By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Firearms and controversy: Is it different now?
Placeholder Image
The nation has been through this too many times, with the usual sequence. A mass shooting with many deaths and people injured is followed by outbursts of remorse and calls for "thoughts and prayers." Predictable platitudes follow; "this should not be politicized" and "not the time for such discussion."

Then a few common-sense steps may be proposed, such as banning bump stocks that convert a semi-automatic rifle to automatic fire. But opponents of this baby-step measure make the technical argument that the bump stock does not convert the semi-automatic into an automatic weapon, even though having the same effect. House Speaker Paul Ryan previously refused to bring such legislation to the floor for vote, assigning it to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for review. Nothing happens.

Outlawing high capacity magazines is considered too drastic, even though they have no practical use for target practice, hunting or self-defense.

Even a whisper about banning military-style assault weapons for civilians is considered way too radical for serious consideration.

Opponents of common-sense steps, most of which have broad public agreement, frame the argument in terms of liberals intending to "eliminate the Second Amendment." Neither President Obama, Hillary Clinton nor other advocates of stricter gun regulation propose eliminating the Second Amendment. Like the Bible and the rest of the constitution, the Second Amendment is a matter of interpretation.

Discussion is then limited to background checks and treatment of the mentally ill. Nothing of consequence happens. Silence returns until the next mass shooting generates the same sequence of events, with politicians beating their gums and nothing accomplished.

Until this time - maybe.

As commentator Steve Schmidt, a conservative Republican, no less, reminds us, while many politicians have heard and like the sound of an AR-15, few of them have been on the receiving end of that sound like these kids.

Being on the receiving end of that weapon would indeed be enough to affect one's attitude, as well as lend credibility to speak to the issue.

Students from Parkland, Florida, most of who have not yet turned 18, and who have had no prior political experience, are organizing, pressuring politicians. They are also getting baptized in the realities of politics.

These students are confronting politicians, asking questions and demanding answers in ways that our mainstream media clones would never dare. On Sunday morning's "Meet the Press," Chuck Todd refused - or was too timid? - to ask either of his Republican guests how much money they have received from the NRA. Heaven forbid that Todd or other media celebrities would risk embarrassing a big time Republican.

Nobody told these students who narrowly escaped death that it would be "impolite," even "embarrassing" to publicly ask Sen. Marco Rubio, with his A-plus NRA rating, if he would continue accepting money from the NRA. When Rubio tried the usually successful gambit of dancing around the question and babbling nonsense, he was deservedly treated to a chorus of boos.

The student leaders of Parkland are speaking with more clarity and balance, not to mention more authority, than politicians and media clones who have been spineless on this controversial subject. For example, even though Rubio deserved that chorus of boos, student David Hogg gave him credit for at least attending that session, while Florida's governor did not. While criticizing NRA leadership, the student credited NRA members with not necessarily being in accord with leadership. The latter is affirmed by Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar's recent visit to the Iron Range where she reported that many NRA members favor stricter gun measures.

While the Florida students are leading the action, they are learning how vicious politics can get. Some extreme opponents are accusing them of not being authentic, said to be "trained actors," of a conspiracy to disarm the American public.

Thanks to these students, the president, Congress, governors and state legislators are paying some attention. Sometimes when movements like this get started they grow with amazing speed, leaving politicians behind and dumbfounded. Common-sense steps on which there is much agreement should have been enacted a long time ago, including outlawing the manufacture and sale of bump stocks, requiring longer waiting periods and more thorough background checks and banning high-capacity magazines.

For now, we can expect much grandstanding, and maybe even some action on incremental baby steps that should have been taken long ago. Though essential, they avoid the major issue, the outstanding supply, availability of and easy access to military-type firearms. Politicians will avoid serious action on this issue like the plague.

The most asinine of solutions is proposed by President Trump, arming teachers with guns. His assertion that an armed teacher would have quickly stopped the assailant is ludicrous, even for him - almost as ludicrous as his assertion that had he been on the scene, even without a weapon, he would have courageously attacked the gunman.

The vast majority of teachers have absolutely no desire to carry firearms. Training those few who would agree to undergo the intensive training, both with handling firearms and how to use them in crisis, would produce uncertain, likely disastrous, results. One cannot know how even a trained practitioner will react in life-threatening emergency. During confusion and panic of an attack, the gun-bearing teacher, if not killed by the assailant, may be the first to be fired on by security forces.

President Trump, who has absolutely no experience under fire, has been watching too many Clint Eastwood movies.

It may be different this time. Under the guise of "action," some common-sense legislation may be enacted. Kids are pushing NRA-controlled lackeys like Rubio and Ryan like other politicians and pundits could not, or would not. But let's not kid ourselves; incremental steps will not prevent another mass shooting incident.

The satirical rag out of Madison, "The Onion," nails it with their headline, "'No way to prevent this' says the only nation where this regularly happens."



- John Waelti of Monroe, a retired professor of economics, can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net. His column appears Fridays in the Monroe Times.