Accommodating the Rights of Gun Owners: Open Carry Laws

Statutes in a number of states allow adults who are entitled to own fire arms to carry or wear such weapons (loaded) on their person, in most venues, as long as the weapons are in plain sight. People who see these guns being carried about have absolutely no way of knowing if the individual with the weapon is entitled to carry a firearm (no signs on their foreheads saying that they are or are not convicted felons or mentally ill) or in a decent enough mood not to deploy that weapon out of a sense of irritation given the right “event trigger.”

Moms with small kids in grocery stores or at the local Target or Wal*Mart are being asked to “trust” these weapons carriers to be nice and safe. Since about 40% of gun sales flow is through private sellers where no background checks are required, there is even greater cause for concern.

Most of the rest of the world thinks we are nuts enough with our misinterpretation of the Second Amendment generally, but for states that allow such open brandishing of civilian weapons, we are over the edge and certifiable to them. And no, the above photo was not taken at a gun convention where private sellers congregate and effect a very good chunk of their weapons sales, a significant number of which somehow wind up in the hands of drug cartels south of the border.

We seem to have forgotten the recent mass slaughters at several primary and secondary schools and the failed attempts at getting even a modicum of sensible regulations in place to stem the rising tide of dead children shot at their place of learning. Old and stale news, I guess, because there are more open carry laws (and states that just look the other way) than ever before. So with law enforcement agencies under massive new scrutiny from recent police killings in minority communities, we are still asking them to prepare for the next vicious gunman opening fire on classmates, teachers or even just kids because… well… they are just kids, and the headlines will be prominent.

Which is good, because so many police departments have assault vehicles, command and control units, tons of body armor and high-capacity magazines to feed their automatic weapons – one must keep up with the Joneses (crooks or neighboring police departments) – are ready! And since we have no particular interest in stemming the flow of guns or checking out those who might wish to use them, we have to assume “shots fired” and go from there. It’s happening all over the land, even in states that do not allow open carry to take place.

“With a rapid-response team and regular lockdown drills, the [Methuen, Massachusetts school district] like many across the country, has long been steeling itself for the nightmare scenario of a school shooting… But over the past two years, a new high-tech approach has been tested at one of the schools here — officials will not say which one — to see whether it is possible to react more effectively.

“Engineers from a company called Shooter Detection Systems have installed infrared sensors and microphones that can pick up the sound of gunfire and immediately notify school and law enforcement officials where and when it has occurred. It was installed free of charge, and school officials were hoping they could find the money to put the system, which costs between $20,000 and $100,000, into more schools.

“It does not stop the first shot, but company officials say the system can shorten an attack by taking the human element out of alerting the authorities.” New York Times, December 7^th. Comforting. Don’t confront the cause, treat the victim as he or she faces certain death. “[T]here is debate about whether military-style measures like a gunshot-detection system are as valuable as more prevention-minded methods. Many experts say limited resources may be better spent on mental health services, training for teachers and students on what to do if their peers talk about bringing a gun to school, or on officers trained to keep schools safe.” NY Times.

Debate? Why, the NRA is always going to vote for more weapons and not give a damn about the children who will die under the completely idiotic mantra of “The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”… precisely the lesson we need to make sure all our children learn! And the NRA trumps any legislator that dares defy their mandate.

So try this one on for size, in Michigan: licensed parents are even allowed to carry guns into their kids’ primary and secondary schools, even to school board meetings. How would you vote, if you were a board member, when an angry parent with a weapon berates your latest motion? Take this little lesson from a board meeting in one local Michigan district. “A gun brought to a school in the Huron Valley district was legally worn by a parent recently… While he is allowed to wear it by law, the issue has many parents fired up…It wasn't hard to determine who was in favor of a law allowing a person to carry a gun on school property.

 “Most of them did so openly at the Huron Valley school board meeting… Their position is clear… ‘We are not people that anyone needs to worry about,’ Johnny Rorig [one gun-toting parent] said. ‘We've gone through the background checks, we've done the research we know what we're doing when it comes to firearms, we're trained.’

“[The sight of parents with guns] isn't welcome by everyone… ‘If I am bringing elementary kids, kindergartners and first graders from lunch and I see men or women with guns on their hips - I'm going to be alarmed,’ said one teacher… Even if the letter of the law is followed, Walsh says if a gun is brought on Huron Valley school property during normal hours, it triggers a lockdown and a call to 911.

“Some feel that goes too far. ‘I hope you guy rethink your lockdown policy,’ said Rob Harris, gun rights supporter. ‘It's really going to scare those kids if they are hiding under their desks every single day.’…It is a topic that ignites a passion for one thing both sides seem to agree on, the safety of kids.” MyFoxDetroit.com, November 3^rd. 

NRA gun policies appear to kill a whole lot more Americans these days than the aggregation of current American casualties outside of the United States, military and civilian, from terrorist or insurgent attacks and Ebola combined. I keep reading and rereading the Second Amendment and the historical context (where volunteers and local militia simply wanted to keep the weapons they needed immediately at hand). It just doesn’t remotely begin to say what the NRA says it means:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I’m Peter Dekom, and I wonder where folks think these words got that NRA meaning?