Gun rights advocates often assert that discussing solutions for gun violence shortly after a mass shooting is a bad idea. Given the propensity for gun violence in the US such rhetoric serves as convenient cover to any meaningful change. Ironically while these people feel waiting to discuss the role of guns in mass murders is a good thing, asking individuals to wait even one day to purchase a gun is borderline unconstitutional.
Of course this is only one of many parlor tricks groups like the NRA use in an attempt to defend their increasingly fringe positions. The current favorite misdirection tactic comes from NRA vice president Wayne LaPierre who said after 20 children and 6 adults were gunned down at school in Newtown Connecticut "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".
Unfortunately far too many people believe this statement instead of see it for what it is - a desperate attempt to discourage any reasonable gun restrictions that might save lives.
Data shows that of the 62 mass murders over the past 30 years zero of the attackers in a mass shooting were stopped by a good guy with a gun. Is it possible that a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun? Sure. But do you really want to bet your life on that possibility? There are a number of examples of how this NRA manufactured meme is more fiction than fact but one recent attack in Las Vegas offers a realistic picture of the dangers of an army of armed "good guys".
In this instance Jerad and Amanda Miller shoot two police officers at a restaurant and then headed to a nearby Wal-Mart where Jerad Miller was confronted by Joseph Wilcox, who had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Unfortunately for Wilcox he was unaware that there was a second armed assailant, and it cost him his life. Perhaps more people would have died were it not for the heroic act of Joseph Wilcox or perhaps the couple would have left the customers unharmed.
The problem is that a good guy with a gun has a completely different goal than the bad guy with a gun. The goal of the bad guy is often to harm as many people as possible and they are typically willing to die for their cause. The goal of the good guy is to save as many lives as possible including that of the bad guy, while not getting shot themselves. The good guy also has the distinct disadvantage of being in a rational state of mind. For the good guy taking the life of another human being is, as it should be, the last resort. For the bad guy this is likely their sole purpose.
The reality is that a good guy is restricted by rules. Even if this Wal-Mart had a guard posted at the entrance, that guard wouldn't be allowed to shoot and kill any customer they deemed a threat without that threat being crystal clear. The bad guy on the other hand has no such restrictions. They will shoot those with guns first and take hostages to shield themselves from armed vigilantes.
Of course Joseph Wilcox probably had no formal training on how to handle this sort of situation. He also had no way of knowing that the individual he was confronting had already killed two cops. Police officers have made being prepared to engage and subdue criminals their job/life mission yet many are still caught off guard. Do we really think simply owning a gun or taking a couple classes makes an individual qualified to properly assess the scene and determine the best course of action when faced with an armed aggressor?
Without this training very few people will be able to determine if the individual walking into their local Chipotle carrying an assault rifle is a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun. Of all the mass murders over the past three decades about 3/4 of the guns owned by the assailants were purchased legally. They may have very well been a good guy with a gun until something happened that turned them into a bad guy with a gun.
But perhaps the worst part of Wayne LaPierre's statement is the "only" portion of it. Are we really supposed to believe that ending gun violence requires every American to carry a gun? Some countries with the lowest gun ownership numbers also happen to be the countries with the lowest gun violence rates. Perhaps what we should focus on is finding ways to keep guns from ending up in the hands of bad guys instead of creating a country full of trained assassins. Polls show that 90% of the population supports mandatory background checks including closing the gun show loophole that allows felons to purchase guns without determining that person's criminal history or mental state. You don't have to support a repeal of the 2nd amendment to recognize that in most states you are required to present more information to vote or own a car than you need to purchase a gun.
Unfortunately for the NRA and gun diehards their 2nd amendment rights are an all or nothing proposition. What may be common sense changes to gun laws for the vast majority of the country are seen as a communist affront to freedom by gun rights advocates. The problem is that if you are the type of person that believes even the slightest restriction on guns is a full frontal assault on your most basic rights then you might just be one straw on the camel short of becoming the bad guy with a gun we keep hearing so much about.
No comments:
Post a Comment