With the recent string of mass shootings in the United States, many people support the controversial idea of putting more restrictions on firearms. However, this might not be the best solution, as White House officials can’t even explain how such initiatives would help to prevent mass shootings in the future.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked the question of how having more restrictions on guns would have prevented any of the recent mass shootings. Earnest gave a weak response that never really provided a definitive answer. The exchange came as President Barack Obama is preparing to take executive action to pass gun control legislation.

Meanwhile, many Americans are taking a more level-headed approach. They know that restricting guns would not necessarily take them out of the hands of criminals. Several reporters have been questioning the proposed policies of Obama.

Reporter Byron Tau asked Earnest, “If not a single recent mass shooting would have been stopped by the kind of gun control measures you champion, are those the right approach to this problem?” Tau asked.

Earnest eventually admitted, “There is no piece of legislation that Congress can pass that would prevent every single act of gun violence. I think the case that we have made is one that rests primarily on our concern about national security and our careful consideration of common sense.”

Tau then asked whether or not greater restrictions on weapon sales would have been sufficient to stop one of the recent shootings.

Tau questioned, “Can the White House point to a recent mass shooting that would have been stopped by an expanded assault weapons ban or stricter background checks? The evidence seems to be that in all these recent mass shootings, these folks either passed background checks or were very determined to circumvent the strict gun laws that are already on the books. Can you point to any that would have been prevented or stopped by the kind of proposals the White House is championing?”

Earnest gave yet another indirect response, citing the need for “common sense” and “national security”. Never did the White House Press Secretary actually answer the question. It was shown that the shooters at Virginia Tech, the movie theatres in Aurora, Colorado, Fort Hood, Isla Vista, the Washington Navy Yard and the attempted mass killing at Arapahoe High School all passed their respective background checks. Even the very fresh shooting out of San Bernardino, CA would not have been stopped with stronger gun regulations.

So while the Obama administration is adamant about pursuing more restrictive gun laws, there exists little evidence that such policies would actually stop violent acts from occurring. At the very least, the White House officials should be better prepared to answer such obvious questions, because right now, they look extremely foolish for not being able to support their own propositions.

Sign Up for Our Newsletters

Get notified of the best deals on our WordPress themes.

You May Also Like

Top Colleges Now Luring Promising Video Game Players With Lucrative Scholarships

Bucking the notion that video games use up time that would better…

The 10 Richest Teens in America (and a Few Other Places)

  There are people under the age of 18 that probably have…

Why I am not going to “Stick to my own lane”

It’s funny someone recently said to me that maybe I should stick…

What happened to us as a country?

My question today is what happened to us as a country? We…