Gun Free Zones Are Not Safe

In the wake of another tragic shooting, the gun debate has once again been ignited in America. On the one hand, there is the gun control lobby that is pushing for restrictions on law-abiding citizens. The claim is that, if those who aren’t likely to murder, have a more difficult time purchasing a firearm, shootings will decline.

In an even more extreme stance, there is an element to the gun control lobby that is pushing for further expansion of gun free zones or even an outright ban on firearms.

The problem is, gun free zones have been a complete failure.

One statistic that gun control advocates like to point to actually reinforces this point. With the Oregon tragedy, the New York Times wasted no time taking advantage of the situation with a propaganda piece. This article made note that CDC and FBI statistics show that in 2013, an alarming number of preschoolers were killed by guns versus police officers in the line of duty.

This is inexcusable as a civilized society and a clear tragedy. Children should not be targets for violence, yet in 2013, 82 preschoolers died versus just 27 on-duty police officers.

Here’s the point the propaganda piece failed to make note of: preschools are gun free zones and on-duty police officers are properly armed to defend themselves.

According to Newsweek, the recent tragedy in Oregon was 142nd since Sandy Hook in 2009.

Let that sink in for a moment: 142 different shootings at a gun free zone where children are supposed to be safe.

Based on these statistics, it is clear that something has to change. The problem is the required change hasn’t been offered yet. Gun control organization Everytown claims at least 134 mass shootings have occurred since 2009, clearly showing a rising trend of violence in America.

So the solution is to complicate self-defense for law-abiding citizens?

Law-abiding Americans aren’t the ones shooting others, they’re the ones being shot. As gun control advocates continue to insist that regulations be increased, it only makes things more difficult for those who won’t break the law and would even be likely to defend others from murderers.

We could ban every single gun in America and it wouldn’t stop violence, because criminals could smuggle them across the border as easily as drug cartels do marijuana and other drugs. The result here would be a defenseless society at the mercy of terrible people.

To be clear, nobody is stating children should be armed or that educators should be required to carry a gun. But if an educator wants to keep a weapon safely tucked away in a locked desk, why stop them? A school shooting, as gun control advocates frequently note, is quickly becoming a constant reality and can no longer be considered an extreme possibility. It happens just far too much.

So why are these people insisting on leaving our children vulnerable?

It’s time that gun control advocates stop playing politics and putting their games before the lives of our children. Preschoolers are dying faster than those who are properly equipped to defend themselves, and this is because not a single person in a building full of children is equipped to defend them. Think about how easy it is for murderers right now. It’s scary.

If an evil individual has terror raging through their blood and decides they want to strike fear in the heart of society, all they have to do is set foot on school grounds. Those children are all there waiting to die, because gun control advocates are more concerned about having their way than seeking rational solutions to ensure the safety of others. This is inexcusably wrong.

Chris Dixon

About Chris Dixon

Chris Dixon is a libertarian-leaning writer. In addition to writing "Undercover Porcupine", he is also the Managing Editor for The Liberty Conservative and writes for Cleat Geeks and Medium.