Is it disgusting or mind-boggling? Or both?

How can it possibly be that on the same day the NC House votes overwhelmingly to institute roadblocks to voting a House committee approves a bill to expand gun rights? I mean it, how can that be? The Second Amendment to the US Constitution is the only amendment that includes the words “well regulated” and yet it is the only one House Republicans treat as inviolate. This is an outrage. If this bill passes the full House and the Senate, every single person who votes for it will have deliberately endangered every single person on every single public campus in this state.

Against the advice of the university system, the House Judiciary Committee voted to allow people with concealed carry permits to bring their guns onto campuses across the state. The bill would require the gun owner to leave the gun in his or her car while on campus. Guess what? Stealing things from cars in one of the most common campus crimes. Who says? Oh, only the head of security for NC State.

“Jack Moorman, chief of the North Carolina State University Police Department, also said allowing guns on campus was a bad idea. Thefts from cars are one of the most frequent crimes on campus, he said. As well, the campus has experience with concealed handgun permit holders who were either carrying on campus illegally or acting out in other ways.

‘We had an individual who communicated threats to the President of the United States on our campus, and he actually had a CCW permit,’ Moorman said. ‘So, some of these individuals who have CCW permits are not people we feel comfortable about carrying a firearm on our campus.’”

Want more?

“Andrew Moretz, a lobbyist for the University of North Carolina system, said that campus police are trained that nobody should be carrying a weapon on campus. That means even a well-meaning civilian who retrieves a firearm from a car and attempts to help in an emergency might be confronted by a confused police officer who could consider him or her a threat.

‘We see it as more of a problem than a solution,’ Moretz said, speaking on behalf of police chiefs from across the 16 UNC campuses.”

That’s right, there is no training for campus police to deal with armed citizens, be they criminals or good Samaritans. Who will pay for the retraining of those officers? How much will it cost? I don’t expect an answer, I’m sure the House Judiciary Committee doesn’t even know. It may be the job of committees to vet legislation before it reaches the full chamber, but we know how seriously that duty is taken these days. It doesn’t matter anyway because the UNC system has seen its budget slashed year after year and whatever the price tag is, we know they can’t afford it.

There is ample evidence that more guns mean more gun deaths, and there is no question that our nation has a gun violence problem. We average 289 gunshot victims each day in this country, resulting in 86 deaths. The Boston Marathon bombings were 10 days ago and the relentless media coverage of the alleged perpetrators has left little room to talk about the almost 3000 people who have been shot since that gruesome attack. You want terror? We’ve already got it, we just don’t care. The North Carolina House Judiciary Committee really doesn’t care. They want our children to be less safe than they are now. Why?

The day 20 first-graders were literally shot to pieces in Connecticut, I looked into my son’s eyes and told him that will never happen to him. I was lying and someday he’ll know that. I don’t have to endanger him further by sending him to campuses where I know people are armed. Who would choose that? Late adolescence is not a period known for impulse control and good judgment. It’s an intensely emotional time marked by a seize-the-day mentality and experimentation with a variety of substances. That’s a developmental fact. Adding weapons to this heady brew cannot actually result in greater safety. It simply cannot. It is time to start lobbying House members to vote against this stupid and reckless bill. Every parent and every restaurant-goer in this state needs to get to work now.

11 Comments

  1. Doug

    April 25, 2013 at 11:26 am

    It is actually disgusting and mind boggling that you read something in the Constitution that is not there. You need to expand your quote of the amendment, and maybe think of what the use of a word was when the document was being written. The second amendment in whole says:
    “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.”
    See, the regulated applies to Militia…..what was the typical use for regulated in the context at the time you may ask (unless you are a leftist)? Regulated was in the context of well trained, ready to fight, in good order:

    The Random House College Dictionary (1980) gives four definitions for the word “regulate,” which were all in use during the Colonial period and one more definition dating from 1690 (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1989). They are:
    1) To control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc.
    2) To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc.
    3) To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation.
    4) To put in good order.
    [obsolete sense]
    b. Of troops: Properly disciplined. Obs. rare-1.
    1690 Lond. Gaz. No. 2568/3 We hear likewise that the French are in a great Allarm in Dauphine and Bresse, not having at present 1500 Men of regulated Troops on that side.

    So…just one more mind boggling hysterical rant by the gun grabbers? I think so…disgusting….definitely

  2. James Protzman

    April 25, 2013 at 12:17 pm

    To the staff at Progressive Pulse.

    I am so sorry you have to put up with the kind idiocy spewing forth from the likes of Doug. I’m even sorry that the rest of us who visit your site have to do so as well.

    Ironic that the rabid right wants to allow guns everywhere except in the gallery of the General Assembly. They fear for their lives … probably for good reason.

  3. david esmay

    April 25, 2013 at 12:41 pm

    What is disgusting and mind blowing is puerile twisting of the intent of the 2nd Amendment by right-wing nuts. The right to keep and bear arms, a well regulated militia, and the necessity of keeping a secure state were implemented to put down revolts like Shea’s Rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion, and slave revolts, not to guarantee the right of average citizens to own military weaponry. The liberal writers of the Constitution could not have foreseen the development of modern firearms and would be appalled by the conservo-fascist gun nuts of today.

  4. Doug

    April 25, 2013 at 1:28 pm

    Interesting you guys automatically write off other views as idiocy. An open mind is quite rare around here. You guys think your twisting of phrases is the only view….well regulated could only mean that those founders were thinking in the sense that we are right now…..and if someone disagrees and provides salient points you resort to calling names rather than a serious rebuttal.

    I for one would like to express my sympathy for the staff the pulse and many of the readers for your lack of critical thinking skills then. I would like to know how it is to be able to tralala around assuming no one else should have another view and able to attack them if they do.

  5. david esmay

    April 25, 2013 at 2:29 pm

    Not other views, just your’s Doug. Regurgitated 1950′s jingoism and vacuous platitudes get old fast.

  6. Doug

    April 25, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    dave,
    get that tin foil hat back on, they are going to come get you if you don’t.

  7. RJ

    April 25, 2013 at 4:14 pm

    As I’ve said the last couple of days: this site needs a better troll. But I can’t seem to help engaging him/her/it. I can’t wait to see his last word/burn on esmay.

    And on that line… Doug, do you think the founders, scared to death of a large standing army (see Amend. III), (1) designed Amend. II to ensure that an efficient fighting force could be raised quickly in times of danger OR (2) designed it to ensure that I can bear arms? Or is it both?

    We’ll chat after your answer.

  8. Doug

    April 26, 2013 at 9:28 am

    Well Ammendment III was put in place to stop the forced quartering of troops or quartering in your home without legal compensatoin not to prohibit a standing army….obviously since we have one.

    As far as Ammendment II both purposes could be accomplished. If a quick mobilization is needed the people have their weapons, are used to using them and are ready to go if needed. Also, if an enemy force is considering invading they would certainly give pause due to the fact that a significant part of the population is armed and ready to resist.

  9. NoGOPinNC

    April 27, 2013 at 11:32 am

    Hey guys give ol dougie a break…at least you can have differing opinions on here..just try it on art popes page civitas…they not only do not allow dissenting opinions they will track you down and threaten you for using facts against them?.that is the type of govt. bootlickers like Doug prefer

  10. Doug

    April 29, 2013 at 9:47 am

    I actually prefer opposition that can actaully think rationally. As short as the supply is here, it does happen on occasion when you get a commenter that can go without using words like “bootlickers” and “troll”. If you do not want to be presented with facts here….then you can block me or try to come track me down if you have the guts.

  11. James

    April 29, 2013 at 7:41 pm

    The words “well regulated” apply to the “militia”.

    2nd A: 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.

    We need a well regulated militia – to keep our free state secure – the people natural rights to have and transport weapons can not be taken away by the government.

    “A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others, for essential, particularly for military supplies.”- George Washington