In response: ‘Congress can no longer ignore gun violence in U.S.’ got it wrong

Posted:

Hatcher Hurd’s Jan. 3 diatribe against the National Rifle Association titled, “Congress can no longer ignore gun violence in U.S.” was factually incorrect, superficial and makes simple-minded politically correct appeals.

Congress has not ignored the gun issue. Government (including Congress and schools) has once again demonstrated their serial incompetence with this recent Connecticut massacre. Short-sighted government doesn’t even know what their “right” job is.

The factual errors and false assumptions in Hatcher’s “so-called” opinion are too numerous to list. A short list would include:

1. Gun violence is not the fault of the gun. That’s like blaming drugs for the problems of drug users.

2. Hatcher misstated NRA’S Wayne LaPierre’s suggestion. Wayne simply said our schools should have adequate security/armed staff - not airborne trained principals.

3. Asserting that we can’t afford “adequate” security to protect our schools is absurd. If you want to cut school costs, get the government and public sector unions out of education.

4. The military routinely teaches high school grads how to use a gun. I’m sure teachers and school staff can also be trained.

5. To tout Mexico (based on Mexican statistics?) as “better” than the U.S. is absurd. In Mexico, civil rights are for sale or stolen. The public sanitation (or a machete) is more likely to kill you than a gun.

Some additional basic facts include:

1. Guns are designed to kill and/or maim. All guns are assault weapons. Some are just better at the job.

2. If you need a gun, do you want to have the second best? You don’t “take a knife to a gun fight.”

3. Guns daily serve useful and lifesaving purposes in the hands of the police, military, private security, hunters, sportsmen and individual home and business owners. What is peace of mind worth?

4. The stupid, the mentally ill, the morally corrupt (criminals) and the politically motivated (jihadists) daily misuse and abuse others to get what they want.

5. Police (law enforcement) very seldom get there before or while the crime is taking place. They show up afterwards. You can’t rely, generally, on the police for protection.

6. Restricting, in any way, the law abiding public’s right to own the “best” weapons (to protect themselves and others) is an effective denial of their natural rights.

7. Our society’s core problem is its corrupt secular progressive politically correct valueless multi-cultural bias which focuses on self (fulfillment, ego gratification and biological functions). We need to re-institute traditional Judeo/Christian God-centered American principles (beliefs and values) in our schools.

8. The Second Amendment was also designed to help protect the country from the tyranny of those who would use force or deception to seize power.

Questions that should guide our discussion include:

1. If you are going to deny citizens the right to fully protect themselves, is the government going to assume the responsibility to reimburse them when they are damaged? I think not. Government has never been strong on accountability.

2. How do you reimburse someone for the loss of a life? It’s too little, too late.

3. Was the recent tragedy the result of our public schools’ failure to secure our children or the lack of gun laws?

4. When was the last time government really DID anything right (free of corruption, waste and abuse)?

5. Do restrictions on law abiding and rational citizens (such as teachers) to protect themselves make us safer?

6. When you are willing to give up your rights (like the basic right of self-defense) for government’s promise of security, aren’t you sure to eventually have neither?

That Hatcher’s article “jumps on the band wagon” of the populace leftist media sentiment (including so-called journalists) is unfortunate. Hatcher does not seem to have “the taste” for true reform that makes for the truly great journalists.

Simplistic attacks on the NRA and taking populist positions doesn’t solve (let alone properly define) problems.

Don’t sacrifice the safety of our children (in school and out) or our freedoms with false “cost accounting” arguments and a narrow vision that doesn’t even address the “real” problems. Hatcher gives cost accounting and problem solving a bad name.

JIM HARGREAVES

Roswell, Ga.