The typical NRA response to a mass shooting is “make sure more people have guns.” Shootings in a movie theater (see: Aurora, CO)? Arm the movie-goers. Shootings in a community center (see: San Bernadino)? Arm the workers. Shootings in a school (see: a school in almost every state in the country)? Arm the teachers.
But isn’t the Cameo nightclub a prime example of what happens when more folks have guns? Here are a couple of quotes worth pondering, from Cincinnati Police Chief Eliot Isaac and Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley:
That’s the challenge, isn’t it? If you have a dispute, and you have guns, you might wind up with a Wild West gun battle inside a crowded nightclub that leaves 2 dead and 15 wounded. And these sort of shots-fired altercations are much more prevalent than terrorist attacks. Just ask Chicago. Or look at this tracker of the last 72 hours.
I grew up in rural Arkansas with friends who went deer hunting, duck hunting, rabbit hunting, squirrel hunting, and gun racks were pretty much standard equipment on pickup trucks. I’m not a “take all the guns away” person. But I also feel very strongly that it should not be easier for someone to get a gun than it is for them to vote, or drive a car… or even buy Sudafed.
If you are a responsible gun owner, this nightclub incident (and all the other ones like it) should sicken you. You should want to work to prevent atrocities like this in the future. There has to be some rational middle ground between “all sorts of guns for any sort of person” and “no guns for anyone.” Between “no regulations” and “outright ban.” Can we have a respectful, responsible adult discussion, please? Lives are at stake.