Finally, some Common Sense Gun Legislation: Congressman Moves to Have “Gun Free School Zones Act” Repealed

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

gun-free-zone

On December 8, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) announced that he will be chair of a new Congressional Second Amendment Caucus.

In a press release, Massie said:

“The recent election results present us with a new opportunity to advance pro-gun legislation and reverse the erosion of the Second Amendment that’s occurred over the last few decades. I look forward to working with the new President and this determined group of conservatives to promote a pro-gun agenda.”

Members of the Second Amendment Caucus will draft and sponsor pro-gun legislation, and will invite firearm experts, constitutional scholars, and pro-gun groups to speak to the caucus.

The group is already taking action: on Monday, Rep. Massie introduced legislation to repeal the law that banned possession of firearms in school zones across the United States.

Titled H.R. 34, the Safe Students Act, the bill was originally introduced by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) in 2007. It repeals the Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) of 1990, which makes it “unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.” In 1995, the Supreme Court held the GFSZA unconstitutional, which prompted Congress to amend the bill in 1996. The Supreme Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of the amended Act.

Gun-free zones are ideal locations for wannabe mass shooters to implement their nefarious plans – criminals are more likely to choose settings where they are not likely to be confronted with an armed person who may stop them.

While the Gun-Free School Zones Act may have been well-intended, take a look at what has happened since its implementation:

mass-shootings-increase-once-GFSZA-passed

Image credit: Bearing Arms

In a press release posted on January 5, Massie said:

“Gun-free school zones are ineffective. They make people less safe by inviting criminals into target-rich, no-risk environments. Gun-free zones prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and create vulnerable populations that are targeted by criminals.”

“A bigger federal government can’t solve this problem. Weapons bans and gun-free zones are unconstitutional. They do not and cannot prevent criminals or the mentally ill from committing acts of violence. But they often prevent victims of such violence from protecting themselves.”

We dodged a bullet (pun intended) with Hillary Clinton’s loss of the presidential election. Her gun control agenda was exposed in leaked emails published WikiLeaks, and there’s no doubt she would have worked hard to stop this common-sense legislation from passing.

Clinton, and other gun-control advocates fail to understand two undeniable facts: 1) there are far too many guns in circulation to ever round them all up, and 2) criminals don’t care about laws.

The sad reality is that shootings do happen in schools, and likely will continue to happen.

Arming teachers and school staff or having armed guards on school grounds has prevented mass tragedies in many cases.

Here are three examples.

At Arapahoe High School in Colorado in 2013, an armed deputy sheriff on site stopped a heavily armed student from causing more deaths and injuries. Unfortunately, the gunman – Karl Halverson Pierson – did kill one person, a 17-year old student named Claire Esther Davis. When confronted with the armed officer, Pierson turned his gun on himself and took his own life. The entire ordeal was over in 80 seconds.

A 14-year old student opened fire at Price Middle School in Georgia in 2013. One boy was shot (and thankfully survived). The shooting was stopped when an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away from the student.

In 1997, Luke Woodham stabbed and bludgeoned his mother to death at home before opening fire at Pearl High School in Mississippi. Woodham killed two students and injured seven others, and was headed to the middle school across the street when he was stopped by Assistant Principal Joel Myrick, who had retrieved his .45 caliber handgun from his truck. Myrick confronted Woodham and detained him until police arrived.

According to Bearing Arms:

Eric Dietz, Ph.D., former director of Homeland Security for the state of Indiana and a 22-year Army veteran, now a professor at Purdue University, researched mass shootings from the 1950s on. He discovered that only two of them occurred where guns are legal to be carried. Think about that: every mass shooting in the United States since the 1950’s except two have occurred in gun-free zones.

In 2016, an analysis of mass shootings since 2002 in the US also found that most shooters prefer gun-free zones. The Heritage Foundation compiled the findings of that research, which was conducted by Stanford University Libraries, into this graphic.

DS-mass-shootings

The Daily Signal provided further explanation of the findings:

The dataset includes 153 incidents going back to the beginning of 2002.

Research done at the Heritage Foundation found that fifty-four of the 153 incidents (35 percent) involved a shooter targeting people at random who were not relatives or adversaries of the attempted murderer.

Of the 54 incidents that fit these criteria, the shooter chose locations where guns were banned 37 times (69 percent). Alternatively, the shooting occurred where guns were legally allowed only 17 times (31 percent). See graphic.

Of the 17 shootings that occurred where citizens could legally carry firearms, 5(29 percent) were ended when the gunman was stopped or slowed by a gun permit holder’s intervention.

As I wrote in 2013 in Why More Gun Control Won’t Prevent Mass Shootings:

More gun control, especially in the form of enhanced background checks, is never going to prevent mass shootings (or any shooting) from happening if the will is there. Enacting more stringent background checks is a feel-good measure designed to appease the public and make it appear as if officials are taking action.

Criminals will always have guns. More gun control regulation will only hinder law-abiding citizens from being able to protect their lives and those of their families – and perhaps, from protecting your life as well.

While some schools are focusing on teaching students to hide and lock classroom doors in the event of a mass shooter event, others – like some in Arkansas, OregonIdaho, and Oklahoma – are arming teachers and school staff, and are training them in how to actively stop such incidents and protect themselves and their students.

Rep. Massie’s bill is a step in the right direction. Let’s hope it passes. Either way, teaching children what to do if they find themselves in an active shooting situation is crucial to their survival. For more on that, please read Teaching Your Kids How to React to an Active Shooter.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Lily Dane of The Daily Sheeple.

Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
[yottie id="4"]

41 thoughts on “Finally, some Common Sense Gun Legislation: Congressman Moves to Have “Gun Free School Zones Act” Repealed”

  1. Guns aren’t the problem. Violent and low IQ immigrants, and our own blacks, with guns are. What on earth will it take for people to wake up? How long until we take back our countries and make them safe, sane and prosperous again?

    1. Don’t forget the shooters who, almost invariably, turn out to have been on some sort of prescription psychotropic drug for a long time prior to the incidents. By the way…just as an experiment, I ordered one of my guns to go out and shoot something. It just laid there and did nothing, regardless of how loudly I yelled at it. I concluded that it was an inanimate object and totally insentient, thus incapable of acting on its own. So…why can’t liberals come to the same conclusion? Note: that was a rhetorical question to which we all know the answer by now.

      1. A friend of mine went so far as to carry his gun out to the front porch and set it in a chair – give the gun plenty of targets to choose from. . .

        Amazingly and Fantastically, it failed entirely to react to the target-rich environment in which it found itself. . .

        I think the lefties may have been pulling my leg about the cause of mass shootings. . .

        1. The problem is obvious: it is a left-wing peacenik gun which voted Democratic, and which is both target-confused and ammo-confused as well: it is unsure about who to shoot, what rounds to use, and has personal issues about why it should shoot at all. You didn’t see this right off?

          1. I had an inkling. . . but not sure enough to bring it up to my friend. . .

            I’ll mention it to him next time we talk.

          2. Don’t forget its conflicts about ammunitional appropriation. Were these rounds made by slave labor? Were the jobs making them paid at least $15/hr? And so on. Not to mention, inquiry about whether or not the test ranges were on Native land where their ancestors lie buried.

      2. Did you try beating it? Maybe it’s just lazy and needs to be properly motivated.

        Or it could be in a coma.

        Did you try another gun? That one might just be a Gump-gun or made in another country and didn’t understand you.

  2. This all seems like such a no-brainer to me.

    Who do bullies go after? The weak and defenseless. Show a little backbone and the bully usually backs down.

    Who do criminals target? The weak and defenseless. Show a little backbone and the criminal usually backs down.

    They are the same types of people. They prey on the weak and defenseless.

    1. I learned at a very young age – the way to keep yourself from being bullied is to go full-on Viking all over the first poor sucker to try it. (maybe that’s why I prefer swords and axes?)

      Destroy him, the rest (other than the terminally stupid) tend to get the message. . .

      1. Heh-heh. “The terminally stupid.” I know some of those folks. Unfortunately, I’m still waiting for the “terminal” part of their stupidity to kick in.

        1. It does kick in, on occasion – look at the “gun crime” stats for places like Chicago, Detroit, or D.C.

          You’ll see the terminally stupid over-represented.

          1. I was more referring to the terminally stupid I personally know. I seriously have no idea how they survive.

          2. I wonder how some of these dipshits can remember how to breathe, as well. . .

            Then I remember that breathing is served by the brainstem – which is all that most people ever use anyway.

        1. But then you miss out on the satisfaction of feeling their bones break beneath your fists. . . or the screams as your blade parts their flesh. . .

          Good times. . .

  3. I am not a proponent for any gun-free zones. I would carry everywhere if possible. But I do find it odd that one of the incidents used to illustrate the increase in school shootings since the passage of the GFSZA is Sandy Hook… which was reported to be a hoax on this same same website. Does that mean it is no longer a hoax because it can be used to further a favorable agenda?

    1. Well to be fair, that graph is not DaySheep’s doing; they just reposted it from a ‘site called Bearing Arms….and even removing Sandy Hoax from this equation doesn’t change the numbers enough to matter, the point is still well-taken.

  4. “Quemadmoeum gladuis neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.” (A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer’s hands.)
    – Lucius Annaeus Seneca, circa 4 BC – 65 AD

    “Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms”
    – James Madison, considered the father of the US Constitution
    “[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”

    – Zacharia Johnson, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788
    “During World War II, six million Swiss had guns and six million Jews did not.”
    – Author unknown

    “…sort of like the people who repeat foolish slogans like “guns kill” – as though guns sprout little feet when no one is looking and run around shooting people all by themselves.”
    – Doug Casey, financial columnist

    “If you don’t have to give up your car because others drive drunk with theirs, then why do you have to give up your gun because others commit crimes with theirs?”
    – Anonymous internet wag

    “When a crime is committed, does the gun go to jail?”
    – From BrotherJohn.com

    “Let’s stop playing games. The problem is people, not guns. Our society suffers from a deficiency of personal responsibility – not from an excess of personal freedom.”
    – Star Parker, African American writer and commentator

    “The horrifying truth is this: we live now in a culture that not only does not respect life, but discards it like trash — not only at the beginning of life, but also at the end, and every place in between. What has happened to us?”
    – Catholic Deacon Greg Kandra

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.'”
    | – HL Mencken

    “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”
    – Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

    “The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … [T]he advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any…”
    – James Madison, 1788

    “Blaming Newtown on guns is like blaming Chappaquiddick on the Oldsmobile.”
    – Ben Crystal, Personal Liberty News
    “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
    – Robert A. Heinlein

    “Eliminate guns and they go to bombs, eliminate bombs and they move to poison or something else. Bad people are just bad people.”
    – “David,” otherwise anonymous internet poster.

    “The trigger is in the head, not the gun.”
    – Michael Howell

    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.”
    —Cesare Beccaria, 1738 – 1794) Italian criminologist, jurist, philosopher,
    politician, widely considered as the most talented jurist and one of the
    greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment.

  5. a.human-right.com

    The gun banners hate effective weapons because armed people are less afraid of their own government and less dependent on it.
    It is no surprise that totalitarian governments world-wide keep most of their populations disarmed. They know from history that even a handful of armed people can stand in the way of genocide and check its advance. It does, however, take well-armed and well-trained people to stop evil in its tracks. Although most civilians’ training level is sufficient only for a last-ditch stand, that stand is much better done with a rifle than with a shovel. I would guess that those relatives of mine who got turned into lampshades during WW2 did wish for a way to fight back, if too late.

    1. This “last ditch stand sufficiency” pushed the fucking british back into the atlantic, partner!!!! Do not under estimate the ability of guerrilla warfare against tyrannous govts!

    2. If you believe the lampshades story then I’ve got some primo beachfront property in Nebraska I’d like to sell you.

  6. Common sense? Absolutely! Needed? Absolutely! An idea whose time has come out of necessity? ABSOLUTELY! Which is precisely why it absolutely will not pass….Remember what we’re dealing w/ on Krapitol Hell, and nearly all State Krapitols, too.

  7. That depends on how it’s used. I reckon if you whack someone with a good, sturdy metal sign it would be pretty effective at stopping them.

  8. Hillary and other progressive democrats want victims to be able to sue the gun manufacturers. Obviously the gun manufacturers are not responsible for what someone does with one of their firearms.
    What should be happening is victims should be able to sue those who lost gun free zone signs, like you said, and also they should be able to sue the politicians who made it difficult or impossible for them to buy a firearm or carry a firearm in a place where such a shooting or other life threatening crime occurs that could have been prevented if the victim was armed.

    1. what is really scary is that those who blatantly disregard the constitution by infringing upon the right to bear arms are not jailed and summarily executed for treason.

  9. Notice how all of the things that are pro-gun that need to happen involve the removal or repeal of anti-gun legislation?
    The best pro-gun policy is no gun legislation. There is no need for gun control laws. The Constitution already has the best gun control law. It’s called the 2nd amendment.
    And I know, everyone who is anti-gun will think that’s crazy. “No gun laws! There will be shootouts happening in the streets everywhere! It’ll be like the wild west!”
    But there is no need for a bunch of useless and redundant laws that do nothing to make people safe. We don’t need a gun law to prevent people from using a gun during the commission of a crime when the crime they are committing is already illegal. It’s already illegal to shoot people (unless you are defending yourself). It’s already illegal to murder people, regardless of whether you use a gun, knife or any other weapon, or no weapon at all. And none of these gun laws do anything to make people less likely to be the victims of gun crime. And there is nothing that anyone can be a victim of that isn’t already illegal.
    Furthermore, all gun control laws target the innocent, law abiding citizens, not the bad guys. And this applies to ALL gun control laws. It’s almost as if they were intending to target the innocent, law abiding citizens.
    Every time there is a shooting that makes the headlines, and the anti-gun crowd springs into action to politicize the incident, every single one of their anti-gun proposals is something that targets legal gun sales and legal gun ownership. None of these anti-gun politicians ever suggests anything that will actually address the problem. And it never occurs to them that there are already a ton of laws that are never enforced that could have either prevented the shooting, or reduced the number of victims. And of course there are always a bunch of laws, usually gun control laws, that if they hadn’t been in effect, it could have prevented the shooting, or reduced the number of victims.
    And now it seems that all they need to do to be pro-gun is to undo all the anti-gun laws that were put in place by the anti-gun politicians. There is no need to try and pass pro-gun legislation. All legislation is inherently anti-gun, even with the best of intentions. Laws such as reciprocity for concealed carry licenses from state to state sound like good ideas, but they aren’t. The right thing to do is to remove the requirement to have a license to carry a gun from all states. Problem solved.
    In New Jersey, to carry a gun you need to have a license, and a good reason, and approval from the state. New Jersey is a “may issue” state on paper, but in practice they are a “no issue” state with few exceptions. A woman requested a permit to carry because her estranged ex-husband was a danger to her and she felt like he was going to kill her. She was stabbed to death by him while waiting for the permit. She had already waited for over a month when she was killed. My point is that instead of trying to pass more legislation to solve this problem, they need to repeal all these useless laws entirely. Getting rid of these laws is the solution, not adding to them.
    These laws are putting otherwise innocent people in jail while actual criminals are getting away. Someone who got an antique flintlock pistol was arrested, someone who inherited a 70 year old M-1 rifle is being hassled by the government, and many other non-criminals along with them, and meanwhile real criminals are mostly unaffected. If you look at the list of people who were arrested under these laws you will find that almost all of them are regular people who just got caught up in the wide dragnet of these ambiguous laws. If these laws are supposed to stop bad guys from getting dangerous weapons to commit crimes with, then why are all these old men and clean cut kids being arrested for having antiques and collectibles? Where are all the gang bangers with the automatic weapons, and why aren’t any of them being arrested under these laws? Clearly these laws don’t work. And furthermore, they are actually harmful to the innocent people who haven’t done anything wrong.
    There needs to be a nationwide movement to rid ourselves of these unConstitutional, ineffective, useless and dangerous laws. We need to remove or repeal all gun laws. These laws are doing more harm than good.
    We need to remove the anti-gun laws. Do not pass pro-gun laws.

    1. How about governing oneself? If you have the normal neuromotor and cognitive development of a 6-year-old, you’re halfway there already. Enormous strides since birth, when one is so helpless that all one can do is breathe!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.