Ron Paul Blasts NRA, Liberals Over Gun Issue
usnews.com / By Kenneth T. Walsh / December 26, 2012
Rep. Ron Paul, not one to shy away from controversy, has blasted the National Rifle Association for proposing that every school hire armed guards to protect against mass shootings, and has also condemned liberals for promoting more government control of guns.
Referring to the massacre in Newtown, Conn., Paul said, “Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control. This is understandable, but misguided. The impulse to have government ‘do something’ to protect us in the wake of national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned. Many Americans believe that if we simply pass the right laws, future horrors like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can be prevented. But this impulse ignores the self evident truth that criminals don’t obey laws. The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence. If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we’re told, would-be school shooters would be dissuaded or stopped. While I certainly agree that more guns equals less crime and that private gun ownership prevents many shootings. I don’t agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence.”
Paul is one of the few Republican members of Congress to criticize the right over the gun issue. He is retiring from Congress but remains an iconic figure among libertarians.
Criticizing the NRA proposal, Paul said, “Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, x-ray scanners and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports, witness this shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided ‘security,’ a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse.” He argued that the federal government should not try to “pursue unobtainable safety” with state-approved security precautions, and said the government has “zero moral authority to legislate against violence.”