My favorite bumper sticker from years passed read: When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. How logical. If we apply a standard of health, we must declare hand guns contraband and then anyone who has one will be in violation of laws concerned with out health.

I’m a smoker, yet I understand that the majority of people don’t want my smoke drifting into their lungs when they are in the Marriuci Center at U. of Minnesota watching a hockey game. They shouldn’t have to worry about it, and they don’t. I don’t remember whether there are “No Smoking” signs there, but the sign that stands out as I entered the facility was a large, prominent “no guns allowed on premises” sign.

The majority, I think you’ll agree, do not think of exercising their CC rights in Minnesota much less bringing guns to a hockey match, but there is a minority that might. The sign reminds the majority that there are people who might come to the game packing, and, if they obey the sign would have to take their gun back to their cars. So now you have guns in the parking lot, and a general awareness from everyone who read the sign that there are guns around. This is the normalization of gun culture (which the minority in an urban is participating in) at the expense of the majority, who probably don’t want to be bothered with it at a hockey game. It’s an intrusion.

The way CC law as proposed in Wisconsin was written, a homeowner or renter with friends who own guns would have to post a sign or warn them verbally to keep concealed guns out of the house. No warning, no sign, and the rights of the CC permit holder take precedent. That’s an invasion.

As for the NRA, one of the most effective lobbying organizations in the country, I think their arguments, motives and goals in this case are far more questionable than those of NEA, PETA, Planned Parenthood or Right to Life. The NRA’s arguments for CC as deterrent have no merit, police are opposed to it — and the group fights against exceptions for urban areas that work to keep guns off the street. I understand that rural residents may not think CC is a big deal, but I think the NRA’s insistance on ignoring the realities of urban life is unfair and unreasonable. Completely? I’ll stand by that.

What I don’t follow is this: How would signs telling CC’s that they can’t bring guns into certain buildings–even many buildings–be an intrusion onto the majority? Would this be more intrusive than non-smoking signs?

One other point: although the NRA is no saintly organization, they are just one of many special interest groups who further the aims of their members–like NEA, PETA, Planned Parenthood or any other group. Why is it completely unreasonable for one group to foist its narrow agenda and not another?

Otherwise, great piece. You point out some of the real problems with the whole issue. Nice comments about the constitution too; too bad most have not read it as closely as you have.