By now, I expect that most people have heard about the horrific mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas (21 dead, 19 students, 2 teachers).
From KABC in Los Angeles -
19 children, 2 teachers killed in elementary school shooting; Beto O'Rourke confronts TX gov
At least 19 children and two teachers are dead after a shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas on Tuesday, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety -- an incident that President Joe Biden decried as "carnage" in a call for lawmakers "to act."
The tragedy in Uvalde, about 90 minutes west of San Antonio, comes just days after another deadly mass shooting in Buffalo, New York and amid a rapid rise in active shooter incidents in the country
.
This, of course, has brought the "we need more guns" crowd out.
From the Texas Tribune -
Top Texas Republicans resist gun control and push for more armed teachers and police at schools in wake of Uvalde shooting
In the hours after a gunman killed more than 20 people at a South Texas elementary school Tuesday, the state’s top Republicans sought to immediately squelch the possibility of gun control measures in the wake of yet another mass shooting.
As the death toll mounted from the shooting at Robb Elementary in Uvalde and President Joe Biden vowed to push for stricter gun laws, Texas Republicans made it clear that any kind of gun restriction in response to the tragedy was off the table.
“Inevitably when there’s a murder of this kind, you see politicians try to politicize it, you see Democrats and a lot of folks in the media whose immediate solution is to try to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens,” U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz told reporters Tuesday afternoon. “That doesn’t work. It’s not effective. It doesn’t prevent crime.”
In an appearance on the far-right television network Newsmax, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton quickly dismissed the notion of enacting restrictions on firearms — reasoning that shooters wouldn’t follow the law anyway.
“I’d much rather have law-abiding citizens armed and trained so that they can respond when something like this happens because it’s not going to be the last time,” Paxton said.
[snip]
On Tuesday, Republican officials revived ideas to stop future mass shooters — arming teachers and school administrators, putting more police officers on campus and limiting entryways to school buildings.
“We have to harden these targets so that no one can get in ever except through one entrance,” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told Tucker Carlson in an appearance on Fox News. “Maybe that would help. Maybe that would stop someone.”
Relax. The ignorance, the hate, isn't limited to Texas pols.
From Business Insider -
GOP Rep. Paul Gosar spread a baseless transphobic rumor that the Uvalde school-shooting suspect was a 'transsexual leftist illegal alien'
Following Tuesday's mass shooting at a Texas elementary school, Rep. Paul Gosar, an Arizona Republican, spread a false and transphobic claim that the suspected shooter was a "transsexual leftist illegal alien."
Gosar tweeted the claim even though authorities had already identified the shooter as an 18-year-old male resident of Uvalde, where the shooting occurred.
As of Tuesday evening, the GOP representative had not commented on his tweet, which was deleted about two hours after being published.
Know who disagrees with the "more guns" mantra (admittedly, under a very specific circumstance)?
The NRA, the chief purveyors of fear for profit in America.
From NPR -
Guns are banned during Trump's upcoming speech at the NRA conference
Former President Donald Trump is scheduled to speak at the National Rifle Association's Annual Leadership Forum on Friday. But audience members at the group's annual meeting, being held this year in Houston, won't be able to carry guns during his address.
The conference is going ahead in the shadow of Tuesday's mass shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school that killed at least 21 people — including 19 students.
[snip]
This isn't the first time firearms have been off-limits during a part of the gun group's annual convention. In 2018 a similar prohibition was put in place during a speech by then-Vice President Mike Pence.
Wouldn't Cheeto be safer if everyone present had a gun? At least he would be, if one believed the rationalizations of the apologists for mass violence in America.
Anyway, I have a potential remedy to offer (of course :) ), one that doesn't involve more gun control or even restrictions on the behavior of gun owners. No running afoul of the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The NRA and other gun industry lackeys will whine about it, but so what? There would be no government laws or restrictions created, so no Constitutional issues, as far as I can see.
Change the rules of criminal court so that someone can viably mount a "self defense" defense when that someone kills someone else who possesses a concealed or unholstered small firearm.
In a worn holster would not qualify as "concealed".
However, a gun that's under a shirt or jacket, even a little bit, even if it's in a holster, would qualify as concealed.
And long guns (think: rifles or shotguns) would always be considered to be "on display" even when covered by cloth.
This wouldn't apply in cases where the gun is in a private residence where the primary resident has declared that guns are welcome there, in a private commercial establishment whose primary purpose is the non-lethal use of such weapons for the purpose becoming more skilled (think: gun ranges), or when disassembled and in a motor vehicle to be transported. Having said that, solely having an ammunition clip separate from the gun would NOT count as "disassembled" - a round could still be in the chamber, and all guns are presumed to be loaded until proven otherwise. As such, the fact that a gun is unloaded would not obviate a self-defense argument.
To keep this from being abused, there would be three caveats (which the non-cynical part of me is a little surprised aren't already in place for ALL use-of-force situations; the cynical part of me is not so surprised).
1. Don't lie about it.
2, Don't be wrong about it.
3. Don't create the reason/situation that causes one to be in fear of one's life. Simply being in public wouldn't be considered to be creating the reason/situation.
Do I believe this is a good idea?
No.
Do I believe it's better than the status quo?
Yes.
Of course, I believe that the status quo comes in three stages:
Stage 1 - A gun nut has a bad hair day.
Stage 2 - That person shoots a lot of people.
Stage 3 - The NRA and its water carriers blame the victims.
Under this proposal, people that want to own a gun could still do so.
I'm not a bookie, but if I was, I'd set the over/under at five.
Five, as in the number of times that this defense would be used before even gun nuts would start paying attention.
