Of course, gun control is hardly a panacea. It won't mean an immediate end to our hideous series of mass murders. And the measures gun-control advocates push will hardly mean endangering Second Amendment rights and wrenching all guns from the hands of law-abiding Americans, no matter what the National Rifle Association tries to tell you. Most of the measures are modest; Obama's centerpiece measures after the Newtown carnage would have established background checks for those buying firearms at gun shows and online and banned assault weapons.
But at least they are a start, an effort to deal with the recurring bloody episodes that have become an all-too-common part of the American landscape. That beats unctuous hand-wringing. The president's remarks about Charleston marked his 14th statement about shootings — 11 of them in the U.S. — since he took office, according to CBS News' Mark Knoller, who keeps track of all things presidential.
Writers like Mr. Reider have already heard the arguments of pro-gun advocates and have rejected them as being either specious or inadequate.
Much like our opinion of Mr. Obama's "modest measures".
The difference is, those modest measures (a) would do nothing to prevent the recurrence of similar tragedies, (b) disarming the public would put even more Americans at risk ["registration", for example, invariably leads to even greater infringement on the Constituional rights of Americans], and (c) the entire article is nothing more than "unctuous hand-wringing".
Turn in your own firearms, sir, but please have the courtesy to avoid undermining our freedoms.
My second amendment protects your first amendment. But then, reciprocity is not a Liberal quality.