Gun free zones...

Discussion in 'Second Amendment & Legal' started by BLCKWLF, Feb 16, 2012.

  1. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    Will be followed by my next paper/letter with my proposed solution...

    “Gun Free Zones”
    Imagine. You are standing outside your local grocery store waiting to meet your Representative. All of a sudden, a man opens fire, shooting your Representative in the head right before your very eyes. Then he turns his gun on you, standing there, completely defenseless, you close your eyes and wait for the inevitable. Believe it or not, this did happen, and even worse, this took place at a store with a “No Guns” policy. Yet, Jarred Loughner still had a gun. Shockingly, that small sign in the window that prohibited weapons, didn’t stop him. Not only do “gun free” zones not prevent shootings, but they violate our rights as citizens, and they are a liability to our safety.

    In 1776, our Founding Fathers fought against the British Crown. In rebelling, they drafted a Declaration of Independence, in which it pronounced that all men have the rights of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” ("Declaration of independence," 1776). Later on, in the development of our great country, we drafted a Constitution. In this Constitution, as the Second Amendment, we wrote:
    “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.” ("The Bill of Rights," 1789)
    It does not say, ‘except in certain places’ or ‘unless told otherwise’, it says “shall not be infringed.” Even our State Constitution of Arizona states:
    “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired”. ("The Constitution of Arizona," 1912)

    These “gun free zones” are unconstitutional and infringe on our rights of self-defense and to bear arms. In fact, they go against the very wishes of our founding fathers.
    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." (Jefferson, 1764)
    These laws leave the good, innocent citizens at risk of being the next target. They disarm the innocent and empower the criminal.

    ​These “gun free zones” don’t stop violence from occurring. They don’t prevent shootings. Think as if you were a criminal, would you be more inclined to attack someone in a place where guns are not allowed as opposed to where you know they might have a gun? Exactly, it’s a no brainer question. Let me demonstrate something real quick; five of the most deadly shootings in the United States:
    “Nov. 5, 2009: The Army says 13 people were killed and 30 wounded in a shooting rampage at its Fort Hood base in Texas.

    April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before committing suicide in the school's library.

    April 16, 2007: Cho Seung-Hui, 23, fatally shot 32 people in a dorm and a classroom at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, then killed himself in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

    Feb. 14, 2008: Former student Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, fatally shooting five students and wounding 18 others before committing suicide.

    January 8, 2011: Jared Lee Loughner killed 6 people and injured 14 outside a local Safeway.” (Reed, 2009)
    All of these shootings occurred in “Gun Free Zones”. In none of these horrific events did the perpetrator decide not to go through with their heinous actions because of a little sign that reads, “No Guns”.

    ​These “No Gun” signs that these companies, schools, and businesses put up, are a liability. They strip a basic right from honest citizens and expose them to be a potential target. They create a defenseless environment. Some of these places put up adequate security measures with metal detectors and armed security on site. These places, such as the airport, or the Court House, have made a reasonable effort to protect their customers. However, some places, such as schools and local businesses, don’t provide adequate, or in some cases any, security measures for their guests. The core ideology behind the second amendment is the right to self-defense; these “Gun Free Zones” strip you of this God-Given right in exchange for nothing. No security, no peace of mind, no safety. In fact, in 2002, a bill in Arizona was submitted called the “Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act” which states that if you create a “Gun Free Zone”, and a crime is committed in said zone, you are liable for any harm done, provided they can prove that if they had a firearm that they would have been able to prevent the incident. ("The Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act," 2002)

    We, as citizens in America, hold our rights and privileges close to our hearts. They are the very core of our nation and define us as citizens. When our Right to Free Speech is threatened, we strike back immediately. When our property is searched or seized without warrant, there in an outcry. When our right to Self-Defense and to Bear Arms is infringed we have a duty to act on it. There are threats to our Life, Liberty, and our Pursuit of Happiness. There are threats to our rights; threats to our safety. We have to act, but how do we regain our rights that have been stripped away from us for so long? What do we need to do?
     
  2. Sarabian

    Sarabian Slightly Opinionated

    Anywhere that has a sign that says "Gun Free Zone" or tell me I'm not allowed to have my gun inside either gets ignored or gets told that if I can't carry in there then I take my money elsewhere. In most places those signs have no force of law behind them, so are moderately laughable anyhow.
     

  3. jimmyalbrecht

    jimmyalbrecht Glockn Rollin

    Very well put, but whatever you are using to format your text does not show up properly, at least on my computer. Apostrophes and punctuation of the the like doesn't show properly but as ’
     
  4. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    Emailed and copied and pasted on my phone using the forum app.
     
  5. Glock22Gen3

    Glock22Gen3 New Member

    225
    0
    No weapons allowed don't mean crap in my state. They can ask me to leave and if I don't I can be charged with trespassing. One more reason why to conceal carry!
     
  6. I agree with the idea that if they dont want you carrying, they can shove it and you can take your business somewhere else :)
     
  7. "The supposed GUN FREE zone is a lie".....

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEbXuwDiUSo[/ame]
     
  8. Unfortunately in my state they do. Wish I lived just a tad more south in GA.:(
     
  9. jimmyalbrecht

    jimmyalbrecht Glockn Rollin

    Right now, there is a Bill, HB981, in Georgia which would let you carry literally everywhere except for courthouses! I hope this thing passes :)
     
  10. Most of my friends live in GA.......you guys suck!:p
     
  11. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    My Solution to gun free zones in todays society. This paper was written at a college assignment about an issue within our state, the state of Arizona. I do believe that this is a federal matter and that the following ideals should apply to the whole United States. You have permission to copy any portion of this paper with proper citation (eg. 'Maxwell Herzog, 2012').



    Currently there are several threats to our second amendment rights as citizens of the United States. One of the biggest threats, right now, is ‘gun free zones’. These ‘gun free zones’ only disarm the innocent and open up an opportunity for violence by those who aim to harm others regardless of the law. When has a crime ever been deterred or a murder discouraged because of a small piece of paper in a window that reads “No Guns”? These zones are a liability to the safety of every one who is within them. If someone were to target people in one of these zones, and bring harm to these defenseless citizens, the establishment that implemented the gun free zone should be held liable for any use of weapons in said zone. While this epidemic of ‘gun free zones’ is a known issue, one that has been written and legislated about for years, it has yet to be put to rest. (Herzog, 2012).

    I propose the following ideas be put into law. First, that gun free zones be abolished with the exception that they will be allowed provided the zone is in a restricted area, has weapon screening equipment, and armed security guards. Second, that any such establishment that does have a gun free zone, meeting the requirements above, be held liable for any use of weapons inside of said zone. Third, that those few Americans that have undergone background checks, fingerprinting, and firearms training, including law enforcement officers and those citizens who have a concealed weapons permit, shall be exempt from the restrictions of ‘gun free zones’.

    There are a lot of places, businesses, and corporations that have no gun policies that really have no business in the area of guns. Not only do they prohibit weapons for no real legitimate reason, but they don’t provide any security or peace of mind in return. Places like restaurants, grocery stores, and other specialized stores and markets, have no reason to limit our rights as citizens. Airports, nuclear energy facilities, military bases, and courthouses, not only have a legitimate reason, but they provide security and screening at a reasonable level. I am in favor of Arizona House Bill 2729 that would prohibit all gun free zones if they do not adhere to the following requirements:

    1. The public property is a secure facility;
    2. Access is controlled or restricted to the general public by the presence of either a state or federal certified law enforcement officer OR an armed security officer and metal detection, x-ray, screening, or other weapon detection equipment;
    3. There are signs prohibiting the possession of firearms clearly posted at all public entrances;
    4. Secure firearms lockers are provided within reasonable proximity to the main public entrance, are under control of the operator of the property, and allow for immediate retrieval of the firearm upon exiting. ("Arizona: Legislation to," 2012)

    These requirements would not only provide security for guests but also peace of mind for armed citizens, that their guns are safe in a locked, insured safe, and for the unarmed citizens that their safety is taken seriously.

    However, even if these gun free zones follow these rules, they are still a liability. They are a liability for those people whose rights have been taken away while they are inside of that zone. These zones leave people defenseless, so in the case of someone bringing a gun or other weapon into said zone and causing harm, the establishment that put up the gun free zone should be held liable for any harm caused. By prohibiting the right to bear arms on their property and in return providing security services like the above bill requires, they are bound by duty to protect their customers/inhabitants from any harm. A bill was proposed in 2002 in the state legislature, HB2456 the Gun Free Zone Liability Act. This bill proposed the following:

    • "A. Any person, organization or entity, or any agency of government that creates a gun-free zone shall be liable for damages resulting from criminal conduct that occurs against an individual in such gun-free zone, if a reasonable person would believe that possession of a firearm could have helped the individual defend against such conduct. In the event the conduct is a result of a terrorist attack as federally defined, or adversely affects a disabled person, a person who is a member of a minority as federally defined, a senior citizen or a child under 16 years of age, treble damages shall apply.


    • B. For the purposes of this section, criminal conduct shall include offenses specified under this title in Chapter 11 (Homicide), Chapter 12 (Assault and Related Offenses), Chapter 13 (Kidnapping), Chapter 14 (Sexual Offenses), Chapter 15 (Criminal Trespass and Burglary), Chapter 17 (Arson), Chapter 19 (Robbery), Chapter 25 (Escape and Related Offenses), Chapter 29 (Offenses Against Public Order) and Chapter 36 (Family Offenses). 


    • C. For the purposes of this section, the term "gun-free zone" shall mean any building, place, area or curtilage that is open to the public, or in or upon any public conveyance, where a person's right or ability to keep arms or to bear arms is infringed, restricted or diminished in any way by statute, policy, rule, regulation, ordinance, utterance or posted signs.” ("The Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act," 2002)

    Personally, I believe in Constitutional carry, that you should not need any permits or licenses to carry a gun. However, given our current concealed carry permit system, I do believe that some changes need to be made, in regards to gun free zones. If anyone undergoes a background check, fingerprinting, and firearms training, and receives either a license to practice law enforcement or a permit to carry a concealed weapon, they should not be bound by the restrictions of any gun free zone, with the exception of those zones prohibited by federal law. These individuals that have undergone these training and background checks have been permitted to carry a gun. They have been thoroughly checked for any criminal activities, links to gangs, mental issues, drugs, and terrorist activities. As far as the government is concerned, they are the most civilized and disciplined of our citizen population. If this is true, then why can’t they carry in any of these gun free zones either? These aren’t the criminals we are so scared of getting shot by, are they? I think not. These select few who have undergone this process to get these permits and licenses should not be disbarred their right to arms.

    There may be many who disapprove of these laws and ideas, and it is their right to disagree. Some may say that there needs to be stricter laws, others may say that these are more strict. Others would like to argue that these gun free zones save lives, I would like to reference them, and you, to a paragraph in a previous paper I have written:
    “These “gun free zones” don’t stop violence from occurring. They don’t prevent shootings. Think as if you were a criminal, would you be more inclined to attack someone in a place where guns are not allowed as opposed to where you know they might have a gun? Exactly, it’s a no brainer question. Let me demonstrate something real quick; five of the most deadly shootings in the United States:

    • “Nov. 5, 2009: The Army says 13 people were killed and 30 wounded in a shooting rampage at its Fort Hood base in Texas.
    • April 20, 1999: Students Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, opened fire at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, killing 12 classmates and a teacher and wounding 26 others before committing suicide in the school's library.
    • April 16, 2007: Cho Seung-Hui, 23, fatally shot 32 people in a dorm and a classroom at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, then killed himself in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
    • Feb. 14, 2008: Former student Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, fatally shooting five students and wounding 18 others before committing suicide.
    • January 8, 2011: Jared Lee Loughner killed 6 people and injured 14 outside a local Safeway.” (Reed, 2009)

    All of these shootings occurred in “Gun Free Zones”. In none of these horrific events did the perpetrator decide not to go through with their heinous actions because of a little sign that reads, “No Guns”. “(Herzog, 2012).

    Honestly, I don’t foresee very many shortcomings or issues with these laws, besides suits in regards to liability the next time a shooting occurs in another ‘no gun zone’, and in that case, it’s what the company, business, or government deserves for infringing our rights.

    (too many characters)
     
  12. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    (continued…)


    The Constitution of the United States of America was written for a reason. Each and every amendment has a purpose; a purpose just as necessary as the next. While these gun free zones are not the only threat to our right to bear arms, they are a major one. In the past decades ‘gun free zones’ have succeeded in disarming innocent citizens from their right of self-defense. These proposed solutions are not definite, and are not foolproof, as no idea or law is, but they seek to restore the rights to hundreds of thousands of Arizonians and Americans; the right to bear arms. As our Founding Father and Third President of the United States once said, "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." (Jefferson, 1764). May our rights be restored, may our families be safe, and may God bless the Great State of Arizona and the United States of America.
     
  13. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    References
     
  14. Sarabian

    Sarabian Slightly Opinionated

    Awesome paper, blackwolffcf. Well thought out and written.
     
  15. BLCKWLF

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    Actually thinking about mailing it out to my reps and senators…
     
  16. Sarabian

    Sarabian Slightly Opinionated

    Please do. It would do nothing but help to have a well thought out piece for their consideration.