I read Mr Reed’s article in the Florida Today online,(I dropped my subscription to the liberal FT in 2000), and again, as in many past articles, I find facts lacking.
“If Brevard commissioners want to let groups exercise their rights to insult radicals — and won’t provide armed security — it’s only fair to let meeting-goers fend for themselves.”
Well, well, well,…I didn’t know that ACT’S mission was to “insult” terrorists. Ah yes, it’s all about being fair, isn’t it Mr Reed! I believe that ACT’s mission, in part ,was to educate myself and other citizens about exactly what Islam is.. and is not. According to ACT’s website, in part, their mission: “ACT for America is the nation’s largest non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to promoting national security and defeating terrorism.”
If you have watched, the overwhelming worldwide terrorism is through and by Islam associated groups, so I applaud ACT. How about you Mr Reed?
“More guns, less shooting? Sorry, but most states — including Oregon, Colorado and Arizona — already had those laws at the times of mass shootings, which have increased in frequency to one per month, the FBI found.” Mr. Reed, sorry, but that is not quite the whole story…again.
To be more factual, let’s take a look at what OPENCARRY.ORG says actually exists in Oregon:
“Oregon is a traditional open carry state. However, their preëmption statute only covers concealed handgun license holders from city or county passed bans against loaded firearms in public places. To our knowledge, only the cities of Portland, Beaverton, Tigard, Oregon City, Salem, and Independence have passed loaded firearms bans encompassing all public places, and other cities have passed bans specific to Parks. Also, all “public buildings” are also off limits throughout the entire state unless you have a concealed handgun license.”
So yes, there are open carry gun laws for concealed permit citizens…but with restrictions; which Mr Reed handily fails to mention. Also, another fact that Mr Reed ignores and fails to mention is that the murders occurred in GUN FREE ZONES. So having the law on the books, but no guns on the property, because as liberals say, “it makes everyone safer”, is an important point that was ignored and I believe should have been mentioned.
“Amid the gun hoopla, it’s the one policy change that might actually affect security, for better or worse.“
In my 62 years of driving a car and the thousands of times I have fastened my seatbelt, I actually needed my seatbelt only twice…but I still put it on each time I get into a car. The result…I stayed safe and unharmed.
So my thinking as far as being armed; which could of been of great benefit in saving lives at Sandy Hook Elementary, is like me seatbelt experience:I would rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. Just saying!
“A Right Unexercised is a Right Lost”