The Orlando nightclub “mass shooting” was a horrible act of radical Islamic terrorism. The murderer proclaimed this, ISIS proclaimed this and yet story after story from activist news installations and the President himself, including most of the mainstream media, continue to talk of this “mass shooting” and the latest impetus to further restrict and control gun rights. I have no intention of tackling the gun control debate here, that is layered and involved, but more to clean a process that has been dirtied by many that will say anything to force their perspective into law.
A terrorist will act according to the guidance and instruction of an organization; some directly trained and some merely receiving guidance from a distance. A common citizen shooting people out of anger, mental issues or for notoriety is a wholly different problem.
Airplanes, bombs, machetes, cleavers, fire and, yes, guns have been used by terrorists to kill and frighten people into submission. It is important to make this clear since the gun control debate is about whether or not the government can or should limit the rights of law-abiding Americans to have access to guns and then what those limits, if any, should be in order to reduce the access of the deranged and unstable.
A terrorist is a completely different animal and terrorism is a very different problem that has nothing to do with access to guns. A terrorist seeks or is trained to use any method available to cause terror and bring a group closer to submitting. If one uses an act of terror to support a ban on all weaponry completely, terrorists would simply use other tools (or illegally acquire guns) since they are ideologically driven. In other words, assuming gun-control advocates are correct, a complete ban on guns might make the school shooter now a horror of the past, but we would still have bombs set in daycare centers, malls, churches and more or the very public cleaver slaughters, as occurred in London a few years back, or more planes flown into buildings plus anything the many international organizations of sick, twisted and clever terrorists come up with. If every gun law that gun control advocates wanted had been enacted long ago, the horror in Orlando, San Bernardino and Fort Hood would have happened. They were seeking to terrorize us, not shoot a specific number of a certain type of people. Ultimately, bringing an act of terror into the gun debate might rid all of the guns from America and yet only shift the tools used by terrorist…slightly… and, potentially, leave the public less able to defend itself.
I believe we need to keep the gun control debate about “if” and “how” we control guns for law-abiding Americans. This will enable us to keep confronting terrorists and the awful organizations that lead them honestly, head-on and properly focused.
Also published on Medium.