The
only winner after the San Bernardino shootout is the Second Amendment.
By
People say this is a do-nothing Congress. That’s unfair.
Why, the sirens in San Bernardino had hardly gone silent before
lawmakers were clamoring about a bill that might address the confluence of mental health problems and potential gun buyers.
And if that draconian proposal weren’t enough, Republican
leaders said they would be forming a committee to study the mass shooting. What
profiles in courage.
There were other proposals too — most of them involving doing
something unpleasant to Muslims.
One thing not proposed, at least not by Republicans, was any
form of gun control. Some Democrats suggested that, as a starter, the
government could ban people on the terror watch list from buying enough guns
and bullets to turn an armored car into steel wool in 30 seconds flat.
No dice, said the
Republicans. That list isn’t perfect, they apparently realize. People get on
there by mistake. And what if one of those innocents was denied the right to
buy an assault rifle — and that person subsequently found himself confronted by
an angry, armed mob? He or she would have no way of defending himself. Or
herself.
I’m not making this up, by the way. This is a real argument.
Another win for the Second Amendment.
Do you like statistics? I love statistics. Here are a few:
More Americans have died of gunshot wounds in the last four years than
died in our wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq combined. And
every 16 minutes, we add to the total.
As for Muslims being the main culprits: Since the 9/11 attacks,
45 people have been killed in what might be called Islamist terrorist attacks
in this country.
During that same period, 48 people have died at the hands of
white extremists, many of them Christians. All of which is a drop in the bucket
when it comes to the number of murders during the same 14-year period —
200,000.
For the Republican presidential candidates, the San Bernardino
tragedy became an instant opportunity to whip up hysteria among the
faithful.
“The nation is under siege,” said New Jersey governor Chris Christie at an Iowa café. “What I believe we’re
facing is the next world war.” Cruz, Rubio, and even Jeb Bush chimed in with
their version of “The Muslims are coming, the Muslims are coming.”
But Donald Trump is lording over this hall of infamy. Even
before The Donald called for barring all Muslims from entering the United
States, he claimed, among other things, that on 9/11 he “watched in Jersey
City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that
building was coming down.”
Actually, they weren’t. John J.
Farmer, New Jersey’s attorney general at the time of the attacks, investigated
the rumor and found it a vile falsehood.
You know, it’s time to stop treating Trump merely as an
entertaining buffoon who spices up the otherwise dull Republican debates.
And
we should call him what he is: a nasty piece of work and a lying ignoramus
who’s bullied his way to the front of the Republican line by being unconscionably
rude.
He’s mocked the appearance of opponents, made fun of a
reporter’s congenital disability, and condoned the “roughing up” of protestors
at his rallies.
And yet he’s rising in the polls, just like the sale of guns
across the nation keeps spiraling upward.
President Barack Obama addressed the nation the other night
seeking to add a note of reason to the climate of hysteria. It was a good
speech. There was nothing wrong with it, but I fear it was too little, too
late.
Americans, apparently, don’t want to be calmed by assurances
that we’re winning a war that we’ve been slow to acknowledge.
We want
somebody up there pounding the podium promising to do something fierce.
We want Winston Churchill.
Barack Obama, alas, is no Winston Churchill. But neither is he
Donald Trump. For that let us be grateful.
OtherWords
columnist Donald Kaul lives in Ann Arbor, Michigan. OtherWords.org.