Fatcow Icon
Obama’s childlike approach on guns
Jan 19, 2013 | 2155 views | 5 5 comments | 3 3 recommendations | email to a friend | print

President Barack Obama set a new standard for stupidly exploitative White House events by appearing onstage with children to unveil his gun-control proposals.

He quoted from the kids’ letters. He invoked their Solomonic authority: “Their voices should compel us to change.” He signed executive orders as they gazed on adoringly. He hugged and high-fived them.

No doubt every parent thinks his or her little Johnny or Sally is the next James Q. Wilson. That doesn’t make it so. Some of the wisdom that the president shared from his adorable pen pals was, “[I] want everybody to be happy and safe,” and “I feel really bad.”

News flash: Kids don’t want bad things to happen. This would be a genuinely useful insight … if we could write public policy in crayon. The White House event smacked of the old unilateral disarmament campaigns of the 1980s when we were supposed to abolish nuclear weapons because they scared youngsters.

We can assume that the kids onstage with Obama don’t have a fine-grained sense of the limits of gun control or a proper regard for the Second Amendment. That’s OK, though — neither does he.

It can’t be said that using kids as props was beneath the gravity of occasion, since the occasion was all about feel-good PR and make-believe. For all the emphasis on stopping another Sandy Hook, Obama didn’t offer any gun-control proposals that would do it.

The president plugged for a universal background check. Adam Lanza’s mother, who owned the guns he used on his rampage, passed a background check. James Holmes, the Aurora, Colo., shooter, passed two background checks. So did the Virginia Tech shooter (although he shouldn’t have).

The president wants a new assault-weapons ban. He told of how another school shooting happened in California while networks were broadcasting a Joe Biden news conference about his task force. He didn’t mention that the shooter used a shotgun, not an assault weapon. He could have said that there was yet another recent shooting at a Kentucky community college. The shooter used a semiautomatic pistol.

During his remarks introducing the president, Biden invoked Colin Goddard, a survivor of the Virginia Tech shooting in the audience. Seung-Hui Cho shot him four times. Not with an assault weapon. Cho perpetrated the worst school shooting in U.S. history with a semiautomatic pistol.

The president called for a ban of magazines of more than 10 rounds (fewer than some guns have as a standard feature). This would have made a difference in Newtown only if you presume that Lanza, who knew his way around firearms, couldn’t have reloaded in the permissive environment of an elementary school without a guard.

Unfortunately, no one can write a law against mothers owning guns that one day might be turned against them by deranged sons who then commit horrific acts of murder-suicide. Shooting rampages are very hard to prevent because they are so often committed by disturbed young men without criminal records who don’t care if they are caught and usually want to die.

These are adult facts that don’t intrude on the childish world of White House policymaking. They must have eluded Biden in the course of his consultations with 229 different groups that just happened to result in recommendations from his task force that anyone could have predicted beforehand.

To justify any gun-control measure, no matter how ineffectual or symbolic, Biden talks of adopting an “if it saves one life” standard. If that really were the White House’s guiding principle — politics and the expense be damned — it would push massive stop-and-frisk crackdowns in the nation’s cities. It would take up the National Rifle Association’s proposal for armed guards at every school in America. But what it really wants is as much gun control as it can plausibly get in the aftermath of Newtown. As Rahm Emanuel might put it, never let a massacre go to waste.

There’s no reason for kids to see through it. Discerning adults should.

Rich Lowry can be reached via e-mail: comments.lowry@nationalreview.com.

(c) 2013 by King Features Syndicate



Comments
(5)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
che1928
|
February 12, 2013
The children may havebeen used as props, however the title of the "Play" is called "Blame This on The Mentally Ill". In Mr. President Obama's last debate ( which may have helped him win the present presidential election) quote from Mr President... "Get the guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and the criminals."( My first thought was why did he say mentally ill first.) All of this was before 12/14/2013. Didhe ever define the compicated term "mentally ill." Today is a celebration of President Lincoln 'birthday. Was Lincoln " mentally ill? Yes. Severe depression. Did he carry a gun. yes

Many times into the woods alone. Did he kill a human being? No. Did he kill himself. No. He is given credit for freeing the slaves. Then all of we ex-slaves are free due to the actions of a mentally ill President. Who do you think will be our next group of slaves. Please help remove these labels. Our terrific , brave and sometimes innocent soilders are returning home

with TMS. Sometimes disflgured, loss of arms, legs and self esteem. And yes depressed. Remove the labels please.
BBBD
|
January 19, 2013
We're supposed to base public policy on the actions of deranged killers and the words of kids? God help us.
Dr.JK
|
January 19, 2013
"it can’t be said that using kids as props was beneath the gravity of occasion, since the occasion was all about feel-good PR and make-believe”.



Here are some other examples of Presidents USING children to promote their agendas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LToAmI4r6ms1988 George Bush Sr. "Family/Children" Ad Campaign

Bush's First Public Statement on 9/11/2001 at Booker Elementary School

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-qHSeMKjZU

www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGKCKh8ajOI Bush on NCLB 2007

Nothing makes me chuckle out loud more than when one of these Right Wing hacks forgets we have all this amazing technology at our fingertips to show their hypocrisy.Not to mention complete desperation to find something to criticize Obama.

YOU guys might have very short memories but, please quit thinking that the rest of the world does as well.

There seems to be no better time than to remind us why we are debating the gun control issue than after 20 children were attacked and massacred in a school.

Why don’t these guys go speak to the parents that had to bury their child a week before Christmas how they feel about Obama’s “use of children” in his speech?
ROSSisRIGHT
|
January 19, 2013
Just because they had children who were killed doesn't make them "gun control experts" no more than asking a fat person their insight on obesity...

And Obama used those kids like an insurgent, as a shield...
ReallyRobeson?
|
January 19, 2013
Dr.

Although I suspect we may differ on 2nd Amendment interpretation, I applaud your spotlighting the hypocrisy of the right wing hacks, as you aptly describe them.

I pray for a time where more of us can disagree while actively seeking out common threads to agree on for the good of our nation.