But, with a twist, he'd have you believe we've never tried it before. He writes:
We do nothing. The same argument that was used to pass the first major gun control law in the United States. In 1968. Forty years ago. After two scandalous crimes involving guns, the assassinations of former Attorney General (and then-presidential candidate) Bobby Kennedy and the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gun Law Pragmatism
By E. J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post
Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing?
Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent deaths. Opponents of gun control shout "No!" Guns don't kill people, people kill people, they say, and anyway, if everybody were carrying weapons, someone would have taken out the murderer and all would have been fine.
And we do nothing.
This is a stupid argument, driven by the stupid politics of gun control in the United States. (link)
We do nothing.
Nothing? We now have 10,000 gun laws in this country. That's nothing? Every time another notorious killing takes place, these guys drag out that same old, worn-out, failed argument. We've done nothing. We need to do something. We need a gun law.
We've sat back and allowed these depraved fools to convince us that we've done nothing - over and over again - about crime in this country and now, 10,000 laws later, the murders continue - and we are still accused of doing nothing.
Well, we've decided to do something. Finally. After listening to E.J. Dionne and his ilk for forty years tell us that they could end the violence with a gun law, another gun law, a series of gun laws, gun laws on top of gun laws, and forty years after they began having their way, 10,000 gun laws later, finding that they've accomplished absolutely nothing, we've decided to try something different.
We now demand that the people of the United States be allowed to defend themselves.
We now demand that, when a parent sends a child to school, that that child be protected, not made absolutely defenseless.
We now demand that a professor, should he wish to be able to defend himself rather than acquiesce to being killed, be allowed to use whatever force is necessary to prevent the depredations of deranged lunatics intent on doing them and their charges grievous harm.
We now demand that, when a woman is being stalked by a crazed psychopath, that she not have to pin her hopes of survival on some meaningless court order, that she be allowed to defend herself with whatever means are necessary.
We now demand that, rather than hide behind a desk as a madman chains the doors barring our escape and begins executing people, and waiting twenty minutes for law enforcement to come to our promised rescue, that we be able to defend ourselves.
We now demand the right to not be at a maniac's mercy, hoping and praying that he either runs out of ammunition or, as was the case in the Virginia Tech Massacre, that the madman finally decides to kill himself before killing all of us.
We have but one life. We now demand the right to live it.
We hold our children to be the most precious gifts that will ever be given to us. We now demand the right to protect them at all costs.
You've had it your way, E.J., for far too long. Your way has ended in dismal, tragic failure. More deaths. More gun laws. More mad gunmen. More gun laws. Enough is enough. We now demand the right to have it our way.
We did nothing. As a sociopath roamed the hallways of one of America's most prestigious universities, slaughtering innocent girls and boys with impunity, those boys and girls, men and women, and their professors, beloved sons and daughters, were allowed to do nothing.
We did nothing either. You at least got that right. To your everlasting shame.