The Arizona Senate has rejected a bill that would have allowed citizens to carry concealed in some public buildings like libraries. The bill would not have allowed gun owners to carry in courthouses or other buildings that traditionally have on site security check points.
The bill was rejected on a 14-14 vote.
This is a perfect example of backwards logic. The senate is looking at this bill and thinking… wait a minute. Do we want to allow people with legal firearms to carry them legally into a place that we currently do NOTHING to secure? At a local library for example, today any criminal can walk right in with a gun. No security, no metal detector, and no law enforcement personnel. Only law abiding citizens are disarmed at this facilities.
Many say it was rejected because it was feared that it would cost a lot of tax dollars to secure buildings that are currently unsecured. My question is, why would those buildings need to be secured if they are secured today?