It "makes a lot of sense," according to former Texas governor Rick Perry, to insert guns into as many situations as possible.
The Republican presidential candidate spoke to CNN yesterday and said those who are murdered in movie theaters and other "gun-free zones" may survive the ordeal if they're armed; enabling them to return fire.
"I think that it makes a lot of sense to send a message across this country. If we believe in the Second Amendment, and we believe in people's right to protect themselves and defend themselves, and their families," he told Tapper. [...]
"I believe that, with all my heart, that if you have the citizens who are well trained, and particularly in these places that are considered to be gun-free zones, that we can stop that type of activity, or stop it before there's as many people that are impacted as what we saw in Lafayette," Perry said.
This is the inherent weakness of the Guns Everywhere argument. There's no way to know when a Good Guy with a Gun will flip and become a Bad Guy with a Gun. They're all good guys with guns until they pull the trigger.
Furthermore, you have to ask where this ends. Is Rick Perry calling on parents and grandparents to pack a pistol when they take the kids to see the latest Pixar film? Does daddy need to carry a gun with him to see Minions? Does this end with a gunfight on every corner? An eye over every shoulder?
The presence of guns clearly isn't a strong deterrent. In Perry's home state of Texas, police headquarters have come under attack twice in the past year, by right wing gunmen. There's a lot of guns in a police station and there's also no shortage of hubris or delusions of grandeur among shooters who see themselves as masters at arms.