In the Wyoming legislative session that starts today (Tuesday), repealing gun free zones will be back on the menu. Rep. Jeremy Haroldson’s (R-Wheatland) House Bill 125, amended several times to …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
The Powell Tribune has expanded its online content. To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free web account by clicking here.
If you already have a web account, but need to reset it, you can do so by clicking here.
If you would like to purchase a subscription click here.
Please log in to continue |
|
In the Wyoming legislative session that starts today (Tuesday), repealing gun free zones will be back on the menu. Rep. Jeremy Haroldson’s (R-Wheatland) House Bill 125, amended several times to gain support, passed in the 2024 budget session with big majorities in both houses, only to be vetoed by the governor. It will no doubt be introduced again in this year’s session, and will probably pass with a veto-proof majority, well before the clock runs out. I’d like to see some improvements before that happens.
Purists insist that the Second Amendment’s “shall not infringe” is literal and inarguable, and the right to keep and bear arms cannot be restricted or regulated in any way. But these bills always preserve some restrictions and Haroldson’s bill is no different. It doesn’t attempt to repeal all state “gun free zones” because if it allowed concealed carry in (for instance) courtrooms, mental health facilities and boozed up college athletic events, it wouldn’t stand a chance; and it only expands the right to carry for those who possess a state-issued permit, which itself is an “infringement” to some 2A purists. Gun rights in a state like Wyoming may be an unstoppable force, but political reality is sometimes an immovable object.
Haroldson’s bill would allow concealed carry with a permit in K-12 schools, colleges and UW as well as several other places where it is currently illegal. The political reality is that the education lobby in Wyoming resists this, which was a factor in the governor’s 2024 veto. I’m with the “repeal” crowd, as far as colleges and the university are concerned, but the smarter approach politically might be to address those venues in a separate bill, using the approach taken in 2017 for K-12 schools, of giving the local trustees some degree of choice. The education lobby didn’t fight that bill, and it became law with no significant opposition. I believe that some of our colleges would authorize concealed carry today if given the choice — and the rest could then observe how safe and effective such a policy truly is. Try to force all of them — and the university — to accept concealed carry on their campuses, and they will close ranks and resist as they have in the past. Take schools out of this bill, and they will not fight it. Legal, safe, concealed carry in many other currently forbidden venues across the state could easily get signed into law this year; and then, or even in a parallel effort this session, we can focus on the schools, where a satisfactory solution is already available.
Beyond the practical political considerations, I believe that allowing concealed carry by any permitted individual in any K-12 school will do little to improve school security against the mass shooter threat. I love my fellow armed citizens, and I trust their stability, their motives, their bravery and principles. However, based on first-hand experience, I believe that it takes 32-48 hours or more of very specific, demanding training for an individual to be ready to stop an active shooter in the first few minutes, before police arrive, which is when all the casualties typically occur. I know some people with Wyoming concealed carry permits who have completed that kind of training and sustained those skills through repetitive training and ongoing practice — and others who have not. I know that armed school staff, where they are present, do train that much, are known to their SROs and local police first responders, and train alongside them to ensure safe link up and cooperation in a crisis. And finally, how likely is it that any armed citizen will be present in a particular school, on the one day it matters? Armed, trained, vetted teachers, administrators and staff work there every day. In districts that do not have armed staff programs, access by permitted concealed carriers may be better than nothing, offering a smidgeon of deterrence, and a possibility of effective defense in the last resort, but it’s not the best solution.
I’m not happy with how few school districts have so far exercised their option to arm volunteers from their staff — that’s a textbook case of normalcy bias, the “can’t happen here” tendency to ignore threats that you’ve never seen before. Last session, the Legislature established a fund for financial assistance to school districts with armed staff programs, while another effort to actively encourage districts to adopt such programs failed in committee. More can be done to promote and expand these programs.
We’ll see where all this goes as bills are introduced, debated, and brought to a vote. Hopefully, some combination of these alternative solutions will be considered, because our schools’ safety may be worth it.
(Bill Tallen, writing from Wapiti, is a veteran of the U.S. Army and the National Nuclear Security Administration with a master's degree from the US Naval War College)