Misrepresenting the NRA

-A A +A

Mr. Pawlak’s recent column demonstrates a common approach to gun control among those of a utopian pacifist persuasion and others who cannot accept that there really are evil people in the world that will kill with a gun, a knife, a baseball bat, a car or any other tool they can get their hands on.
That approach is simple, when they can’t argue the facts or logic; they resort to name-calling, insults, derision, and worst of all exaggeration and misrepresentation.
Let’s start with Mr. Pawlak’s blatantly dishonest exaggeration and misrepresentation. The NRA did not recommend that we:
“Convert public schools to firearms depots.”
“Arm all the teachers with guns.”
“Patrol the hallways with a few mercenaries.”
“Have a couple of Humvees equipped with Browning .50 cal machine guns ride protective circles around the school playground.”
What Wayne LaPierre and Asa Hutchinson of the NRA did recommend can be read by anyone honest enough to seek out the truth at nraschoolshield.com.
You can see for yourself that the actual transcript of the December 21, 2012 press conference and The National School Shield program doesn’t resemble Mr. Pawlak’s assertions at all.
Mr. Pawlak asserts that “More guns is not the answer.” He obviously doesn’t know or say why, and even admits he doesn’t have a solution. Let’s look at one of the facts Mr. Pawlak and the others who use name-calling, insults, derision, exaggeration, and misrepresentation choose to ignore.
From 1992 to 2012 the violent crime rate in the United States has been reduced by more than 50%. If you analyze the data, those states and cities that allow firearms ownership and concealed carry by their law-abiding citizens have the lowest rates of violent crime.
And during that time legal firearms ownership has grown to more than 80 million households and more than 300 million firearms in the hands of private citizens.
It is only in cities and states that prohibit firearms or the concealed carry of firearms that violent crime has grown. The two worst examples are Washington D. C. and Chicago.
There is a video on YouTube that shows the FBI uniform crime statistics youtube.com/watch?v=6HwVTzyDmc or you can go to the FBI.gov website yourself.
The NRA recommends putting people who are willing to accept the responsibility of carrying a firearm and protecting the safety of our children, whether they are teachers or school administrators, or policemen, or private security, or private citizens that are formally trained and qualified to carry firearm and respond to violent attacks such as these, in schools to protect our children.
The NRA is simply stating the obvious; at the time of an attack, only a good person or persons with a gun can stop a bad person with a gun. If that good person with a gun isn’t there, they can’t prevent or stop the killing.
This is exactly what happened in Columbine. The officer wasn’t there because he was improperly trained to hold back and wait for help to arrive instead of confronting and stopping the killers.
Taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens won’t stop the criminals from getting and using guns any better than prohibition kept alcohol away from drinkers or than the war on drugs is keeping people from smoking pot.
Gun control will only take and keep the guns away from law-abiding citizens. The crazies, criminals, and crusaders will still be able to get guns and use them.
We need to address the social issues, mental health issues including how to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill, eliminate gun-free zones that simply create killing fields for crazies, criminals, and crusaders, and correct our failure to educate our children in the immorality and reality of violence against others.
I am frankly embarrassed that the Los Alamos Monitor would publish such a blatantly dishonest and disingenuous diatribe.

Jay 'Skip' Andersen