The core of the Sandy Hook situation is not about gun control. but as long as we pro-gun rights folks keep demanding that there be no more laws, and pushing inflammatory responses about good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns -- who wants to see the old west in every street in America? no one, not one of us -- but as long as our side of the fight keeps pushing back with inflammatory stuff, no one will get to the core of the problem.
Sandy Hook wasn't about a criminal with guns; Lanza was not a criminal until Friday. Sandy Hook was not about getting guns off the street; the guns he had were in the hands of a law-abiding citizen, stored when not in use and not out on the street available for sale to any dirt bag with a fat wallet. Sandy Hook was about a disturbed young mind that needed help.
But as long as both sides ratchet up the rhetoric, and the debate is fueled by things like the deaths of 20 innocent elementary school children, we will be on the losing side of the yelling and fighting.
I'd suggest we stop yelling and fighting.
If the NRA really wants to do some good, they should call the White House and offer to sit down and help figure out a way to make situations like this come to an end -- quietly and peacefully sit down at the table and discuss this. That's the only way, from this point forward, with the media firmly planted against us, that we stand a chance at re-gaining any credibility. Please know this: we cannot win the yelling match. The cards in their hands.
I don't know what the solution is, but I have heard some interesting proposals that all have some merit. If we could get pro-gun and anti-gun people at one table to discuss some of these solutions, I'd bet we could get a some mutually beneficial conclusions. Will everything come out the way we want it to? No, but if we play our cards right they won't get everything the way they want it either. The only way to effect a reasonable and mutual solution is to have both sides talking reasonably.
How many different proposals have you heard? Armed guards at schools? Armed teachers? Armed administration? How about, as one teacher suggested to me, a small school armory and an effort to teach those in the school that are comfortable with firearms how to access them and use them safely, so the teachers that are not comfortable can have a different role such as herding kids to safe places? That sounds like each school having a plan to deal with a potential threat. That's not a bad idea. But it won't get heard if we don't get in the debate, and we won't get in the debate as long as there's a stalemate.
I say dial down the rhetoric and start offering positive, measureable and effective solutions to the problems, not fight about whether they're going to take our guns away.