About midway during his interview on Fox News with Chris Wallace, incoming National Rifle Association President Oliver North uttered what were possibly the 15 most important words in the debate about school shootings.
“You’re not going to fix it by taking away the rights of law-abiding citizens,” North, a retired Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel, observed.
This seems to be the common sense that gun prohibition lobbying groups just don’t get or can’t accept. In the wake of Friday’s tragic school shooting in Santa Fe, Texas, anti-rights organizations were busy, seeking donations and calling for new gun control laws.
Rights activists might instead send contributions to their favorite Second Amendment group, because a fight is already in progress.
Like it or not, when these groups push for new gun laws, it amounts to an admission that all the gun laws so far adopted to prevent such crimes haven’t worked.
North advocated for metal detectors at school entrances, but is turning schools into prison-like facilities the answer to school shootings? Seattle’s KIRO radio commentator Dave Ross raises an interesting issue about that.
There is something else about the aftermath of coverage, and it has to do with a remark attributed to a senior at the school that has virtually disappeared from various accounts. The teen, identified as Logan Roberts, was reportedly asked by a group of reporters about gun control. His reported reply: “I don’t have a comment about that. We shouldn’t control our guns.” When Liberty Park Press sought that quote Monday morning, it was found only here.
The Santa Fe shooting involved a handgun — described as a .38-caliber revolver — and a shotgun. There was no semi-auto modern sporting rifle, no “high capacity magazine,” and no opportunity to exploit this tragedy to push a gun ban agenda.
During his Fox News appearance, North also mentioned something that has gotten very little, if any, media attention, and that’s the NRA “School Shield” program. It’s a multi-faceted program, and according to North, it doesn’t cost the school districts or local governments a penny.
The problem, of course, might be that it has the letters “N-R-A” attached to it. For many people, “NRA” is a four-letter word.
Not surprisingly, in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook school shooting, after NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre noted that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” there were loud guffaws and disdain from the “mainstream media” and many school officials. But quietly, a lot of school districts increased security, worked with local police and sheriffs agencies to put armed “school resource officers” in their buildings or on patrol in school areas, and some have even allowed armed teachers and administrators.
But heaven forbid any of them acknowledge that the idea came from the NRA, much less actually sit down with someone from that organization, even a firearms safety instructor.
After the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School attack on Valentine’s Day, students marched, their campaign was quickly assimilated (hijacked) by the gun prohibition movement, and there were renewed demands for “a national dialogue on gun safety.”
But this raises the question: If you don’t care to talk to the real experts on gun safety, what kind of national dialogue can you possibly have?