Thanks to Mr Heidelberger for the update. He didn't appreciate the pun in the linked news item. I hope my excessive alliteration doesn't offend. Mr Heidelberger thinks the vote to kill was a good idea. I've asked him why shouldn't a responsible, law-abiding adult be able to carry any place he has a right to be. I'm looking forward to an answer.
Here's another SD blogger's (Sibby Online) take on the committee vote.
2 comments:
I'm actually rather agnostic on the issue. Gun issues just don't leap out as a legislative priority to me. I hunted when I was a kid, but guns aren't a big part of my day-to-day life. I did get crabby, though, when I taught HS English and was not permitted by my employers or the law to carry my Swiss Army knife on the job. And don't get me started about TSA and the Patriot Act (now there's a real threat to constitutional liberties).
I don't have a big problem with law-abiding citizens carrying weapons; I've also noted the argument that the US has more school shootings than Israel because Israeli teachers are armed and trained to use those arms. But note it's the teachers, not the students. Would weapons in everyone's hands deter crime, or would it just create a bigger public safety problem (one person draws, everyone starts shooting, and the cops don't know good guys from bad guys)? That argument is still open.
I do have a problem with the SD Legislature expending lots of energy on this bill while leaving bigger issues like education until the last minute. The law was mostly political bluster, not a real stand for rights. There's already a mechanism for allowing guns on campus: university presidents can extend permission to anyone they choose to carry firearms on campus.
Oh, and I don't really mind puns or alliteration (remember, English teacher!). But I had to take my shot at the groaners our local media were putting out. ;-)
Post a Comment