Posted on
July 25, 2007 in
I wrote here about the new Texas law permitting prosecutors to carry guns to court. An English magistrate picked up on the story here:
The idea of knowingly allowing weapons to be taken into court is stupid enough; but by prosecutors? Most of the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] I deal with are people I would not trust to feed my goldfish, even if I had any goldfish. If they turn up in my court packing heat – I’m going to look for something – anything – safer to do in my spare time.
The comments are diverting as well.
Are the prosecutors going to shoot the defense attorneys? The judges? I’m not saying it wouldn’t be funny, but do we have so little faith in prosecutors?
I have two concerns:
1. That a prosecutor (often not the most stable of folks) might go postal; and
2. That a prosecutor (not trained, as cops are trained, to retain his weapon) might lose his firearm to a bad guy.
so would you have less concern with judges packing heat?
I thought everybody down there in Texas wanted to pack heat. Ain’t that the Tejas way? Don’t listen to them Brits. They never understood the manliness of guns anyway.
Seriously, it just sounds like boys with macho toys. And a lot more clout to them than defense lawyers.
There’s less danger of a judge losing his gun to a bad guy, but I still don’t like judges packing heat for various reasons, one of which is that some of the worst judges I know do so; another of which is that I would rather have judges who aren’t living in fear (and carrying a gun is a symptom of fear); a third is that it turns the Second Amendment on its ass to allow government officials to carry weapons where citizens can’t.
I pack heat. Serious heat.
so you would propose a system where nobody in court but perhaps the sheriffs would have firearms? And what about out of court? here in baltimore it’s practically impossible to get a concealed carry license, but if you’re a judge or [I think] a prosecutor they basically offer you one along with your job. Do you disagree with this? Would your disagreement melt away if everyone (except perhaps convicted felons) were armed?