|Action||Promulgation of new regulation banning concealed firearms in executive branch agency offices|
|Comment Period||Ends 1/27/2016|
(1) Some public buildings obviously require that EVERYONE from the outside, INCLUDING but not limited to on-duty and off-duty law enforcement officers, CCW permit holders, and honorably retired law enforcement officers with former employing department-issued CCWs check their guns in gun lockers that MUST be provided. Examples include local jails and state and federal prisons. (2) There are other buildings where a case can be made against civilians with CCWs being allowed to enter with firearms, such as court houses and law enforcement offices, and the offices of government executives, officials, and legislators; that said, no one should be required to be a sheep (soft target), everyone has a right to self-defense, and therefore, if we are disarming folks, such buildings should have armed law enforcement officers (or at least armed, well-trained and competent security officers) protecting all entrances, patrolling the exterior and interior, should have metal detectors, should check ID of all persons entering, should issue badges to persons entering, should have central CCTV monitoring and dispatching, and should have individual gun lockers where civilian CCW permit holders can secure their firearms. (3) In buildings, other than schools, where resources do not allow for 24/7 armed protection of the public and do not have gun lockers, such prohibitions should not apply, because, again, everyone has a right to self-defense, and no one should be required to be a sheep. Criminals and terrorists just LOVE soft targets. A good example of such an area would be a visit to a public rest stop building in an isolated area. Remember, a 75-year-old senior citizen or a 5 foot tall 95 pound female, armed with a firearm and trained how to use it, has at least an even chance against a big, strong, athletic and vicious attacker, whether the attacker is armed or not. There's a reason they call a gun an equalizer. (4) Schools that are protected by competent, armed security or police (such as qualifed retired peace officers, or peace officers of a school district police department, or school resource officers employed by local law enforcement agencies), should have fenced perimeters, security posted at all entrances, and gun lockers for civilian CCW holders. Entry by armed on-duty and off-duty law enforcement officers, as well as armed honorably retired peace officers with CCW permits issued by former employing departments, should be allowed. (5) Entry to all schools, colleges and universities by armed on-duty and off-duty law enforcement officers, as well as honorably retired retired peace officers with CCW permits issued by former employing departments, should be allowed. (6) More and more law enforcement officials are stating that, in the case of active shooters that are terrorists, they do most of their killing before law enforcement arrives. And in the case of criminals that prey on the public, law enforcement response can vary from a few minutes to an hour or more, dependent upon the agency, location, and availability of officers. You may be killed in an instant, and you may not have the luxury of waiting even a few minutes. If a person considering this issue puts him or herself into a situation where they are sitting in a diner drinking a cup of coffee when a mass shooter starts shooting up the place, would that person prefer playing "dead" under a table and hoping the shooter doesn't approach and finish them off, or would that person prefer to shoot back? Would that person prefer being a sheep waiting for the police to arrive, probably a dead sheep if there wasn't a police officer nearby, or would that person prefer to be a sheep dog and shoot back at the wolf? PERSONALLY, I PREFER THE ROLE OF A SHEEP DOG! The aforementioned ideas are thoughts that come to mind; that said, this is a complex issue and much thought should be given to it before making decisions, but keeping in mind that the human right of self defense and the Second Amendment trump political considerations.