As Parkland gun control activists and their surrogates mock the idea of arming teachers, march for gun bans in D.C., and call for new gun controls via Twitter, they risk driving Americans toward the Second Amendment instead of away from it. They run this risk via their in-your-face gun control hubris, especially when that hubris is directed toward docile actors. For example, on Monday Rep. Steve King (R-IA) addressed Parkland students who want to raise the minimum age for gun purchases by asking, “If you are a teenager & believe you won’t be responsible enough to own a gun until 21, why should you vote before 21?” That is a reasonable question when one considers that voting and owning guns are both constitutional rights. Yet the responses to his question varied between things too vulgar to print and pronouncements that his political career is over–that he is a pawn of the NRA and is going to be voted out office. Or consider David Hogg, one of the most frequent spokesmen for Parkland gun control activists. He put out a PSA one week before the student march for gun control and asked, “What if our politicians weren’t the bitch of the NRA?” And it is not just the way he talks about the NRA, although that runs the risk of motivating the group’s five million-plus members to show up and vote. It is also the way he appears to set himself apart from other Americans in general. Take his March 22 Axios interview as an example. In that interview he talked of how his teachers are “very understanding” when he has to skip school for gun control events and appearances. He even talked of how he was recently supposed to take a math test but just said, “Nah.” This gives the appearance of special rules for the philosopher king, rules and opportunities that cannot be enjoyed by others. One cannot be blamed for sensing a similar, conflicting set of rules in gun controllers from Hollywood and D.C. If, by chance, you still do not see the hubris, then look at Parkland gun control activist Cameron Kasky, who spends time rejecting the idea of arming teachers to defend students when he is not making fun of Americans’ abiding conviction that we need to be armed to repel a tyranny. On Tuesday he tweeted: “To all people who think they need an assault rifle: I can not promise this, but I truly do not believe the redcoats will be coming for any of us any time soon.” And we have not even mentioned how the gun control activists treated Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch during the CNN gun control town hall. It was just a few short months ago–October 19, 2017, to be exact–that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was urging his colleagues to drop gun control until after the November 2018 election. He worried that the incessant, post-Vegas gun control push was going to hurt Democrats in the midterm elections. Yet the gun control push from Democrats has only escalated since Schumer voiced his concerns, thanks to the Parkland activists and others. Meanwhile, the NRA PAC took in February donations that were three times higher than it received during January. This could mean that people had spent months saving in a coordinated effort to give money to the NRA in February or…it could mean that Schumer was right and all the gun control rhetoric is rallying Americans to the standard once more. And that standard is the Second Amendment.
Agreed.. Author AWR Hawkins has a great point here…one I heard someone echo last night. Each time there is an overreach for guns by anti-gun, liberal politicians, there is a political backlash against them by we-the-people. That said.. If you’re thinking about getting a firearm, NOW is the time to do that, and stock up on ammo while you can. You just never know.. Also, take a minute and join the NRA or renew your membership online. If we all do it, it’ll send a powerful message to the politicians in D.C.
As President Trump and lawmakers consider ways to make schools safer in the wake of the Florida high school massacre, an academic study is reporting that U.S. schools overall are safer today than they were in the early 1990s, and there is not an epidemic of such shootings. Researchers at Northeastern University say mass school shootings are extremely rare, that shootings involving students have been declining since the 1990s, and four times as many children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today. “There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” said James Alan Fox, the Lipman Family Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy at Northeastern. He said more children die each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents. There are around 55 million schoolchildren in the U.S., the study said, and over the past 25 years, about 10 students on average per year were killed by gunfire at school. The researchers used data collected by USA Today, the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Report, Congressional Research Service, Gun Violence Archive, Stanford Geospatial Center and Stanford Libraries, Mother Jones, Everytown for Gun Safety, and a New York City Police Department report on active shooters. The Everytown group said this month that its own research shows there have been nearly 300 school shootings in America since 2013 — defining a shooting as anytime a firearm discharges a live round inside or into a school building or on a school campus. Since the shooting on Feb. 14 in Parkland, Florida, that killed 17 people and wounded 15 others, policymakers including Mr. Trump have been exploring ways to prevent more school shootings, including proposals to arm more teachers and to raise the age limit for purchasing firearms. Mr. Fox said some policy changes could lead to an overall decrease in gun violence, such as banning “bump stocks” and raising the age of purchase for assault rifles from 18 to 21. But he doesn’t believe such measures will prevent all school shootings. “The thing to remember is that these are extremely rare events, and no matter what you can come up with to prevent it, the shooter will have a workaround,” Mr. Fox said in a report on the university’s website.
Exactly!! Some good info here that the White House and members of Congress need to read. So, please forward it on to your member of Congress and both of your U.S. Senators, regardless of party. Oftentimes it is they who pass laws which restrict our freedoms based on emotion; NOT facts. To read the rest of the article, click on the text above.