Do Republicans still believe in such old-fashioned concepts as local control and state sovereignty? Apparently a lot of them don’t, judging from what they’ve been doing in Washington lately.
They tried, unsuccessfully, to get Senate approval of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage anywhere in the United States, from Savannah to San Francisco. Now President Bush has signed legislation that will let off-duty and retired police officers carry concealed firearms in any jurisdiction in the country, regardless of what the people who live in a given place may prefer.
The bill, which managed to avoid attracting much notice until it was already in the books, deserved a thorough debate at the very least. It’s an astonishingly arrogant assertion of the principle that Washington knows best. It ought to embarrass any lawmaker who has ever suggested that the federal government is too big or too powerful.
The text of the measure couldn’t be any more emphatic, or any more presumptuous. It grants this prerogative “notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any state or any political subdivision.”
“Conceal-carry” laws have always been a matter for state and local lawmakers. In recent years, in fact, most states have chosen to allow citizens to carry guns with a state license after undergoing safety training. Illinois has resisted the calls, on the sensible theory that allowing more weapons on the streets is not likely to reduce the level of gun violence. Critics who think Illinois has the wrong policy are free to change it, but only if they can persuade Illinoisans and their elected representatives of the need for change.
When it comes to off-duty and retired police, though, Illinoisans have been cut out of the decision. Never mind that this year, the General Assembly declined to pass a bill, endorsed by the governor, granting conceal-carry privileges to retired cops. The federal law now reigns. If a former Georgia sheriff wants to bring his trusty 9 mm with him when he visits Chicago, he’s free to do so.
It’s one thing to say that a municipality gains from having its own off-duty cops around and prepared to perform their duties if trouble erupts. But current or former police officers visiting from elsewhere may not be nearly as much of an asset–and could be more of a danger than cops who know the community. Locals who trust their own police departments may not want to extend a blank check to any cop in America, active or retired.
Why did Congress insist on butting into this arena? Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) defended the measure as a way of “making our communities safer” at no cost to taxpayers. But he assumes that he and his Capitol Hill colleagues are better able to judge what is best for each state and each community than the people living there.
He’s wrong, but everyone will have to live with this mistake.
