Kent Williams: Don’t visit my district, it’s unsafe
TN’s new House Speaker Kent Williams came out early with some pro-gun sentiment. Said he wanted to move some pro-gun bills. Now, he’s opposed to the guns in parks bill:
I think local parks are a lot different from state parks. I have attended a lot of events with my four boys who are grown now and a few with my grandkids. I’ve seen too many fits of anger at these local parks. I’ve seen parents fighting parents. Parents fighting coaches. Coaches fighting coaches. Coaches fighting umpires and umpires fighting umpires. I’ve seen just about all. I feel where there’s a situation where there’s a danger we don’t need someone carrying a gun in that area. I think it would only escalate the problem. I believe in protecting our second amendment rights. There’s a lot of controversy over exactly what the second amendments rights are.
First of all, remind me never to visit a park in Carter County, if that’s how folks behave in parks. I’ve been to plenty of parks with my kids and never seen a fight. Or maybe he just goes to bad parks. Anyway, people with carry permits carry in many places, such as malls and so forth, and I don’t think they’re going to turn into lunatics just because they’re at a park.
February 26th, 2009 at 11:56 am
In places where everyone knows that normal people are disarmed, violent people often free to act out of control.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
People with CCW get into heated, cuss-filled, redfaced, arguments and screaming matches. And don’t shoot each other. Imagine that. I assume Kent Williams would shoot someone in an argument over a picnic spot, based on how he thinks other people behave.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
“I feel where there’s a situation where there’s a danger we don’t need someone carrying a gun in that area. I think it would only escalate the problem.”
So he’s opposed to police carrying guns? Not likely. These liars overstate their opposition to guns by claiming to have a saintly opposition to guns generally, when what they really mean is that they want guns for their people but not for anyone else. And “anyone else” always ends up only meaning law-abiding citizens, since these laws have no effect on criminals who carry anyway.
“I believe in protecting our second amendment rights. There’s a lot of controversy over exactly what the second amendments rights are.”
So he claims that he supports the Second Amendment and then weasels out of it the very next sentence by saying that he doesn’t know what it means! What a scoundrel! And this weasel word artist isn’t just some local politician; he’s the Speaker of the House?
February 26th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Interesting… so how many of those “fights” were really just arguments?
Did any of those “fights” happen with people that could carry (but were not because of the law)?
I think that is the key question. Otherwise you are saying bad things happen in parks and people should not be able to defend themselves.
If unlicensed people can go to a park, what if we try allowing only concealed carry permit holders to visit parks? We could see if as many fights break out then as they apparently do now.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Interesting… so how many of those “fights” were really just arguments?
Did any of those “fights” happen with people that had a permit (but did not carry because of the law)?
I think that is the key question. Otherwise you are saying bad things happen in parks and people should not be able to defend themselves.
If unlicensed people can go to a park, why don’t they try allowing only concealed carry permit holders to visit parks? We could see if as many fights break out then as they apparently do now.
February 26th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Since self defense is a fundamental, inalienable human right, and since the 2nd Amendment was enacted to guarantee that right, there is no reason to stop law-abiding persons from providing for their self defense in parks.
Mr. Williams’ arguments demonstrate precisely why legal CCW licensees should be allowed to carry their weapons in local parks. There is apparently a real danger of violent confrontation at these parks. That being so, should the lawful, nonviolent persons with CCWs submit meekly to violent assault? I think not.
February 26th, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Not only is the 2A not about hunting, but baseball, softball, football and soccer also do not appear in the Constitution. If coaches and sport-parents are creating such hazard in Mr. Williams’ district, perhaps he ought to consider outlawing some games, and getting the populace back to honest recreation like target practice.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:23 am
No, there is no controversy over what the Second Amendment means. The only controversy is over how dishonest some people are why we keep them in office when they claim it isn’t clear.