Following the attack on Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the crowd that gathered to participate in her “Sidewalk Congress,” a renewed call, as always in the wake of another American shooting tragedy, went up around Arizona and elsewhere for a tighter, and more sane, gun policy.
It’s well known that Arizona is the darling state of NRA, led by its governor Jan Brewer, herself the proud holder of an NRA A+ rating and it’s legislator’s most fanatic gun-rights spokesman, senator Russell Pearce.
In the aftermath of the Tuscon shooting, an event with added horror by the fact that a member of congress was attacked and the gathering was seen as grassroots democracy at its best, there was a sense that maybe, just maybe, this was the act of senseless gun violence that would change hearts and minds, at least in Arizona, where Gabrielle Giffords serves the state’s 8th District.
No such luck. Three weeks after the shooting, with Giffords making a remarkable recovery but still far out of the woods in Houston, Governor Brewer announced that she was seeking ways to “liberalize” Arizona’s gun-rights policy. Under other circumstances and in most states, one with a more humane life outlook could depend on at least a breath or two of opposition among ruling party members who might possibly see the outrageous absurdity of calling for more, not fewer, guns, and to be allowed in more places, without permits, than ever before. . . .
But Arizona isn’t any other state and the legislature still governs with an old-west mentality. In late 2009 the state passed its concealed weapon without permit ruling. It followed up with some extra crazy sauce by ruling that any citizen could carry a concealed weapon into a bar, but to make sure a patron with a few too many didn’t pull a gun and shoot someone, the law stated that it was illegal to drink in a bar while carrying a concealed weapon. What one might be doing in a bar if not to drink was never addressed.
The latest to come out of the Arizona state capital is the capstone of fear that drives the gun proliferation advocates. Senator Pearce proposed on February 7th, with typical backing of the republican majority, that guns be allowed in all public places. To make sure cities across the state don’t pass their own counter measure , the proposal would require an owner of a public establishment to either hire armed guards or install expensive metal detectors. The financial burden on business owners opposed to the law would, of course, be prohibitive, and the responsibility of every municipal government to protect its citizenry from gun packers in a public place would be taken out of their hands. For Pearce and his ilk there’s no such thing as too many guns. If everyone’s carrying, the logic goes, then we’re all safer. That’s why Pearce violates his own governing body’s prohibition of guns in the legislature with a don’t- ask-don’t-tell policy on guns in the legislature.
The next target is schools. If the current proposal to allow guns in all public places becomes law, teachers, and, very possibly, students, will be armed. The sky’s the limit in Arizona on “2nd amendment gun rights. “ NY mayor Bloomberg pulled a sting operation recently that revealed an Arizona gun show vendor was okay with the “buyer” telling him he didn’t think he could pass a background check. For his efforts the mayor was denounced by Governor Brewer and Pearce for meddling and going outside his authority.
Meanwhile Gabbie Giffords goes through a very long and very difficult rehabilitation in Houston. If only the state she represents could honor her–and perhaps help her–with a gun policy that might prevent another Jared Loughner from taking out his anger on innocent people .




8 Comments

I’m surprised their not trying to rename the state Tombstone as they act like their at the OK Corral.
In my view, which pisses off people on both sides of the gun control debate, American citizens DO have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms. On the other hand, government has the duty to protect its citizens.
Just like we have the right to free speech, but we don’t have the right to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Clearly, to me, government has the right, and the duty, to limit firearms access, to regulate and license it. But an outright ban on firearms, including handguns, is as unconstitutional as it is impractical.
What should those limits on the right to bear arms be? I don’t know, but I’m willing to debate it. The fact that many liberals ignore is that NRA members are not in the habit of committing gun crimes. That’s just true. In Tucson, a man with a legal, concealed gun tackled the gunman instead of drawing his weapon and firing so as not to endanger the innocent. That speaks well of him, and his gun safety training, which may well have been provided by the NRA(it’s consistent; I went through a couple of NRA gun safety courses and they DO teach that.)
There is a logical argument for allowing teachers to carry guns in schools, at least some of them. There’s also a good argument against allowing them to do so. Students? Nah, they’re minors. Sorry kids, but you’re just not growed up enough. There is also a logical argument for prohibiting guns in places where alcohol is consumed. This was even true in the Old West. Check your guns in at the door, boys, or better yet, leave them at home.
As a political strategist, I find it ill-advised for progressives to attack the NRA and any pro-gun legislation in a kneejerk fashion. You can argue for limits and restrictions, but don’t go around calling for outright bans, which will never happen, or accusing gun advocates of being crazed at the drop of a hat. Remember, once you get the gun issue off the table, many of them are very sympathetic to other progressive causes.
It is unfortunate that there are so many single-issue voters, but that’s just the way it is now.
When I saw the camel and horse mounted thugs whipping the protesters and watched about 100 of them torched with molotov cocktails, a strange thought cascaded through my senile pate. ” When they set up a republic with ordered liberty, they will allow the private possession of fire arms.” Boris Yelstin after seeing how close the old guard came to restoring Communism contacted the NRA about a weapons trainning program for his citizens. If in down town Phoenix a pro immigrant rally was attacked by the Minutemen, maybe the first attack would be met with stones and broken bones but the second would be repulsed with shot gun fusilades In America the possibility of the second prevents the first..What happened to the congresswoman, the judge and the child was horrible but also the payment we all have to pay for not being run down by government sponsered secret thugs and keeping our freedoms.
Zenostoa
Good points from both you and Ohio Gringo. My Pop and I used to switch sides every few years on the question of gun control and after a few decades of batting the issue back and forth we came to similar conclusions.
I think its prudent to require extensive training on all firearms but handguns should be made exceedingly difficult to acquire. Rifles are used primarily for hunting and would be valuable in resisting the depradations of an oppressive corporate govt. Hand guns are just too easy to use in street crime and in moments of rage that end in family tragedy. I am in emergency medicine and by far handguns are the cause of fierearm tragedies. Often as simple as a child getting his or hands on them.
I hated the tragedy in Tucson. Gabby Giffords is apparently a very nice and engaging person.
But let’s not ignore the fact that she is a blue dog and opponent of all rational gun control as far as I know. Nobody deserves what happened to her of course, but if you are going to pursue a stupid and mindless policy you shouldn’t be too terribly surprised when that policy comes back to bite you, a la Jim Brady.
I’ll tell you right now, though. I would trade my own life to have that little girl back. Few people are more hard bitten than myself on a lot of issues until it comes to the kids.
Do you honestly believe her gun control views or Arizona`s had any effect at all on that bald babbling baboon? Do you think John Lennons killer or George Wallace`s assailiant or ever Reagan`s shooter cared a dam about gun control or ever even thought about it. So you believe having her head blown off was Almighty God`s just punishment for her refusing to back the Brady Bill or any other peice of Manhatten inspired madness.Keep talking such trash and you will become the poster child for the NRA.
Zenostoa
I believe you need to read my piece again. There is no mention of a ban on guns, nor is there any mention of the NRA and its supporters other than the fact the Arizona governor has an A+ rating from this organization. What I address are political policies pertaining to the extraordinarily nonrestrictive gun laws of Arizona and the refusal of the Arizona governor and republican legislature to even consider “limits and restrictions” of weapons in the aftermath of the Tuscon bloodbath. It might well be true that there is no connection between a pro gun-rights policy and gun attacks by deranged people. By the same token if we aren’t willing to even face the possibility that more restrictive gun laws might save lives then we will continue to whistle into the wind.
Thanks
Never said anything about God’s just punishment. But yes I DO think that refusing to restrict the availability of hand guns to people who have a history of mental derangement is a great way to see people like John Lennon or George Wallace or R. Reagan or that little 9 yr old girl to get shot and killed.
Try reading things a little closer and thinking before you write such illogical, mindless drivel. “Poster child for the NRA.” F****in’ stupid.