One week ago, a gunman armed with a Ruger AR-15 shot at Sutherland Springs First Baptist Church, then entered and began killing parishioners. One week ago, an armed American grabbed his AR-15 and shot the spree killer bedevilling the small west Texas town. To mark this gruesome milestone, the anti-gun rights mainstream media is focusing on the first part of that horrific equation and trying its best to ignore the latter. It’s not easy . . .
Simple logic says if there’d been armed members at the Sutherland Springs church they could’ve stopped or at least limited the killer’s deadly rampage. Which is why churches, synagogues and temples around the country are reevaluating their security arrangements, many [finally] adding defensive firearms to the mix.
Which is also why the anti-gun-rights mainstream media is scrambling to find writers who can make a case — some kind of case — against armed worshippers.
As one the leading lights of the civilian disarmament industrial complex, The Washington Post no doubt felt compelled to turn to opinion writer (as opposed to?) Colbert I. King (above) to explain why houses of worship should be “gun free zones.”
Mr. King’s polemic acknowledges “the role of the armed neighbor who returned fire before first responders got to the scene.” But asks “As we contemplate God in our spiritual journey, must we also now pray for the capacity to shoot back?”
Sure! Why not?
Set aside for the moment the risk of armed church members confusing congregants they don’t recognize with an assailant, or the danger of friendly fire, or protectors who accidentally mishandle their lethal weapons.
Consider what we are giving in to. Some may call it reality. How about resignation? To think: gunning up and hunkering down in a house of God.
Got it. Reality sucks. Resigning yourself to reality can be a painful process. You have to abandon the preconceptions and prejudices that obscured your ability to see things as they really are, as opposed how you thought they were, or wish them to be. The red pill is a bitter pill to swallow. But there it is. And Mr. King only makes a head feint in that direction.
Gun violence is our problem. And we, holed up in our sanctuaries, seem to be losing heart as we resort to building arsenals in our churches and homes.
We know better. To return peace to our houses of worship and communities, we need to start by fixing our gun laws. We need to restrict access to those deadly weapons, keeping them out of the wrong hands — domestic-violence offenders, people with histories of violent behavior and the like.
We can’t set ourselves apart, hunkering down behind church walls. We need to keep faith that things can be made better, that there are ways — legislatively, medically, communally — to prevent the violence that takes a toll on our lives, done in the spirit of loving our neighbors as ourselves.
If we can’t do that, if we don’t want to try that, really, what’s the point?
What’s the point of what? Life? Tooling-up before you take a knee for your deity? If that’s the question, self-preservation and the preservation of innocent life is the answer.
It’s an answer that gun control advocates can’t counter, except to throw up their hands and say “has it really come to this?” They singularly fail/refuse to understand that lethal threats to religious groups were, are and always be with us — no matter what laws man passes.