- - Tuesday, April 23, 2013

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

BOCA GRANDE, Fla. — Some 4.5 million people around Boston cowered in their homes last week as an unknown number of heavily armed, mercilessly dangerous terrorists lurked in the dark outside, roaming the eerie stillness.

Most people were utterly defenseless and hid in their homes praying that local police or federal agents would get there before the hellbent killers who had proved their complete disdain for innocent life.

Just a glance at the thousands of security officers lining the route of the Boston Marathon earlier in the week, however, was clear evidence that no number of police can protect against all violence. It is why responsible people in Florida and other sane states own guns and know how to use them. In America, WE are the real first responders.


In Massachusetts — Boston specifically — politicians have enacted some of the toughest gun laws in the country to prevent responsible and law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families from such evil. These laws, of course, apply only to those who obey laws. They do absolutely nothing to keep guns — or pressure-cooker bombs — out of the hands of terrorists who have no regard for laws.

That is why accused marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had no hesitation about obtaining and carrying numerous guns, according to police. Not to mention having other explosive devices that authorities are now calling “weapons of mass destruction.”

Across the country, good people watched the events unfold in Boston all week and felt sorry for their defenseless fellow Americans cowering in their homes. “Bet they wish they had a gun now,” was the common refrain.

In Washington, and especially among the smart media set, the response was the opposite. Gun laws worked so well for the people of Boston in this case that surely there will be a sudden groundswell of support for greater federal government restrictions on law-abiding gun owners.

“The news that the suspects were not authorized to own firearms will likely add fuel to calls for tougher gun laws,” The Hill newspaper reported upon learning that the suspects were in possession of illegal guns and did not have the licenses required by local laws.

A Politico journalist who apparently covers gun legislation in Washington predicted “a whole new dimension to the gun control debate” if it is proved that the terrorists obtained their illegal guns “through a loophole.”

By “loophole,” the reporter apparently meant the Tsarnaevs’ total disregard for the very gun laws that millions of responsible Americans studiously abide by every single day. Another “loophole” the terrorists attempted to exploit was the assassination of Massachusetts Institute of Technology Police Officer Sean Collier, who was shot from behind as he sat in his cruiser.

Authorities told CBS News that the brothers killed the cop because they wanted another gun. But they were unable to withdraw Officer Collier’s sidearm from his locking holster.

Only in Washington do people call the constitutional right to protect one’s family from deadly terrorists a “loophole” and then confuse that with the assassination of a cop. No wonder this country is in so much trouble.

Charles Hurt can be reached at charleshurt@live.com or via Twitter at @charleshurt.