GUNS
ON CAMPUS AND AT WORK
By
John Longenecker
March 16, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
Many
Trustees are now beginning to realize that no one can take your place
as the first line of defense � one of the best kept secrets of the anti-gun
movement.
When
any organization or agency weighs private or corporate property rights
against armed self-defense, as many in this examination are, the guns
have to win because the Second Amendment is absolute and property rights
are not.
The
Second Amendment is absolute because it backs citizen authority in this
country as it must. Any regulation of weapons seeks to challenge the
lethal force which backs citizen supreme authority in this country.
Any such view is a European view, and not an American view. This citizen
as supreme authority is not checked at the Admissions Office or the
front door of someone�s home or workplace. On private property, one
may not own another human being and hide behind property rights. Lethal
force backs citizen authority, and this does not change by where you
are.
More
are coming to understand that any agency banning weapons cannot offer
something better in protecting students, employees, visitors or staff
than the armed person already there, and already possessed of all legal
authority to act. Citizen authority is the key, and that authority trumps
the appointed authority of trustees.
This
legal authority is already well established in law, and the increasing
acceptance of the Castle Doctrine clarifies and cements it [Internet
Search term Castle Doctrine]. Yes, more are getting it: armed citizens
are more in the public interest than silly, anti-violence policies.
Part
of the wrongful interference comes from trustees and others who opine
on how they disagree, but we are not working for them, they work for
us, and they interfere with a right secured by law. Tortious interference
litigation could result in a blowback where they are found liable after
having opposed armed self-defense for so long. Litigators, call your
office.
In
the final analysis, more trustees are getting it: they are looking at
increasingly affirming the will of the people, which is not about carrying
guns, it is the will of the people to see official adherence to oath
of office, and that includes protecting the second amendment and recognizing
citizen authority to act when facing grave danger. Oath of office has
long been the desire of both sides of the aisle for a very long time.
Advertisement
Armed
citizens who travel to and from work also contribute to the community
by their mobility while armed, in their alertness and perhaps even willingness
to aid another, also permitted by law. Are they playing Police? No,
the Police are authorized by the very people who carry, the citizens.
Police derive their authority from the people, so the people are hardly
playing cop by exercising their own higher authority in the public interest.
Is someone playing doctor by giving first-aid or the Heimlich Maneuver?
My book Transfer
Of Wealth elaborates the CPR Corollary � the identity of values
between Citizen CPR and Citizen CCW.
What
we�re going to see is a humiliating defeat for the anti-gun crowd, because
the dire predictions of gun ownership in large numbers will not come
true anymore than they have over the past decades.
All
of the murderous shootings are done by criminals, not good citizens.
Crime guns are obtained illegally to begin with � through illegal channels
and then used in illegal possession � already breaking 17 or more laws
en route to their planned crime, according to some experts. It goes
to show that not only do the dire predictions never come true, but that
20,000 gun laws don�t work to stop crime. They only interfere with stopping
crime and generate high statistics of broken-hearted citizens they can
point to. People are beginning to get it: being unarmed and discouraged
from resisting in authority make up the bulk of those numbers.
The
humiliating defeat for such ideas will come in the reduction in violent
crime by the widespread announcement of concealed carry laws. Any serious-minded
approach to fighting crime will meet with resistance of organizations
more interested in permitting violence that defeating it, you can be
sure of that. But still, any serious-minded approach to fighting crime
by way of increasing concealed carry will work. It has worked in forty
states.
First,
campuses, workplaces, public buildings, airports, churches and more
places presently forbidding carrying of handguns must repeal their gun
bans. We need to stop the after-the-fact response from eclipsing the
during-the-fact authority to respond � the armed citizen. [Think Citizen
CPR when first responders are not on scene. Think armed citizen when
first responders are not on scene.]
Second,
they must publicly announce this repeal. The thugs will get the message.
Third,
rinse and repeat.
The
shootings are not the worst worry of crime: there will always be the
non-gun crimes of knifings, the beatings, the rapes, strong-arms, robberies,
and of course, the silent abductions. Gun bans do not address these
by the millions across America, and millions are talked out of their
authority and resolve to resist. Gun control policy is adverse to the
interests of the United States, as it forces students and workers to
choose between Felony and Funeral.
|
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
|
Concealed
carry does address all of these, by official recognition of citizen
as supreme authority and being armed to back that authority. [Internet
Search Term: police have no duty to protect individuals.]
For
any serious-minded approach to fighting crime, officials must affirm
citizen as supreme and affirm the lethal force to back it not only against
violent crime, but also against the boondoggles of anti-violence policies
that touch every anchor institution in America with indictments of hate
and violence.
� 2008 - John Longenecker
- All Rights Reserve
