If there was ever any doubt as to whether or not House Bill 199 is a Republican gimmick cooked up by NRA enthusiasts, shrouded in nonsensical arguments about protecting students, and aimed at turning the gun-wielding public against any and all sane politicians in this state—well this pretty much dispels it.
The Advertiser points out:
Rep. Roy Burrell, D-Shreveport, was one of only two members of the House Criminal Justice Committee to question the wisdom of passing such a state law.
He said he found it an unusual move in a committee that recently approved carrying concealed weapons on college campuses.
"Are we making the assumption that if we don't allow the wearing of body armor, we're making schools safer?" Burrell asked. "If somebody is going to commit a crime of this nature, they're not necessarily going to wear body armor."
Rep. Damon Baldone, D-Houma, said anyone intent on attacking students is likely to "wear a vest and break this law anyway."
But wait:
The bill has a provision that would allow any student who wants to wear armor for protection to request permission from the principal or chancellor of the school.
So doesn't that make this even more absurd? Assuming that a kid hellbent on murdering his fellow classmates wouldn't just wear the body armor anyway, couldn't he or she just get permission the day before? Or are we going to allow principals to select which students should and should not be allowed to protect themselves?
That aside, if the House wants to introduce a bill that would prohibit body armor in schools because it unsettles teachers and students, fine. But how can they simultaneously entertain a bill that would allow college students to arm themselves with concealed weapons? Would not the prospect of a classroom full of gun-toting youths also unsettle many teachers and students?
