

          We don’t need to justify using them, the government needs to justify, with strict scrutiny, any sort of restriction or limitation on them.

          But even then, here’s some justification.
          You say trust TSA and Law enforcement to be armed in an airport, yet you don’t acknowledge that uniformed officers are three times more likely to commit a violent felony than a licensed CWP holder. And again, when has a gun-free zone EVER stopped a violent criminal? Is a sign and a misdemeanor going to stop or even slow down someone intent on multiple murder?

    • I believe he’s referring to all those thousands of incidents at U.S. airports where law-abiding, government permission slip carrying average citizen brought their guns into non-secure areas of airports and shot the crap out of the place and anybody the could get a bead on…oh, wait a minute, that didn’t happen.

      The only even remotely similar incident I can recall is he one in the picture accompanying this post, and I’m not sure of his legal OR mental status at the time of the attack. Also, unless I am greatly mistaken, he was specifically targeting TSA agents, not randomly shooting people for the hell of it.

    • VivaLaSatire, isn’t it your bed time, and don’t you have school tomorrow. Seriously, weren’t you using a different name a few days ago? Doesn’t matter. You are not the first troll to visit these pages, and it is the same. You pull out a few sound bites from leftist propaganda sources, you may point us to a few discredited statistics, but you do not present any real facts. Lets just say it is getting rather boring. So, go to bed and let the grownups talk.

    • Because there is no magical method by which to keep dangerous weapons away from anywhere.
      It’s not as if a sign or policy is every going to stop an attack.
      They only people would could possibly be affected by such a policy, would be those who have no intent of harming anyone in the first place.

  9. Can somebody please explain why the Republicans weren’t introducing common sense pro gun rights legislation every other day when they were the minority in Congress, the way the Democrats are now doing with anti gun rights legislation? Did I just miss it??

    • It’s very simple, really. The Dems know without a doubt two things 1) This legislation will NEVER pass, and 2) This is a cheap way to win points and votes from low-information voters by pretending to do something about an emotional issue.

      This is a pandering attempt to buy votes, nothing more. Come election time they can point to their names on this legislation and cry on the stump about how they tried to save everybody from the evil gun owners and NRA but the dastardly Republicans refused to join them in saving innocent lives.

  10. And what about the thousands of airports that don’t even have airline service? They frame it like all airports are LAX, but that’s really a minority. If I lived in a residential air parks (neighborhoods built on an airport), I don’t think that should qualify as a gun free zone. Or back country strips in the middle of nowhere? You know, where a preflight check involves making sure your tires weren’t used as a bear chew toy or an aileron wasn’t damaged as a back scratcher. Doesn’t sound like “common sense” to me.

  11. It is common sense the Constitution be followed and lawful citizens not be labeled as criminals for doing nothing other than being citizens.

    • A few years back, I flew with weapons to rifle and pistol matches. The rules at the time were to have the weapons declared by the passenger, shown to an airline agent to be unloaded, who then attached a red tag to the luggage containing the gun — telling every luggage thief and pilferer who saw it where the attractive commodities to steal were to be found.
      In most cases, the airline people would agree to place the red tag INSIDE the luggage containing the guns, which of course frustrated it’s purpose of outwardly identifying luggage with guns inside, but stopped the idiocy of yet another typical “common sense gun law”.

    • Nick,

      Of course clearly marked cases scream “steal me”. That serves the Almighty State in two ways. First, it disenfranchises firearms owners who risk theft of their property and suffer losses when someone does steal their property. Second, it puts a firearm in the hands of a criminal who may very well use it to attack people — who will in turn cry out for more “protection” from the Almighty State.

  12. It defies logic that we would allow anyone other than law enforcement officials to carry a loaded gun within an airport.
    — Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga.

    Since when are United States Representatives the final arbiter of what is “logical”? And where does the United States Constitution empower the federal government to criminalize that which it deems to be “illogical”?

    If the U.S. House of Representatives declares that speech about my faith is “illogical”, can they ban my speech about my faith? What if my speech about a political party’s platform is “illogical” … can they ban that speech as well?

    Someone needs to tar and feather the Representatives who are sponsoring this legislation.

    • Hank Johnson hails from the house seat that was vacated by the illustrious Cynthia McKinney. Hold your breath on getting a sensible candidate out of there.

    • And yet there are people who comment even here who will argue in defense this mythical power when it’s proclaimed in other instances. If one speaks out in defense of the plain language of the Constitution and strictly observed subservience of government to that defining document, the name calling will commence and the character assassinations run wild.

      The Constitution created, defined, and limits our federal government. That government has been out of bounds in so many areas for so long that it’s no longer even legitimate. It has become something other than what was founded. It must be restored now or replaced. But yeah, that’s just crazy talk…

  13. This is the weekly (or is it weakly?) anti gun bill from the dems. Prior bills included a tax credit for turning in AR15s, no internet ammo sales, a national pistol license and now this POC by a man who was worried that US troops would tip over Guam- a real mental giant.

    My guess for next week’s POC bill is a national law to require firearms at home to be stored disassembled and the parts stored in safes in different rooms.

    • I’m wondering if a lot of this is running cover for the gag order regulations on online gun related speech. When the M855 ban was put forth for public comment, that seemed to be the only issue on the docket for most of us to write our congress critters about. It got their attention, now there is one ridiculous proposal after another to keep up with. They want to distract our focus on specific bills and executive actions.

    • You beat me to it. Yep, this is the same Hank Johnson that thought Guam would capsize from too many military personnel there. Who elects clowns like him?

    • No, no, no.
      He didn’t really think Guam would capsize, he is just a comedian and had perfect facial control for the “joke”
      That’s literally the claim his office made.
      BTW, how on Earth are you giving testimony and your reply to that idiocy isn’t.
      “It’s an island, they don’t float, and hence can’t capsize, and since you don’t seem to understand basic geography, why are you asking questions you can’t possibly comprehend the answers to?”

      • Well, because the man giving the testimony was a military officer, and evidently of the old-school “officer and gentleman” variety

  14. Lately I think we are seeing a trend of these kind of “annoyance” legislative proposals, that have little chance of passing. My guess is the strategy is to create a list of these defeated proposals to use in the next election. I can see, “Voted against banning guns in airports. Voted against requiring safe storage of firearms. Etc.” Unfortunately, I think it will sway some voters.

    I gotta be brutally honest though, and I know I’ll get flamed for this, but I’m a weekly airline traveler and I’m not all that warm and fuzzy about people carrying AKs and ARs in airport terminals. So one honest guy does it, fine. But if I see five Middle Eastern-looking guys doing it (and I know I’m profiling, live with it), it’s stress I don’t need. And of course I can’t be armed to defend myself because I’m about to go through TSA. I know, I know, it is anti-2A, blah, blah, blah, but I can’t help it. It’s the way I feel.

    • Well Ol’ Hank threw this out in reaction to the rocket surgeon who decided to flaunt the new GA gun laws by OC’ing an AR15 through the Atlanta airport.

      Needless to say our local (D) legislators had a fit and the AJC ran a lot of press about it.

    • I know, I know, it is anti-2A, blah, blah, blah, but I can’t help it. It’s the way I feel.

      That says it all. You fear freedom so you don’t want others to be free either. It’s an age old affliction; since the beginning of mankind.

  15. The correct title is “Dems Want a Federal Ban On Guns”

    – but will be satisfied with a ban at airports, for now.

  16. “Common sense” says most of these politicians need to be removed from office. The speed of this executive order should be extreme.

    For the children’s sake.

  17. One more federally mandated barrel for the fish. I wonder if these politicians who dump arms into Syria, send our troops to train jihadis, use the CIA to manufacture coupes and lobby for the creation of fatal funnels and kill zones at home can be arrested for aiding and supporting terrorists?
    Oh, that’s right. It’s only terror when anybody but America does it. When America does it it’s brave and strategic peace-keeping for bettering international relations.
    Seriously, any politician supporting this or TSA grope lines is essentially saying America needs more mass casualty events.

    • It’s only terror when anybody but America government agents does it.

      There. I fixed that for you.

  18. Congressman Johnson, could you perhaps explain to us precisely how allowing Americans to exercise their rights “defies logic”?

  19. Typical Constitution hating Democrats, appeasement at its best! These Fascist”s want to empower all the Radical infected Muslim people in this Country! they can kill us in the name of their God but we the people got too take it in the ASS because of Idiot Treasonous porkers in Congress! starting with the top dog down, they think it’s OK for these people to run around with big Knives lopping of heads, more Islamic violence has been perpetrated at airports than any where else remember 911! so Lets make it’s a Gun free Zone!
    better yet,, lets send them on a fact finding mission over in Iraq with no escorts making sure they adhere to a strict no gun policy, only common sense to me

  20. Woohoo!

    More useless “fail outta the box” gun control legislation!

    Why dont they just hurry up and make crime illegal?

  21. This is the Rep.Hank Johnson who worried that the island of Guam might capsize if there was an increase in its population. His “logic” in proposing this law runs true to form for this lame-brained excuse for a legislator.
    Hey Donald, forget Ophrah as your running mate. Johnson would make a great replacement for “Shotgun Joe” Biden.

  22. Next thing, they’ll declare a five-mile zone around all airports where the possession of rifles are banned, because some well-practiced fellow with a 30-06 might be able to put a 185 grain slug in an engine during takeoff.

  23. Who are these “Homeland Security” personnel running around airports armed? TSA agents are part of Homeland Security, but they are not peace officers and are not allowed to carry guns. Which to my way of thinking is a good thing, giv en the number of mental midgets I’ve run into the few times I’ve been forced to fly commercially.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *