Last week the Pulse killer murdered 49 and wounded another 53 who were in Orlando’s Pulse nightclub (a mostly gay, Hispanic nightclub) in a 4 hour ordeal in which he also made 17 phone calls, texted his wife, checked his Facebook news feed obsessively, made professions of loyalty to ISIS on his Facebook page, and told the 911 operator that he pledged loyalty to ISIS and was killing his victims as a religious work to his god, Allah. The President of the United States and the entire Democrat Party told Americans that the danger was guns. However, no guns walked out of their homes, loaded themselves with ammo, took a car to the Pulse nightclub, shot at the guard at the door, and went inside shooting people to death while shouting “Allahu Akbar” and other phrases often heard on the lips of Muslim murderers all over the world. Every time a weapon shot a victim in that nightclub it was because the Pulse killer pulled the trigger.
Eventually the police entered the club and shot it out with the mass murderer. He was killed, finally, after killing 49 others.
We could ask why the police waited 4 hours, during which the killer had plenty of time to roam the nightclub, shooting those who had so far escaped his attention and finishing off those who were still bleeding, as well as all the other things he did. That is a valuable conversation to start. Police should not be waiting for a mass murderer to finish off every victim trapped with him. They need to act quickly, well within the one hour it takes for gunshot victims to bleed to death, so they can save the wounded from death.
But that wasn’t the President’s concern. His concern is that law abiding Americans have guns.
Now the President has declared that American parents need to talk to their children about guns. This is true, but not in the way the President meant. The President belongs to the political party that invented American gun control as a way to disarm freed black former slaves after the Civil War, and his party continues to push gun control as a magic formula that will finally convince murderers (who are undeterred by harsh sentences for murder) to stop murdering people with guns. I believe neither in magical formulas that will instantly and painlessly turn murderers into saints, nor in keeping victims disarmed so they can be better oppressed, attacked, robbed, and murdered.
The fact is that guns are defensive weapons. This is a crucial distinction. Any killer can kill people with a bomb, an automobile, box cutters, or a sufficient supply of rocks and bricks. However, the person being attacked cannot defend himself with those things. Those deadly tools are only good for offense. Guns, on the other hand, are good for defense. They are lightweight, sufficiently lethal to deter attacks, and can be quickly re-aimed should a second threat arise. Someone under threat who has a gun can defend himself or herself from a larger, more vicious, and stronger attacker. Without a gun this is nearly impossible.
Aside from the killer, one person at that nightclub had a gun. The guard at the front door was armed, but realized he was outgunned by the killer and retreated. Everyone else was a sitting duck.
And the strangest thing for everyone who thinks that banning guns is the answer is this: The Pulse nightclub is a gun free zone by law. Guns are banned there. If banning guns worked, the victims would not be dead, would not be victims, and we would have never heard of the Pulse killer.