Keeping a Level Head on Gun Control

There is much speculation in the news about upcoming gun control legislation.  As one might imagine, the reactions are extreme on both sides.

The Washington Post reported yesterday:

A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said.

Over at Red State, Moe Lane responds:

…None of which would have stopped the Newtown atrocity. The shooter stole the guns from his mother, who passed a background check (Connecticut has that); the guns, being stolen and used rather than resold, would have been effectively invisible to a hypothetical database; the guns were not in fact owned by a mentally unstable, violent person who used them to murder children (they were stolen by somebody who used them for that); and penalties for possession of firearms around schools or by minors obviously had no effect on the shooter (who was, by the way, a legal adult). 

He makes a legitimate point.

As this debate moves forward, and it will, it's important to keep our heads, and wits, about us.  The administration who vows to "never let a crisis go to waste" will certainly move to enact something here, although I suspect and terribly restrictive legislation will have a difficult time moving through Congress.

What we need to me more concerned about is Obama's already demonstrated penchant for running around Congress.

Tom Gresham has a rational, thoughtful op-ed today in which he says:

We have a clear track record of what works to increase our safety. We know what doesn't. Arming good people does, in fact, reduce crime. Banning certain types of firearms, or the loading devices, does nothing to stop mentally ill people and criminals. 

Focusing on the failed siren song of gun control diverts us from doing things that actually work, such as programs to secure firearms. Congress eliminated the funding for “Project Childsafe,” a program created by the firearms industry to educate gun owners about safe storage and to distribute millions of gun locks.

Americans will not willingly give up their guns.  Nor should we.  Gresham argues for the benefit of safety and education programs and that's something both sides can agree on.

As a sort of grounding plug to this whole debate one only need consider the story in the news today of the woman hiding in her attic who had to shoot an intruder to protect her two children.  She had absolutely no choice in the matter.

I was reading some discussion about this case on Michael Yon's Facebook feed; Yon wrote:

There are numerous lessons here:
1) Do not break into someone's castle 

2) .38 is too weak. Always has been. Always will be 

3) 6 shots are not enough. What if there had been three intruders? She hit this guy five times and he was still alive and talking, which means he could still pull a trigger. 

4) Do not mess with momma bear when she has cubs. 

In the comments there was discussion about what a good shot this lady was.  She hit him five times with her .38 revolver.  He's got a punctured lung, punctured stomach, and a punctured liver yet he was still able to get in his car and try to drive away.  I suspect she might upgrade to a weapon with a little more firepower.  Or upgrade ammo.

If the gun-control advocates have their way, she wouldn't be able to upgrade to a semi-automatic style weapon with a clip or magazine.

Michael Yon raises a good point, though.  What if you're attacked by more than one intruder and you only have six shots?

We need to keep level heads as this discussion moves forward.  There are bad people out there, crazy people to be sure, and it's a plain fact that no amount of gun control will keep weapons from them.  None of the proposals mentioned so far would have stopped the Sandy Hook massacre.

As for me, I'm going to learn how to shoot.  I'm signed up for my first class already and I'm looking forward to learning.

(More at Memeorandum)

The Prophetic Michael Yon

Add war correspondent Michael Yon to those calling for the firing of General McChrystal as a result of the Rolling Stone article.  Yon has a copy of the article and has been posting excerpts to his Facebook page, including this one:

"By midnight at Kitty O'Shea's, much of Team America is completely shitfaced.  Two officers do an Irish jig, mixed with steps from a traditional Afghan wedding dance, while McChrystal's top advisers lock arms and sing a slurred song of their own invention.  "Afghanistan!"  they bellow.  "Afghanistan!"  They call it their Afghanistan song."

McChrystal steps away from the circle observing his team.  "All these men," he tells me, "I'd die for them.  And they'd die for me."

Yon reports that this drunk-fest was also the same week he was de-embedded.

Yon writes:  "From here on out I'm going to call McChrystal President McChystal until President Obama fires him or McChrystal denies this article," citing complete insubordination to the president.

Yon has been critical of McChrystal for weeks now and warning of a failed outcome in Afghanistan under current leadership there.  Most recently, Yon reported on June 12 that morale is dangerously low and McChrystal should be replaced.

Looks like Yon might have been right.

The Rolling Stone article is here.

A New Michael Yon Dispatch

Be sure you read Michael Yon's dispatch to Instapundit published yesterday. Nobody does a better job of embed reporting than Michael Yon and this particular dispatch touched me, not only because of what he writes about the soldiers, but because he writes about their dogs!

Yon's photos are fabulous as well as his reporting, and I especially liked the photo of the fat white puppy sleeping on the roof.

Michael Yon on Afghanistan

Don't miss Michael Yon's OpEd in The Washington Times about Obama's plan for Afghanistan.

Yon, who knows a thing or two about Afghanistan, believes that Obama's plan falls far short of what it should be. He says Obama's goal of 216,000 Afghan security forces by 2011 is nowhere near the 400,000 U.S. military forces say are necessary to secure Afghanistan.

When Obama's plan was announced last week, some members of the press called the plan "bold" but Yon begs to differ.

"Like Mr. Bush before him, Mr. Obama is trying to win the AfPak war on the cheap while minimizing political risks. He's playing safe, and any truly experienced combat leader will tell you that the surest way to lose a lot of people is to try to save all of them. Bold was the president who committed to putting a man on the moon before the end of that decade. Our current president has not committed to the relatively much easier and straightforward task of creating 400,000 Afghan security personnel during the course of his first term.

A truly bold plan would authorize the deployment of another 40,000 U.S. troops, and set a goal of 400,000 Afghan security force members by, say, 2013. The clock is ticking."

Yon contends that the longer the Afghanistan conflict draws out, the less support we will have. He says the Obama plan pulls us into a quagmire because it does not provide the necessary forces and plans for the security of Afghanistan; in fact, it would take 12 years at the rate Obama plans to train forces for us to reach the appropriate numbers.

Obama either needs to commit to the mission or get out. It remains to be seen how committed he is to Afghanistan. He appears to be committed for now with this current "surge" but is he in for the long haul? A secure Afghanistan is still a long way off. And he does not seem to be inclined to ask the Europeans for help.

Yon is most worried about losing the support of the Afghan people and that is certainly an important issue. To that end, the administration needs to make all efforts to follow the advice of the generals "on the ground" and close this one out.

Michael Yon on Gary Sinise

Don't miss Michael Yon's words on Gary Sinise. Sinise is ONE TRUE PATRIOT and does so much for the troops! Yon has a schedule of the Lt. Dan Band's base shows and another hot picture here.

(Photo credit William G. S. Smith)