All the "pro-gun" Democrats on US Senate Homeland Security Committee vote against amendment to end gun-free zones in US Post Offices
I watched the C-SPAN rebroadcast of Thursday's Homeland Security Committee's vote on amendments. Unfortunately, the "pro-gun" Democrats unanimously voted against ending the gun-free zones in US Post Offices. And the reason for keep gun-free zones at Post offices is what? Does Fedex or UPS have a problem with permit holders? Do other places of business report problems with permit holders? The answer to all those questions is "no." Yet, this is how the 4 "pro-gun" Democrats voted:
Mark Prior: No
Jon Tester: No
Mark Begich: No
Heidi Heitkamp: No
The vote was 9 against - 6 in favor. If just two of these "pro-gun" Democrats had supported the amendment, it would have passed.
Over all, all the Republicans who voted supported ending gun-free zones at post offices and all the Democrats voted to keep them. Even John McCain voted to end these gun-free zones. The one exception to this pattern was Porter from Ohio (R) who was absent.
Democrat Mark Begich tried to give Democrats cover for their opposition by having a vote on allowing permit holders to lock their guns in their cars while they are in Post Office parking lots, though Begich himself said that his amendment was merely codifying recent court rulings on this point and not changing anything.
UPDATE: An additional discussion is provided here.
Mark Prior: No
Jon Tester: No
Mark Begich: No
Heidi Heitkamp: No
The vote was 9 against - 6 in favor. If just two of these "pro-gun" Democrats had supported the amendment, it would have passed.
Over all, all the Republicans who voted supported ending gun-free zones at post offices and all the Democrats voted to keep them. Even John McCain voted to end these gun-free zones. The one exception to this pattern was Porter from Ohio (R) who was absent.
Democrat Mark Begich tried to give Democrats cover for their opposition by having a vote on allowing permit holders to lock their guns in their cars while they are in Post Office parking lots, though Begich himself said that his amendment was merely codifying recent court rulings on this point and not changing anything.
UPDATE: An additional discussion is provided here.
Labels: GunFreeZone, postedgunfreezone
posted by John Lott at 11:30 PM
6 Comments:
A "Pro 2A Democrat"? No such animal when it comes to a legislative vote, in my experience.....
Life and death situations trump stupid ill conceived laws. A sizable proportion of Concealed Permit holders might just overlook the "gun free zone" ordinances. I personally would rather have a gun in my pocket than be completely defenseless where ever I happen to be - in a mall, at a restaurant or at my neighborhood post office. Do we lose the right of self defense when we enter certain places? I don't think so!
I don't respect any law that doesn't respect me.
after all this time the phrase "Going Postal" still resonates with too many.
And some school administrators/teachers/etc in Illinois(?) are raising objections to the now-required "No Guns" signs because they depict - gasp - a firearm! How can they expel a student who draws his police officer parent with a firearm if the school itself posts an image?
Depends on the state. In Virginia all they can do is ask you to leave if you get caught. In a Federal building it is a felony
This is a curious situation that's been batted around by attorneys for quite some time. The signs in post offices state that weapons (including guns) are categorically banned, which tracks with the pertinent CFR. However, the actual law, which the CFR is supposed to be based on, contains an explicit exemption for carry pursuant to lawful purposes, which would clearly include self-protection. (Post offices are not federal buildings and have been covered by a separate statute for quite some time.) The actual case law is a pretty poor guide, since the extremely small number of convictions are all cases in which the defendant was engaged in some other problematic or outright illegal actions. To the best of my knowledge there isn't a single case in which someone has been convicted for simply carrying a gun into a post office during the course of his or her normal activities there.
Post a Comment
<< Home