Senate Democrats called for the passage of gun control laws within hours of the November 5 church shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas. The senators include Bob Casey (D-PA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Chris Murphy (D-CT). All five expressed their gun control desires via Twitter. Casey called for Congress to “take action” but did not explain what gun control could have stopped the Sutherland attacker. Sen. Durbin also tweeted that “Congress must act,” but he did not explain what those actions should be. Sen. Blumenthal also called for action without providing any explanation as to what that action ought to be. Sen. Feinstein struck a similar tone, tweeting: “When will we decide that we can’t accept massacres in our places of worship, schools, or at concerts? When will we actually DO something?” Sen. Murphy used his tweets to hurl invectives at senators and House members who oppose punishing law-abiding gun owners over the heinous actions of a criminal: “Can you sleep tonight, colleagues, when the price of gun lobby goodwill is this – blood soaked church and school floors, city streets?” Following the October 1 Las Vegas attack, Sen. Murphy called for universal background checks. Such checks already exist at all retail points of sale, and Murphy wanted to expand them to all private sales too. Ironically, the Vegas attacker passed background checks repeatedly in order to acquire his firearms.
But, to these self-righteous, agenda-driven Senate Dems using this horrific event to shamelessly grandstand, the facts do not matter. They have no real solutions. They’re just emoting, and playing on the emotions of the low-information voters (i.e. their constituents), to support their extreme liberal, anti-gun agenda. That’s all this is. It’s all from their worn-out playbook. Seize on a tragedy, and play on people’s emotions to further their liberal agenda. Sad, but not surprising…
With the automatic caveat that early reports are often wrong, it appears that the man who attacked the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, was a dishonorably discharged veteran of the United States Air Force. If this report is accurate, he wasn’t permitted to legally own a firearm. As the ATF explains, the Gun Control Act prohibits any person who’s been “discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions” from shipping, transporting, receiving, or possessing a firearm or ammunition. The shooter apparently cared as much about the Gun Control Act as he cared for laws prohibiting murder. While the Texas shooter was obviously able to fire on the church members long enough to commit one of the worst mass murders in American history, he appears to have been stopped by a good guy with a gun — a civilian who armed himself and engaged the shooter: According to the law-enforcement briefing, a resident engaged the shooter with his own gun, the shooter then dropped his rifle and tried to escape by car. He died in the car, but it was not clear (as of the time of this post) whether he died after being shot by the resident or whether he killed himself. Already Twitter is erupting in furious arguments over gun control, concealed carry, and various pie-in-the-sky “solutions” to the problem of mass murder. The calls to “do something” will ring out once again, and if the past is any guide, the various gun-control proposals that will be put forward with maximum rage and sanctimony wouldn’t have stopped this — or any other — recent mass killing. At the same time, however, while I’m extraordinarily grateful for the courage of the good guys with guns who’ve ultimately put a stop to multiple mass shootings — including this dreadful massacre — it’s not at all clear to me that good guys with guns present the answer to our troubles. They help, certainly, but they are not the cure for this national disease. If recent history teaches us anything, it’s that there is no reliable way to stop a man determined to commit mass murder. He can use guns, cars, trucks, fertilizer, or boxcutters to exact a terrible toll in human life. Though there is no single answer, there is still effort. Individually, that means learning to how to use a weapon, carrying it, and remaining prepared to defend yourself and the people around you. Individually, that means if you see something, you say something. If a person is acting erratically or radicalizing in dangerous ways, then contact local law enforcement. Collectively, it’s difficult to identify effective prophylactic public policies. We have better answers for jihadists and other terrorists than we do for vengeful and evil men who lash out based on purely individual slights, real or imagined. In the meantime, we once again mourn the dead, express thanks for the brave, and do our best to rationally seek answers in a nation beset by grief, anger, and division. (Update: The Daily Beast is reporting that the shooter received a bad-conduct discharge — not a dishonorable discharge — after a domestic-violence conviction. The domestic-violence conviction would have also barred the shooter from possessing a firearm.)
Exactly.. Another “gun law” would not have prevented this horrible event in Texas. The suspect was already committing a felony simply possessing the weapon he had. And, unfortunately, you cannot stop every evil act. That is simply an uncomfortable fact/reality….whether it’s using a rented truck to run over people on a sidewalk in New York, or illegally getting a hold of a firearm and using it to commit murder. Thanks to attorney, and Army Reserve officer (Major), David French for sharing his perspective. David was awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.