At the Salt Lake City International Airport, a sign on the door warns people not to bring firearms into the building. Yet just a few minutes away, it's easy - and perfectly legal - to stick a loaded pistol into your pocket or purse and walk into a public school.
Ah here we go. First, we're confronted with the All Powerful No Guns Sign. We all know the A.P.N.G.S. is the pinnacle of military technology adapted to police use and has prevented every violent episode in all the gun free zones where it's posted. Empowered by Harry Potter's wand, these signs would surely keep the children safe if posted in schools. Violent maniacs do not respond to a show of force or the threat of force, but rather quiet, rational pleas by posted notices.
These signs obviously protect the airport, since it would be impossible to carry a firearm in the presence of the sign. That poor school.
Supporters of a new law that loosens restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons in Utah assert that allowing teachers, janitors, and other school staff to carry such weapons will add to school security. It will deter or prevent Columbine-like tragedies, they say, even though those carrying concealed weapons don't have to tell anybody they're doing so and even though they aren't required to have any special training.
If they have to inform anyone they've chosen to carry a concealed weapon, that utterly defeats the point of concealing the weapon. The whole point of concealing the weapons is for security and retention coupled with the desire to not interrupt the educational environment.
As this is done voluntarily, I don't particularly see why forcing volunteers who are providing this service for free to some arbitrary feel good standard of training is necessary. Does the author of this article really think that most people who carry a concealed weapon do it flippantly, without any regard whatsoever? That's like supposing that most people who own scuba gear have no clue how to use it.
Opponents say it's just as likely that letting untrained persons carry guns in schools will lead to accidents or the theft of weapons. School security, they say, should be left to professionals.
If the weapons are anonymously carried on one's person and only produced in emergencies, I don't see where it's logical to suppose accidents and thefts will result. Furthermore, there is no evidence of concealed weapons carriers causing accidents or having their weapons stolen en masse in any place where it's legal to carry a concealed weapon. This is just a piece of emotionally charged drivel.
Furthermore, the teachers, administrators, and others on campus ARE the professionals. These people are adults, not helpless children who can't handle a simple machine like a firearm. You trust them to drive cars don't you? Those are statistically much more dangerous than any firearm.
What's more is that if there is a need for this kind of security measure, these are are the people who are in the best position to make that determination. They are in the school day after day, and they are the most likely to be the first responders to any incident, as well as the most likely to realize something is wrong in that environment.
Utah's new law went into effect last month. It's left school administrators scrambling to figure out how to deal with it legally and politically before school starts in September. And it has law- enforcement officials worried.
How is there anything to deal with? The law seems pretty clear to me. I would like to meet these "worried" law enforcement figures.
One such officer is Lt. Todd Rasmussen of the Granite School District Police Department in Salt Lake City. With many large families in this predominately Mormon state, Utah has the youngest average age in the country. This school district alone has nearly 70,000 students and nine high schools.
"I don't think this is any place for a weapon to be," he says.
The size of the districts is meaningless. Let's see this opinion substantiated.
Taking care of vandalism, theft, school fights, growing numbers of gang-related incidents, attacks on teachers, and other offenses is a big job. Adding more guns into the mix, even if carried by normally law-abiding adults, only adds to the potential for deaths and injuries, says Mr. Rasmussen. With two children of his own, he adds, "I don't want a gun in the school with them, whether it's [carried by] a teacher, a principal, a cafeteria worker, or whatever."
Yes because we all know guns magically turn "normally" law abiding adults into manic killers. Notice the use of that qualifier to imply that the presence of the firearms, despite being legally carried, will convert their users into people who will contribute to vandalism and attacks on teachers. Yes, teachers carrying concealed weapons will lead to more attacks on teachers... what kind of logic is that? Give me a break.
The debate over legally carrying concealed weapons has raged for years.
John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime" and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute argues that armed civilians - even in schools - deter crime. "Annual surveys of crime victims in the United States by the Justice Department show that when confronted by a criminal, people are safest if they have a gun," he wrote in the Los Angeles Times recently.
Not so, says John Donohue, professor of law at Stanford University, who has researched the subject for the Brookings Institution. In fact, he says, "criminals may become more likely to carry or be quicker to use a gun in response to increased gun carrying among prospective victims."
You know, I could just as easily present the Donohue quote first and then the Lott quote.
John Donohue, professor of law at Stanford University, says, "criminals may become more likely to carry or be quicker to use a gun in response to increased gun carrying among prospective victims."
Not so, says John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime", who has researched the subject for the American Enterprise Institute. In fact, he argues that armed civilians - even in schools - deter crime. "Annual surveys of crime victims in the United States by the Justice Department show that when confronted by a criminal, people are safest if they have a gun," he wrote in the Los Angeles Times recently.
All I have to do is transpose the order of the quotes to get whatever spin I want. This is much easier than actually reading the reports or research in question and trying to draw conclusions.
Unlike the local Roman Catholic and Episcopalian dioceses, which have publicly stated their opposition to concealed guns in schools, the Mormon Church has not taken an official position on the issue. But the church-owned Deseret Morning News has run a series of editorials against guns in schools. And polls consistently show that most Utahns (approximately 73 percent of whom are Mormon) want to ban guns in schools despite - or perhaps because of - the gun culture here.
What does the opinion of religious organizations have to do with this?
This is a politically conservative state, a place where "a Utah Democrat is essentially a national Republican," says one of the relatively few activist Democrats. Still, the state legislature - which meets in a capitol filled with the history of pioneer settlement - tends to reflect an attitude even more conservative than its constituency on such issues.
What? This is so full of meaningless buzz words and claims I can't even decipher the intended point.
State legislators recently crafted a law that would make it harder for Utahns to get initiative measures on the ballot here. It's aimed specifically at those pushing for a referendum on the state's concealed-weapons law.
Evidence please?
The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence rates Utah as one of the worst states "at protecting its children from gun violence."
Ah yes here's a balanced source of information.
"Utah does not hold adults responsible for leaving loaded guns around children,
I doubt that. Wait until some negligent idiot lets a child under his care stumble across an improperly stowed firearm. I guarantee you charges will be filed, as will a civil lawsuit by the child's guardians.
does not require child-safety locks to be sold with guns,
Why should they? I keep my guns in a residential security container. I don't need such locks.
and does not have any handgun-safety standards,"
What the hell does that even mean? In addition, I promise you that if a gun maker makes an unsafe product, they will be sued for lots of money in short order. Such a law would be unnecessary.
states the gun-safety organization.
Gun prohibition = gun safety?
"Utah also forces police to let people carry hidden handguns in public, even into schools, and does not require background checks at gun shows."
Just like it forces police to allow for peaceful assembly? Just like it forces police to read arrestees their Miranda rights?
Also, I challenge anyone to go to a Utah gun show and buy a firearm from a dealer without a federal background check.
The state's current law on concealed weapons went into effect in 1996. In essence, officials may not deny an application for a concealed weapons permit except for good cause - a felony conviction, for example. A short safety course is required, but the applicant does not need to demonstrate any proficiency with a gun.
Sounds too restrictive to me.
Since then, the number of people permitted to carry concealed weapons in Utah has risen from about 15,000 to nearly 57,000. Of those, about 1,000 have lost their license - in many cases for violent crime, including sexual assault and murder. Still, the total number continues to go up by about 1,000 a month.
So them getting the license has what to do with their crimes? Also, 1 in 57 people is less than 2%. Can you say statistically insignificant boys and girls?
What is it about the politics and culture of Utah that allows guns in schools?
Part of it is the Western attitude toward firearms - the right to keep and bear arms with as little government interference as possible. It also may have to do with Utah's history of violence, including the murder of Joseph Smith, founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the Mountain Meadows massacre of non-Mormon emigrants from Arkansas on the way to California in 1857. Utah is one of the few states where those convicted of capital crimes can be executed by firing squad.
Ever since emigrants from back East headed out the Oregon and Santa Fe trails 150 years ago, people in the rural West - particularly in the intermountain states - have thought of guns as a natural part of life and society.
Hunting, target shooting, and owning guns for protection are commonplace.
"Roughly 55 percent of Utahns have a gun in the house, including me," says Marla Kennedy, executive director of the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah.
Yet, she says, "We're not the wild West anymore....There's just places where guns ought not to be."
Utah's influence in such matters may manifest itself back in Washington.
Earlier this month, US Senator Orrin Hatch (R) of Utah introduced legislation that would revoke Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns, end registration requirements for ammunition and other firearms, and remove bans on the possession or carrying of weapons at homes and workplaces.
Senator Hatch says making it easier for law-abiding citizens to have guns in the nation's capital would help reduce the city's high crime rate. He calls his bill the "D.C. Personal Protection Act."
Noting that the 17 Senate cosponsors of Hatch's bill received more than $225,000 in contributions from the gun lobby during the 2002 campaign, critics call it something else.
"It's another example of the gun lobby using senators as puppets to fulfill their legislative priorities," says Chris McGrath, executive director of Handgun-Free America, an organization dedicated to banning handguns nationwide.
All drivel proving nothing, just stating opinions which are not substantiated.
I particularly like how when citizens who want to preserve their gun rights, they become some kind of faceless "Gun Lobby", as if though it's some kind of special interest. The Brady shills are "safety advocates" and those who oppose them are some big evil "lobby".
