Ron Paul on NRA Safety Plan: Government Security Just Another Kind
presidential hopeful Ron Paul has rejected calls from the National
Rifle Association to put armed patrolmen in every school across
Rep. Ron Paul
(R-Texas), who will retire from Congress following the completion
of his current term, released a statement on his website Monday
morning condemning the NRAs response to the horrific school
shooting in Newtown, Connecticut earlier this month.
Only one week
after 20-year-old Adam Lanza opened fire in Sandy Hook Elementary
School and killed more than two people, NRA Vice President Wayne
LaPierre called on Friday for the government to pay for armed officers
in schools across the country. In response, Rep. Paul said, Government
security is just another kind of violence.
comments were met widely with criticism from anti-gun advocates
who insist that more firearms, specifically in schools, will not
be able to curb another massacre. Three days later, Rep. Paul responded
by saying that while he believes personally that more guns could
mean less crime if, increasing security in schools to such an alarming
degree does not sit well with him personally.
agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government
legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to
violence, the congressman wrote. Real change can happen
only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America,
meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions,
and peaceful cooperation through markets.We cannot reverse decades
of moral and intellectual decline by snapping our fingers and passing
Paul added that he considered calls for stricter gun laws from the
left understandable, but misguided.
to have government do something to protect us in the
wake national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned,
he wrote. But this impulse ignores the self evident truth
that criminals don't obey laws.
the other side of the spectrum, said Rep. Paul, calls from the right
raise a red flag as well.
really believe government can provide total security? Do we want
to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated
person who fantasizes about violence?Or can we accept that liberty
is more important than the illusion of state-provided security?
Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really
wish to live in such a fictional place, he wrote.
as Americans preceded gun control laws, the TSA, or the Department
of Homeland Security.Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens
to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy
to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but
liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception,
and we will be safer for it.
with permission from Russia