While nobody has ever accused “progressives” of consistency, even they must be wondering about their perspective on Cuccinelli after his office filed the legal brief in Digiacinto v. The Rector and Visitors of George Mason University. The brief was filed to the Virginia Supreme Court regarding a challenge to GMU’s regulation prohibiting the possession of firearms in university buildings and at university events. Mr. Cuccinelli filed a brief in favor of GMU’s regulation. However, it was the tone of Cuccinelli’s brief which should warm the cockles of any liberal’s heart.
“Without the regulation, the University community’s safety is seriously compromised. Unquestionably, the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens. Nevertheless, a rejected student applicant could walk into the Dean of Admissions office with an openly visible sidearm to discuss why the university rejected his application. An expelled student could do the same while he met with the Dean of Students to discuss his appeal of his expulsion. A disgruntled ex-boyfriend armed with a large hunting knife mounted on his side could enter the student residences to speak with his former girlfriend where she lived. Finally, any person who wishes to enter Fenwick Library with a sidearm, could not only frighten students and minors, such as preschoolers, but also expose them to unnecessary risks, such as an accidental discharge.”
Wow!
It seems to me that the District of Columbia v. Heller US Supreme Court ruling provided ample “wiggle room” for Mr. Cuccinelli to go either way with this brief. The overall ruling clearly asserted a personal right to bear arms as part of the second amendment. However, the majority opinion also clearly stated that there could be reasonable regulation of that right.
After the Virginia Tech massacre I believe that good public policy would argue in favor of allowing university administrations to limit firearms on campus.
