Reply #9: The argument is not really for more guns, rather an elimination of unenforced fake gun-free zones

[slackmaster]

Declaring a place to be free of weapons without implementing physical security to make sure that it really is free of weapons just creates fodder for empty self-congratulation, and an enhanced target opportunity for anyone who is looking for an easy place to pull off a mass shooting. Places that do so inevitably fail to accept responsibility and accountability for the security of people who enter.

Places like the secured areas of courthouses and airports are true gun-free zones because they have controlled entrances with metal detectors, X-ray machines, guards, etc. But there are no real controls at the entrances to places like college campuses and the District of Columbia.

Someone who has been properly trained and licensed to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense should be permitted to do so anywhere, except places where guns pose an obvious threat to physical security. For example, MRI labs (because of powerful magnets), and places where compressed gas cylinders are kept. Of course any places with such clear hazards are not (or should not be) open to the general public anyway.