I’ve chided the state of Arkansas for needing to get their crap together, but at the end of the day, I still respect them as a solidly pro-gun state. Their mistakes are genuine mistakes, not an effort designed to undermine the rights of its citizens.

But one lawmaker in the state just made some proposals that seek to do just that.

With just weeks left of the legislative session, a Fayetteville legislator is showing support for gun-control measures.

One of three new firearm bills filed by Rep. Denise Garner, D-Fayetteville, would amend the controversial campus-carry law.

“It’s not a second amendment issue at all. It’s just that there are places that maybe should be gun free zones,“ Garner said. “My district sent me here to do this.“

My reaction upon reading this phrase.

Of course, it’s a Second Amendment issue. It’s always been a Second Amendment issue. Her attempts to change that are always going to be a Second Amendment issue.

But wait, there’s more.

One bill mandates universal background checks, another requires “restraint“ holsters for concealed carriers.

House Bill 1938 would amend the campus carry law, restoring the decision-making back to the university.

“My predecessor was the author of the bill that was pushed very quickly and not vetted. There are just a lot of unintended consequences,“ Garner said.

Yet Garner fails to mention a single one.

I can, though.

All that’s happened is that snowflake students and professors who are so fearful of anyone and anything are scared that they can’t viciously and physically attack their ideological opponents without having to consider someone being armed.

That’s it.

Criminals know they can’t assault students anymore and be assured their victims are unarmed–that was an intended consequence.

Potential mass shooters now have to consider concealed carriers should they plan an attack on a college campus–that, too, was an intended consequence.

Things like that are intended consequences. Allowing colleges to restrict the carry of firearms by law-abiding and permitted individuals will undermine those very things. I think Garner knows that, but with the timing of her bills being filed, she can signal that she’s a good Democrat without having to actually face the ramifications of her actions.

However, on the subject of campus carry, I want to point something out.

A Google search for “professor murdered by student” found no examples of students using lawfully-carried concealed weapons to kill their professors. In fact, I can’t find a single instance of a law-abiding student misusing a firearm at all in the 10 states that allow concealed carry on college campuses. I may have missed something, but it’s not likely.

So why the push by many states to repeal campus carry?

Easy. Anti-gunners believe colleges are their domains and they don’t like the Second Amendment showing up and reminding them that they don’t get to act with impunity. They’re worried about law-abiding citizens with guns because it means they can’t assault and destroy simply because they didn’t get their way. That’s what it’s really about.