Democrats, as a rule, don’t like guns. Unless you’re wearing a badge, they don’t want anyone with a firearm within 200 or so miles of them. It’s why they’re so vehement in their gun control policies.

The buildings in which they were are pretty locked down on the firearm front, too. The average citizen can’t carry a gun into the Capitol, for example. Yet there are exceptions to every rule. Members of Congress can carry a gun. After all, they don’t necessarily get Secret Service protection, but they do get an awful lot of death threats. They have reason to carry a firearm.

Yet they’re now trying to prevent that, oddly as control of the House seems to slip from the Democrats’ fingers.

However, not all Democrats are alright with this kind of thing.

McAllen Rep. Vicente Gonzalez is making clear his opposition to an effort by some of his fellow House Democrats to overturn a decades-old regulation that allows lawmakers to carry firearms on the Capitol grounds.

The soon-to-be three-term Democrat said Thursday that he trusts the existing policy.

“There is a clear history of members of Congress being targeted with violence,” Gonzalez, a relative moderate who this year won a closer-than-expected reelection race, said in a news release. “And if we want to carry for an added layer of protection, we should be able to do so.”

His argument is the flip side of the case offered by a group of more liberal Democrats, including El Paso Rep. Veronica Escobar, who are pushing for the gun ban.

“Threats of political violence are on the rise, and it makes all of us less safe if members of Congress don’t have to comply with gun safety standards,” said Colorado Rep. Jared Huffman, who’s been leading the effort to change the gun rule.

In other words, what Huffman wants is his opposition to be less safe when traveling between their office and the Capitol.

Of course, members of Congress don’t have to go out into the open when they leave their offices on their way to the Capitol itself as there are tunnels between them all, but not everyone wants to go that route. They might have reasons not to take the tunnels. What Democrats are calling for is to make sure their opponents–the very people who may be armed as a response to a potential threat–are disarmed.

Gonzalez and I probably disagree on a great deal, but I have to respect him standing up against members of his own party over the Second Amendment rights of his fellow congressmen.

Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s bull that congressmen and women get to play by a different set of rules than the rest of us. I just don’t think the direction to take is to disarm people. Instead, it should open up carry for any American citizen.

Now, I suspect that Gonzelez’s stand might have a touch of politics to it. He won a tight election and is probably feeling some conservative heat. Making a pro-gun stand that is really nothing but maintaining the status quo is something of a no-brainer. It’ll likely help him at home. At a minimum, it’s unlikely to hurt his chances in pro-gun Texas.

In the meantime, this push now is nothing more than an attempt to make Republicans more vulnerable to leftist mobs and anyone with half a brain knows it. While members of Congress aren’t saints, House or Senate Republicans aren’t exactly the most likely to start gunning down their opponents, either. Again, we all know it.

The question is, are there enough Democrats like Gonzalez who will help shut down this stupidity?