Brain Free Zone

I'm not sure if we should be amazed by how adept the left is at framing a debate for the entire nation on just about any given topic, or if we should just be appalled by how inept the right is at doing the same.  Maybe it fits into the theme of previous posts regarding how poorly positioned the right seems to be for getting any message out. Whatever the reasons behind it, we once again find the left on offense and the right on defense.  These have become default positions for the two sides, and that's an increasingly unfortunate thing.

The compulsion to protect children is deeply engrained in our national psyche.  Part of our cultural sense of character and honor is defined by our treatment of children and our concern for their well being.  Unfortunately, our nobler tendencies regarding our children also make us vulnerable to those that would manipulate or exploit those tendencies for their own purpose.  Politicians are keenly aware of this chink in our armor, and happy to take advantage of it.

The political exploitation of the horrors of Sandy Hook elementary school are appalling.  The anti-gun lobby has opportunistically seized the situation to pursue their irrelevant agenda.  They are showing no more compassion for those lost in this horrible tragedy, and they are showing no more concern for the safety of other children in schools across this nation, than they would by pursuing better fuel standards for SUVs.  The anti-gun crowd is pursuing an irrelevant agenda while ignoring real and pressing issues.

School security is a serious issue.  Mental health is a serious issue.  The potential harm of psychoactive drugs is a serious issue.  Sadly, the left is framing the debate and they are more focused on exploiting a crisis to achieve a long desired goal than they are in protecting anybody.  Even more sadly, the spokespeople from the right are displaying gross incompetence by not rejecting the nonsensical premise that the left has framed the debate upon.  So we are left with a situation wherein one party (small 'p') seeks to do something irrelevant in the name of the children, and the other party legitimizes that irrelevance by defending against it, and the children are not seriously considered at all.

Assault styled weapons with high capacity magazines are the primary focus of the ongoing anti-gun debate. It has been clearly illustrated that assault style weapons account for a very small portion of gun violence.  It is also reasonably obvious that the absence of an assault style weapon at Sandy Hook would have made no difference in the outcome.  Constitutional arguments aren't needed to resist the premise of the anti-gun crowd, and they really aren't interested in what the constitution has to say on the matter anyway.  Despite assertions to the contrary, the anti-gun crowd isn't really confused about the meaning of the 2nd amendment.

There is no logic in starting a gun-control debate over a type of gun that is responsible for a very small portion of gun violence.  A 10 round magazine restriction will do nothing to stop mass killings.  A ban on assault style weapons and high capacity mags would not have averted the Sandy Hook killings.  The premise for the arguments for more gun control is demonstrably dishonest.  The left will continue to steadily advance their agenda until the right comes to the realization that it is not required to accept the premise of left wing arguments for every crisis that comes up.  While the gun control debate rages on there is no significant national discussion about how to make our schools safer.