Gun Fanatics Using Trojan Horses to Keep Their Deadly Toys

© David Burton 2019

     Universal background screening will stop the mass shootings, scream the gun owners. More mental health checks will weed out the killers from the peaceful among us, say the paid-for politicians. Guns don’t kill people - people kill people, yell the gun fanatics. The truth is: THEY ARE ALL LIEING! These are all Trojan Horses that have been constructed by gun lovers, their supporters, and the politicians that they have bought!

     Still, what the gun-crazies in America lobby for are more and deadlier guns on the streets of America. Arm the teachers, they offer up as a solution. Give every good person a gun to defend himself from the bad people, they tell us. They hand out the totally unsubstantiated canard that, arming every American citizen will put an end to gun violence, because then, the upright and honest gun owner will be able to defend themselves by killing the armed and despicable criminals among us. The fact is, that only in a statistically slim percentage of cases, do armed civilians actually help thwart some sort of crime or act of violence.[1] What these righteous firearms proponents won’t tell you is that, basically no armed citizen has ever stopped a mass shooting! Only our armed law enforcement officers have sometimes succeeded in ending a mass shooting. “A 2012 study by Mother Jones found that none of the 62 mass shootings from the preceding three decades were stopped by an armed citizen with a gun.” (Ref. 1)

     If you think more aggressive background checks will end mass shootings, you are totally naïve. Background checks would not have prevented a single mass public shooter in recent history from obtaining firearms. Would-be mass public shooters rarely have disqualifying criminal or mental health histories—meaning, they often can and do pass background checks when legally purchasing their firearms. With respect to the Dayton, Ohio gunman who killed nine and wounded more than two dozen others in August of 2019, “Police have said there was nothing in {the gunman’s} background to prevent him from buying a gun.” (Ref. 2)

     Another report on armed civilians saving lives at a mass shooting is as follows. “In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could’ve stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn’t just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. [Emphasis mine] As . . . reported recently in {an} in-depth investigation, not one of 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea of armed citizens getting involved. [Emphasis mine]
     “Those pesky facts haven’t stopped the ‘arm America more!’ crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny.  . . .” (Ref. 3) While written in 2012, the facts, some seven years later, remain unchanged. FACT: Good people with guns haven’t been able to put end to mass shootings in America. But, bad people with guns have committed all the mass shootings here in America.

     “While anecdotal evidence might make for a compelling public relations, and there are indeed some circumstances where gun ownership saves someone's life, the statistics overall are very clear: more guns equals more gun deaths. Which is precisely why so many other countries throughout the world, admittedly unburdened by the 2nd Amendment, have taken legislative action to regulate and control them.” (Ref. 1)

More and Stricter Gun Control Laws

     The cry has gone out: more and stricter gun control laws! In response, the gun lovers of America have uncovered the holy grail that will end gun violence in America - background checks and red flag laws. Even President Trump is getting in on the action.

- Red Flag Laws -

     Unfortunately, red flag laws are bad ideas. They are designed to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable. Sure, no one wants a mentally ill person to have guns, but who is to determine who is mentally ill? What would be the legal definition of mental illness? Realistically, Most mentally ill individuals are not — and will never become — violent, especially when they are receiving proper treatment.

     As a result of the Texas and Ohio shootings, red flag laws and universal background checks have become the rage. The argument goes: If we want to stop mass shootings, take the guns away from nut cakes before they start shooting everyone. Simple, eh?

     But there are lots of problems with these overly simplistic solutions. In the case of a red flag law, there are some people who completely freak out over guns and can overreact to the mere existence of a firearm in another person’s hands. There are others who may maliciously use red flag laws against people they don’t like. With a red flag law, all it would take would be for someone to convince a judge that another person posed a threat, despite little evidence to back up that charge. To be effective, a red flag law would have to have a very low of a burden of proof, and that’s a glaring fault with such a law. Simply accusing someone of being a threat could be enough to deprive an individual of his civil rights. A law with a very low burden of proof could well overwhelm our court system with a veritable flood of cases stemming from unsubstantiated charges. That’s something we need to keep in mind when considering the legality and effectiveness of a red flag law. Will it solve the problem? I seriously doubt it! And I believe that such a red flag law would create a much greater problem than the one it is supposed to solve. Our lawmakers and the public need to keep this in mind and, instead, focus on the only realistic solution – no guns!

     “ ‘Red flag’ laws are now all the rage in the Beltway as the magic pill to prevent homicidal maniacs from wreaking havoc on the nation. Even President Trump has endorsed the idea of preemptively confiscating people’s firearms if they are deemed a ‘threat’.
     “But if you want to know how this {law} would work in practice, let me remind you of how Veterans Affairs recklessly red-flags ‘disruptive’ citizens without due process, transparency or accountability in the name of ‘safety.’ Government bureaucrats routinely deprive our nation’s heroes of medical treatment based on arbitrary definitions of who and what constitutes a mental health menace.
     “Under the VA policy on ‘patient record flags', federal bureaucrats can classify vets as ‘threats’ based on assessments of their ‘difficult,’ ‘annoying’ and ‘noncompliant’ behavior. The VA manual says the flags ‘are used to alert Veterans Health Administration medical staff and employees of patients whose behavior and characteristics may pose a threat either to their safety, the safety of other patients, or compromise the delivery of quality health care.’
     “What a crock. It’s precisely because so many vets receive inferior care from the feds that they have been forced to raise their voices. Have we all forgotten the 40 veterans who perished at the Phoenix, Ariz., VA, which relegated patients to a bureaucratic black hole through secret waiting lists? Among examples of patients’ behavior referred to the red-flaggers in the VA’s ‘Disruptive Behavior Committees’: venting ‘frustration about VA services and/or wait times, threatening lawsuits or to have people fired, and frequent unwarranted visits to the emergency department or telephone calls to facility staff.’
     “{A Disabled} Air Force veteran and veterans advocate/attorney . . . has exposed the Soviet-style targeting of veterans flagged for exercising their First Amendment rights or threatening to sue the VA over neglectful care or for simply being too ‘expensive.’ He calls it ‘straight out of a totalitarian regime.’ In January 2018, a VA Office of Inspector General report found that large numbers of flagged veterans were being left in the dark about being placed on dangerous patient lists — with no recourse to remove phony flags or appeal in any meaningful way. [Emphasis mine]
     “There are undoubtedly patients in the system who may pose real threats. But the problem with the process is that it is secret. The review process is done in secret and the veteran will not know who sat on the committee or what the evidence presented was prior to the decision. Only after the decision is made are veterans informed of the outcome and given a chance to appeal the vague allegations. That seems like a due process violation {if there ever was one.}
     “{An Army veteran from} Virginia {said} recently that he was a flagged veteran. ‘My grave sin?’ {he said}. ‘I tried to report the abuse of a deaf, infirm, WWII veteran. He was approximately 95 years of age. A male nurse stood behind his waiting room chair and shouted down at the top of his head, ‘Hello! Hello! Hello! If you can hear me, you can come in now!’
     “{He} describes how the elderly vet could not hear this, and the nurse went through three iterations, while giggling and looking at the wait-room personnel as if we were a comedy club audience. It was one of the sickest displays I’ve ever seen.’
     “For blowing the whistle on VA elder abuse, he was banned from all satellite clinics and only granted access to one main facility. VA flaggers can ‘manufacture tone, the content of what you’re saying, and will even ascribe actions to you that you did not perform.’
     “ ‘The potential ‘red flag’ laws concern me deeply,’ {said the veterans advocate/attorney} ‘Why any citizen would think it wise to let the government screw such handles to our backs, to threaten and wag us any which way, is beyond my understanding. However, I fully understand why politicians want it.’ “ [Emphasis mine] (Ref. 4)

     A red flag law is just another useless substitute for the real solution to the problem of gun violence in America. It keeps the dogs at bay and it keeps naïve voters off the politicians' backs. It gives the politicians and their donors from the NRA the appearance of doing something useful when, in reality, they are allowing the problem to fester and to worsen.

- Universal Background Checks -

     The other part of more and stricter gun control laws! that is being bandied about is universal background checks, and this too is a flawed proposal. Take note, that in the case of the Parkland, Florida shooting, the perpetrator was on the FBI’s radar but that didn’t stop the massacre. The two shooters in El Paso and Dayton both passed background checks because they had no prior records, so a universal background check law would not have stopped the massacres. We need to recognize what these two so-called solutions to mass shootings – universal background checks and red flag laws – are. They are diversionary tactics intended to distract honest people from insisting on the only practical solution – getting guns off the streets of America.

     UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS WILL NOT STOP THE MASS SHOOTINGS. The NRA knows this, Donald Trump knows this, and all intelligent Americans know this. Look back at all the mass shootings in recent decades and tell me how many of them would have been prevented by background checks. VERY FEW TO NONE! Universal background checks might weed out a miniscule few mass shooters, but it most definitely won't put an end to the problem.

     The call for universal background checks is simply another move by the unthinking public, NRA-beholden politicians, gun-lovers and Donald Trump to implement a feel-good move that will have little-to-no impact on gun violence in America. BUT, the disingenuous gun owners and their supporters want to appear to be taking action to stop the mass shootings while actually doing nothing of real significance to end the killings and maiming. Heaven forbid, anyone should have to give up their lethal toys!

- Where Does the President Stand? -

     President Donald Trump is a member of the National Rifle Association (NRA) even if he isn’t a card-carrying member and doesn’t pay membership dues. Along with the NRA, President Trump has consistently opposed any meaningful action to restrict the use of guns to commit mass murders in these United states and he is once more colluding with the NRA to guarantee that, in the wake of the recent mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, no effective action will be taken.

     Immediately, following the public uproar after the El Paso and Dayton shootings, “{The} National Rifle Association CEO . . . and President Trump have spoken, a senior administration official confirmed to CBS News. The White House has not disclosed what the two spoke about during the phone call.
     “In the wake of the mass shootings in Ohio and Texas, the president called on Congress to pass legislation on background checks, which the NRA has long opposed and lobbied against. Mr. Trump has not always supported strengthening background check laws, threatening to veto such legislation earlier this year. [Emphasis mine] The president has also spoken with West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, who said the two discussed the NRA's concerns about a background check bill, according to a spokesperson for the senator.
     “Manchin said the president told him he wants to see legislation before September, and the West Virginia senator told Mr. Trump he needs to be outspoken in his support for the background checks bill in order to secure Republican support.” (Ref. 5)

     The president has reversed himself so many times on the issue of universal background checks that nost Americans are dizzy. Why does the President continue to flip-flop on the background check issue? Why would he oppose it in the first place? Did he oppose universal background checks because the NRA opposes it? Is he reversing direction because of the upcoming 2020 election? Is Donald Trump colluding with the NRA to scuttle any meaningful action to stop mass shootings? Will President Trump and members of Congress take any effective steps to end the gun violence in these United States or will they continue to shed crocodile tears over the victims and simply express their condolences to the victims and their families?

The NRA and Donald Trump Collude

     “The NRA issued a statement expressing ‘deepest sympathies’ after the Ohio and Texas shootings, insisting the group would ‘work in good faith to pursue real solutions that protect us all from people who commit these horrific acts.’ But late Thursday, {the NRA CEO} issued a statement saying the NRA ‘opposes any legislation that unfairly infringes upon the rights of law-abiding citizens,’ adding, ‘The inconvenient truth is this: the proposals being discussed by many would not have prevented the horrific tragedies in El Paso and Dayton.’
     “{the NRA CEO} continued, ‘The NRA will work in good faith to pursue real solutions to the epidemic of violence in America. But many proposals are nothing more than 'soundbite solutions' – which fail to address the root of the problem, confront criminal behavior, or make our communities safer.’ “(Ref. 5) While, as always, not offering a realistic answer to the mass killings, the NRA did, at least, expose the universal background check proposal as nothing but useless.

     It’s interesting to note that the “NRA was a substantial financial backer of Mr. Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, and Mr. Trump has spoken multiple times at NRA gatherings, praising the group's defense of the Second Amendment and pledging that Americans' rights to carry firearms will always be protected under his presidency.
     " ‘Your Second Amendment rights are under siege, but they will never, ever be under siege as long as I'm your president,’ Mr. Trump said in a speech to the NRA last year. After the February 2018 Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, however, the president mocked fellow Republicans for being ‘petrified’ of the NRA, claiming he doesn't need to cave to the group's demands. Back then, the president also said at the time that he supported expanded background checks, although he did not push the effort. The Trump administration did ban bump stocks, a move that received significant pushback from the gun lobby.” (Ref. 5)

     Mr. Trump’s pledge that “Your Second Amendment rights are under siege, but they will never, ever be under siege as long as I'm your president” effectively means that, as long as he is president, there will be no meaningful action taken to end mass shootings. As I’ve written before, the only way to put an end to gun violence in America is to once-and-for-all get rid of the guns. To do this, the Second Amendment must first and foremost be repealed.

The Only Meaningful Solution

     I’ve written about the largely uncontrolled gun violence in America before. And, with each more-frequent mass shooting that has taken place, my thinking on how to put an end to the killings and injuries has both clarified and hardened. America is gun crazy. There are an estimated 400 million privately owned firearms in the United States, with somewhere between one-third and one-half of American households owning at least one gun. That's about 50 million more guns than the total population of these United States - men, women and children. I started addressing this problem in 2017, by writing, “Today, in the 21st century, the time has long since passed for repealing the outdated and irrelevant Second Amendment to the constitution and for instituting meaningful federal and state laws to put an end to the escalation of gun crimes in the United States.” (Ref. 6)

     After the Parkland High School shootings in Florida in 2018, I wrote:

     “Where do we start to end gun violence and mass shootings in America? We start by repealing the second amendment to the Constitution! Every time there is an attempt to institute meaningful gun control legislation and to end or, at least, to reduce the number of gun deaths, injuries and mass shootings, the gun owners, the gun lobby, and the plain gun nuts invoke the 2nd amendment, as if it was some law engraved on tablets of stone that was handed down from God and which is immutable, sacred and unchangeable. It’s time to refute such argument! The 2nd amendment is no such thing! Is is simply an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. It was not even the first amendment to the Constitution and, let’s remember that the U.S. Constitution was not even the first set of rules to govern the newly independent Thirteen Colonies – the Articles of Confederation were! Also, let’s not lose sight of the fact that the Constitution was designed to be amended, i.e., changed, and that amendments to the Constitution can and have been repealed. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not sacred and it is not sacrosanct – it can be changed and it can be repealed! The time has now arrived when it must be repealed!” (Ref. 7)

     Again in 2018, I noted the passivity of our legislators, {our president,} and gun-rights activists in tackling the epidemic of mass shootings by stating: “After a mass shooting, politicians offer condolences and prayers, observe moments of silence and order flags flown at half-staff. But afterward, legislative efforts are deferred and ultimately derailed. Invariably, the refrain is: not now, later; There will be a time and place for a political debate, but not now. Now is the time for us to mourn and unite as a country. And the time for political debate and meaningful action never comes. It’s always the same old story – now is not the time, later. When it comes to guns, it’s business as usual!
     “Will the American public continue to avoid taking the first hard step toward reversing this trend? Or, will the American public finally stand up and demand that their elected representatives institute meaningful, effective and innovative legislation to reverse the trend of gun violence in the United States? Will the American public demand the repeal of the Second Amendment to the Constitution, followed by the enactment of radical and restrictive gun control laws that will put an end to these senseless killings? When it comes to gun violence, will the American public finally demand an end to the business as usual attitude of its elected officials? Isn’t now finally the right time?” (Ref. 8)

     Most unfortunately, the need to once again address the issue of gun violence arose following the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh later in 2018. I said:

     “To those mealy-mouthed politicians who are beholden to the NRA and the gun fanatics throughout America, guns are never the problem, now is not the time to take really meaningful action, and putting more guns on the street by enlisting a new army of armed guards everywhere is the solution. To these gun advocates, their solution is a return to the wild west of the 19th century, where every man totes a six-gun on his hip. To these gun lovers, their solution is to lock up every venue in the United States where more than a dozen people congregate and place an armed guard inside to ward off any potential attackers. Better yet, these American patriots would have the rest of us cower in homes to avoid being shot by some gun-wielding crazy, while they cavort around with their beloved guns shouting that guns are not the problem. That is not the America in which I want to live!
     “Repealing the Second Amendment and enacting laws to get rid of the weapons on the streets of America are the first two necessary steps to ending the senseless slaughtering of Americans with firearms. The remaining step is the passage of laws to severely punish all illegal activity associated with the use, possession or trafficking of guns.” (Ref. 9)

     And then at the beginning of this year, I once again took up the worsening problem of shootings in America when I wrote: “Another year has passed since the mass shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. In the intervening 12 months, what have we here in America done in response to that tragedy? What have we accomplished in the struggle to end gun violence in America? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! For shame, America!
      - - -
     “Unless and until America decides that getting guns off its street and out of the hands of those who would do us harm supersedes gunowners’ perceived 'right to own a gun' and unless and until America simply outlaws their possession, the spate of gun deaths in America will continue to grow. Until the gun fanatics realize that sometimes citizens must give up certain perceived rights in order to benefit society as a whole, the epidemic of mass shootings will continue. Unless and until our politicians stop spouting their blather and rhetoric and get serious about ending gun violence, the death toll from shootings will continue to spiral upward.
      - - -
     “America, for Shame! We are long on words and short on actions. We sympathize, we mourn, we remember and we make unfulfilled promises – but still, we do nothing! For shame, America!”
     “Are you fed up with nothing being done to end gun violence in America? Will you do something to end the madness or will you stay with those who talk a lot, but do nothing? If you are willing to take action, contact your representatives and senators and tell them you won’t support them, nor vote for them if they won’t push to:

1. repeal the second amendment to the Constitution,
2. ban the possession of all guns except by law enforcement, the military and those who need guns to protect the public, and
3. enact laws to severely punish anyone who illegally possesses or traffics guns.

1. How Many Mass Shootings Were Stopped By Armed Civilians? There Are Documented Cases, Chris Tognotti, Bustle, 3 October 2017.
2. Feds: Ohio gunman’s pal bought body armor, ammo magazine, Boston Herald, Page 22,
   13 August 2019.
3. Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No., Mark Follman, Mother Jones,
   19 December 2012.
4. How the VA ‘red flags’ patriots should raise alarms, Michelle Malkin, Boston Herald,
   Page 19, 12 August 2019.
5. Trump speaks with NRA's Wayne LaPierre as he weighs possible gun reforms ,
   Kathryn Watson, CBS News, 8 August 2019.
6. The Second Amendment in 2017, David Burton, Son of Eliyahu:Article 292, 1 June 2017.
7. When it Comes to Mass Shootings, There are Doers and Then There are Politicians,
   David Burton, Son of Eliyahu:Article 318, 8 March 2018.
8. When It Comes to Guns, It’s Business as Usual, David Burton, Son of Eliyahu:Article 319,
   19 March 2018.
9. The ONLY Way to End Gun Violence in America, David Burton, Son of Eliyahu:Article 339,
   1 November 2018.
10. For Shame, America!, David Burton, Son of Eliyahu:Article 350, 21 February 2019.
11. America Obfuscates and New Zealand Acts, David Burton, Son of Eliyahu: Article 353,
    8 April 2019.
12. It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them., Phoebe Maltz Bovy, The New Republic,
    10 December 2015.