TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS
Carrying firearms a chance to educate public

    Have you ever watched a Western movie and noticed the cowboy who looked out of place, but you couldn't figure out why? At some point in the movie it is pointed out that ol' Slim doesn't pack iron because he killed/nearly killed an innocent man/woman/child years ago and he swore he'd never touch another gun. How Slim deals with his demons is his own business; the point is that he stand out because he's not wearing a six-shooter.

    These days the tables have turned and now most people are not seen with a handgun perched on their hip. When one sees someone carrying a gun, one usually assumes the armed person is either an off-duty police officer or someone up to no good. Most likely both assumptions are wrong.

    There is a growing cadre of law-abiding gun owners who use their everyday interactions with others to educate them about firearms and our rights. According to a Los Angeles Times story, most states allow people who aren't barred from owning or carrying firearms to carry them openly. That is the way things should work in a free society; what isn't specifically forbidden is allowed. And government must have a good reason to forbid something.

    Open carry is legal in Colorado, except where specifically banned. Locally, open carry was the subject du jour in 2003 when a man began carrying a shotgun with him as he went about his business. When his business included attending City Council meetings, council members took notice and banned open-carry in city-owned buildings. El Paso County has a similar law. Other than government buildings, including public schools and post offices, carrying firearms openly is legal most places in the Pikes Peak region.

    Property owners have the right to forbid customers to carry on their property. We'd urge them to err on the side of freedom. When people see firearms owners as the friendly guy ahead of them in line at the grocery store or the woman sharing a joke with them at the coffee shop, they're likely to have a good opinion of firearms owners. Too often, the only thing non-owners hear about firearms is in connection to criminal activity. That unfairly casts legitimate owners in a bad light.

    It's not just men packing iron these days, either. More women than ever before are attending firearms safety classes and carrying guns, openly or concealed. They know that firearms can be a safety factor for someone who knows how to use them. A 250-pound thug will think twice when he discovers his 130-pound intended victim is not inclined to do his bidding and has the ability to protect herself and her rights.

    Firearms dealers and shooting clubs are presenting classes specifically aimed at educating women about firearms. Manufacturers are responding to this new market by rolling out firearms designed for women's smaller hands.

    Open carry is not without its problems, though. Many police officers might not be aware of the legality of the practice and are apt to err on the side of caution when they come in contact with an armed citizen. Other people can feel uncomfortable in the presence of a firearm and might complain to management or call the police. Those who carry openly must be ready to explain their rights and let others know they don't present a threat.

    It can be a dangerous world, and the recent budget cuts show there won't always be a police officer or sheriff's deputy around to protect everyone. Even if government had enough money to put an officer on every block, he could be at the other end of the block when some bad actor demands your wallet or kicks in your front door. Ultimately, each person is responsible for his or her own safety. And if gun owners can educate the public on positive aspects of firearms, everyone is better off.

AMTRAK TAPS TAXPAYERS

    With gas prices hovering around $4 a gallon in most of the country and little relief in sight, folks are doing what they can to squeeze more miles out of their fuel dollar. Some are switching to smaller cars, motorcycles or scooters. Others are taking to the bicycles they've had stashed in the garage. For longer trips, many turn to rail travel.

    That's good news for Amtrak, the nation's long-struggling passenger service. Amtrak and its supporters in Congress used the increase in passengers to push through a bill giving the service $14.9 billion over the next five years. But it's bad news for taxpayers who now must pour more money down the hole that is Amtrak.

    Since its creation by Congress in 1971, Amtrak has been a losing proposition for taxpayers. All pay to subsidize a service few use. Under the original law, passenger rail service in the U.S. was to be self-sufficient for its operating expenses by the end of 2002. Five years after the deadline, we're not even close.

    One positive thing the House version of the bill has is a provision that requires the Department of Transportation to solicit proposals from the private sector to operate high-speed trains between Washington, D.C., and New York. According to an Associated Press report, critics argue that would strip the one profitable route from the government service, further increasing the need for tax dollars to keep the rest of the system afloat. But private operators could develop equipment and policies Amtrak could emulate in other parts of its system in an effort to remain viable.

    One of the biggest hurdles Amtrak must overcome is Congress' demands that the service reach as many Americans as possible. That's a big leap in a nation as spread out as ours. Rail service might make sense and be commercially viable in densely populated regions, but as the population diminishes, so does the feasibility of rail service. There's simply no way to provide the same service to southeastern Colorado as people have in the Boston-New York-Washington corridor.

    The AP reports both the House and Senate bills passed with veto-proof majorities. That being the case, we'd like to see the privatization provision included in the final version of the bill. It would be a step in the direction of making Amtrak more self-sufficient by providing a model for the service to follow.