Guns On Campus, in Malls, in Churches...

Stop ignoring the solution that's not on the table. Put it on the table. In fact, put it on your belt.

By John Longenecker

Praise to the armed citizen who stopped the nameless shooter in Colorado's New Life Church. Jeanne Assam is the perfect illustration of what the armed citizen is all about. She is a concealed carry permit holder private citizen at the time she had to make the decision to act in facing grave danger and in defense of another. She is one of millions of Americans who carry their weapon without problems enunciated by anti-gun activists. More than 2 Million by last count.

Click 'Read More' for the entire article.

The Colorado New Life Church Center had announced that it would re-examine security, and there is one superb security all churches, campuses, workplaces, airports, hospitals, parks, public buildings and malls should learn: the armed citizen is the original Homeland Security, not only for the location, but for the Nation.

Armed Citizens are already on scene. In fact, they are ever-present.

Private citizens have the authority they need. Gun bans interfere with that authority.

They are trained, they are vetted in background check, and they have satisfied the state sufficiently to carry the identification that says they can carry their personal weapon concealed.

Oh, and one other thing, the shooter didn't see her until it was too late. He calculated that no such person would be there.

In a word, lift the gun bans.

The concept of improving security is a good start, but consistent security personnel known to a shooter cannot work as well as simply lifting the gun ban and permitting parishioners, patrons, customers, students, parents and visitors to carry their own weapon. Faces change, patterns of armed persons are no so easily identifiable as Security as before.

Any other policy is a public statement that the Mall or Campus does not trust the people they serve. And that's backwards. it's also fatal, as we have seen.

At least New Life Church is re-examining the situation. And they're not the only ones. Utah is friendly to guns on campus and so are others.

For the less friendly and less cooperative, there is the inadvisable tactic of vexing students by compelling students and others to sue. This forcing students to sue is a trend in hostility to students and others in a state where the law is quite clear: concealed carry is affirmed and not rejected. Yet the campus administration insists on clarification in the form of a mandate from the State. This reflects also ignorance of the law. Ignorance from Educators. The very issue in Washington D.C., for one example, has been to refuse the court of Appeals ruling that D.C.'s gun ban is unconstitutional. How's that for a mandate?

Refusing a mandate which they sought. The District wants justice in a nation of laws, but justice was precisely what they got, three times, in fact, from reports. Three times the District found justice, and now it wants another toss of the coin.

In New Orleans, they don't listen to the court, either. In fact, for not returning weapons confiscated from house-to-house takings found to be against the Constitution, the City is still in contempt of court.

The idea of refusing to honor the law of the land, and then sending citizens to court to assert their rights only to meet again with further refusals to obey the law is, itself, un-Americian and illegal. People die for this abuse of power.

On the other hand, the blowback of such a vexing urging could be that these locales could be found liable for tortious interference.

I'm very pleased to see some organizations revisiting the concept, and their interest in understanding it better. Welcome. And with thanks. Around the country, administrations previously banning weapons now interested in revisiting the concept might like to study the right-to-carry states and notice that the dire forecasts of the anti-gun movement have not come true – the road rage, the lover shootings, mass murders and other predictions bred of hysteria and contempt for the force which protects our nation on so many levels simply have not come true - except within the Victim Disarmament Zones where murderers find them to be as advertised.

Gun Control Policy interferes with citizen authority to act when facing grave danger, even at the micro level of private property within a right-to-carry state. Where state law affirms concealed carry, cities and other places within the state continue to defy state law and punish armed citizens just as D.C., New Orleans and Virginia Tech do.

Let me state in a friendly manner that Security would not be the optimal answer: a calculating shooter can too easily identify Security and simply wait them out, approach from another side or take them out first. Even plainclothes Security can be spotted by their consistency and presence. The genius of citizen concealed carry is that the shooter cannot know who is armed and who isn't from one moment to the next, from one Service to the next. Or one Class to the next, or one shopper to the next. Nor in what numbers they are present. The optimal solution is to lift the gun bans.

Until that hour, one tragic social dynamic is in force: Citizens fear the ire and punishment of officials more than they fear the knives and bullets of those who come to kill them.

It's time to reverse this. Where killers find the Victim Disarmament Zone to be as advertised, let them see a new advertisement: What would happen if churches, malls, airports, parks, campuses and public buildings publicly announced that they are simply adopting a new policy of adhering to state law and now allowing.. no, AFFIRMING concealed carry on the premises?

For any serious-minded approach to fighting killings of our children, neighbors, friends and family — Lift The Gun Bans.

It's the solution you can live with. It THE solution to live with. Get it on the table. And get it on your belt. It would be good for the country.

John Longenecker is President and CEO of Good For The Country Foundation, a patriotic non-profit organization.