On Wednesday, President Obama surrounded himself with cute kids to make a speech about gun control and how guns that hold more than 10 bullets are evil, and anyone that says otherwise obviously hates children. And puppies. Then he signed an executive order that is totally going to prevent bad people from doing bad things. He also said that any pundit that disagrees with him is doing so for “monetary gain.”
Or something like that. He didn’t specifically mention puppies, but he did imply that people who do not see the wisdom in his 23-point executive order to limit gun violence in America must not care about the children. It’s always about the children.
Here’s the thing: Second Amendment advocates care about the children too, but don’t parade them around to evoke an emotional reaction to accomplish a political end. President Obama could have just as easily said, “In order to protect our children, we need to put armed guards on every school campus, just like my daughters’ school. That way every parent can feel as safe as I do about the protection of their children.” It’s for the children, you know.
He didn’t though -- he used them to illustrate the need to do things like ban magazines that hold more than 10 bullets and require more stringent background checks. Unfortunately, none of that would’ve prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy, but it makes people feel better to think that maybe something could have stopped it from happening.
Tragedy happens because evil exists. There will always be an Adam Lanza, and no amount of trampling on law-abiding citizens’ Constitutional rights is going to change that. Lanza did not use a legally acquired weapon, so how is creating more laws going to stop someone in the future from doing the same thing?
Side note: I have no idea why liberals want to outlaw what they term ‘assault rifles’ but not handguns. Of the 8,583 people murdered by firearms in 2011, handguns killed 6,220 of them. Only 323 of them were killed by a shot fired from a rifle. Less than 5 percent of murders committed by guns involved rifles, yet somehow restricting access to them is suddenly going to prevent gun violence? It just doesn’t make any sense.
President Obama does the public a disservice by parading kids out to make a political statement. He effectively ends the conversation about how to address gun violence by implying that his opponents must not care about the children. That’s called game playing, Mr. President, not effective leadership.
Do you feel like these children were used as political props?
Image via ProgressOhio/Flickr