Whatever you do, don’t mention the word ‘gun’

After a series of horrific school shootings in recent weeks, the White House decided to host a panel discussion in Maryland on school safety. Victims and their families spoke, the president listened, the Attorney General was on hand to discuss some law-enforcement efforts, and most of the discussion appeared intentionally driven towards promoting some kind of “character” education agenda. In other words, it was about what you’d expect from the event.

The amusing part, in a sad kind of way, was the one word that no one was supposed to utter.

President Bush has always been a disciplined man, but yesterday he set a new standard for self-control: He moderated an hour-long discussion about the rash of school shootings in the past week without once mentioning the word “guns.”

First lady Laura Bush was nearly as good, giving a seven-minute speech at yesterday’s White House Conference on School Safety without mentioning guns. Two longtime aides, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, deftly led hours of panels at the National 4-H building in Chevy Chase with only a few glancing references to weapons.

This was no misfire. The White House, hastily arranging yesterday’s forum to react to shootings over the past fortnight at schools in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Wisconsin and Missouri, neglected to invite any gun-control advocates. In fact, how the killers had carried out their deeds might have remained a mystery if 19-year-old twin brothers Theo and Niko Milonopoulos hadn’t infiltrated the gathering.

Yes, those Milonopoulos brothers appeared to be real rabble-rousers. Theo pointed out that “the common denominator in the rash of school shootings” has been access to high-powered guns. He asked what could be done to reduce the spread of such weapons “in light of the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban?”

No one wanted to take the question. Eventually Gonzales piped up, saying the nation didn’t need any new gun laws.

And that was that. After a series of school shootings, government officials and community leaders got together for an hour-long chat without even casually addressing the weapon behind all of the violence. It’s a bit like talking about rebuilding New Orleans without mentioning the hurricane.

Given the skill with which the Bush gang puts politics above policy, it was almost impressive.

The Bush administration has for years been known for its use of human props to make its points: middle-class “tax families” to pitch for tax cuts, victims of Saddam Hussein’s torture to pitch for the Iraq war, and friendly partisans to pitch soft questions at “Ask President Bush” sessions. The technique is not new; Bill Clinton did much the same when hosting events about race.

Still, yesterday’s forum was unusual. While experts dispute how much blame to place on children’s access to guns, even the invited guests found it a bit odd to banish the topic entirely from a school-violence forum. “No one wants to touch gun control before an election,” surmised one participant, Warlene Gary of the National PTA.

Democrats and gun-control advocates shut out of the invitation-only event had to do their sniping from a distance. They pointed out the COPS in Schools program, given $160 million in 2000, has been cut to zero. “The Bush administration is in denial,” protested the Violence Policy Center.

For what it’s worth, the “g-word” wasn’t the only verboten subject yesterday. When another panelist brought up “computer predators” who pray on school kids, the president had to change the subject. Quickly.

Given recent events, Bush just wasn’t willing to go there.

Fine. We alter the terms of the debate. No more mention of the word gun. From now on, all ballistic weapons will be referred to as weapons of mass destruction.

I’d like to se how W and his pet dog Alberto would answer a question such as, “How can we get the weapons of mass destruction used in these school shootings out of the hands of these terrorists?”

  • Funny thing about democracy in America. When it comes to decisions on making war or gun regulation, there is no freedom of thought or expression. The weapons of destruction, by the state or the individual, have us in its grip. If this ain’t a technocracy, explain what it is.

  • Bill Clinton did much the same when hosting events about race.

    Clinton had a “short list” of black families that he preferred to appear with. Bush has only a short list of black people willing to appear with him.

    Freely speaking is as dangerous to the Bushies as it would be to a gay Afghani.,

  • Apparently the invitation-only crowd at the 4-H conference made a big deal about the shooting being the result of God not being allowed in public schools, as if God got pissed off at America for separating church and state so he sent some nuts with guns to make a few martyrs. Meanwhile, gay marriage is legal in Canada and God hasn’t punished them yet. And to my knowledge we’ve never had a professed atheist shoot up a school. But then we are talking about people who believe 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina happened because of gays. Just like my granddad believed the flood of 1969 resulted from the hole Apollo 11 made in the sky. But, he was really old and kind of crazy.

  • It’s like talking about hurricane protection in the future without talking about the levees.

  • And after Theo Milonopoulos asked his question the moment was, as John Stewart might say,

    “Ackward”.

  • Guns don’t kill people. They don’t have an agenda. But, people with guns DO kill people. They’re pretty damn successful that way. As I understand it. quite a few of the guns used in school shootings are registered, so that apparently deesn’t weed out the whack jobs sufficiently enough. Maybe in addition to sticter gun laws, including training in safety and how to secure them away from minors, maybe schools need dogs on campus who can sniff out firearms, or if that isn’t possible, find a way to make an inconspicuous gun detector in every entrance at every school. That way the schools won’t feel quite so prison like and the screening won’t be so invasive. Am I dreaming, or do we have enough smart people to figure this out???

  • You know, I was just thinking: I am surprised at the right wing of this country that they haven’t figured out that the rash of school shootings is just a Democrat conspiracy to bring a discussion of gun control to the table so close to an election. It’s as plain as day, no? Or, maybe they have, but I just don’t read enough Malkin.

  • “Democrats and gun-control advocates shut out of the invitation-only event had to do their sniping from a distance.”

    No pun intended?

    Honestly, the NRA may be the only group still solidly behind the GOP. They cannot afford to lose the shell (now that’s a pun!) of a man that was once Charleton Heston, et all.

    Maybe Alberto Gonzo is right. America does not need any more gun laws. We need more people laws, like PEOPLE cannot leave AK47’s where PEOPLE besides the owner can acess them.

  • Must be a preview of the latest GOP wing-nut appeal:
    Guns don’t kill people, abortions do.
    (Unless you’re talking about anti-abortion freaks who use guns to kill people. But that doesn’t count because they’re defending life, liberty and the pursuit of a steady stream of unwanted kids to grow up and keep our jails full.)

    Aaaarrgh!

  • Some wing-nut-job kid a couple of months ago attacked a police station not a mile from where I work and shot and killed some officers (two I think). When they finished him and went to his parents house, they found guns, loaded, just lying around the house. All legal of course.

    That’s America for you, two good officers dead in exchange for the “rights” of some lazy bastards who couldn’t be bothered to lock up their guns. But George Felix Allen Junior says we can’t clog up the Federal courts with Habeus Corpus cases from GitMo (or anywhere in America now that Boy George II can declare you an enemy combatant).

    Do you realize that every year more people die from guns legally owned by either the shooter or the victum and where the shooter and the victum are related than died in the 9/11/2001 attacks?

  • Well, of course Gonzo is going to say “we don’t need any more gun laws.” They don’t even bother enforcing the gun laws they’ve got on the books now—because if they did, most of the wing-nut “base” would have to surrender their private arsenals. You know—the ones they have so they can be good “soldiers for Jee-zus?” Whaddaya think “Jesus Camp” is for?

    It seems, to me at least, that our schools are on the verge of becoming a practice range for “Reich Amerika’s “HitlerYungen.” Somehow, the idea of VCS (Virtual Charter Schools) is starting to have an appeal….

  • The reasoning here ties in with the earlier post on the level of violence that Iraqis are willing to “tolerate.”

    There must be a certain number of school shootings that the Bushites are willing to “tolerate” before they contemplate additional controls on firearms.

    Matt

  • I’d liek to point out that the “federal assault weapons ban” didn’t ban one true assault weapon. It also didn’t effect crime rates in any noticeable way. So how about instead of blaming the tool we start blaming those that provide access and those that utilize them.

    Personally my SAR1 (ak47) is safely trigger locked in a locked cabinet with my ammo in a seperate lock box in my closet. Common sense..

  • Hey lance do you realize that more people die a year from automobiles then 9/11 or gun accidents? So maybe we should be putting stricter controls on automobiles and their owners too! or better yet BAN THEM that way there’ll be no more automobiles killing people!! Next up on the agenda of making america safer.. Bath tubs the silent killer!

  • Personally my SAR1 (ak47) is safely trigger locked in a locked cabinet with my ammo in a seperate lock box in my closet. Common sense.. — Matt (#14)

    I was 9, when my bestest friend in school showed me where her father kept his gun (a revolver, issued for work), where he kept the ammo, how to load it etc…

    That was in communist Poland, which had gun control laws *so* strict, that, to be able to hunt, you had to be a registered member of a hunting club — otherwise you could not buy either a rifle or ammunition. And ammunition you could only buy in limited amounts (each box had to be signed and accounted for), during the hunting season. For practicing on the range, you could only buy blanks and *those* had to be accounted for…

    Gun control laws do help, though I’m no longer convinced that they’re the only answer. I have always been amazed, however, at just how little control over personal armory there is in the US. DH says that the right to bear arms stems from the days of the revolutionary war. Fair enough. But do we really want another well-armed revolution?

  • Hey Matt! Sure car accidents kill more people than guns do. And funny, there ARE many more regulations for car ownership and use than there are for guns. Cars are also in use much more often than guns are [I don’t shoot myself to work every morning]. Yours is a non-argument: apples to oranges. But your argument had one key element that the 4-H conference did not. You mentioned guns. Your president did not.

  • “Hey lance do you realize that more people die a year from automobiles then 9/11 or gun accidents?” – Matt

    First Matt, I did not actually ask for any new gun laws. Though I think it would be great if the Bushites actually enforced the laws that exist, just like I think it would be great if they enforced the work place undocumented worker laws. If they had done that maybe we wouldn’t have 4,000,000 more illegal immigrants in this country than we had in 2000.

    As Chrenson points out, there is a big difference between cars and guns. Cars are transportation. Guns are weapons. If the difference is not clear to you, than you’ve lost a lot of perspective from standing too close to the issue, and anything else I’d write would have no effect. If the difference is clear to you, than you wouldn’t write as you have.

  • Oh, I see. Assault weapons and other guns are “tools”, are they? Sort of like a hammer or a saw. Right.

    Tools are used to build things. Tools are the most obvious example of man’s use of technology to improve life in a vast number of ways. Since when are guns tools?

    Idiot.

  • “Guns don’t kill people. They don’t have an agenda. ”

    Um… I meant that sarcastically. Forgot you can’t hear tone in written form.

  • Guns are tools in the sense that they can be used towards both bad (hurting innocent people) and good (lawful self-defense, hunting, recreation) ends. Last time I checked a knife was also a tool. It can be used to cut up a carrot or slit a throat.

  • “I was 9, when my bestest friend in school showed me where her father kept his gun (a revolver, issued for work), where he kept the ammo, how to load it etc…”

    SO why are you blaming the gun when obviously the parent is breaking laws already? That’d be like me telling a cop it wasn’t my fault I was speeding it’s the car’s fault!

    You think by banning guns that they’ll just suddenly disapear (SPOILER : They won’t)?

    “Hey Matt! Sure car accidents kill more people than guns do. And funny, there ARE many more regulations for car ownership and use than there are for guns. Cars are also in use much more often than guns are [I don’t shoot myself to work every morning]. Yours is a non-argument: apples to oranges. But your argument had one key element that the 4-H conference did not. You mentioned guns. Your president did not.”

    Actually the regulations concerning guns varies from the city level all the way to the state level. Depending on where you live there can be MORE regulation on your guns then your car 😛

    YOu city dwellers seem to be forgetting that this country still has a lot of wild open spaces.

    “As Chrenson points out, there is a big difference between cars and guns. Cars are transportation. Guns are weapons. If the difference is not clear to you, than you’ve lost a lot of perspective from standing too close to the issue, and anything else I’d write would have no effect. If the difference is clear to you, than you wouldn’t write as you have.”

    Like I said before you city folk are quick to forget that this country is a BIG country with a lot of wide open spaces and large areas of undeveloped land. You wouldn’t know the annoyance of having your livestock(or worse your family) preyed on by coyotes or cougers. You wouldn’t know the simple pleasure of hunting for your own food. You look at a gun and you no longer see the tool that it was and always has been.

    “Oh, I see. Assault weapons and other guns are “tools”, are they? Sort of like a hammer or a saw. Right.”

    You do realize that these “assault weapons” are NOT assault weapons. There wasn’t ONE single gun on that ban which anyone in their right mind would prefer in a situation requiring true assualt weapons. There was on the other hand several semi-automatic long guns and other stupid trinkets such as banning high cap clips (grandfather clause ensured there was still a good supply of clips/etc).

    “Tools are used to build things. Tools are the most obvious example of man’s use of technology to improve life in a vast number of ways. Since when are guns tools?”

    No tools are not just used for building things. Look up the word “Tool” in a dictionary and you will quickly see your error.

  • Comments are closed.