Just One ‘Gun Law’ Could Have Reduced ‘Stoneman Shooting’ Killings
“Another school shooting” has rocked America, once more bringing out how divided the country is on guns. As we’ve seen before, furious words are being hurled by raging citizen disarmament zealots manifesting their hatred of those who believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and accusing “NRA” of having “blood on its hands.” As usual, we see opportunistic and strident “progressive” politicians, cheerleading “journalists” and foaming-at-the-mouth “celebrities” egging that on, and posturing loudly for new “gun laws.”
“Debate” with fanatics vested in citizen disarmament is a wasted effort. At best, those attempting to inject reality into the public discourse may help enlighten those who have not given the matter close scrutiny and retain open minds. As for those whose minds are on lockdown, ask what laws would have made a difference in the atrocity at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High. You’ll get the same tired old platitudes.
Background checks? How have those worked at “stopping the violence” in places like Chicago? Besides, the suspect reportedly passed one.
Banning so-called “assault weapons”? Those represent only a small fraction of homicides committed with firearms, so anyone seriously proposing that needs to also demand a ban on handguns.
As previously reported at Oath Keepers, Nancy Pelosi admitted the “slippery slope” gun-grabbers used to ridicule as “paranoid,” but which the founders of the modern disarmament movement freely endorsed. And lest you think banning all guns hasn’t been a long-term goal, check out what I found from the Jan. 1968 issue of GUNS Magazine while doing some research:
So much for the lie that “No one is talking about taking your guns.” Of course they are. That’s the end game, or at least the beginning of the end game.
OK, so if guns are at a stalemate, what about identifying common factors to stop killers before they can strike? Like Hollywood’s Department of Precrime…?
There are plenty of conflicting reports about the suspect’s mental state, temperament, politics and ideology, with many playing “Gotcha” to conflate and spread blame. And people are naturally curious about such aberrations in their midst and information gets put out there that later turns out to be inaccurate. We’re still finding out much about him, not that the finger-pointing matters in terms of resolving anything. And our finding out is being hampered anyway now that the suspect’s social media presence is being taken down, forcing the public to rely on major media passing along what civil authority wants them to know.
The only relevant ideology is that he is twisted and evil. No one in his right mind advocates killing innocents.
Speaking of “right mind,” how about the “fact” that “everybody knew” the suspect was a likely school shooter? Even the FBI had been informed and they didn’t follow up properly!
While we don’t know what they legally could have done, it’s tempting to believe they could have taken the suspect out of the general populace.
On what grounds? We can’t throw away due process. Recall that despite three visits, cops from a few years back say they didn’t have enough to remove the Isla Vista killer from circulation (which, among other things, was a spectacular admission of how California gun registration has proven useless at preventing anything.)
So I’m saying that’s just the way it is? Nothing can be done?
Not at all. There is one “gun law” that at least had the potential to make a difference, but it was being infringed by “gun free school zoned” edicts. Broward County Public Schools, of which Stoneman Douglas is part, explains on its website:
No person shall be authorized to carry any weapon or firearm into any meeting of the public school district; any school athletic event not related to firearms; any school administration building; any school facility; and/or school sponsored event. Any person possessing, transmitting, and/or using a weapon on School Board property shall be subject to arrest. In addition, employees who violate this policy may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment. The SBBC hereby waives the exception in section 790.115(2)(a)3., and therefore prohibits the possession of any firearms in vehicles for student or campus parking privileges. a. Certified law enforcement officers are exempt when working within scope of their employment. b. School Board property shall be defined as school grounds, facilities, administrative offices, bus stop, school bus, or vehicle provided for transportation by the school system. c. School sponsored activities shall be defined as any approved School Board event or official School Board business, on or off School Board property.
Don’t look for the Second Amendment to be recognized any time soon by our representatives or the courts as “being necessary to the security of a free State.” Instead, look for renewed demands to enact even more citizen disarmament edicts.
We’ll see if this puts the kibosh on the Republicans’ stomach for nationwide concealed carry reciprocity with the midterms coming up. And don’t be surprised if some “gun rights leaders” — prone to endorsing “compromises” on things like “bump stocks” or “Fix NICS” — decide it’s time for them to extend another olive branch to those who want nothing less than everything.
The proper response of course, for those who would “guard with jealous attention the public liberty,” is to respond to gun-grab demands with one word:
“No.” You can add “Your move” for effect.
For those who still insist on the disarmament we see so many calling for, I have one question:
How many men who resist are you willing to see killed in order to make that happen?
Don’t be surprised if some of the more emotion-driven and restraint-challenged answer “All of you.”
STATEMENT BY STEWART RHODES, FOUNDER OF OATH KEEPERS:
A terrorist, a drug lord, a gang, or a raving lunatic, can all get whatever they need on the black market worldwide. That is the reality.
Given that reality, exactly what gun law here in the U.S. would have possibly prevented that crime? None. You can’t legislate away the existence of modern firearms. They will exist. But you can empower we the people, in all places, to be the protectors and actual first-responders the founders expected us to be as the militia. An armed populace – including teachers and school staff – who are allowed to protect the children under their care, is the answer, just as it has been the answer in Israel for decades in defense of their children at school. It works. in fact, that is the only thing that works when a school is targeted for attack. Everything else is simply too slow, as this latest shooting again demonstrates with the police failing to stop the shooter in time to prevent 18 deaths, and counting.
The staff and the teachers need to be able to put a stop to the killing, because they are ALWAYS THERE and don’t need to come from somewhere else. They and they alone can provide the fast response that is needed to stop the killing. When seconds count, the police are only moments away. And that means the teachers and staff need to be armed and trained, just like in a church the staff and volunteers need to be trained. The recent mass slaughter at Sutherland Spring Baptist Church in Texas shows that reality all to well. Even with a local hero like Stephen Willeford responding as fast as he could with his own AR to stop the killing (beating the cops there) he was nowhere near as fast as an armed church member would have been, if any had been armed.
Whether it is a church, a school, a college, a mall, or any other public soft target for terrorism or mass murdering nuts, the answer is that the intended victims must be able to defend themselves and to protect those under their care.
One answer short term is for us trained military and police veterans to volunteer to do shifts at schools as armed guards across the nation until we can get enough teachers and staff trained up. I’ll serve, Won’t you? Stewart
If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work. You can donate HERE.
David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”