Another Example Of Why 'Gun Free Zones' Actually Aren't

When anti-gun zealots want to keep an area safe, they pass requirements that guns aren’t allowed. They see the signs warning people that firearms aren’t permitted as magic talismans that repel anything that fires a bullet.

Of course, more rational sorts recognize that these rules only apply to those inclined to follow the rules. For those who aren’t, they’ll try and find a way.

For example, there’s a rule that guns aren’t allowed in the secure areas of airports or on planes. How did that work out?

A former Delta Air Lines baggage handler was sentenced Thursday to 30 months in prison for allegedly smuggling guns onto passenger planes at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.

According to U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia Byung J. “BJay” Pak, 34-year-old Eugene Harvey of College Park as a Delta baggage handler used his security badge to smuggle guns to restricted areas at the Atlanta airport in 2014.

At food courts or in men’s restrooms on airport concourses, Harvey allegedly transferred the firearms to a former Delta employee, who hid the guns in carry-on bags and took them onto flights from Atlanta to New York. The guns were then illegally sold in New York, according to the U.S. Attorney’s office.

“Harvey breached airport security at one of the nation’s busiest airports in the world, when he smuggled illegal weapons – some of which were loaded – onto passenger planes,” Pak said in a written statement.

Harvey trafficked a total of 135 firearms between Georgia and New York, according to the U.S. Attorney’s office. There were 18 guns in the last shipment on Dec. 10, 2014, including seven that were loaded. Harvey was arrested on federal charges 10 days later.

The kicker here is that it’s entirely possible to drive to New York without hitting any checkpoints or vehicle searches. In other words, they could have transported these guns in a way that would have been far less likely to get them prosecuted.

But they did this because it was faster, most likely.

In the process, they showed just how effective gun free zones really are. After all, a commercial airliner is basically a mobile gun free zone, yet there were guns, some loaded, on airliners.

Look, I get the thinking. However, let’s also face the hard facts. If this could happen, so could a lot of other scenarios where bad guys get guns on planes. In particular, terrorists.

Meanwhile, everyone else is unarmed and unable to respond. Following 9/11, a lot of people aren’t willing to go along with the old suggestion of just playing nice with the terrorists. Why be docile if you may well die anyway? However, if faced with an armed terrorist, you don’t have a lot of choice, all because someone thought they knew better.

The truth is that “gun free zones” aren’t anything of the sort. Some call them “victim disarmament zones,” and for good reason. The predators will never give up their claws and fangs because of a sign. The only people who do are those inclined to follow the rules in the first place. The thing is, those who follow the rules in the first place can be trusted with anything and nothing will happen. Those who aren’t will use rocks to hurt people if they want to and don’t have anything better.

How is this difficult for some people to understand?