The Collective Failure of Gun-Free Zones

By Robert B. Young, MD

Repeal Gun Free Death Zones
Repeal Gun Free Death Zones
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- President Obama, in his address on the Oregon Community College shooting, asserts that we are “collectively answerable”.

As a responsibly armed American I heartily agree—we are answerable for the disastrous failure of so-called “gun-free zones” to stop mass shootings.

The Chattanooga recruiting center, Charleston AME church, and Lafayette theater shootings, and now the massacre at Umpqua Community College all happened in so-called “gun free zones”.

Despite Oregon law to the contrary, UCC had a policy that restricted the possession or use of firearms on campus. The UCC student code of conduct states: “students may be subject to disciplinary action” for “Possession or use, without written authorization, of firearms…”

This creates a virtual “gun-free zone”. As Kevin Starrett, executive director of the Oregon Firearms Education Foundation recently told NBC news, “Most students see the rules and they just think that’s what it means and they obey them”.

“It is relative to our common life together. To the body politic” President Obama preached. Although Obama is right about our collective burden, he is wrong on what the focus of our efforts should be. Collectively, we have to answer to the failure of “gun free zones”. How many more people have to die before we recognize the failure?

“This is a political choice that we make, to allow this to happen every few months in America. We are collectively answerable to those families who lose their loved ones because of our inaction.” Once again Obama is correct. When we allow another so-called “gun free zone” to go unchecked, we put every person who enters that “gun free zone” in danger. This stark reality has been shown time after time lately, every time President Obama and his gun grabbing minions call for more gun control. Even though none of their “gun control” would have stopped any of the deaths or slowed the gunman, they all just want to “do something”.

He goes on to say: “The notion that… our freedom and our constitution prohibits any modest regulation of how we use a deadly weapon,” Has he read the Second Amendment, especially the simple declarative phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”? Declining even to toe the usual gun grabber’s line of “common sense gun laws”, he goes straight to “modest regulation”.

What is so modest about restricting the legal and constitutional right of a college campus of 2500 students to defend themselves from an armed assailant?

He condescendingly asks if our “views are being properly represented by the organization that suggests it’s speaking for [us]”. If he is asking about the National Rifle Association, the United States Concealed Carry Association, the Second Amendment Foundation, or Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (my personal favorites) the answer is yes, yes, yes, and yes. These organizations stand up for the rights of the American people, even those who don’t realize the rights they may be missing. Those rights are what make America what it is today and will make America even better tomorrow and next year.

Obama concludes by promising to bring this up every time it happens and by repeating his mantra that we need to change our laws.

I cannot agree more! Each time this happens we should continue to bring this issue up. We can do something about it, and we do need to change the laws.

We have to get rid of the so-called “gun free zones” whether by law or by local policy and rules!

Famed self-defense guru Massad Ayoob has referred to “gun free zones” as “hunting preserves for psychopathic murders”. This simple but profound truth has been proven time after time. It is time for the killing to stop. End “gun free zones”.

Dr. Sean Brodale is a family practitioner in Iowa. He is pursuing the right to carry in hospitals for eligible medical personnel. At DRGO he is involved in membership and public engagement projects.

Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of the Second Amendment Foundation. www.drgo.us

  • 26
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    18 Comment threads
    8 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    21 Comment authors
    NC RowBearJohnBobTionicoWild Bill Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    John
    Guest
    John

    How bout we as the people stand together, responsible responsible gun ownership. And ignore the signs as well and self defend our selfs. if we know as we seen the signs won’t protect us who will. we need two arm our selfs in situations in gun free zones regardless of the laws. if the property owners of these gun free zone sign holders cannot protect us we need to protect ourself. we the people need to change when we go to get our drivers license we need to go next door and get our conceal carry holders. if America’s quietly… Read more »

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    The 2nd Amendment limits Federal govt action, and has been incorporated against the several states as well (see DC v. Heller and McDonald v.. Chicago). The 2nd Amendment does not limit an individual from not wanting, and telling you in advance, that you are welcome in his store, but not your gun. Oh, and government (I presume that you mean Federal) entities are not immune from law suits (e.g. the Federal Tort Claims Act, Bivens v. Six Unnammed Agents of the Fed. Bur. of Narcotics, and 42 USC sec. 1983). The Federal government merely has, over the years, developed lots… Read more »

    Cal
    Guest
    Cal

    This question is directed to any lawyers reading this thread. Why have there not been any lawsuits directed against businesses that post their premises as “gun free?” I understand that government entitities are largely immune to being sued. But a business owner(s) that buys into the fiction that a sign will make customers and staff safe from criminals, which is disproved weekly, would appear to be liable for damages related to creating an lethally unsafe environment. What am I missing?

    Carl W. Sumner
    Guest
    Carl W. Sumner

    People that put up “Gun Free Zone” signs. should be held legally responsible for any violence that happens there. Just like they had created any other danger!

    I think that there should be a law against people that say “there should be a law…” !

    RJM
    Guest
    RJM

    I refuse to claim any ownership in the collectively answerable position the resident of the White House and your self say that I should. I didn’t vote for any of the mental deficients we have in power at this time. It happens to be a great example of Chicago Politics at it’s Finest. I am not responsible for cheats and those that facilitate them, i.e. liberals.

    Curtiss
    Guest
    Curtiss

    I agree, get rid of the gun free zones, change the laws. While you are at it, change the laws to require gun owners to have a gun safe to store their guns. Not only are the mentally unstable a danger with fire arms, but so are children, how many times do we read about a child getting their hands on a gun aid killing someone? How many of us know of someone that keeps a loaded gun under the couch, in the magazine pocket of the lazy boy recliner, under the towels in the bathroom cabinet etc… where a… Read more »

    Rich
    Guest
    Rich

    Ammoland is just another phony rightwing moderated site

    Pepe
    Guest
    Pepe

    You said,”Ammoland is just another phony rightwing moderated site”. What’s phony about it?

    Bob
    Guest
    Bob

    Apparently Rich can’t handle complicated questions.

    Rich
    Guest
    Rich

    Oregon Shooter Linked to Man Praising Islamic Terrorism: ‘Kill the Jews’ – Mercer’s MySpace features only two connections, one of which is a man named Mahmoud Ali Ehsani. Ehsani published a photo album titled, “Classic – The Mujahideen Collection LOL,” featuring Islamic terrorists from several countries, including Palestine, Iran, and Pakistan, among others. One caption reads: “my brave soldiers keep on fighting for the liberation of Palestine against Israel. fuck israel. Kill the jews. jews are the only infidels.” Mercer wrote on a dating profile he disliked “organized religion,” and considered himself “spiritual” instead of religious. He also described himself… Read more »

    Rich
    Guest
    Rich

    Islamic State (ISIS) Claims Responsibility for Chris Harper Mercer Umpqua College Shooting.. Law Enforcement removed his page and the Media is trying to make it out about blood glory..WHAT DID THEY SCRUB – thats the question..
    Pamela Geller

    Rich
    Guest
    Rich

    Islamic State (ISIS) Claims Responsibility for Chris Harper Mercer Umpqua College Shooting.. Law Enforcement removed his page and the Media is trying to make it out about blood glory..WHAT DID THEY SCRUB – thats the question..

    http://pamelageller.com/2015/10/islamic-state-isis-claims-responsibility-for-chris-mercer-harper-umpqua-college-shootingchris-mercer-harper-umpqua-college-shooting.html/

    DirtyHarry44
    Guest
    DirtyHarry44

    Having driven a truck for 18 years, the GFZ signs remind me of the “Slow down ahead” signs that no one obeys either, or the speed limit signs for that matter! It’s not like the sign can detect who has a gun on them or not, or even do anything about it if one did. I guess it makes some politicians feel good about themselves and that’s all that matters. As long as their circle of influence agrees, the hell with the real world consequences.

    Bill
    Guest
    Bill

    How many more will die before we begin to control psychoactive pharmaceutical drugs with homicidal and/or suicidal ideation as side effects?

    archangel55
    Guest
    archangel55

    get rid of your treasury agents guns and put little gun free zone buttons on them. Then we’ll see how you feel about GFZ’s

    SweetOlBob
    Guest
    SweetOlBob

    Gun free zones could be OK, and would work if they were regulated somewhat like the purchase of a gun. That is, the owners and managers of the venue need to pass a federal check list to assure that they are not terrorists and that they are citizens of the United States. In selected States they should be required to pay for and attend a class or classes on how to handle a stressed crowd of people to assure that no panic is induced and no one is trampled or suffocated by people trying to escape a real or imagined… Read more »

    Mikial
    Guest
    Mikial

    Gun free zones are stupid. People who believe they will do some good are stupid. People who force them on society are criminals.

    Craig Butelo
    Guest
    Craig Butelo

    DITTO, DITTO, DITTO!

    JohnC
    Guest
    JohnC

    You and yours should stay out of gun free zones. To suggest that an organization cannot control it’s on policy whether in agreement with your stance or not is contrary to freedom.

    JoeUSooner
    Guest
    JoeUSooner

    NO! Any organization that caters to (provides goods, services, etc to) the public – even on privately-owned property – damned-well IS required to obey the Constitution!! And the term “shall not be infringed” (which should be readily understandable, at least to sane minds) had better not be beyond the comprehension of supposed “educators.” If they do not intend to (or do not understand HOW to) operate constitutionally, they have NO business being in any kind of social, political, or educational leadership positions.

    Mikial
    Guest
    Mikial

    I do not patronize GFZ businesses. Period. I will not give them one dime of my money. And if I absolutely have to enter a non-government GFZ . . . well, that’s what the word “concealed” is for.

    NC RowBear
    Guest
    NC RowBear

    I agree do Not patronize the business and let the business know, however if you do patronize “concealed” than you yourself are breaking the law and a criminal.

    Pepe
    Guest
    Pepe

    So if you’re saying a private company can make rules contrary to constitution on their private property, then you see nothing wrong with owning slaves, as long as they never leave the property. Correct? What about higher pay for men over women? Discriminating against gays and minorities, as long as it’s done on private property, is acceptable to you? Or is it just the rights that you don’t agree with the ones that can be abused on private property? Just something to think about.

    Tionico
    Guest
    Tionico

    Don’t be ridiculous.. or worse. Speaking of publically accessible spaces, YES, noone in control of such spaces (school admin, business owner, etc,) should have the ability to deny those who can freely access that space their God-given right to defend their lives or those lives around them. Yes, I can declare no one but me can bring their weapons into my home, or onto my private land. But those spaces are not generally accessible to the public. When WalMart open their doors for any and all to enter, they lose their right to prohibit defensive weapons. If they wish to… Read more »

    oldgringo
    Guest
    oldgringo

    The idiocy of Gun Free Zone signs is that only those persons who work on those premises or attend schools and or universities where these signs are posted are the persons that also obey the ruling of these signs…Killers of mass destruction do not obey these signs nor will they ever…Hence these signs are nothing more than “stupid is as stupid does” warning signs posted by feel good, do good politically correct liberal Democratic idiots.

    Ragtown Kid
    Guest
    Ragtown Kid

    Amen, brudder!!!