ThinkProgress and MSNBC are losing their collective collectivist minds because South Carolina State Senator Lee Bright, who is challenging current incumbent Lindsey Graham for his U.S. Senate seat, still believes that the 2nd Amendment really means what it says.
Bright was on the radio with Alan Colmes to discuss his proposed bill, the “South Carolina Gun Safety Program,” (DOCX format) which would “focus on learning how to properly use a firearm, safety techniques, and the history of the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms.”
The legislation is relatively sedate, merely providing the opportunity for schools to offer at their own discretion a 1-credit-hour class to learn the history and intent of the Second Amendment, along with basic firearms safety and marksmanship training.
The course’s curriculum would be developed by “South Carolina Law Enforcement Division in consultation with the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, and private firearms organizations and may include materials provided by private youth organizations.” In other words, the same people in law enforcement who develop the training for the state’s concealed carry permitting and the people who develop the state’s hunter education training would work with training organizations like the Appleseed Project, National Rifle Association (NRA), and the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) to develop the coursework. It truly sounds like a “best in the nation” proposal, bringing together a diverse group of expert organizations to provide an optional course for South Carolina’s students.
Of course, gun-hating, citizen-controlling progressives can’t let that sort of common-sense proposal stand unchallenged, but they couldn’t face it honestly either… people might actually accept that it is a very reasonable and optional proposal that no school has to teach and no student has to take.
So since there was no real argument for Colmes to make against Bright’s legislation, he played to his progressive audience and went for shock value, baiting Bright for his support of the Second Amendment.
Colmes and Bright had the following partial exchange, according to ThinkProgress, which is infamous for ripping conversations out of context:
COLMES: So [teachers] shouldn’t have machine guns?
BRIGHT: I would think a teacher protecting a school grounds should be able to carry whatever she can carry legally.
COLMES: So should machine guns be legal to carry?
BRIGHT: The Second Amendment is pretty clear. It says the right to carry arms should not be infringed. […]
COLMES: So you should be able to have any gun you want?
BRIGHT: Well, I don’t see how the government can regulate it.
In other words Bright believes that Constitution and Bill of Rights mean precisely what they say.
STOP THE PRESSES!
We can of course have a discussion on which arms are most appropriate for the defense of schools—many districts around the nation are debated open-carrying uniformed guards versus training faculty and staff for concealed carry, and at least one district is purchasing AR-15s—but it is indisputable that guns in the hands of trained faculty and staff give schools options, options that they can’t have if there are no guns in the hands of anyone but a school shooter.
As we learned vividly in the Pearl HS shooting in Mississippi in 1997 and the Arapahoe HS shooting in Colorado last month, the faster an armed faculty or staff member can close with a school shooter, the faster the situation will be resolved and lives may be saved. Luke Woodham surrendered after being approached by his armed Assistant Principal, Joel Myrick at Pearl High School, and Arapahoe shooter Karl Pierson committed suicide after being approached by armed school resource officer Deputy James Englert. There were less injured and killed at Arapahoe because Englert has his weapon on him and was able to close down on Pierson just 70 seconds into what the young communist had planned on turning into a mass shooting with five different locations in the school targeted.
Is a selective-fire weapon the best choice for the defense of a school? That’s not a decision I’m qualified to make, and Colmes and his fellow gun-haters are far less qualified than I am. That is a matter best left up to school districts, and Bright is 100% correct in stating that it isn’t the federal government’s call to attempt to legislate the matter.