A Loaded Question, Part 2

Dave Weigel notes that Arizona Republicans like State Sen. Jack Harper have no compunction against immediately expanding gun rights in the state.

In Arizona, gun-rights groups don't have to worry about the "anti-freedom bigots" at all. Harper and Pearce are right; they began this year with the votes to expand gun rights, picking up right where they left off last year. They passed a "Constitutional Carry Act" that expanded the right to carry weapons in public—the right Arthur Olivas was enjoying today—and limited what local authorities can do to regulate firearms. They made Arizona the sixth state to pass a "Firearms Freedom Act," exempting any firearms made and used in the state from federal regulations.

The point of all this is that there's very little gun-control activists can do in Arizona in the aftermath of the Tucson shooting. They can point out that Loughner had shown signs of mental problems before he was sold a Glock 19 at the Tucson Sportsman's Warehouse, or bullets at a local Wal-Mart. But the state prohibits any coordination of mental health records with the National Instant Criminal Background Check system.

So Arizona's response—the most likely legislative response—is going to be expanded gun rights. Heller told me on Monday that the Arizona Citizens Defense League has drafted legislation that would allow the state to train members of Congress and their staffs in firearms, and give them access to firearms they could carry in their districts.

"I don't think having a firearm on her would have done Congresswoman Giffords any good," Heller admitted. "However, if it was known that members of her staff were well armed, that very well could have dissuaded [the shooter]."

Yes, more guns might have stopped anyone from getting hurt, especially the crazed, illogical stalker guy willing to shoot somebody because he was running around with a couple bolts loose up top.  We're really now saying that the problem last Saturday was there weren't enough people with guns in the area, and that guns in Arizona are too difficult for normal citizens to obtain?

You can already carry a gun openly in the state.  The state refuses to obey or implement any federal laws on guns either.  The next step is what, making it mandatory for all government employees to be trained to carry and to carry a firearm?

Look, no matter what your position on firearms control is (and we've had some good arguments both ways earlier today on the subject) is it really appropriate to train political staff and provide weapons for them at this juncture?

This ain't Shadowrun, folks.