The American gun rights movement has passed the tipping point. I’m not saying the battle is over. The struggle to defend and extend the right to keep and bear arms won’t be won until legal residents across the country enjoy constitutional carry (no “extra” paperwork needed for concealed carry). And not even then; all our constitutional rights will always be under threat. But it’s clear that the old gun control stimulus – response pattern—tragedy > tighter firearms restrictions—is broken. Despite the President’s [alleged] promise to The Brady Campaign to Prevent Violence to launch “under the radar” gun control after the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, he hasn’t. And any clamor for gun control after the Trayvon Martin episode has fallen on deaf ears. Much to the chagrin of left-leaning media mavens. To wit, this from Oregon’s bendbulletin.com . . .
Despite the scrutiny of state gun laws following the February shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., state legislators across the country continue to work on scaling back gun restrictions this session.
The Kansas House passed a bill last month to allow concealed-carry permit holders to carry their weapons into any public building that doesn’t have “adequate security,” like metal detectors or security guards, and Oregon pro-gun legislators narrowly defeated a bill that would have banned guns on schools grounds, which included K-12 schools, community colleges and universities.
Virginia repealed its statute that blocked residents from buying more than one gun a month unless they got dispensation from the police, and Oklahoma legislators are likely to allow gun owners to visibly carry their now concealed weapons.
South Dakota lawmakers ventured the furthest in removing gun restrictions this session by voting to get rid of concealed-carry permit requirements and allow any state resident over age 18 with a valid driver’s license to carry a concealed weapon without undergoing the background check now needed for a permit. Under the legislation, law enforcement officers in the field would have had to assess whether the gun owner had a criminal background or mental illness history that would preclude them from carrying the gun.
You caught that last bit, no doubt, where scribe Maggie Clark [above] implies that constitutional carry would endanger cops “in the field” because they’d have to find out if a citizen carrying a gun had a lawful right to do so. ‘Cause they don’t have to do that now, right?
Besides, we all know onto which side of the gun control “debate” the boys in blue fall. Well, in which direction they’re going . . .
Law enforcement officers across the country are becoming some of the loudest critics of eroding gun restrictions.
As the gun debate becomes more polarized among state and federal policymakers, advocates on both sides are also ratcheting up their efforts. Groups supporting gun control are calling for more local ordinances restricting gun ownership, while others are fighting to allow guns in schools, workplaces, courts and even churches.
Here on the front lines of the gunblogosphere I see no increasing polarization. Like Ray Bans, it is what it is. Nor do I perceive ratcheting-up from gun control advocates. In fact, they seem to be playing defense these days. To the point where we’re hearing strangely realistic noises from the aforementioned Brady Campaign (full quote tomorrow).
And yes, legal gun owners want to carry their legal firearms into their places of worship. And so they do, in many states. And so they will, in many more. In fact, I have four words for Ms. Clark about the momentum towards the roll back of unconstitutional restrictions on Americans’ Second Amendment gun rights: get used to it.