Immediately following the news that there was an attack in a movie theater in Antioch, Tennessee, CNN’s anchors consistently started the segment by intoning that, “We’ve seen this time and again.” The implication was that shootings in theaters are becoming commonplace and they bemoaned the fact that nothing has been done to prevent such tragedies. The obvious conclusion: CNN’s anchors wanted to see more gun control legislation. Since that hasn’t happened they are blaming every attack on the evil NRA and gun owners. There’s just one problem: the gun used in this particular incident was fake . . .
Not that CNN really cares. Well after it was determined that the pistol was a pellet gun, the “news” organization ran an op-ed calling for more gun control and using this non-shooting as a prime example of the “gun culture gone wrong.”
That the alleged assailant in Nashville, Vincente David Montano, was wielding a pellet gun that only, quite convincingly, looked like a real gun changes the outcome, but not the terror. Some of us may decide going out to the movies isn’t worth it.
The strength of the gun lobby in America and the fears of some that they will lose rights conferred, they say, by the Second Amendment are only part of the reason such topics are mostly avoided in the business world, including in the business media. Our attachment to guns crosses lines of race, gender and sexual orientation: it is a national disposition. Who wants to mess with that?
According to the author, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a fake gun is no different than a real firearm. She argues that since there is no difference between a fake gun and a real gun, the evil gun lobby is ultimately to blame for this incident and that something must be done to pressure people into accepting more restrictive gun regulations. For their own good.
America’s economic leaders should apply the boldness and tenacity that fuel national enterprise to the task of shifting the conversation about gun control in this country. They will face opposition at first, but they will be making a necessary investment in our human capital and in our collective prosperity.
The author’s argument is that business owners should impose the most restrictive anti-gun policies they possibly can on the American people in order to make their patrons “feel safe.” The problem is that, as we have seen time and again, gun free zones like the ones she suggests do more to attract mass shootings than to deter them.
This is pretty much what the gun control activists have been reduced to: begging individuals for support in their cause. The American population believes now more than ever that a firearm is a useful tool for self defense, and having a gun in the house means that you are safer. Enacting any sort of gun control in this environment is pretty much political suicide on a national level, and the only way that this can change is if the nation’s opinions start to change as well. Demonizing gun owners, ostracizing them from your favorite places, and making them appear to be untermensch is the place to start, but there’s very little support for such measures outside the liberal bastions of Seattle and California.
The line of thinking for gun control activists hasn’t changed one bit. “I’m more intelligent and more important than these gun owning yokels, and I think they need to have their guns taken away for their own good.” That’s the way it has always been, but now with the opinion of the American people no longer on their side it is becoming crystal clear. The elite few want to disarm the unwashed masses, and the masses are telling them to cram it. The only way they can make progress is if the rest of the elites — the business owners — fall in line and force gun control down the throats of the American people.
That’s what CNN is pleading for in this editorial, and they couldn’t care less that the facts don’t match their narrative. Because they’re better than you. They don’t need facts.