Brewer vetoes bill allowing guns on public property

[azmouse]

Color me surprised. This may be the most reasonable thing this old hag has done.
I don't expect her reasonableness to go on for long but longer it last the better.

Quote:Gov. Jan Brewer rebuffed gun-rights advocates by vetoing for a second time a bill to allow guns on public property, and sent a strong message that such a proposal would need wider support from police, cities and the public before she would sign it.

Brewer's veto of the bill, which could have let guns into city halls, police stations, county courts, senior centers, swimming pools, libraries and the state Capitol, was the latest setback for a push to expand the right to carry guns in public places in Arizona.

Legislative efforts to put guns on university campuses, just outside K-12 school grounds and in homeowners associations all appear to have run into roadblocks this session.

Citing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in her veto letter, Brewer, who vetoed a similar bill last year, recognized the legitimacy of laws banning guns in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.

"The decisions to permit or prohibit guns in these extremely sensitive locations -- whether a city council chamber or branch office staffed with state workers -- should be cooperatively reached and supported by a broad coalition of stakeholders, including citizens, law-enforcement officials and local government leaders," Brewer wrote in her veto letter.


Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic...z1sOvQYk1K

[jaxx]

A good surprise.

[Peacetrain]

I would not have believed it until I read it..but maybe the ALEC push back is finally taking hold..

[sandnsea]

Well public property includes her office. She's at risk, that's why she gets it. Typical self-absorbed GOP.

[SeattleGirl]

(04-18-2012 11:26 AM)sandnsea Wrote:  Well public property includes her office. She's at risk, that's why she gets it. Typical self-absorbed GOP.

Quite true, sandnsea, but at least with this veto, that trait of hers will spill over to protect other people too.

[sandnsea]

(04-18-2012 01:07 PM)SeattleGirl Wrote:  

(04-18-2012 11:26 AM)sandnsea Wrote:  Well public property includes her office. She's at risk, that's why she gets it. Typical self-absorbed GOP.

Quite true, sandnsea, but at least with this veto, that trait of hers will spill over to protect other people too.

Completely agree. It's just sad that that's what it takes to get a good law out of a Republican.

[Treestar]

What kind of rabidly insane legislators passed that? The courthouse? Good Lord!

Family court would be a shooting gallery.

[Born_A_Truman]

(04-18-2012 02:40 PM)Treestar Wrote:  What kind of rabidly insane legislators passed that? The courthouse? Good Lord!

Family court would be a shooting gallery.

Yes it would. Might as well hand out targets and ammo at divorce and custody hearings.

[DFW]

Brewer heard the revised version: "Ask not at whom the gun points, for it points at thee."

[SeattleGirl]

(04-24-2012 04:28 AM)DFW Wrote:  Brewer heard the revised version: "Ask not at whom the gun points, for it points at thee."

Yes, exactly!