People who live outside the US may be unfamiliar with Metrocons. They're fiscally, and sometimes socially conservative people who live in big cities, and whose worldviews are often shaped by the values of densely populated metropoli. This tends to mean that while they're not exactly hostile to gun rights, living in a place where gun ownership has been driven to very low levels has made them disinterested in guns. They generally don't get the appeal, and don't care much one way or the other.
Cliff May, writer for the National Review, is one such Metrocon. His most recent editorial, which gives a soft endorsement to Mayor Bloomberg's proposed 1000-foot floating "gun free zone" around "important politicians" isn't too big a step from mainstream metroconism, but still, what the fuck is he thinking?
Such a law will not be a panacea. Anyone carrying a gun openly at a political rally already draws attention. “Concealed carry” is unlawful without a permit in most states and, it goes without saying, lunatics and extremists don’t care what laws are on the books.
But if this can provide even a small measure of additional protection for public servants who are too often too vulnerable, it’s worth considering.
Since when does the employer give up his fundamental rights to make the servant feel safer? Aren't we even pretending "public servant" means anything any more?