US Politicians already capitalizing on tragic Newtown shooting to push gun control

By Madison Ruppert: In the wake of the horrific shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, politicians have not wasted a moment in their effort to use the tragedy to achieve their own questionable goals.
The mainstream media has also jumped on the bandwagon, publishing pieces with wonderful titles like, “Put reason back in America’s gun debate,” which, unsurprisingly, advocates for more strict gun control.
The author of the piece goes as far as to call people advocating a strong defense of the Second Amendment unreasonable, arguing instead that people should only be able carry weapons if they can demonstrate “a reasonable fear of imminent violence.”
In other words, unless you can prove you’ll soon be the victim of a violent crime of some sort, you shouldn’t be able to bear arms. That makes about as much sense as saying you should only be able to have a deadbolt if you can demonstrate reasonable fear of imminent robbery.
While the above is obviously absurd, we must remember that the Second Amendment says absolutely nothing about having to prove why you need to carry a weapon.
Just two days after the tragic shooting, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California promised “that she would introduce new gun-control legislation at the beginning of next year’s congressional session,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Feinstein’s bill is reportedly to be a version of the so-called assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.
President Barack Obama has also used the tragedy to present himself as “comforter-in-chief,”
which is especially absurd given he couldn’t care less about the deaths of children caused by the U.S. drone program. One would hope that Obama could at least be consistent with caring about the death of children.
Unsurprisingly, Obama is apparently going to push gun control as well, evidenced by the Washington Post reporting, “Obama, apparently alluding to gun-control laws, vowed to ‘use whatever power this office holds . . . in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this.’”
Obama also asked, “Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children, all of them, safe from harm?” Yet another hint at what Obama intends to do.
However, increasing the government’s control of guns isn’t the only option, according to some commentators.
In fact, one school district has allowed teachers to be armed during school hours since 2008 in an effort to protect the children. Similarly, in 2006, it was reported that Utah teachers received a free concealed weapons course.
Texas Republican Representative Louis Gohmert has advocated the arming of teachers to prevent tragedies similar to what occurred in Newtown, a marked departure from the majority of the political rhetoric, as you can see in the clip below:

Unsurprisingly, Gohmert has been attacked for the comments and while I don’t think it is necessarily the time or the place for such discussions, the idea isn’t entirely without merit.
That being said, I’m not going to pretend to know the solution to this problem and I certainly do not think that there is a perfect way to prevent such horrific shootings in the future.
However, does that mean that gun control will somehow solve the problem? I see no reason to believe that is the case given the fact that people who really want to slaughter innocent human beings can and will get their hands on weapons despite gun control legislation.
Criminals will always get guns and passing laws to restrict the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens will not do anything about it.
Personally, I just find it somewhat disgusting that politicians shamelessly exploit the deaths of children in order to push their agenda.
On a strange and final note, the British Daily Mail reports:

Friends and family portrayed Adam Lanza’s mother Nancy as a paranoid ‘survivalist’ who believed the world was on the verge of violent, economic collapse.

So the question remains: what is the solution to this problem? Is it more gun control? Arming teachers? Something completely different?

Source