-
Crisis Looms, and Kevin Williamson Can Hardly Wait
May 23, 2013 | 1 comment
-
House Judiciary: Constitutional Rights Vital in Wartime
May 22, 2013 | 0 comments
-
U.S. Admits 4 Americans Killed by Drones
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Cook Insists: No Income Shifting, Tax Avoidance
May 21, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Apple CEO Faces Down Senators’ Tax Scrutiny, Calls for Reform
May 21, 2013 | 2 comments
The Spectacle Blog
The National Rifle Association is hobbling its own public relations effort by remaining committed to its original Sandy Hook response, namely that an armed guard should be stationed in every school. This view was introduced by Wayne LaPierre at a tone-deaf, now-infamous press conference. That event was held a full week after the mass shooting, allowing the NRA’s opponents, among them significant proportions of the mainstream media, to control the narrative about the Association. Public Relations 101 is to be in control of the narrative about you.
Focusing on school security validates opponents’ exploitation of understandable but misplaced fear for the safety of innocent children in the wake of a horrific tragedy. It also puts the NRA on the defensive and frames the debate over gun safety in a context where the other side enjoys a natural advanage. The NRA’s refrain that we need to “put more guns in schools” alienates potential allies and partners, even if more guns would indeed make schools safer.
The problem, really the good news, is that schools are already very safe on average. Nick Gillespie originally made this point in a brilliant, thoughtful, yet characteristically irreverant post about 4 Awful Reactions to Sandy Hook School Shooting - And Thoughts on a Better Response, and it bears repeating. Between 1992 and 2010, the number of school-associated violent deaths was low and flat, despite a considerable population increase, and the rate of violent victimization of students fell. The enormous cost of turning every school into a secure facility on par with federal courthouses would be better spent elsewhere.
The precipitous decline of the violent victimization rate outside of schools seen in the above data illustrates that our society as a whole has become less violent at the same time that guns have inundated it. The NRA should offer a positive message that demystifies gun culture and demonstrates good faith. Its current proposals come across as unserious. Lending credence to a deceitful narrative about an emotionally resonant but frankly minor aspect of a complex issue is counterproductive.
View all comments (14) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Luca Gattoni-Celli
http://spectator.org/blog/2013/01/18/nra-shooting-self-in-foot
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- A President Loses His Power
- Her Unrequited Letter
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Bob K| 1.18.13 @ 2:25PM
Sure enough Luca!
Don't you agree that instead he should be calling for the the removal of the armed guards at the Friend's School in Washington DC where Obama's children and other children of the politically powerful attend school?
You agree with that, don't you? When he does you will write a column in support of it, won't you? Certainly this won't alienate potential allies and partners of the NRA?
Come back to reality Luca!
Nothing the NRA does will get good words from the media. That is not in their plan for the country! Public Relations 101 when applied to gun politics in the USA will tell you that!
You just flunked it!
Maxwell| 1.18.13 @ 2:45PM
Just how many new members did the NRA just pick up this past few weeks? I'd say they are doing pretty well. But, as a life member of the NRA, it works for me......
I don't think Chris Christie likes me any more.
bileklik | 1.18.13 @ 2:54PM
great post!
aware| 1.18.13 @ 5:34PM
30,000 gun laws later you'd think some people would start to see the NRA for what they are, a false flag operation. This last response is typical Establishment vintage, Statist to the core, as usual.
CJW| 1.18.13 @ 7:11PM
Don't agree, Luca. Having police at the school is the most effective, rational way to stop attacks at the school. At my township school, we have a police car parked in front of the bldg. There are two township officers on duty during the school hours. The school district pays the township for part of the cost. What better use of the police is there if not to protect children? Would you rather have them stopping cars for driving 40 in a 25 zone?
This is a
Dai Alanye | 1.18.13 @ 8:14PM
Seems to me that it's Luca G-C who is missing the public relations boat on this issue. The idea that cool reason can overcome hot emotion is naive at best. The first problem is listening to Nick Gillespie, of course.
Whether armed guards are the best solution is another question. I'd like to go after graphic violence in visual media, as well as paying more attention to the potentially-violent mentally ill who seem to be affected by the images.
Occam's Tool| 1.18.13 @ 10:04PM
The focus should be on making it easier to involuntarily medicate dangerous psychotics with injectable depot antipsychotics. But that would piss off the ACLU.
RCV| 1.19.13 @ 5:20PM
Spot on. It would also solve a lot of other crime problems, ranging from simple quality of life issues all the way up to sexual assaults, illegal drug dependency from ineffective attempts at "self-medication", and host of other crimes committed by people who could be successfully and easily treated by folks like you.
kingsmill| 1.18.13 @ 11:01PM
Sorry Luca,
your Pavlovian response to the Leftist dog whistles being blown in the media by crafting a criticism of the NRA......is not very encouraging for your future posts...
AllAmericanAmerican| 1.19.13 @ 2:33PM
Hey Luca maybe instead of this garbage you've been spewing you could write an article on why these allegedly "deranged" or "schizophrenic" killers understand the simple logic that gun free zones = target rich environments but our supposed lucid politicians in DC don't?
Seriously man, the last thing we need is more sissy, effeminate, compassionate conservative types telling us what we "should" do or that a response is too scary or--gasp--"offensive!" Yeah that ain't been working out so well now has it? Come back and try again when the ol' testes drop, OK?
Maxwell| 1.19.13 @ 4:11PM
Darn!!!! Outch! That was good.
Kingofthenet| 1.20.13 @ 2:25AM
Do Gun Nuts not read?"Well regulated" is actually in the second amendment.
SteveInFL| 1.20.13 @ 4:30AM
Can liberal kooks understand what they read? Well regulated doesn't mean banning them. Also I find it very amusing that you kooks want to destroy a stated right but shriek about the "abortion rights" which you somehow think it is inferred in the Constitution.
Bob K| 1.20.13 @ 9:40AM
Stop parsing!
It refers to a WELL REGULATED MILITIA being necessary to the security of a FREE STATE!
The rest of the sentence says that the right OF THE PEOPLE to "keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."