FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

 
 
 

Fun Targets - Savage Range Systems
Designed with either moving, rotating or alternating pop-up targets, Savage...

Columns : Editorial

Gun Rights: Keep Up the Fight

Gun control advocates are trying to blind America to the real solution to school shootings.

December 21, 2012  |  by - Also by this author

Photo: Kelly Bracken
Photo: Kelly Bracken

As we were preparing to send the January issue to press, 26 students and faculty were murdered at a grade school in Newtown, Conn., by a deranged man firing a Bushmaster AR-15 variant.

The Newtown massacre could have as much effect on the firearms industry as 9/11 had on the airline industry. And it may result in the hasty passage of ill-conceived laws and onerous regulations that accomplish nothing but depriving law-abiding Americans of their rights. New laws may even make it more difficult for law enforcement officers and retired law enforcement officers to acquire the weapons you need for duty and personal protection.

Just hours after the Newtown massacre, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that she would seek to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, which expired in 2004. Feinstein's statement was nothing more than a gun-control advocate seizing the moment.

Anyone who knows anything at all about guns knows that the Assault Weapons Ban was one of the most superficial pieces of legislation ever enacted by Congress. Rather than actually restrict the manufacture and sale of weapons based on their lethality, which was its intent, it focused on cosmetic aspects of certain firearms such as their pistol grips and bayonet lugs. And like all gun control laws, it didn’t keep such guns out of the hands of the bad guys.

Nonetheless, it's likely that Feinstein will have her way. And regardless of how anyone feels about the need to restrict so-called "assault weapons," what Feinstein and her allies are advocating is a really stupid law.

It's a stupid law for two reasons. One, it seems to have been written by people who have no working knowledge of guns and are scared of contemporary weapon design. Two, it won't make a single child in America any safer.

I could rage on for hundreds of words about the absolute firearms illiteracy of many gun control advocates. They speak of AR-15s as "automatic" weapons, they rail about high-capacity "ammunition clips" when they mean magazines, and they say things like semi-auto weapons are unnecessary for home defense. You see, these people have never shot a gun and don't know anything about them. They think it's really easy to hit a moving target that is trying to kill you, so you only need one shot. They are the same kinds of people who would take guns away from police officers and give you batons, and they are the people who will write our new gun laws. You can bet on it.

Even most people who believe in gun control know that restricting legal access to guns is not going to end the tragedy of school shootings. They have other agendas. They never liked the Second Amendment, and they have seized Newtown as an opportunity to kick the gun industry and the NRA in the teeth.

So stricter gun laws are likely inevitable. But they won't save one child. If we were really serious about protecting the kids, we would protect them. It's not hard to make a school a hard target for someone inclined toward mass murder. But it's expensive. You have to hire trained security personnel and give them guns.

This is the way that Israel protects its schools. It's the way Israel has been protecting its children since 1974 when a group of Palestinian terrorists dressed as Israeli soldiers murdered 22 children in Ma'alot.

Armed security is the only real way to protect our schools. Anything else is intellectually dishonest. But you can bet that armed security will not be one of the president's new proposals. He will champion gun control, gun purchase screening, school access control, community mental health resources, and lockdown drills for teachers, but he won't advocate fighting back because it's expensive, because the left believes armed response is not the right message that we should send to our children, and because it involves…gasp…guns.

Leading the children and teachers out into the gore-splashed halls of Sandy Hook Elementary School, the Connecticut State Police and the Newtown Police told the kids and teachers to close their eyes. They were right to protect those kids from that horror. But we are adults and we can't let our politicians tell us to close our eyes to the reality of this situation. Restricting the sale of "assault weapons" will not protect our kids. Providing them with security officers who are ready, willing, and able to kill the bad man when he comes is the only thing that will really protect them.

Related:

NRA Calls for Armed Officers in All Schools

Biden, Holder Meet with Officers On Gun Violence

Sen. Feinstein Promises New Assault Weapons Ban

Tags: Assault Weapons Ban, U.S. Congress, AR-Type Rifles, Sandy Hook School Shooting, Gun Rights Advocacy


Comments (28)

Displaying 1 - 28 of 28

Curt @ 12/21/2012 4:31 PM

"Just hours after the Newtown massacre, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that she would seek to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, which expired in 2004. Feinstein's statement was nothing more than a gun-control advocate seizing the moment."

Just what we expected from a subversive leftist whore! No surprise there!

flh @ 12/21/2012 6:21 PM

If they do anything I hope that it all they do. If that is all it takes to make them feel better, good. I'm afraid they try to go a lot further this time. I doubt there will be any mental care health reform. That is where the problem is.

john wright @ 12/21/2012 9:50 PM

You sir and the NRA are right. What grieving parent wouldn't have wanted an armed police officer or security guard at the front entrance of Sandy Hook Elementary on 12/14/2012 at 0925 hrs.

DaveSAM5525G @ 12/21/2012 10:28 PM

My feeling are based on my training and certifications –we need the whole truth in this matter. Right now everything is fluid and keeps changing as many times they do. I have followed this since it happened and have talked with my many contacts. I listened to the radio transmissions of first responders on scene and read the other Major news media stories reporting in the media, others. There are too many disconnects...One first responder radios a rifle on scene and a shotgun...In other story it states the bushmaster semi-auto was found in the school parking lot car back seat member only had pistols on person?

We need a better foundation to work from to attempt to fix this issue that crosses more than just firearms goes to the schools themselves...

Indicators missed...health status-and “CONN has some of the strictest firearm restrictions I have read the laws” - statutes and requirements especially on the AR-15 version semi-automatic rifles ask for it or view it on-line. There lies the foundation or root to work from...physical security - standoff-control will also need to be part of the solution for schools...especially so for all visitors or those seeking access...but these extra precautions also cost $$$...Time and distance are keys also for reactive reasons....When emotions are this high we need to step back for a bit an then approach with clear thinking all the way around…

Prayer's and thoughts are with all stay strong!

PD @ 12/21/2012 11:44 PM

Wow - perfectly worded article. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Mpostava @ 12/22/2012 4:21 AM

I'm glad I am retired. If Draconian measures are passed such as confiscation;who will enforce the law? The local cops will be assigned the task. They will go to someones home & demand their weapon. I can hear it now "from my cold dead hands". There will be bloodshed & death. It doesn't matter as to whose because it will be pitting citizens against the Police Officers who are sworn to protect them. I see a sad day in America coming. As I said I'm glad I'm retired.

Morning Eagle @ 12/22/2012 4:50 AM

Very well said. I listened (on video) to W. La Pierre' entire press conference speech and found what he said made a lot of sense. Of course the only thing the media is reporting is that the NRA is calling for more guns (shudder) in schools, taking his words out of context and twisting them rather than tell the people the logic of his proposals. No clairvoyant ability was needed to know what feinstein would do as this has been one of her pet projects for years though she has obviously not bothered to learn effects her feel good band aids would actually have. John Wayne used to say” You can't fix stupid and that is what we are being confronted with. Californians need to recall her rather than continuing to re-elect her. She and many like her have been there way too long. Obama has apparently excised funds from his budget to schools that would have trained armed security people for schools. Meanwhile the hundreds of billions in foreign aid we give to nations that vote against us in the U.N. continues without let up. Why not start using those dollars here at home to reinforce protections in our schools? We pay out hundreds of billions to millions of people that are in our country illegally. The NRA is offering to set up and pay for a program of training enhanced security for every school in the country that wants to take advantage. Not only for armed guards but also enhanced access security controls, etc. But administrators and staff have been made so afraid of the gun itself they do not think clearly.
Adding more laws to the 20,000 restrictions already in place across the country will accomplish nothing but allowing the politicians to feel good because they did "something." They passed gun free school zone laws and those have really made a difference haven't they? Their answer to any tragedy is to pass more laws and usurp more power over law-abiding citizens. Criminals do not obey laws! What is hard to understand about that concept?

BtwoA @ 12/22/2012 7:55 AM

If the proposed legislation goes through It will have a horrible adverse affect on Police Departments. It is a simple example of supply and demand If ammo manufacturing is greatly cut do to a loss of consumers, it will drive the price of the limited quantities that are produced to unreasonable prices. Nationwide budget strapped Police Departments will most likely feel this extreme price increase and will need to cut back on firearm training. Hopefully the Departments will provided the minimum amount of ammo necessary to complete a training course, but good luck trying to get ammo for supplementary training.

longo2guns @ 12/22/2012 8:10 AM

I'm shouting this "from the mountaintops"- making more laws WILL NOT FIX ANYTHING. If it did, we'd have NO domestic violence, NO drunk driving and related deaths, NO child pornography, NO meth addicts and meth labs all over the place, and NO crack/cocaine.
Yeah Diane, outlawing guns will solve everything. Does that include the ones YOU own, as well as Chuck Schumer!?

Adrian Stroud @ 12/22/2012 9:25 AM

I live just a few miles from Sandy Hook. Newtown is my hometown. I started my Police career as an Auxiliary Officer with the Newtown Police. Newtown is a beautiful town with great people living there. This incident has torn apart the community. I can tell you that I have seen a wonderful giving spirit arise in the fact that Police Officers from all over the state are volunteering to stand traffic for long hours and do the funeral escorts. I have visited my friends on these posts and their sacrifice is a tribute to our occupation. Other departments are assisting NPD in every way possible and are answering the NPD officers calls and will continue to do so for days to come.

Retired Boss @ 12/22/2012 9:41 AM

Once again we have politicians catering to a vocal minority. It amazes that we as people and government always have these knee jerk reactions when a tragedy strikes. When are we going to talk about the disease, our societal values, as opposed to the symptoms.
I'm with mpostava, I'm so glad I retired.

BtwoA @ 12/22/2012 10:14 AM

The UK greatly restricted/banned firearms to curb violence and violence committed with knives skyrocketed. So then a ban was imposed on all locking pocket knives to try to curb the violence. Ineffective and unconstitutional.

Kevin Gallagher @ 12/22/2012 10:21 AM

Knee-jerk response in liberals is part of their psyche. With the backing of the president and his lap dog media the truth and facts are the last things the average American will hear. We all know the horribly tragic episode that occured in Newtown and hopefully will never know the emotional roller coaster of feelings that the parents and families of the victims are experiencing. Using liberal logic why not ban automobiles, cigarettes and alcoholic beverages because they kill people EVERY DAY. Maybe there are savvy school administrators who will be smart enough to hire retired military and police who are weapons qualified, street smart and dedicated. These active shooters are basic cowards and the last school they would pick for their terror would be one where there is a determined deterent. The schools which don't choose deterence are taking a chance on the safety of those inside. I wouldn't want to roll those dice.

M.Moats @ 12/22/2012 11:55 AM

Thank you!!!! Well said!

Dan @ 12/22/2012 3:07 PM

This writer hit the nail on the head. What a thinker! I love the comparison to Isreal, because that's the country I think we all aspire to be like. But after the killers stop looking to the schools for an easy target, they'll just go else where. What then genius? More cops? More taxes? And there will still be more death, just good cops instead of teachers and students. However, the NRA president doesn't mind advocating for that but you'll never see him standing guard.

Gun control isn't the only option, but it is an option.

Like everything else, guns should be subject to regulation and restriction. The 1st amendment is not an absolute right and neither is the 2nd. I believe when the president called law enforcement officials to the table, it was a wise descion. It is presumptuous of you to assume he will blatantly ignore their advice. My guess is you also thought Romney would win, so I would stand to think your ability to judge people is left wanting.

Tom Ret @ 12/22/2012 4:13 PM

Dan-I suspect that if Obama calls on law enforcement for their input, he will already know what their position is on the subject. In other words, it will be a stacked deck in the way Obama wants things to go. I personally believe Obama is being the ultimate hypocrite when he is up to his eye balls in the Fast N Furious gun running caper. Of course that caper
was suppose to be secret before an ATF whistleblower exposed it.

John @ 12/23/2012 1:57 PM

David Griffith, thanks for the excellent article. You summed up the issue so well.

Obama thought the U.S. needed a trillion dollar stimulus package (so he could buy future votes in rust belt states), but he doesn't think we need to find a meaningful way of protecting our children.

Doc @ 12/23/2012 7:58 PM

Dianne Feinstein carries a gun, but has been forcing gun control on the rest of us, like she should be exempt. If anyone needs Limits, we should have Term Limits on the Senate & Congress, so that can't get so Powerful. We all arrest the same Violent Criminals time and time again, but they never seem to be punished, and THAT is what needs to be fixed. Gun control has failed and the criminals do Not have to obey the law anyway, just look at the so called gun free zone failures.
Our 2nd Amendment has been ruled upon by the US Supreme Court, so Obama, Feinstein, & the rest of the Liberals better learn to respects the rights of the people. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with Hunting or other sporting, it's all about protection. Obama should have met with officers that work for a living, not those that sit behind a desk. After the Clinton gun ban of 1994, people remembered and voted several of them out of office, that needs to happen again.

DEADMAN @ 12/24/2012 12:31 AM

How come these shootings don't take place at private or church funded schools,only at public schools,there seems to be a difference in rearing/raising the children with a higher regard for people and respect for others that just doesn't happen in public schools.

DEADMAN @ 12/24/2012 12:31 AM

How come these shootings don't take place at private or church funded schools,only at public schools,there seems to be a difference in rearing/raising the children with a higher regard for people and respect for others that just doesn't happen in public schools.

Crossdrawjohn @ 12/26/2012 12:45 PM

I do believe that we need to look at the Ins, Co. and ask ourselfs why it is that they ignore, and refuse to help the ones that need help. (mental help) becouse it costs to much. And the Med, doctors that don't want to deal with problems like this. AND the schools that don't do anything to stop the BULLIES that drive the others to a point where they feel they don't have any other way out but to act in violance.
When I grew up we as kids knew to get under our desks in case of NUKE attack Witch we know now was stuped. Now we have children that don't know what to do or where to go if the bad people come for them. Stop trying to make everything all right and teach the children what to do, and why an officer is in there schools and that he is there to protect them from harm..THE CHILDREN NEED TO KNOW!! there not stupid. They don' want to die becouse no on felt it was a good think to tell them what is going on in the big bad world. Lets not be stupid.. Don't arm the teachers put trained officers in place and let them do there thing like there trained.. The goverment sends un
known amounts of our money over seas to people who don' even like us. Keep the money here and pay officers to protect our children.

Jes @ 12/26/2012 8:45 PM

Charles Krauthammer — distinctly anti-gun, wrote in the Washington Post in 1996

"The claim of the advocates that banning these 19 types of “assault weapons” will reduce the crime rate is laughable.... Dozens of other weapons, the functional equivalent of these “assault weapons,” were left off the list and are perfect substitutes for anyone bent on mayhem....

In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security."

"Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic — purely symbolic — move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."

bill @ 12/29/2012 9:26 AM


The "Senator" is exploiting a tragedy to further her own political agenda. If passed as its written merely paves the way for confiscation. She must have had this drafted and waiting for the right moment to introduce it. Pathetic..

Robert @ 1/3/2013 12:04 PM

Here in Utah there are only a few exceptions where guns can be carried. Our schools are NOT "No Gun Zones." Teachers that have a CCW permit may carry during school hours and citizens may carry onto and into all public schools. Many certified firearms instructors around the state are offering free CCW and defensive firearms training to any teacher that wishes it.

This is how you defend the defenseless children. This is how you stop the evil minded from doing their evil.

These liberals aren't interested in saving lives. They're only interested in power over the masses. History tells us that a society incapable of defending themselves from tyranny will suffer at the hands of their masters. Until we as a society wrap our heads around those facts we are doomed to repeat history in this country.

Be warned, this will not end nicely. Turning 90 million gun owners into felons is a recipe for disaster.

Jim Nardi @ 1/8/2013 7:56 AM

It's nice to see a group of Americans who understand and respect their sacred oath to "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic ..."

Thank you ...

Kevin G @ 1/9/2013 2:50 PM

I have to agree with Jim's take on you guys. I came across this article because I was curious about the common opinion from law enforcement across the country. I'm not affiliated with law enforcement, but I get the impression most people who commented on this article are.
So here's a question to the LEOs who disagree with the all too possible outcome of this...What would you do if faced with the task of confiscating firearms, knowing that it is unconstitutional, hence and illegal order, and knowing the possible dangerous scenarios stemming from such a thing?

Greg @ 1/15/2013 5:19 AM

I heard a good discussion by Col. Dave Grossman at Trexpo years ago...describing how the Chechnian (Muslim) terrorist took over a school in Russia and killed a lot of children...he said he expected schools to be the targets in the future for Muslim terrorists. Israel learned this lesson and acted, our liberals wave their hands and blame honest citizens.

Remeber the Liberator Pistol of WWII fame. They were dropped to partizans and regular citizens to use against the bad guys. Basically, they were a $1.25 .45 ACP zip gun you were to use on the troops and then use their guns you just took away from the cooling corpse.

Think of the Democrat's idea of the future with guns taken away, by force, from citizens...and who would be the new "nazi's"? The police officer. Who would be a good source of guns to use against other police officers/government/politicians? The police officer. Whose families would be potential targets of the criminalized citizen? The police officer's. The politicians who passed these laws will have bodyguard (as Obama voted himself for life last week)...the police on the front line of these horrid policies...they'll be seen as the enemies and they'll be all alone.

It's not where I want to be...imagine a whole country with the Detroit attitude towards police!

Doc @ 1/15/2013 8:35 PM

We think enough to protect our money and "stuff" with armed guards, but not enough to protect our children with guards? Quit letting this administration make a "victim" out of you. You can't trade liberty for security.......soon you won't have either.

Join the Discussion





POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.
Get Your FREE Trial Issue and Win a Gift! Subscribe Today!
Yes! Please rush me my FREE TRIAL ISSUE of POLICE magazine and FREE Officer Survival Guide with tips and tactics to help me safely get out of 10 different situations.

Just fill in the form to the right and click the button to receive your FREE Trial Issue.

If POLICE does not satisfy you, just write "cancel" on the invoice and send it back. You'll pay nothing, and the FREE issue is yours to keep. If you enjoy POLICE, pay only $25 for a full one-year subscription (12 issues in all). Enjoy a savings of nearly 60% off the cover price!

Offer valid in US only. Outside U.S., click here.
It's easy! Just fill in the form below and click the red button to receive your FREE Trial Issue.
First Name:
Last Name:
Rank:
Agency:
Address:
City:
State:
  
Zip Code:
 
Country:
We respect your privacy. Please let us know if the address provided is your home, as your RANK / AGENCY will not be included on the mailing label.
E-mail Address:

Police Magazine