Gun-free zones are one of the more divisive sub-issues in the gun debate we have in this country. Unsurprisingly, anti-Second Amendment fanatics love them. They argue the zones keep people safer because it keeps people from carrying guns into certain places.
On the other side, pro-Second Amendment voices argue that the law and a sign on the door aren’t exactly going to stop someone from carrying a gun somewhere they’re not supposed to.
So who’s right?
Well, a case in Arkansas may clarify a few things on that front.
A brawl involving students and a woman with a gun caused chaos outside Central High School Thursday morning.
Police say the armed woman is one of the involved student’s parents.
The fight was captured in a widely shared video, detailing the moments the violence broke out. According to a notice emailed to parents, it all happened just before 9 a.m. during the school’s drop-off period.
Students from a nearby high school arrived and attacked a central child, her mother nearby. That mom then walked onto campus and pulled out a gun.
According to the Little Rock Police Department, 36-year-old Precious Lyons was arrested for carrying a weapon on school property. The students from outside Central High quickly left after the fight was contained by security.
Now, I get the mama getting involved. A group of people jumps my kid and I’m likely to get involved, too.
But all the laws about guns on school property and what happened? Lyons still carried a gun onto that property then pulled it when she felt the need. How much good did that law manage to do?
In fairness, I could see an argument for her being justified in presenting the weapon. A number of teenagers from another school attack a lone teen? The potential exists there for serious bodily harm. I’m not sure it’s enough to justify it in the eyes of the law, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it were.
Except for that whole “gun-free zone” thing we were talking about.
Lyons had a gun somewhere she wasn’t allowed by law to have it. No one got killed because she didn’t want to kill anyone. The law didn’t stop anything. A sign on the door didn’t stop anything. Absolutely nothing would have stopped her from having that gun on her that day.
Gun-free zones are an idea that requires everyone to play by the same rules. The problem is, by definition, criminals don’t play by the rules. They ignore those rules as a matter of course. As such, why would they obey a gun-free zone sign when they don’t obey rules about robbing, stealing, or any of the other things that they do?
The answer, of course, is that they wouldn’t obey any such thing. They’ll do as they want, which is all they do anyway.
Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens who may feel a need to carry must decide whether to remain law-abiding or to put themselves at grave risk to themselves in order to comply with such a stupid regulation.
Clearly, gun-free zones aren’t making anyone safer.