What we know is killing us! To defend homes, entertain ourselves, or assert constitutional rights do we take a butter knife? Is a spoon the weapon of choice in domestic violence? Are the dark minds of spree killers filled with voices that say purchase bar-be-que forks?
Look at history: from fists, the knife (and knife fights) became the weapons of choice for thugs. Many of us carried a hawk bladed knife with the spring loosened so it can be popped out in a single move. But guns arrived on the scene–flooded the scene! Especially urban areas; uzis first, then MAC-10s. The NRA ignores this illegal traffic, proposes no measures to stop it, arguing only for–more guns. They ignore how uzis, a foreign made weapon, arrived in American inner cities. They seem to consider the 2nd amendment a license to kill any nominal threat and the carnage of spree killings is a byproduct of insufficient arms.
Their absurd, pinwheel logic (ratchet up more sales which increases the threat); their locked in 2nd amendment approach (which doesn’t offer ideas about intercepting the illegal trade); and their pointing at the broad base of murders committed (by the single instrument they defend) is logically insufficient. By its moral default, it provides abundant reasons to pass the President’s agenda.
The NRA’s ad false analogy underlines its moral brokenness. The children of every President have a security detail able to meet a variety of threats, including kidnapping and protecting their extended peers. The goal is not only safety but to reduce the risk of political leverage by hostile groups. In many South American, Asian, European countries–and in America–the children of wealthy, powerful, political families provide security deals for their children because of the proven higher levels of risks and threats. These details are quietly carried out, not to attract attention. In the case of the US President, the attention acts as a deterrent.
Having lived through an era of assassinations and kidnappings, the NRA ad fails to point out the truth that threat levels and reasons are higher and more complicated for political leaders. It is our duty to keep their families safe from the higher dangers of politics–including been identified and targeted in ads that ignore the real dangers and exaggerate the differences to falsely pretend they are the same.