Gun Nuts Play Soldier After Chattanooga, the headline at dailybeast.com sneers, referring to open carry Americans protecting unarmed military recruiters from terrorist attack. What could go wrong? the subhead snarks. The article underneath the anti-gun agitprop proclamations isn’t that bad. Like so many civilian disarmament posts of late, the authors do a pretty good job of presenting the pro-gun position. Such a good job, in fact, that they paint themselves into a rhetorical corner. How can you argue against arming stateside military personnel when the military can’t come up with a convincing argument? You invent one for them! Like this . . .
“We’ve got to debate this. We need to give this a rationale, measured look,” one senior defense official explained to The Daily Beast. “Would you let your son or daughter join the military if a recruiter showed up at your house with a gun?”
Those involved in recruiting said that arming troops would make it even harder for them to get into schools, malls and college campuses.
“Our presence on high school and college campuses is tenuous enough,” a second senior defense official explained. “How are we supposed to go to a high school and say ‘can we come to your fourth period history class with a gun’?”
As a journalist (off and on) for the last 25 years, I’d bet dollars to donuts that those quotes are entirely fabricated. They use the exact same “rationale” to suggest that the military thinks that arming military recruiters would be counter-productive: it would terrify/intimidate civilians interested in joining the military. As John McEnroe would say, you cannot be serious.
Once again, the antis demonstrate their belief that the ends justify the means, by making shit up. Regardless of what you think about gun control, it’s clear that those who promote it cannot be trusted. Not now. Not ever. Never.