We’ve read the sickening script before. Following virtually every mass shooting in the United States, the news media focuses briefly on the question of whether anything can be done to prevent such incidents in the future. Soon, a softly spoken “no” infiltrates the coverage, either out of sheer hopelessness or the certain knowledge that our elected officials are so firmly in the thrall of the gun lobby that they quiver in fear at the mere thought of contemplating even tepid measures advanced by gun control advocates in the wake of the latest atrocity. If the aftermath of Aurora (12 dead, 58 wounded) plays out as others of recent or fading memory — Tuscaloosa, two weeks ago, (18 wounded), Tucson in 2011, (six dead, 14 wounded), Binghamton in 2009 (13 dead, 4 wounded), Ft. Hood also in 2009 (13 dead 29 wounded), Virginia Tech in 2007 (32 dead, 17 wounded), Northern Illinois University in 2008 (five dead, 21 wounded), Columbine in1999 (12 dead, 21 wounded), etc. — the role of the National Rifle Association will be lightly brushed over, then dismissed.
It shouldn’t be. Here’s why.
keyboard shortcuts: V vote up article J next comment K previous comment