Bill Removing Gun Free Zones VETOED! | Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News
Summary
Transcript
Hey, everybody. Welcome back to the channel. I want to read you a letter from a governor who just vetoed a bill that made it through the legislature to get rid of gun free zones to make their state safer. Why? Because a vast majority of shootings where good people are made into victims happen in gunfree zones. It’s one of the biggest paradoxes in this land. Gun free zone is only for law abiding, and that’s where criminals who have guns go.
But to me, it comes off a little bit as I support the second amendment, but that’s why I want to read it to you. But I also want to make a quick announcement. April 2 is Tennessee’s scheduled lobby day. There’s a bunch of antigun bills that are in this state right now looking to get passed. I don’t think they have a huge chance of making it because Tennessee is still very red.
But mom’s demand action and the Bloombergs are pumping money into this state, and if people don’t get involved, that’s how stuff starts to pass incrementally. And I got word from my friends that are setting this whole thing up that they might have to cancel it because not enough people are showing interest. If you want to come to the state capitol, I’ll be going then I’ll have a link down below.
Come be part of the process. Listen to the bills and committee. This is how you become a better citizen by taking part of the legislative process. Don’t let Tennessee become Massachusetts. Don’t let Texas become California. You know where I’m going. Let’s jump into the letter. Here it is. This is from Governor Mark Gordon, the governor of Wyoming, and it’s in regards to vetoing hb one and 125, he says, dear Secretary Gray, I am a fervent supporter of the second amendment.
The right to bear arms is not some obscure academic or political principle. To my family, it is a real right and responsibility. I have consistently advocated for firearm freedom. Accordingly, this session alone, I have signed Senate Enrolled act number 38, which is concealed firearms permit eligibility, Senate enrolled act 41, Wyoming Second Amendment Privacy Act, Senate enrolled act 54, prohibit Red Flag Gun Seizure act, and Senate enrolled Act 57, school safety and security funding.
As governor, I have signed nine additional bills in support of the Second Amendment, which expand concealed carry, limit firearm seizure, protected firearm commerce and transactions, and created the state shooting sports complex. I continuously promote Wyoming as a second amendment friendly state to businesses, retailers and manufacturers across the nation. Those businesses agree as they continue to move operations and manufacturing to Wyoming. Our current laws have also shown constitutional carry and giving school districts the ability to craft local policies allowing for trained staff to carry in schools do not bring about an increase in violence, however.
House Bill 125, House enrolled Act number 49, erodes historic local control norms by giving sole authority to the legislature to micromanage a constitutionally protected right. Any further clarification of the law if this bill were enacted, would augment the legislature’s reach into local firearms regulation. The bill exceeds the separation of powers embodied in Article two of our Wyoming constitution. I must therefore veto it. If enacted, House enrolled act number 49 would require every one of our unique state facilities, such as the University of Wyoming, Wyoming State Hospital, or the Wyoming Boys school, to receive legislative approval to restrict carrying firearms, or even to set policies as practical as proper weapon storage.
These potential restrictions regarding government and school facilities are not novel, as described by the United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in his opinion on the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, quote, like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th century cases, commenters and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, and for whatever purpose, end quote.
Every piece of legislation must stand for critical review, particularly those affecting our constitutional rights. As delivered to my desk, this bill lacks sufficient review and debate. Imperfect language opens potential loopholes, such as putting a family services case worker at risk of being charged with a misdemeanor for simply asking someone they knew to be carrying a firearm to leave a building in order to diffuse an emotionally charged family situation.
A bill covering such a sensitive topic does not lend itself to successive tweaks to correct flaws, and therefore, I believe the legislature should be open to debating and fully working this bill through its established processes. I must also question the need both this bill and the Senate enrolled act number 54, red flag Gun Seizure act, to include civil and criminal penalties for simple repeals, the probation of government actions, and the erosion of qualified immunity for law enforcement who risk daily their lives to uphold the very laws the legislature has passed.
Wyoming values our law enforcement personnel. This legislature does not operate in a vacuum, and most of the time it works to consider legislation transparently and with an eye to the regulatory lay of the land. In this case, it seemed to act more in the mode of blitzkrieg. It is important to note that in 2017, WS 21 3132 was created allowing for local school boards to authorize employees to carry concealed, deadly weapons under well thought out conditions, as described in Governor Mead’s veto message on House enrolled Act number 107 and currently House enrolled Act 49 would repeal the statute obliterating the hard work of the school districts that have established excellent policies and provisions for their districts.
Instead, this bill would only carry forward certain legislatively approved standards for school board employees, obliging those school boards to choose to adopt them or have no standards at all. This is not a veto of the notion of repealing gunfree zones. It is a request to approach this topic more transparently. With the authority already in place to address this issue at a local level, I call on school districts, community colleges, and the university to take up these difficult conversations again and establish policies that allow for the safe carry of concealed weapons within their facilities.
It is one thing to have had the conversation, as four school districts in the state have done, to allow for trained employees to carry on campus or others to have decided on hiring additional school safety officers, and yet another to avoid the topic altogether. There exists a degree of executive leeway to begin the conversation for state facilities. I will direct the state Building Commission to start the process to reconsider our rules to allow concealed carry permit holders to exercise their rights within the capitol and other appropriate state facilities.
This process will involve significant public input and consist of carefully crafted policies which have the ability to contemplate the unique circumstances in the state’s array of jurisdictions. These conversations will set the stage for robust and well informed legislation and the best traditions of the Wyoming legislature. With this veto letter, I deliver original HB 125, House and Roll Act 49, to you without my signature. Signed the governor, Mark Gordon.
So again, he’s signed some great legislation, but in his veto of this bill, saying he doesn’t want the local powers stripped. Like Wyoming already has firearm preemption laws, and that means that the local, county level, town level, city level, they can’t make gun control laws that go or restrict more than the state law already does. For me, safety is number one. And for the people who are the gatekeepers in keeping the community safe, to tell them they can’t go into certain areas because it’s a magic dome bubble, yet criminals can.
I have a problem with that. What do you guys and gals think? I think the governor’s done some good stuff, but on this one, I just don’t like it to say that restricting or removing gun free zones is removing local tradition. Well, your local tradition violates the Constitution. It violates the Bruin decision, the Heller decision, especially. It’s a public area. I mean, yeah, the whole Supreme Court did say that the sensitive locations area could be kept gun free, but I don’t agree with that either.
And there’s lawsuits against New York and other states right now to try to flesh that out. But let me know what you think down below. Kind of on my soapbox, because I think this governor could have done something great for the state, but don’t know why he didn’t let me know. Appreciate. Y’all take care. .
See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.
