Still rolling along here with the MiFi, through the highways and biways of the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. Should be home fairly soon, fortunately, and back to real bandwidth. Bitter is busy re-caffienating as we speak to go the last leg.
I’ve noticed while catching up on reading that some are troubled, particularly over at Ace of Spades, about NRA’s School Shield proposal. Some contributors don’t understand why we need a brand new federal program. While I agree with the criticism directed at NRA for demonizing video games (a position I share), I agree with this contributor about the purpose of the proposal:
…whether it was an accident or by intent, the NRA succeeded in forcing the MBM and the left (but I repeat myself) to refocus their attention away from “ASSAULT WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!” and onto something different. And who cares that the new topic doesn’t make perfect sense. It puts into the public consciousness the idea that maybe gun-free zones aren’t such a good idea.
The ideal solution is not a new federal program, I agree. But it’s a way to deal with the “Something must be done!” voters, who politicians are generally eager to appease (because it’s a huge swath of voters). If there’s one thing a politician fears is that when something must be done, they are not seen as a public figure busy trying to do something.
So is it an ideal program? No. Would it be better with a security solution that had state and local funding and control? Sure. But is it something? Yes. Does the “something involved gun control? No. Does the something reframe the issue culturally? Yes.
It’s something that can be done that’s not gun control, and it may actually help prevent more Newtowns, which I think we can all agree aren’t good for anyone, except gun control advocacy organizations. A new federal program, that in the big scheme of things won’t actually cost much, is a far better result for liberty than major new limitations on our Second Amendment rights.