The National Rifle Association has come under fire recently with regard to the mass-shooting in Parkland, Florida. The shooting is truly an atrocity and should be addressed in a serious manner. Which is why it’s befuddling to hear so many people attempting to lay blame on the NRA.
The NRA represents the precise opposite of the Parkland School-shooter. Members of the NRA have been credited for stopping mass-shootings, such as the case in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Where NRA instructor Stephen Willeford gunned down an assailant who attempted a mass-shooting at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs. So why on Earth would people attempt to conflate a 507(c) (3) organization that promotes responsible gun ownership with those whom commit mass-shootings? It seems like we need more responsible gun ownership, not less.
The answer is much simpler than most would like to admit. Politics. The NRA gives more money to Republicans candidates than Democrat candidates. This is the sole reason why democrats attempt to blame the NRA for mass-shootings. It is illogical and dishonest.
The NRA does absolutely nothing to facilitate mass-shooters in fact, they advocate the exact opposite. They argue for responsible gun ownership, that of which the Florida shooter was clearly not. Furthermore the Florida shooter was not a member of the NRA. Anything the NRA endorses and/or supports is always in regards to responsible and safe gun ownership.
Democrats built this one-way NRA support themselves. Democrats built a wall between their coffers and the NRA. The pursuit of turning everyone into a victim lead Democrats to blame the gun and not the actions of the individual firing the gun. By doing so they make responsible gun owners feel vilified, the very people that make up the NRA’s membership. By blaming the gun and not the individual, lawful gun owners feel as if they are being conflated with mass-shooters. They rightfully disregard such accusations as well as the politicians who spout them. In turn, as members of the NRA, they will advocate the NRA to support politicians who put the blame where it belongs. The mass-shooter!
Why don’t Democrats go after other groups that advocate for the safe use of a product that has the potential to kill when misused? There are groups that advocate for responsible and safe consumption of alcohol, but Democrats never blame them for the deaths related to alcohol. Why not? They are advocating the use of a product that can ultimately kill you, and does. Around 88,000 people die annually from alcohol related reasons as opposed to 12,000 annual gun related deaths that were not categorized as “self-inflicted.”
The alcohol lobby supports both Democrats and Republicans. As it currently stands Democrats in the Senate receive more money from the alcohol lobby than their Republican counterparts however, Republicans in the House receive more money from the alcohol lobby than their Democrats counterparts. It seems they satisfy both sides of the aisle therefore they do not have to defend their advocacy in the same way the NRA does.
There are groups that advocate for people not to use vaccines. Should they be blamed for the deaths related to influenza viruses? After all, influenza in the 8th most likely cause of death in the United States, many of which are children. This issue should be front and center if Democrats are being honest about their motives in enacting “common sense” gun laws. But Democrats have never laid any blame for influenza deaths on any of these anti-vaccine advocacy groups. Why? Because no Republican would accept their support so Democrats see no incentive in vilifying them. If the motive was to save lives then Democrats would be slamming these groups but, since they make no political contributions they are safe from the Democratic Party’s attacks.
Democrats are now using the Parkland Shooting in an attempt to bring voters to their side of the gun debate with regard to the 2018 mid-term elections. They are now stating that any politician that receives support from the NRA, an organization that advocates for responsibility and gun safety, should be voted out. Gun safety is not a bad thing, so why would they say this? It’s obvious they want to make gun ownership taboo. They want to make people ashamed of owning firearms so they stop using infringements on the 2nd Amendment as a key voting issue.
It’s all about politics and nothing more. There is no Democrat willing to be honest and admit that their armed security detail likely contains members of the NRA. Even more troublesome, not a single member of the media is willing to ask that very question. Mainstream media is bent on carrying water for the DNC while ignoring and/or belittling solutions from dissenting voices. Through the mainstream media’s lens, if you disagree with the Democratic Party’s suggested “common sense gun laws” then you are complacent with mass-shootings. They deem all dissenting voices as “complacent in the killing of children.”
If we do not address the issue in a realistic way, we will have many more gun restrictions coupled with many more mass-shootings. Allowing knee-jerk reactions to dictate policy will only make one feel better until the next mass-shooting.
Banning inanimate objects has not worked out well in the past. Look at the drug epidemic we are experiencing in America today. Heroin has been banned since 1924 however, we are experiencing a heroin epidemic 94 years after it was outlawed. Why are we to think banning guns, or any type of guns, would result in a different outcome?
What was Einstein’s definition of insanity again?
Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result.