By David Harsanyi
Thursday, February 22, 2018
CNN hosted an anti-gun rally “townhall” yesterday
featuring freshly grieving children and parents from Parkland High who aimed
their ire at the NRA, politicians who are peripherally associated with the NRA
and anyone who didn’t say exactly what they wanted to hear. It was an event
where a Parkland student could compare Marco Rubio to a mass murderer and question
whether NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch truly cares about her children without ever
being challenged.
I hope CNN got the rating it was looking for, because
it’s almost guaranteed that NRA membership and gun sales are about to spike.
Between all the demonizing, heckling, sophistry,
gaslighting, platitudes and emotional appeals, members of the crowd — people
who should never be the target of conspiracy theories or ad hominem attacks, but who shouldn’t be exempted from a real
debate, either — booed a rape survivor’s story and cheered at the idea of
banning “every semiautomatic rifle in America.” Maybe someone will ask them if
they support banning every semiautomatic in America, period, since the latter
is responsible for the preponderance of gun homicides. One death is too many,
after all.
Whatever the case, these young people are about to be hit
by a harsh reality, because banning semiautomatic rifles or handguns is not
only impractical (there are probably over 5 million AR-15s in circulation
alone; and semiautomatics constitute the majority of modern guns) and not only
likely unconstitutional (the Supreme Court has found that weapons “in common
use by law-abiding citizens” are protected) but, for many millions of Americans
who worry about the Second Amendment, also highly undesirable.
Yet a star-studded line-up of liberals, many of whom are
funding the activism of Parkland students with big checks, cheered with them.
Do they all agree that every semiautomatic rifle in America should be banned?
Do they agree that anyone who supports legal semiautomatic rifles has “blood on
their hands?” Someone with access should ask.
What we do know is that the entire liberal political
class couldn’t stop praising the activism and lack of “cynicism” displayed by
these kids (a selective admiration reserved for those who coincidentally align
with their positions.) The kids were indeed earnest, even if they were
generally uneducated about gun laws, legal process, and the underpinning of the
Second Amendment — which is to be expected. Those who use them as political
shields, on the other hand, are cynical. Those who put them on TV to
participate in a national Airing of Grievances are cynical. Those who point to
bodies of victims and argue that every American who refuses to accept the
Left’s framing of the issue are the ones that deserve contempt.
What we’ve learned from the events of the past few days
is that most liberals are uninterested in a holistic answer to school shootings
— a unique problem detached from general violent crime, rates of gun ownership,
region or age. While there is no cure-all, a mix of improved background checks,
a better reporting system, better law enforcement reaction to threats, more
community involvement, and mental health reform could lower the number of
shootings. Pulling back from the massive wall-to-wall coverage, which probably
helps glorify these shooters for the next madman, might also help.
Yet as far as I can tell, banning or inhibiting gun
ownership seems to be the only answer for the Left.
For instance, while we can never truly quantify how many
shooters are dissuaded by new laws or restrictions, we do know some mass
shooters can be stopped by armed Americans. It
happens all the time. Why shouldn’t teachers and others who have a
constitutional right to protect their homes and families do the same for their
students? The dismissive, sneering reaction to that idea by most of the media
and Democrats was telling. Now, I understand some Americans don’t want to send
their kids to schools with armed teachers. That should be their choice. But the
idea that a trained concealed-carrier or guard couldn’t possibly stop or mitigate the damage done by a mass
shooter defies reality.
So a real divide exists in America. Not between those who
want to “do something” and those who don’t, but between those who believe there
is a natural right to own and defend oneself with a weapon — preferably a
semiautomatic weapon — and those who do not. The latter position seemed to be
prevalent among the young people at the town hall, and certainly among their
cheering section. While I feel great sorrow for these kids, and worry about my
own, I have no moral duty to be on their side politically.
More immediately, events like the CNN’s town hall go a
long way in convincing gun owners that gun control advocates do have a desire to confiscate their
weapons. They can’t confiscate weapons right now, so they support whatever
feasible incremental steps are available to inch further toward that goal. We
don’t know how this plays out in the long run. In the short run, though, it
does nothing to stop the next school shooting.
No comments:
Post a Comment