« Massad Ayoob on gunfighting myths | Main | "Only police are competent to have guns" »
A novel approach
Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe is proposing various forms of gun control, and has by executive order banned firearms in State offices. Va State Senator Charles W. Carrico Sr. has an interesting response: defund the governor's armed guards. "It's easy for someone who is surrounded by armed state policemen to tell someone else they can't carry a weapon to protect themselves."
The idea has lots of potential. If a public figure maintains that, oh, firearms should be limited to ten-round magazines, the legislature could ensure that his body guards are limited to those. After all, if ten rounds is enough to defend against a criminal attack, and the body guards are there to prevent criminal attack, they can set the example for the rest of us.
Actually, we might wonder why a governor needs body guards. I can't recall a single case of a governor being attacked while in office, with the exception of Huey Long eighty years ago. And there are some that argue that Long was hit by an errant shot from his body guards.
6 Comments | Leave a comment
And there was a Ky governor assassinated 'bout 115 years ago. William Goebel
Being a state Governor seems safer than being a judge though; there's been several of those rapscallions shot over the years.
It sure looks like a self-described anarchist tried to kill Missouri governor Jay Nixon but attacked the wrong person. Nixon, BTW, opposes legal concealed carry in Missouri.
This is an interesting rhetorical approach. I think most of us recognize the very low probability of getting any traction on any proposal to strip Noblemen of their Pretorian Guards. But that is the wrong focus. It won't matter at all whether we succeed or not in actually removing any anti-gun politician's armed guards. Instead, it's the public perception of the rhetoric that really matters.
The press will have a hard time avoiding covering the controversy. Naturally, the national MSM will succeed in avoiding coverage. Why should anyone in any of the 49 States care about a controversy that affects just 1 State such as VA? Nevertheless, the local (municipal and State) press will cover it. We can win the fight for the 2A one State at a time.
The Antis dare not meet us in this debating hall. What could they possibly say to defend armed guards (15-round magazines, etc.) for politicians but not for the proletariat?
Another facet to work on is LEOSA. Why should Congress give valuable life-saving and living-earning licenses to carry as an emolument of serving in their politically-controlled police forces? Once they turn-in their badges they are no longer the knights of the Noblemen; they become proletariat like the rest of us subjects. The apparent purpose is to provide a limited supply of armed-guards licensed to serve men-of-means such as Bloomberg. What is the principle that justifies LEOSA when the 2A guarantees the right-to-carry to the People generally? We can play the class-warfare game as well.
Not that body guards or personal carry would have helped him, but John Connally was also shot.
Lets see how this can work. The State legislature designates the governors armed men be armed only with 0.45 caliber Colt M1911s. They are then uniformed in a manner within the requirements of the State Defense Force laws as administered by the National Guard Bureau. This way they won't be mistaken for federal troops and their arm and ammunition will not impact national defense. Of course they will be restricted to the standard seven round magazine but then again law enforcement is being returned to the six shot revolver given the Obama policies against the militarizing of Police. Sounds sensible
George C Wallace was still Governor in 1972 when shot in Laurel MD.