It was supposed to be a night when the news media was expected to focus on the heated political primary rivalries of Trump-supported Republicans against Republican candidates strongly opposed by Trump and progressive Democrats against moderate Democrats.
Instead, the night turned into coverage of another American nightmare - another school shooting with 19 young students killed along with 2 adults. The shift in priority of the news last night was a glaring example of how America’s petty political bickering should be put into a proper perspective.
As much as our political passion over the right vs. the left has been taken to the brink of a life-and-death scenario, last night, we were reminded of the real threats to life in America.
The mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, TX bore a haunting parallel to the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 when a gunman entered the elementary school in Newton, CT and killed 20 young students and 6 adults.
The Sandy Hook shooter shot and killed his mother at home before embarking on his murderous mission to kill young students. The Uvalde shooter shot his grandmother in the face at home before heading to the elementary school to kill young students. Both shooters were obviously mentally unstable, and one burning question is whether there were signs along the way that might have predicted the mission of the shooter.
We do know the shooter bought two AR-15 style weapons days after his 18th birthday. He appears to have purchased the weapons legally under Texas state law.
Sadly common in the wake of every mass shooting, the hot political topic of gun control rises to the top of the country’s consciousness. President Joe Biden addressed the nation Tuesday night and after expressing the depth of the tragedy of school children being murdered, Biden raised the issue of gun control.
There is a definite limit as to how effective any new gun control laws would be in preventing a tragedy like the one that occurred in Uvalde. But bills that strengthen background checks continue to fail, and stricter background checks could prevent some people with mental health issues from getting guns. But is there another area we could focus on without violating 2nd Amendment rights?
The ecent shooter at a grocery store in Buffalo, NY, wore body armor and other mass shooters have worn body armor. Why does anyone need body armor? It’s argued that guns can be used for hunting or for protection of family and property, buty who is buying body armor? Obviously, the shooters expect to be shot at during their reign of terror; and while they might expect to die, they might feel like body armor will extend their lives to the point of being capable of increasing the carnage.
Purchasing body armor is a very specific purchase and could be a clue as to the thinking of a person who is buying a gun. Shouldn’t we be tracking people who buy body armor - especially those who make a dual purchase of body armor and a gun? It’s not as if anyone could argue that they can use body armor when they go hunting - the animals aren’t shooting back at the hunter.
It is difficult to accept the reality that nothing will be effective in stopping all mass shootings. Unfortunately, there is no way to see into the distorted minds of killers or predict when and where the next mass shooter will show up, but stricter background checks and more official curiosity about anyone buying body armor are things that might lead to change.
It is unfortunate that when it comes to something so logical as strict background checks that so many Republican candidates are held hostage by campaign money from the NRA and gun manufacturers. And once again this proves that the priority of most politicians seems to be getting elected or reelected - and not what is in the best interest of the voters they are supposed to represent.
