New York Magazine (!)
It’s been two weeks since a heavily armed psychopath turned Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School into a war zone — and the survivors of that massacre have already changed gun politics in the United States for the better.
With their acts of witness and advocacy, the teenage protesters of Parkland, Florida, shook many voters out of their complacency about pervasive gun violence. Upwards of 30,000 people lose their lives to firearms in our nation each year, a level of carnage unparalleled anywhere in the developed world. And yet, last October — just days after the worst mass shooting in American history — only 52 percent of Americans told CNN’s pollsters that they supported “stricter gun laws.”
Today, that figure is 70 percent — the highest it’s been at any time since 1993. Recent polls from Quinnipiac University and Politico/Morning Consult have produced nearly identical results. In Florida, long a bastion of NRA support, the leftward turn in public opinion has been especially sharp.
Moderate Democrats have had their “come to an assault weapons ban” moment. Moderate Republicans (such as they are) are imploring their party to move left on the gun issue. Major gun sellers are cutting tieswith the NRA and imposing their own restrictions on firearm sales. Even Donald Trump has called for strengthening America’s background check system.
By keeping the national spotlight on the mass murder at their high school — and calling on their peers across the country to walk out of their schools, so as to “no longer risk their lives waiting for someone else to take action to stop the epidemic of mass school shootings” in the United States — the theater kids of Marjory Stoneman Douglas have built the broadest public consensus for gun-safety measures that America has seen in a quarter-century.
But they’ve also (inadvertently) triggered a moral panic about the safety of America’s schools that has little basis in empirical reality — and which is already lending momentum to policies that would increase juvenile incarceration, waste precious educational resources on security theater, and bring more guns into our nation’s classrooms.
My God… is this the left’s argument for “safety”?
So, whatever happened to “if one life can be saved”? Since there is a direct correlation between the advent of “gun free zones” and an increase of mass shootings, what more could they want? This is far more strict than the normal CHL. What opposition to this represents is exposure of what the real goal is: total disarmament, which would not be “total” at all.
Well, the Columbine shooting was NOT ignored, was it? Afterwards, we got the “Assault Weapon Ban” which accomplished… absolutely nothing. Because, long guns are rarely used in crimes.
Herein you will find the core stupidity of the left’s argument. Had Obama’s executive order to ignored crimes and misbehavior committed by minorities, which constitutes MOST of the internal problems within schools, Cruz would have had over 40 incidents on his record indicating dangerous violent and erratic behavior. His multiple expulsions from schools would be recorded. The 45 or so police calls to his places of residence would be documented. IF (and that is a big if) the proper authorities had done their job evaluating this information, filled the proper blanks and checked the appropriate boxes, Cruz could have NEVER bought a weapon… the famed “background checks” most agree upon and support. No, scrap that. The left wants to excuse bad behavior, ignore dangerous precedents and excuse violent tendencies and, instead, blame an instrument of metal, wood and plastic for crimes.
To make the liberal argument, you have to ignore reality.
So, teachers, the vast majority of whom are liberal, are racist. Nice.
Is it a rule in the liberal handbook to overlook the obvious 100% of the time? Did it ever occur to liberals that there might… just MIGHT… be a discipline problem in schools and, due to the ongoing poverty of minorities and the influx of illegal immigrant children in schools, this MIGHT result in minorities being disproportionally (but not necessarily unfairly) represented in disciplinary problems? No, by all means, do NOT look at decades of liberal policies regarding excising discipline from society and consider how they have failed and created an open-ended monster. DON’T do that… it’s racist.
There you go… the money shot. No matter what happens, the results will be the Republican’s fault. Follow our (liberals) recommendations, but if the the violence continues or gets worse, it’s because Republicans didn’t go far enough. Now, in that case, what could we possibly do? HEY! I have it!! Ban more guns!!
“But, we are against discipline, arming teachers, ending “gun free zones” and documenting behavioral problems.” In other words, kill more… it’s good for the gun control business.
This is how stupid liberals think people are. No, really.
A remarkable admission. Yet, on the rare occasions these tragedies DO occur, the left is loathe to look at the actual causes and, instead, scrambles to further their gun control agenda… thus leaving in place the elements which bring about these tragedies.
And yet, here we are. The left will continue to ignore the deadly failure of the policies in their liberal cities they wish to enact nationally.
As this article highlights, “safety” is the least of their concerns. Disarmament is the goal. If that were not true, they would not be pursuing the LEAST likely means to make the public safer and ignoring (at great effort) the glaring failures of the very big government the left clamors to “protect” us. If the Democrats had spines that could be stiffened, they could take an introspective look into their own policies and souls and admit they are making society more dangerous, not safer.
Yes, by all means, liberals, don’t overplay your hand and force the enactment of actual SOLUTIONS. Gee, if liberals ran out of mass shootings, what would they have to exploit to promote gun bans?
By now any informed person realizes that Obama’s disparate punishment letter from DOJ/DOE to all schools did more to cause the FLA shooting than lax gun laws.
The shooter came into contact (negatively) with school administrators over 20 times but was never entered into either a mental health program or a criminal proceeding.
Police also were called to his home almost 40 times yet never once arrested him.
Only because of that was he allowed to buy guns; his background check came back clean.
Obama/Arne Duncan got what they wanted: lower crime/suspension stats for minorities.
But he got guns when he wanted them in exchange.
Just this week the Trump Administration has rescinded this Obama program.
Sadly it was too late for the 17 victims.
I see old George Cloonney is so darn proud about the Useful idiots for Gun Control noting the facts of all the movies he has made where guns were used and people killed this Hollywood Dip-Wad is just another liberal celeberty to boycott
“How about we treat every young man who wants to buy a gun like every woman who wants to get an abortion — mandatory 48-hr waiting period, parental permission, a note from his doctor proving he understands what he’s about to do, a video he has to watch about the effects of gun violence, an ultrasound wand up the ass (just because). Let’s close down all but one gun shop in every state and make him travel hundreds of miles, take time off work, and stay overnight in a strange town to get a gun. Make him walk through a gauntlet of people holding photos of loved ones who were shot to death, people who call him a murderer and beg him not to buy a gun.
It makes more sense to do this with young men and guns than with women and health care, right? I mean, no woman getting an abortion has killed a room full of people in seconds, right?”
Does anyone know how many school shootings there have been since 25 March, 2018? Count them, if you’re curious: