Just when you think the National Education Association couldn’t wedge themselves any deeper into the padded corners of their own ideological safe space, they go and protest a bill that—wait for it—makes Americans safer.
I know, I know. You’re thinking, “Surely they’re not opposing something as basic as letting law enforcement officers carry firearms across state lines?” Oh yes. Yes, they are. And it’s a masterclass in the kind of logic you get when your organization is run by people who think arming a school resource officer is somehow more dangerous than turning an auditorium into a vape-scented panic room because Kyle forgot his pronouns.
The bill in question is the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Reform Act of 2025—H.R. 2243, if you’re keeping score. This common-sense legislation would allow both current and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed across state lines. You know, like grown-ups. Like people we entrust with life-and-death situations. Like folks trained to de-escalate a violent threat while half the country still fumbles with unlocking their phones.
But the NEA? Oh no. They don’t like it one bit. They sent an actual letter to Congress, and I’m quoting here: “On behalf of the 3 million members of the National Education Association… we ask you to vote NO on the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Reform Act.”
No. Just flat-out no. No nuance. No acknowledgment that police officers might—just might—be a net positive when society goes full potato. Instead, they threatened to include support for the bill as a negative mark in their Congressional report card. So basically, if you’re a lawmaker who dares to say, “Hey, maybe a trained cop with a gun isn’t the worst thing to have around during a crisis,” the NEA will put you in time-out with the other wrongthinkers.
Let’s pause here and state the obvious: the bill doesn’t arm random civilians. It’s not turning PTA meetings into shootouts at the O.K. Corral. It simply allows trained law enforcement officers—some of whom have spent decades dealing with real-world violence—to carry across state lines. Because bad guys don’t check the local laws before they open fire at a shopping mall. Funny how that works.
As Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska pointed out, “These measured changes will make existing law stronger and more workable… while maintaining the rigorous standards that currently apply.” Translation: it’s not a free-for-all. You still have to be vetted, trained, and certified. It’s not like they’re handing out Glock 19s with Happy Meals.
But what does the NEA think will make us safer? They’d rather give every student a therapeutic coloring book and a pamphlet on conflict resolution. Their idea of public safety is a guidance counselor with a megaphone shouting, “Use your words!” at someone swinging an axe in the school parking lot.
Let’s be honest—most Americans wouldn’t mind one bit if a retired police officer was seated two rows over when the fire alarm gets pulled at the movie theater. But the NEA? They don’t trust cops. Unless they’re unarmed, wearing a rainbow patch, and helping facilitate a “safe space drum circle” on school grounds.
Here’s a line from their letter that perfectly sums up their thinking: “The legislation will bring more guns to the places we gather.” Yes. It will. Guns in the hands of people who know how to use them to stop the kind of people who don’t care about your TikTok activism or your “Gun-Free Zone” signage.
But the NEA calls that a threat. They think the presence of a firearm—even in the holster of a seasoned law enforcement veteran—is inherently evil. Like the gun itself is going to leap from the holster and start quoting Alex Jones while firing into the air.
Their closing statement is almost too absurd to parody: “We can only attain this goal by enacting commonsense gun reforms and providing greater access to mental health resources…”
I’m sorry, but you can’t just hand out a box of tissues and a mindfulness app and expect that to stop a lunatic from storming a public place. You need deterrence. You need real consequences. And sometimes, yeah, you need a guy with a gun and a badge who can drop a threat in five seconds flat.
Of course, the bill is still alive—it’s passed out of the House Judiciary Committee and is waiting for a vote. Whether it passes or not depends on whether common sense can still get a word in edgewise in a room full of career politicians who have more empathy for criminals than the people sworn to stop them.
If this bill goes down, it won’t be because of logic or public safety. It’ll be because too many legislators are scared of being scolded by a teachers union that thinks “diversity training” is more important than keeping kids from being shot.
Bottom line? You can’t fix stupid. But you can arm someone to deal with it when it walks through the front doors with a weapon and bad intentions. The NEA doesn’t get that—and that’s exactly why they’re the last people we should be listening to about public safety.
You want real peace of mind? It starts with trusting the people who’ve already proven they can protect us—and giving them the legal tools to do it, no matter what zip code they’re standing in.
