U.S. Representative Massie Proposes Repeal of Federal Gun-Free School Zones Act

By Dave Dolbee published on in General, News

Gun free zones have been an area of contention since their inception in 1990. We all know a sign will not deter a criminal and serve little purpose other than restricting the right of self-defense of the law abiding. Here is the full release from the Second Amendment Caucus.

WASHINGTON, D.C.On Monday, U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced H.R. 34, the Safe Students Act, which would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990.

The bill, originally introduced by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) in 2007, repeals the Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) of 1990, which makes it “unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.” In 1995, the Supreme Court held the GFSZA unconstitutional, which prompted Congress to amend the bill in 1996. The Supreme Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of the amended Act.

Gun free zone sign

“Gun-free school zones are ineffective. They make people less safe by inviting criminals into target-rich, no-risk environments,” said Massie. “Gun-free zones prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves, and create vulnerable populations that are targeted by criminals.”

The Safe Students Act has garnered the support of three major gun organizations: National Association for Gun Rights, Gun Owners of America, and the National Rifle Association.

Representative Massie concluded: “A bigger federal government can’t solve this problem. Weapons bans and gun-free zones are unconstitutional. They do not and cannot prevent criminals or the mentally ill from committing acts of violence. But they often prevent victims of such violence from protecting themselves.”

As John Lott, author of The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies, writes in The Columbus Dispatch, “Would you feel safer posting a sign announcing your home is a gun-free zone? Criminals don’t obey these signs. In fact, to criminals, gun-free zones look like easy targets. So why do we display these signs in public places?”

Cosponsors include: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Rep. James Comer (R-KY),  Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA), and Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX).

Representative Massie is Chairman of the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus in the 115th Congress.

Tags: , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (15)

  • MR. CHARLES

    |

    DEAR SIR. You are one of the unrecognized HEROES of our nation and I salute you for your courage, honor, duty, and patriotism for doing what was needed and not politically correct. Thank you and may you always enjoy the FREEDOM THAT YOU HAVE EARNED.

    Reply

  • Dragon

    |

    As I have commented before, I have been carrying concealed handguns for over 50 years, and as I have also commented sometimes it was legal and sometimes it was not. That said, following my retirement from the Army, I taught for 22 years, and for most of those 22 years my students were always a little safer when they were in my presence. My daily attire usually always included a deeply concealed handgun that I carried for use if our school should happen to come under an attack of some sort.

    In addition, in the trunk of my car was an M-1 carbine with several 30 round magazines, and I figured that in accordance with usually accepted doctrine, if my concealed handgun didn’t resolve a conflict within the confines of the school, I could fight my way to the car and retrieve the M-1 carbine for a bit more firepower. Interestingly, administration and I had a duress code worked out in which the public address system would broadcast that it was necessary for me to move my car. If that statement was heard on the PA, it was my signal to go into a defensive mode and act as the situation necessitated.

    Reply

  • MR. CHARLES

    |

    Anytime governments (Fed, State, County, City, etc) puts restrictions on the CITIZENS they are accountable to the restrictions have only one purpose TO CONTROL THE CITIZENS. That is not the purpose of many laws (Speeding, DUI, Drug control, Maintenance of Property, Safe Food handling, Clean water and Air, etc) which are needed to insure a safe and orderly society for all CITIZENS that is livable for everybody. There are a lot of laws on the books that are just stupid and have no common since at all but maybe somebody thought they were needed at one time or another (Law makers need to look into some of these and get rid of them if not needed anymore.) for some special problems. With that I will end this and wait for comments.

    Reply

  • LEVELLER

    |

    Yeah good luck on that one.

    Reply

    • MR. CHARLES

      |

      LEVELLER, You never know just what might happen, keep up the HOPE.

      Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.

%d bloggers like this: