
Originally Posted by
cstone
Since I wrote the original question, I have been reminded of the issues about having weapons in a detention facility (criminal or mental). As I stated above, I consent to be disarmed in a place where the inmates are stripped searched. Taking a weapon into one of these places is truly counter productive and dangerous.
Second, while I still do not feel safer in a "gun free" airport or on a "gun free" commercial airliner, I will publicly acknowledge that there is virtually no possibility that this restriction will go away during my life time. I lament the amount of taxpayer and consumer money that has been spent and will continue to be spent on a false sense of security.
I did add the private property and private property owner rights caveat after the original question, and I fully recognize, and support the rights of private property owners to consent or deny access to anyone or anything on their property.
Last, let me add this point. IMO, there is no such thing in this country as a true "gun free" zone. It is a legal construct of government that is either obeyed by law abiding citizens, ignored by criminals, or superseded by agents of the government, who are authorized to carry guns into these so called "gun free" zones. I personally resent the assumption by government at all levels that agents of the government are inherently more trustworthy and proficient than law abiding citizens. IMO, this assumption by government is based on arbitrary and often untested and unsupported implied competence.
I will expand on a tenet of our judicial system, Innocent until proven Guilty. I believe that a citizen is competent and trustworthy until proven otherwise. I support due process of an objective magistrate in examining evidence prior to removing the rights of citizens. This is where I stand.
Be safe.