Recognize The Pattern, Break The Pattern

Take Action Time to Act
Take Action Time to Act

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- If there is one pattern that leads to Second Amendment supporters losing ground, it is what comes with mass shootings. These horrific incidents are when anti-Second Amendment extremists make their biggest pushes to attack our rights, often with a major assist from “mainstream” media outlets.

In the wake of Uvalde, we saw that pattern play out with a very limited amount of success for anti-Second Amendment extremists. That said, it is clear that to preserve our rights – particularly the victories we secured with the Supreme Court’s rulings in Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and Bruen – we need to break that pattern.

The first thing to keep in mind is that if we are fighting legislation in the aftermath of these events, we’re 90% of the way to failure. As is the case when we discussed the heroics of Eli Dicken at the Greenwood Mall, Second Amendment supporters need a different standard of success:

Things should not have to come to the point where we need to fight a legislative battle in the aftermath of a mass shooting any more than the prevention of a mass shooting should come down to an armed citizen’s skill, courage, and luck.

How many mass shooters had prior run-ins, or worse? The Sutherland Springs shooter had disqualifiers under 18 USC 922 – but the NICS records were never updated, and he carried out a horrific act that a heroic NRA instructor eventually stopped. Would it not have been better for NICS to have flagged the shooter, and for said shooter to have faced charges under 18 USC 922 than for that massacre to have happened?

Similarly, the Parkland shooter was caught with ammo on school grounds and once reportedly held a gun to someone’s head. There were ample chances to put him away before he carried out that horrific shooting. None were taken.

The same can be said for other mass shootings. Too many times, there were warning signs that were ignored. Too many times, our rights become targets – and while the federal level has seen negligible losses, these events have seen massive moves by some states.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll repeat it. The more mass shootings that are prevented long before they hit the news, the safer the Second Amendment is. We should be looking for constitutionally-sound guardrails to prevent those mass shootings – and should have a long time ago.

Our rights are best defended when there are multiple levels of protection. We can’t just beat legislation after a tragedy or bank on the skill, courage, and luck of an armed citizen. Otherwise, we will be caught in the type of pattern that eventually led to the fates suffered by gun owners in England, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.

That pattern can be broken if Second Amendment supporters develop Second Amendment-friendly solutions to prevent these tragedies in order to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.


About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.Harold Hutchison

Subscribe
Notify of
35 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Knute Knute

The pattern is this: We gun owners and lovers of liberty are winning this fight. The anti gunners are getting ever more and more desperate, and we are growing well beyond the ability of quisling authors to continue to force us down. The whining Moms and this author are soon to go the way of the dodo bird, and they are fighting fang and claw, using both hooks and crooks, to try and hold back this tide of liberty. They will fail. They ARE failing. Miserably. This is the pattern that Harold wants so badly to see broken. IMO only,… Read more »

JSNMGC

There are more than two sides to politics, so the “we” that you identify with may be winning.

“We” (meaning the side I’m on) is most definitely not winning.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC

What we really need is a war:

https://www.longtermtrends.net/us-debt-to-gdp/

The Crimson Pirate

War is the last thing we need, or ever needed. The American revolution was the last legitimate war this country fought.

War inevitably enriches politicians and their friends at the expense of the rest of us, wastes our best blood, reduces our freedoms, wrecks our economy, and increases government size and power.

sharky65

Pirate, I agree that the last thing this country needs is another war, however, I believe one is coming. But I would like to know why you believe “the American revolution was the last legitimate war…”. So the Civil war, WWI, and WWII were not legitimate: What is your definition of legitimate?

Russn8r

Our jumping into WWII was legit. But it’s too bad the NAZIs weren’t able to take out the Sovs before we took the NAZIs out. And scumbag FDR could’ve saved millions of Jews – arming them, bombing rail used by death trains – wouldn’t even try.

JSNMGC

See my comment below – I was being facetious. Eisenhower was correct.

Last edited 1 month ago by JSNMGC
Wild Bill

Yes, we have time to prepare, for the sake of our families and communities, even if our government isn’t.

Knute Knute

War is a racket (a secret, unlawful, hugely profitable enterprise) just as General Smedley Butler, (then the most decorated Marine in U.S. history) wrote in his book.
https://americanswhotellthetruth.org/portraits/major-general-smedley-butler/

JSNMGC

I was being facetious. I don’t want a war. Look at the link – my point was that debt as a % of GDP is already insanely high and a war would drive it to a point from which we may not be able to recover.  

Russn8r

Yeah, but that’s all handled. They’re printing another $T to fight inflation!

JSNMGC

There’s absolutely nothing to worry about.

Just wait until the Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate:

  • Bigger government;
  • More powerful government;
  • More laws (including red flag laws);
  • More law enforcers;
  • More surveillance; and
  • More constraints on local food production.
Russn8r

“F’n A, Bubba!”

JSNMGC
Last edited 1 month ago by JSNMGC
Russn8r

LOL. “Take a monkey like that with his wits about him, you could make a Democrat, politician, ex(?)-cop named OpeTEX…”

JSNMGC

Everything will be fine. Don’t worry. Have a beer. Discuss sportsball.

Our elected officials are fighting for our rights.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC

Maximum federal income tax rate 1987 through 1989: 28%

Maximum federal income tax rate 2018 through 2022: 37%

Knute Knute

I clearly specified who the “we” I was talking about were in the first sentence. Nothing to do with political parties. What I said was; “We gun owners and lovers of liberty…”
Gun owners are not necessarily politicians, any more than lovers of liberty are. You might think about some reading comprehension night classes. They might help you to understand words and what they mean.
For example, I think that the side that you are on, the demanding moms and their ilk, are clearly NOT winning, but losing badly.

JSNMGC

I’m not arguing with you – your “we” sounds like it is different from mine. No need to get snippy. Why do you think I’m on the side of Moms Demand Action? You wrote: “We gun owners and lovers of liberty are winning this fight.” “We” (the side I’m on) are gun owners and lovers of liberty and “we” are not winning. I cited some of the reasons: Total Debt Debt as a percent of GDP High inflation High taxes Red flag laws Stop and ID laws Those are all the result of politics and all of them negatively impact… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by JSNMGC
john

Harold 99.9 % of gun owners do not commit mass murder

As we all know the system in place failed

The one that fails again and again is police work that fails to have these mentally ill offenders added to the background check list. As most of the time there was multiple encounters with the those individuals and law enforcement.

Why call it what is is not call it what it is mass murder.

Harold the democrats are soft on crime and criminals rights.Look at all the democratic controlled states. Mayhem on a grand scale………

Last edited 1 month ago by john
nrringlee

True story. Where we tend to lose is in the post incident reporting and the emotion driven propaganda surrounding the incident. We must recognize we live in a zero accountability society when it comes to public schools, juvenile justice and mental health. Everyone gets a trophy, no one gets marched in front of a judge under Florida’s Baker Act or other ‘5150’ laws. Failure to use standing law and process is endemic in these incidents. Nicky Cruz and Jerrod Laugher are prime examples. These kids radiate ‘crazy’ from an early age but in the name of diversity and tolerance no… Read more »

TargetAssassin

And stop making these shooters into celebrities. Just report the incident. No names, no photos. The vast majority of these shootings are committed by deranged copy cats who are willing to die just to be recognized in the media because they feel ignored in their every day life. Stop glorifying them. Stop giving them any notoriety.

JayWPB

Absolutely! “An obviously emotionally crippled, seriously mentally ill person acted out on his uncontrolled impulses today when he couldn’t get his mommy’s attention…”

swmft

dea had some nuts on payroll that were their to do things that could not be legally done , and sometimes the nuts went off the rails

Rob J

So, where’s some suggestions? The author states we need suggestions, so where are a few from the author? I’d certainly be willing to entertain them with the caveat that they not infringe upon the rights of the law abiding citizen to own, buy, or sell a firearm… as specifically and clearly enumerated in the Constitution. All the prior acts that were mentioned in the above article were procedural (police, prosecutor’s, judicial, and behavioral) failures. Punitive action can only be taken after the fact against the party responsible… so why must the law abiding firearms owners, who are not the perpetrators… Read more »

KK

Prevent these tragedies?
How about this, this world has never, and will never, prevent tragedies.
They will happen.
When they do, citizens that were prevented by law from being ready and able to defend and minimize tragedy right there on the spot, will not as a result surrender their arms to those that kept them unarmed at the moment of tragedy thus maximizing tragedy.
The game is over, they have passed laws to disarm citizens, nobody complied.
This has never, and will never, be a safe world.
We have the right to EFFECTIVE armed defense.

loveaduck

But some could have been prevented by people and institutions being more alert. If nothing else, lives are saved without pressure for new infringements.

The Crimson Pirate

The goal of the left is not to prevent mass shooting or crime. It is to disarm those who might have read Solzhenitsyn and taken his advice to heart. They want mass murder and crime because they think it strengthens their position with the majority population. As we have seen the last few years, it doesn’t; the data clearly indicates that when people perceive danger they immediately think to arm themselves. You act and talk and think as we did in the early 1990’s. All such appeasement was tried and failed, as appeasement always does. Catch up to us in… Read more »

HLB

“That pattern can be broken if Second Amendment supporters develop Second Amendment-friendly solutions to prevent these tragedies” The thing is that all solutions have failed for decades. Nothing is going to change tomorrow. I have tried to mold my government and found that to be impossible. The one thing that any one of us can do today is to carry our weapon to stop these things from happening. The other side of physically stopping bad things from happening is to let the rest of the people know that we are on-duty; they must see the weapon. In time, they will… Read more »

Russn8r

“Wouldn’t it be better for NICS to flag shooters? We need constitutionally-sound guardrails to stop shootings”

There you go again humping de facto gunowner reg, prior restraint & ‘compromise’ instead of CIVILIAN CARRY & 1ST PRINCIPLES: Unsafe around guns = unsafe without guardians.

You wouldn’t know a constitutionally sound guardrail if you tripped over it.

You push RINOs in primaries e.g. Oz-Collins-Cornyn, then hector us to deal.

You shill for LaPew’s “Winning Team” that grifted $Bs from NRA members that should’ve gone to elections & taking legislative turf.

“TIME TO ACT!” LOL

STRIKE GROUP ROGAINE!

Last edited 1 month ago by Russn8r