Blaska Policy Werkes repeats its assertion that “No Firearms” signs are false advertising unless the premises are secured by airport-level screening. Yet, we have in Madison WI school board members who would ban armed, trained police resource officers from our schools. Schools and churches are among the most vulnerable places because they offer an abundance of targets for the indiscriminate shooter.
That church in Texas (named after a highway!) took reasonable precautions. The state of Virginia, it appears, is going in the opposite direction, despite history’s lessons. (Virginia Tech, anyone?)
Madison crime 2020
I wouldn’t attend a church that had one of those “no guns allowed on premises” signs. Everyone inside is a sitting duck.
LikeLike
We are the security. Our Church has cameras and we also have radios. Always street clothes officer plus concealed carry. I would have stopped him before he got in to the worship area. This article suggests he had been seen in the Church before, we would have talked to him when he came in to welcome him. He never would have got in to the worship area through our large lobby. Sad situation when WI dismisses this. Church leadership make the decision and we have been armed for almost 2 years,
LikeLike
Those No Firearms signs should be banned unless enforced by airport-level screening.
LikeLike
A highly trained and qualified guy like that with a concealed firearm, I don’t mind. All you other untrained yahoo wannabe Rambos? Not so much. Texas has stringent requirements for obtaining a concealed carry permit. Wisconsin… uh, basically none. Dumb.
LikeLike
bobo is a non-believer~~~> in the 2nd Amendment.
Dumb.
LikeLike
Coulda used a Rambo or two at the Hannukah service in NYC.
LikeLike
Why The Second Amendment Has Become So Controversial
By Dr. Michael Hurd
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads:
“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Advocates of gun control and gun bans argue that the Second Amendment only applies to the “militia,” which they interpret as the military and police.
In other words, according to such an argument, the Second Amendment does not protect the right of an individual to own a weapon; only the right of the government to possess weapons. This is like saying, “You have a right to defend yourself if it’s the police or the army defending you; but not on your own.”
And continues on, about a 5min read.
https://drhurd.com/2016/01/14/what-the-right-to-bear-arms-really-means/
LikeLike