Bills? Some Congressmen to Carry GUNS
By Jane Dudley | Monday, January 10th, 2011 | PolicySome congressmen to carry guns while in their home districts? Yes, according to this in the National Review. I find this both delightful and horrifying. Delightful because anyone in danger should be able to defend himself or herself in this country. Also delightful because if there were a visibly heavily armed Eric Cantor that would cause a lot of liberals to become dizzy from the general outrage. [Note: Cantor is NOT listed in that article - only Chaffetz of Utah and Schuler of NC. I suspect that as Majority Leader he has plenty of security now, which is appropriate for anyone holding that title]. Also delightful because… picture your congressman or -woman. Now picture that person with a serious firearm. In some cases, the picture alone is comedy gold.
Horrifying because – people, what? Have we turned into a Wild West movie? Will every home district meet and greet look like an episode of Gunsmoke? Will extremely gun-shy people [actually shy of guns, in this case] complain that they are afraid to go to such a meeting because they are made too uneasy by their armed congressman? What about people who normally carry – can they attend such a meeting?
“Armed congressman”? What on earth have we come to that that’s a phrase? Sure, if a congressman fancies firearms and likes to carry, fine, no problem. But for congresspeople to feel the need to do that? And what about ill-trained congressmen? What if a congressman that is inexperienced at personal self-defense decides to carry, goes to some meeting carrying, then some nutcase grabs the gun away from him and turns it on him?
In my opinion common sense would say:
1. Congressmen and -women who like to carry and are well-trained can and should do carry.
2. Those who would rather not carry can request some extra security (yes, I think it’s fair to pay some for that – how much from whose budget I don’t know).
3. Try harder to get treatment for those who seem scary-crazy – as in, psychotic, not “someone who disagrees with me politically but seems personally agreeable and peaceable.” This is not easy, but to me it makes sense.
Gun-toting congressmen? In America? In the 21st century? Not such a good sign, America!
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Jane Dudley has enjoyed conservatism and photography for over 30 years. After looking around at the mediocre state of affairs of political photography as it exists on the right, she decided to start making better images, to document Virginia Republicans and to inspire them to make more of an effort to put a fine face on their fine ideas. She is a graduate of the University of Virginia and works in new media.
Comments
7 Responses to "Bills? Some Congressmen to Carry GUNS"
I believe our senior senator has been armed for a number of years. Doesn’t seem as funny on him as it would on Cantor or Goodlatte.
Having gut toting Congressmen doesn’t bother me. That one got shot does. I have carried to meetings with my Congressman (although he was a candidate and an elect then) and to meetings not carrying. Seemed fine either way to me, although I prefer to be carrying nearly all the time in public.
I am not comfortable with the people saying that “authorities” need to find the “scary crazy” people and treat them. I fear that going too far in that direction would potentially infringe on natural rights.
It should be their choice on what they as our representative feels comfortable doing. They have the right to bear arms and protect themselves. It’s hard to be a public servant these days when death threats come from those they serve.
I wonder how hard it would be to smile, shake hands and kiss babies with a gun. Good point about a crazy taking the gun away and hurting them with it too. I grew up with guns as my father always had a 357 Magnum and numerous rifles. He taught me how to shoot and how to hunt from a small child. As an adult I have chosen not to have them in my house because of raising five sons and a daughter. Too many friends who lost children to accidents (kids sneaking and playing around with them)and one to suicide from guns in the house.
No matter what, it should be their choice. Not ours.
The article seems to mention only concealed carry, so these Memebers aren’t going to be showing their guns. Thus, there really isn’t any reason to think people should be “gun-shy”, that a person can come up and grab the gun easily, or that a Rep would be untrained. Rep’s still need to abide by the law, and in both states individuals must apply for a permit and that usually requires taking some type of State approved class.
Both Reps mentioned in the NRO article have their Concealed Carry permits, and so have met the requirements of their respective state’s.
I am sure that there are more Reps and Senators then we are aware who carry concealed. I am pretty sure that Rep. Hostettler carried concealed when he was in Congress, and as mentioned above Sen. Webb does as well.
As a former cop and long time concealed gun carrier, I feel that I have a certain amount of expertise in this area. In thirty years on the police force, I was shot at twice. In both cases, return fire was impossible because of innocents in the area. This is the case in any crowded area. How many people are willing to maim or kill an innocent bystander in order to take out a gunman? Unless you are standing right next to the shooter, it is unlikely that you can stop him with your own weapon. Even then, it is risky.
Another very important point. Police are trained to keep their heads in a firefight. Trust me when I tell you that, your adrenalin will completely re-adjust your thinking process when you are suddenly afraid for your life or the lives of others. The average person will not think logically in this circumstance. I know of nothing more terrifying then the sound of bullets, that are meant for you, hitting the wall behind where you stand. As I said, Been There!
In Va., a citizen with no criminal record can obtain a concealed weapons permit after taking a safety course. The student does not experience the thrill of being shot at in these courses. The course will not tell us how we will react in a life threatening situation.
Naturally we wear our weapons for personal safety. However, if a thief points a gun at you during a robbery, will you be foolish enough to go for your own? Sometimes, people are just at the wrong place, at the wrong time. We cannot stop living life over the fear of what might happen.
Legitimate points, Been there. There are many people with concealed carry and I too fear eventually there will be an innocent shot. We do have friendly fire that happens with trained combat shooters, after all.
That said, your worst case scenario excludes the best case. Some people are in the right place at the right time. Some average and untrained people at times, out perform professionals. It comes from an unexplained instinctual drive in rare individuals.
Look at Daniel Hernandez, that in a situation that imperiled the lives of his and others, reacted beyond belief to save others including Giffords. I heard a woman grabbed the ammo clip as the lunatic tried to reload. What about the people that tackled him? Clearly there were capable people within point blank range.
I am sure there have been some incidents where somebody carrying concealed never drew their weapon. Perhaps they, like you suggest, were not in a real position to act. Maybe they froze. We will never know.
A robber has his gun pointed at you – should you draw yours? No, you don’t want to test the theif’s willingness to kill. Nothing you have is worth dying for.
I think a lot of people already know they wouldn’t perform well and choose not to arm themselves for that very reason. Some just couldn’t bring themselves to kill anyone, even a murderer in the act.
Where it can also be a danger is when Law Enforcement arrives to a scene and has to decide which gun wielding person is the law abiding citizen and which is the criminal/terrorist. There was an incident in Norfolk where a plain clothes officer was shot and killed by Norfolk Police. So, you are correct in saying that citizens can create problems for themselves if they act.
Still, don’t you think a law abiding citizen wanting to go home to their families will only draw a weapon as a last resort anyway? I am sure the vast majority will continue not to be armed. Even those that do, haven’t “stopped living life out of fear”. They simply made a choice that provides more options and bears possible consequences.
Btw, Been there, thank you for your service in protecting the public. As rewarding as service in that capacity can be, it is a job I personally would not want to have. I am sure that you have witnessed the ugliest side of humanity, something I am fortunate enough not to have had to endure.
Been There,
I echo, thank you for your service. Law enforecement is not a field that I have been called to, and I am thankful for those that are called to it.
An interesting, and not widely reported fact. One of the gentleman who helped subdue the Arizona shooter was legally carrying a concealed firearm at the time of the shooting. He heard the shots, ran towards the shots, and by the time he got there saw that the shooter was out of bullets. He proceeded to assist in subduing the shooter, and never brandished his own firearm.
The interview is here:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/01/08/exp.az.zamudio.witness.cnn?hpt=T1
I don’t know what his prior background is, but his actions were most likely the best actions to take given the situation he was faced with.
-Ryan
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.