Like clockwork, every time there is a shooting, the cry rises up from the left that we need gun control. This demand occurs whether it’s a tragic school shooting or a couple of failed assassination attempts on their least favorite presidential person in the whole wide world.

The logic of a gun-free zone from coast to coast seems to suggest that without any firearms, school shootings and feisty ex-presidents would never be targets. Apparently, it is the very existence of the weapon itself that lures a person to wield it for nefarious purposes.

I grew up hearing the Right’s counterpoint to this logic, summed up in one particular mantra:

“When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

However, when I used this gun-grab argument twenty years ago on a liberal relative of mine, he flipped the logic on me. He said, “Well, yes, of course. That means anyone possessing a firearm would then be considered a criminal—whether they are an actual criminal or just an ordinary citizen—both would be equally guilty.”

My relative was right. He was also ahead of his time.

Today’s progressives have sought to criminalize those who use their weapons in self-defense. Recent examples include Kyle Rittenhouse, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, and Jake Gardner. All these citizens protecting their life and property reached varying degrees of national notoriety. And one, Jake Gardner, met a very tragic end.

Author and pundit John Zmirak, in the powerful closing argument to his new book,........

© American Thinker