When it comes to the anti-gunners’ viewpoint, don’t be too hasty in thinking that things can’t get more ridiculous than they already are, because–as this story illustrates–they most assuredly can.

[Recently], the Daily Caller reported that, in response to a law requiring the posting of small, “no guns allowed” stickers where the carry of concealed firearms is still banned, some school officials in the Chicago suburbs are deeply troubled over the fact that the signs banning guns actually show a very basic image of all things…a gun! In other words, they’re disgruntled over the fact that an image of a gun appears on signs banning guns!

The 4-by-6-inch stickers are intended to announce that guns cannot be carried in schools, and feature small picture of a black gun with a red slash through it on a white background–the standard “no fill-in-the-blank-allowed” stickers, such as “no smoking allowed,” or “no dogs allowed.” And who would ever suggest removing the image of a cigarette or dog from those signs? That would be absurd. The whole point of the sign is to allow the person viewing it to instantly recognize what is disallowed.

According to the article, one administrator, Theresa Nolan, principal of Tinley Park High School, stressed that she is very concerned with “safety and security” and is further concerned that, somehow, someone could wrongly interpret an image of a gun as part of the universal prohibition sign. “It is bothersome to have to post a sticker of a gun that says, ‘Hey, folks, leave your guns at home,'” Nolan said. “I think the general public will be alarmed by it and wonder if people have been allowed to bring guns to school in the past.”

One has to wonder if Nolan thinks the general public, upon seeing a similar “no smoking allowed” or “no dogs allowed” sign, would be alarmed and wonder if people had previously been allowed to smoke or have a dog in the area.

Administrators concerned with “safety and security” should be less troubled over images of guns appearing on signs banning guns, and more focused on strategies that work. Our children are our most precious resource and have to be protected. A “no guns allowed” sticker–with or without an image of a gun–does not make a school secure.

Gun control supporters have lately used the 20th anniversary of Bill Clinton’s signing of the Brady Act into law as an excuse to repeat their demand for “universal” background checks. Even though most people who commit crimes with guns defeat the Brady Act by getting their guns by theft, on the black market, or from straw purchasers, anti-gunners have portrayed the law as having saved countless lives.

Nevertheless, the gun ban movement is altogether ignoring two other significant anniversaries associated with its efforts.

Last month marked the 40-year anniversary of the founding of the National Council to Control Handguns, which in its early days openly admitted that it supported banning the private possession of handguns. It has since been renamed the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and while its handgun banning rhetoric is more muted, its goals are still to ban guns by any means necessary.

Since the group’s formation, Americans have bought over 60 million handguns, bringing the total to somewhere around 100 million; 32 more states have adopted Right–to-Carry laws, bringing the total to 42; and, contrary to the group’s predictions, the nation’s murder rate has decreased to a 49-year low. That’s not much for anti-gun rabble-rousers to celebrate.

The other anniversary relates to something with a more contemporary significance. On Saturday, it will have been 25 years since the late-Sen. Howard Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) introduced the first federal legislation in anti-gunners’ war against the most universally useful firearms of all time: general-purpose semi-automatic rifles, such as the extraordinarily popular AR-15.