I have not read this entire thread, though I will over the next day or two, so these points have already been covered. But here are a couple of things that I notice in my limited reading so far.Most of us (some of us?) decry giving special permissions to the "privileged classes", so why do we continue to do it?
The GFSZ Act prohibits even current but off-duty LEOs from carrying in a school zone. If we're going to fix that "oversight" in the GFSZ Act for them, why not fix it for "regular" licensed carriers at the same time?SEC. 103. CERTAIN OFF-DUTY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFI-
7 CERS AND RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OF-
8 FICERS ALLOWED TO CARRY A CONCEALED
9 FIREARM, AND DISCHARGE A FIREARM, IN A
10 SCHOOL ZONE.
And this from Section 104 (emphasis mine)
a Federal judge may
23 carry a concealed firearm in any State
Some people always talk about the power of the NRA lobby. Looks like these two groups must have some pretty powerful lobbies themselves.
As for HR 4477, I'm just now starting to look at it. One thought I have on it though: will this allow the SSA to again turn around and report to NICS as unqualified all those pensioners who need help with their finances? Or allow some other agency to doing something similar? Maybe I'll figure it out as I study further, but who decides what is or is not a disqualifier?