What's a 'recreational facility'?(NC)

Garner, on the other hand, defined "recreational facility" for what it seems to be - a playground, ball field, gym or swimming pool. That definition seems more in line with what the General Assembly, though we suspect the courts will ultimately write the definition. (And we suspect lawmakers were purposely vague in defining recreational facility because they wanted the courts to.)

As for those who think that law-abiding folks ought to be able to carry a gun wherever they want, we're sympathetic. At the same time, we sympathize with moms and dads who might be uncomfortable at the sight of someone packing a handgun on the playground. We sympathize too with referees who don't want to confront parents with pistols, and no one wants an athlete or spectator to get caught in the crossfire of an exchange of gunfire.

We know what gun-rights advocates are thinking right about now: Criminals, because they're criminals, are not going to respect a ban on handguns at recreational facilities. They're right, of course. We just don't know that a ban on handguns on playgrounds is worth challenging in a courtroom or in the court of public opinion.

We will forever defend the right of people in this country to bear arms, but we also support reasonable restrictions on where people can carry guns. Which is to say that if it's reasonable to keep handguns out of, say, courthouses, it's reasonable to keep them off of playgrounds too.

The ugly truth is that gun free zones are not about irrational dreams of safety. They certainly are about power and control. The irrational spouting about safety is just a way to get emotional support from those who don’t realy think about the issue.

Gun free zones are just another incremental way to move toward total control. The idea is simple: make an example of a place where guns are not allowed, with no rational reason other than “we do not tolerated armed citizens *here*” . This lends legitimacy to the thought that citizens with guns are a bad thing, and the idea that more such zones should be created and encouraged. Havn’t we all heard a variant of “If we do not allow guns in (school, legislature, church) then we certainly should not allow them in (school, legislature, church, parking lot, mall, store, DC.)

Gun free zones are designed to grow and spread, like small pox.

The other purpose of gun free zones is to make carrying a gun as uncomfortable, legaly dangerous, and impractical as possible. Look at any map that shows the impact of the insane “Gun Free School Zone” act of 1996. In any urban area, it becomes impossible to conduct business in a normal manner while carrying a gun that is not licensed in that state, without breaking the law.

Neither of these clear purposes is discussed openly by those who detest free citizens and fear the power that they gain from carrying guns, and the independent mindset that it fosters.

The left is based on lies, derives its power from lies, and cannot exist when its lies are exposed.

Which is to say that if it’s reasonable to keep handguns out of, say, courthouses, it’s reasonable to keep them off of playgrounds too.

The first reasonable, isn’t, so therefor the second must not be as well. Who’s defining reasonable? Surely not someone other than Mr Webster?

At the same time, we sympathize with moms and dads who might be uncomfortable at the sight of someone packing a handgun on the playground.

AAAAAAAGH! Criminals aren't going to obey your ban on "packing", nitwit reporter! And the 2nd Amendment NOR NC law say anything about others being "unconfortable"!

I'm glad we are winning some battles on the 2nd Amendment. But people in large US cities are, by and large, hoplophobes. Until that changes, expect the 2nd to be infringed.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.