The gun control debate has begun anew even though the recent election makes any real progress close to impossible. My friend and fellow blogger, Steve Greene, posts a response to those who say more guns in the hands of the citizens could have prevented this. NRA types argue that ordinary citizens could have shot the shooter, stopping the spree. Indeed, one of the people who helped bring down Loughner was packing a gun and had aimed it in the direction of the attacker. However, he targeted one of the people trying to stop Loughner and was lucky enough to pause. The point of Steve's piece and of the Slate piece he quotes is that we are more likely to see friendly fire--hitting the innocents--than stopping the bad guys because of the chaos of the moment and the lack of training by the armed citizenry.
It just goes to show that the NRA and its friends are so deep into their myths/gun religion that they cannot see reality. The reality is that most folks in such situations would probably miss with at least a few shots, probably hitting bystanders. The reality is that a crazy person would not be deterred by the possibility of others carrying guns. The reality is that guns with bigger magazines will kill more people. To ignore these realities is, well, crazy. But this would not be the first time that folks used the phrase Gun Nuts.