What David Hogg learned about winning on guns

After avoiding action on guns for almost three decades, Congress has delivered a mouse.

But it was better than nothing, a life lesson learned by David Hogg that should be shared by everyone.

You might remember movie star-handsome Hogg as one of the survivors of the 2018 massacre at Stoneman Douglas H.S. in Parkland, Fla. He and some of his classmates became overnight celebrities when they stood up, organized and became self-appointed spokespeople for the anti-gun movement. They founded Match for Our Lives.

They were outraged. They demanded the world. They demanded immediate action.

Have they had success, he was asked by Time magazine? ”Obviously, if you look at the number of gun deaths, no,” said Hogg, now 22 and a Harvard senior studying the history of conservative political movements. What?

He believes only conservatives are great at picking a target and pursuing it. 

“Liberals are organized the way that a bunch of 6-year-olds doing a group project together with a bunch of crayons are,” he said “Conservatives are organized like SEAL Team 6.”

He admits being guilty of the former when he started out. His people went too fast, asked too much, were too in love with their own self-righteous voices.

Then, he would have hated the gun measure just signed into law by President Joe Biden, but not today. He has matured, and learned about life.

“It’s more than has ever been done in my lifetime on the federal level, and that’s progress.”

While the legislation was hailed as “historic,” it was meek, but bipartisan and important for that reason.

It did not ban “assault rifles,” nor large magazine for those guns, nor raise the age of rifle ownership to 21. 

Background checks will be tightened — but only for people 18-21. It will bar firearms from more domestic abusers, provide money for mental health and protect schools, and the most controversial — help states implement “red flag” rules meant to deny firearms to people showing warning signs — such as mental instability or threats against themselves or others. (It is controversial because it could deny due process, if not drafted carefully.)

I am letting Hogg speak for the sensible Left — small nibbles are more likely to result in progress than gigantic bites. The bill is a success, even if modest,

Yes, yes, I know what some of you are going to say: The progress is slow. Better than no progress, no? Adults control their need for immediate gratification. Hogg learned that.

Now, this is for the Right, and reasonable gun owners: Does this law sound like anyone is “grabbing guns,” or restricting your right to the weapon of your choice? I mean, assuming you are not a felon, domestic abuser, or a mental case.

And don’t we all want firearms kept out of those hands? Even the majority of NRA members approve of universal background checks.

Yes, yes, I know what some of you are going to say: Gun licenses and background checks won’t stop the criminals from getting guns. True, but these laws do present an obstacle, and then a means to jail them for mere possession, even if guns were not used in the commission of crime.

All rights have to be balanced. The First Amendment doesn’t give you the right to libel someone. The Second Amendment allows for reasonable restrictions, such as the ones just passed.

As for the slippery slope argument, that these weak laws pave the way for stronger ones, well, that might take another 30 years.